Ah, I love science. Especially when it supports my political leanings.
This week's issue of New Scientist (September 29, 2012) has an opinion piece by Jim Giles, a consultant for the magazine. It's title and subtitle:
No contest. Don't believe the US presidential opinion polls. Barring a political earthquake, Barack Obama will be re-elected at a canter, says Jim Giles.
Hey, makes sense to me. Here's some excerpts:
FROM tabloids and broadsheets to left-leaning blogs and conservative talk shows, the US media has been united on one point in recent months: the presidential election is too tight to call.
...But it takes just a few clicks to go from that last article to one that tells a very different story - one much more in keeping with what science tells us about the election. The New York Times hosts FiveThirtyEight, a blog by statistician Nate Silver dedicated to crunching electoral numbers. It gives the Republican challenger Mitt Romney a 1-in-4 chance of victory. Over at PredictWise, another source of political forecasts, Romney's odds are only a shade better. The race isn't close or razor-thin or dependent on advertising. It is President Obama's to lose - something that readers are rarely told.
Why the discrepancy? To answer that question, think about what polls actually are. They are often taken as an indication of who will win the election. But polls only provide a snapshot, often with a large margin of error, of who would win if the election took place today. That's very different from what we really care about, which is the candidate most likely to win the real thing in November. That's a forecast. It's what FiveThirtyEight and PredictWise provide, and it's a more complex beast than a poll.
...If the models are robust, and their predictions strongly in favour of Obama, why are we being told that the race is a dead heat? I think it is partly a cultural issue.
...The hurly-burly of day-to-day politics is filled with dramatic events, like the recent leaked video of Romney talking in unvarnished terms about voters he cannot hope to win over. These events make the race feel like a roller-coaster ride.
The truth, as revealed by the science, is much more prosaic. Obama is way ahead and has been for ages. The meat and drink of daily political reporting - party conventions, gaffes, attack ads - have a limited and often passing impact. That's not to say that an unforeseen event couldn't put Romney in the White House. But it would have to be something huge, because studies of previous elections show outcomes depend far more on fundamental factors such as employment rates.
...The race is not tight, and the only honest approach is to say so.
[Note: this comment describes an "urban legend" that isn't true. Facts are a wonderful thing. We should respect them. Actually, this debunking shows that Obama has signed 135 executive orders, less than half as many as George Bush did. See:
http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/Barack-Obamas-Executive-Orders.htm
Wikipedia, by my count, shows even fewer Obama executive orders to date. I counted 95. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_federal_executive_orders
Lesson: fact check things you hear on the Internet, or read in emails. Often they aren't true. Conservatives are particularly prone to spreading untruths. I rarely get falsehoods passed on in emails from my progressive friends, but I often need to correct falsehoods that my right-wing friends haven't bothered to check on.
So don't blindly believe what's said below. Check the facts yourself. Verify before trusting. -- Blogger Brian]
-------------------------------
Some of you may be interested in this who are still undecided. IMO, this is quite serious. It has to do with executive orders.
EXECUTIVE ORDERS ISSUED…
Teddy Roosevelt 3
Others to FDR NONE
FDR 11 in 16 years
Truman 5 in 7 years
Ike 2 in 8 years
Kennedy 4 in 3 years
LBJ 4 in 5 years
Nixon 1 in 6 years
Ford 3 in 2 years
Carter 3 in 4 years
Reagan 5 in 8 years
Bush Sr. 3 in 4 years
Clinton 15 in 8 years
George W. Bush 62 in 8 years
Obama 923 in 3 1/2 years!
If you don't get the implications you're not paying attention. How many warnings do you need? 923 Executive Orders in 40 Months!
During my lifetime, All Presidents have issued Executive Orders, for reasons that vary. But...
WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT 923 EX. ORDERS IN LESS THAN ONE TERM?
YES, THERE IS A REASON. IT IS THAT THE PRESIDENT IS DETERMINED TO TAKE CONTROL AWAY FROM THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE.
Even some Democrats in the House have turned on him, plus a very small number of Democrat Senators question him.
HE SHOULD BE QUESTIONED. WHAT IS HE REALLY TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH ?
DOESN'T THIS CONCERN YOU JUST A WEE BIT?
Not really surprising is that there are now "Czars" in charge of everything, all responsible only to the President with no oversight of any kind.
Remember what he told Russia's Putin: "I'll be more flexible after I'm re-elected".
Here are a few of Obama's exec. orders:
-EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.
-EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.
-EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.
-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.
-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions.
-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the registration of all persons. Postmaster General to operate a national registration
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.
-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.
-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.
-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.
-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.
-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.
-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months.
Feel free to verify these executive orders. Watch the President's ACTIONS, not his words! By his actions he will show you where America is headed. Sounds to me like he is superceeding the Constitution of the USA.
Obama also issued an executive order that seeks to "harmonize" U.S. economic regulations with the rest of the world. This new executive order is yet another incremental step that is pushing us closer to a North American Union and a one world economic system.
Unfortunately, most Americans have absolutely no idea what is happening. The American people need to understand that Barack Obama is constantly looking for ways to integrate the United States more deeply with the rest of the world. The globalization of the world economy has accelerated under Obama, and this latest executive order represents a fundamental change in U.S. economic policy. Now federal regulators will be required to "harmonize" their work with the international community.
THIS IS DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE?? THEN PROVE TO YOURSELF IT'S WRONG.
If Romney wins, watch how many more Executive Orders are created between Election Day and Inauguration Day. If Obama is re-elected, watch how many more Executive orders are issued during the next four years. And now consider him and all future Presidents having these powers.
You decide if this is a good thing.
Posted by: tucson | October 02, 2012 at 09:10 PM
OK, you got me. RPH will be pleased. I should have checked it out.
However, I stand by my statement..goofy foot is right foot forward.
Posted by: tucson | October 03, 2012 at 12:28 AM
tucson, thanks for the mea culpa. Hope I didn't sound too accusatory in my note to your comment. It was late at night, I was sleepy, and I've been irritated at all the unfactual crap that gets slung by both sides in the presidential campaign. Yes, by the Obama campaign also -- though in my opinion not to the same degree as the Romney campaign.
I appreciate how you're willing to change your mind and are open to fresh facts. We all have our blind spots and biases. But we can try to see more broadly.
You're absolutely correct about goofy foot being right foot forward. I wish I could longboard with either foot forward, but so far I feel incapable of anything other than "regular" (left) foot forward. Now that I've gone to the Big Stick, rather than pushing with my foot, this isn't such a big deal, because I'm using both sides of my body in using the Big Stick.
Posted by: Brian Hines | October 03, 2012 at 11:49 AM
I am pleased that I (now) feel no need to suggest the same "lesson" about pursuing facts(/"truth").
Robert Paul Howard
Posted by: Robert Paul Howard | October 03, 2012 at 01:23 PM
On the chance of anyone's interest, a book I have finished recently is by Robert W. Merry, _Where They Stand: The American Presidents in the Eyes of Voters and Historians_ (NY: Simon & Schuster, 2012) - xxii + eleven Chapters in four Parts plus a Conclusion on 3-239, Acknowledgments Index on 283-298. on 241-242, two Appendices on 243-250, Notes on 251-272, Bibliography on 273-281.
Merry argues that, generally speaking, the subjective scholarly opinions of various "experts" (historians, et al.) offered in a number of rankings by "merit" of the U.S. Presidents tends to agree - despite somewhat altering changes in opinions over time - with the "referendum"-like opinions the American voters have put forth every four years in their voting at the polls. Those regarded as the "best" Presidents (Washington, Lincoln, FDR) have been re-elected and then passed on the presidency to someone of their own "party." Some of those typically regarded as among the "worst" (Harding, Buchanan, Pierce, Fillmore) often served only one term and were followed by people not of their own ideological preference or choosing. (Grant and Harding deserve special consideration and explanation as exceptions to this general rule.) In overall standings, the Presidents regarded as the most "average" (i.e., holding "median" positions in the "experts'" opinion rankings) have often been Van Buren and/or Taft, or sometimes J. Q. Adams. (This tendency is often repeated, despite variations in the overall rankings as determined by separate scholarly assessments over time [from 1948 to 2005].) Appendix A (pp. 244-245) illustrates this quite nicely. While certainly all who have ever held the office of the U.S. President have been "exceptional" men, within that category as a group, some have certainly performed better than others and have thereby come to be more highly regarded than their "lesser" fellows. Merry argues with illustrations from their separate histories how the opinions of the "experts" (though varying somewhat through the passage of time and greater perspective) have broadly tended to parallel the voters' regards for their Presidents in every electoral "referendum" they held every four years. His treatment of this topic - with consideration given to contrary evidence and argument - strikes me as worth while. I commend the book to anyone interested in the topic.
Robert Paul Howard
Posted by: Robert Paul Howard | October 03, 2012 at 01:42 PM
Geez - all the aforementioned Executive Orders appear to be reiterations of powers that have always been understood to be implicit to the presidency. Maybe Obama is hoping to accidentally discover a legal loophole that actually allows a president to do whatever he damned well feels like doing without the hindrance of Congress to keep him (or her) in check.
Like a conductor who can keep the woodwind section of an orchestra muted when the symphony calls for it without checking with the brass section first. Or something like that.
The President of the United States is a puppet without a puppeteer who can be held personally responsible for the puppet's actions.
We can blame our own non-existent selves for the failures of any president.
Posted by: Willie R | October 04, 2012 at 03:56 AM
It will be interesting to see the polls after last night's debate. If this debate, which was as one-sided as any I can remember, does not change the landscape, if Obama retains a significant lead, it means that the election is done, and that voters have decided they are going to stay with Obama.
As a reporter stated: "That is thin gruel on which the Obama campaign must dine for the next few days; but after this debacle, it’s the only sustenance on the menu."
Posted by: tucson | October 04, 2012 at 03:21 PM