A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote maps

People today can look for more and more information on the internet.  One sort of information political folks often want is how the candidates are doing in the electoral college.

MyDD's electoral maps purport to provide that information.  And they are cited regularly on this site.

It is an important service, well worth providing.

Yet there is very limited transparency when it comes to the information. No one can tell:
a) Whether the data is based on one poll or a poll average of some kind,
b) If it is a poll average, what particular polls are included and what rule is used to decide which polls remain in the average,
c) How recent the poll or polls are,
d) The trend from the last poll conducted by the same polling organization for that state,
e) The organizations that conducted the poll orpolls,
f) The sample size and margin of error for the poll,
g) Whether there are additional data, such as internals for the poll, that would shed light on the dynamics of the race, and
h) How recently a state's data and the electoral map as a while has been updated.

And, at the same time, the current maps have some very real discrepancies from what other, more transparent sites show. For example, realclearpolitics shows Obama over McCain in PA while MyDD does not, and realclearpolitics shows Clinton losing to McCain in Wisconsin while MyDD does not.

In my opinion, for the readers of MyDD to be able to use these data well in their discussions and analyses, more information is necessary.

Please vote in my poll to indicate whether you think more and more transparent information for those electoral votes maps would be of benefit.  

And, of course, discussion is most welcome. Perhaps we could convey to site administrators that we very much appreciate them posting the electoral vote maps, but also let them know what information would be most useful.

Tags: electoral votes (all tags)

Comments

201 Comments

Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

I agree 100%. I would recommend this, but this Obama supporter's ability to recommend diaries has been mysteriously taken away.

by animated 2008-05-14 10:56AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

If others could rec this, I'd appreciate it. Thanks. :}

by politicsmatters 2008-05-14 10:59AM | 0 recs
Rec'd

by lizardbox 2008-05-14 11:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Rec'd

Thank you. I lost my rec ability this week.

by Veteran75 2008-05-14 02:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Rec'd

Get a new username.

by Jordache 2008-05-14 03:14PM | 0 recs
More Transparency From Political Candidates

I think transparency is a good thing. We should start with politicians. When you trade your money for a contractor's labor, there is a legally defined set of deliverables spelled out in a CONTRACT. However, when politicians like Obama make promises, they often make promises that they have no intention of keeping. In Obama's case, this is shown in his healthcare 'plan' which - CAN'T POSSIBLY WORK as its written, indeed, if the cost of healthcare per individual is defined as the cost to provide the service plus a set profit, Obama's plan, with his recent changes (to make it look 'universal') WILL ACTUALLY END UP MAKING HEALTHCARE MORE EXPENSIVE FOR 90% of AMERICANS - ! (if he truly does make it so insurance companies can only price by age, then the setup will be much like that in New Jersey, where individual health insurance is expensive, or Seattle, where its very hard to get a policy.)

Do the math!

Wikipedia article on Adverse Selection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_sel ection

Mathematica Adverse Selection Simulation (free download)
http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/Advers eSelection/

http://www.economist.com/research/Econom ics/alphabetic.cfm?LETTER=A


Adverse selection

When you do business with people you would be better off
avoiding. This is one of two main sorts of market failure
often associated with insurance. The other is moral hazard.
Adverse selection can be a problem when there is asymmetric
information between the seller of insurance and the buyer;
in particular, insurance will often not be profitable when
buyers have better information about their risk of claiming
than does the seller. Ideally, insurance premiums should be
set according to the risk of a randomly selected person in
the insured slice of the population (55-year-old male
smokers, say). In practice, this means the average risk of
that group. When there is adverse selection, people who know
they have a higher risk of claiming than the average of the
group will buy the insurance, whereas those who have a
below-average risk may decide it is too expensive to be
worth buying. In this case, premiums set according to the
average risk will not be sufficient to cover the claims that
eventually arise, because among the people who have bought
the policy more will have above-average risk than
below-average risk. Putting up the premium will not solve
this problem, for as the premium rises the insurance policy
will become unattractive to more of the people who know they
have a lower risk of claiming. One way to reduce adverse
selection is to make the purchase of insurance compulsory,
so that those for whom insurance priced for average risk is
unattractive are not able to opt out.

by architek 2008-05-14 03:33PM | 0 recs
Re: More Transparency From Political Candidates

thank you for once again trying to hi-jack the discussion.

by JDF 2008-05-14 06:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Rec'd

But if we get a new username - as I had to two weeks ago after being here for four years - you lose all the connections, comments, diaries and relationships you've built up. It shouldn't be necessary.

by duende 2008-05-14 05:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Rec'd

it's also against the rules to zombie...

by zerosumgame 2008-05-14 06:10PM | 0 recs
Right....

Slap my wrists

by duende 2008-05-14 06:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Right....

or maybe take away your ratings ability? DUUUUUUUUUUUH

by zerosumgame 2008-05-14 06:26PM | 0 recs
Yes but at least....

I don't make a complete ass of myself in a public thread.

You've just gone down the list, trolling every comment you don;t agree with. But please carry on. It's amusing to watch.

by duende 2008-05-14 06:30PM | 0 recs
well as normal you are wrong

I saw LOTS of comments I disagrees with. the only ones who got TR's from me were the whiny baby ones trying to blame their own actions on a vast MyDD conspiracy and basically calling the admins here traitors. and you wonder why you and your ilk get their ratings taken away?

by zerosumgame 2008-05-14 06:35PM | 0 recs
Logic 101

Dude. Simple cause and effect - how could they have got they're rec'cing and ratings powers taken away for complaining about having their rec'cing and ratings powers taken away.

Technically you're abusing the site guidelines for trolling thus. But since the site guidelines have turned into a total farce, it's not big matter.

And when it comes to whining, you're the star of that farce: all you've done is whine about the whiners. Guess you win first prize.

by duende 2008-05-14 06:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Logic 101

you really should take that course someday. You are not observing a cause you are SPECULATING on one based on your own assumptions about your 'goodiness'. You deliberatly break the rules by creating another account after being disaplined before for your own actions and now whine about how unfair it is that rules are follwed even when they go against you. which you seem to view as a sin against the natural order of you being the most superior of all.

by zerosumgame 2008-05-15 08:21AM | 0 recs
oops, sorry about that

I know how it is when you build up a big faux outrage over an imagined conspiracy then get slapped with facts...

:)

by zerosumgame 2008-05-14 06:29PM | 0 recs
You know what?

If you're going to make content free comments, at least ensure they're funny or something. And if you're spoiling for a fight, take an ambien.  

by duende 2008-05-14 06:32PM | 0 recs
LOL oh how my heart bleeds for you!

here you take the time and trouble to zombie yourself just so you can 'teach us all a lesson' with you wondermus edumacation and book larnin to us po' white trash. after all what do you care about rules or courtesy when you just know everyone else is against you...

by zerosumgame 2008-05-14 06:38PM | 0 recs
From their own words ye shall know them

by duende 2008-05-14 06:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Rec'd

zerosumgame is concerned with rules, who knew?  Along with knowvox, 4justice and TeresainPA you are one of the worst TR abusers on the site.  And you are at it again today.  Counting down until zsg TR's this post 5....4....3....2....1  

by interestedbystander 2008-05-15 08:27AM | 0 recs
Lost my ability this morning,

I think because I have been a little salty in some of the more disingenious diaries.  But I'll give you Mojo

by KLRinLA 2008-05-14 01:05PM | 0 recs
wait I misspoke I couldn't b/c in poll results

format.  Rec'd

by KLRinLA 2008-05-14 01:06PM | 0 recs
The Maps

The Maps have always reported only the most recent poll in a state.  This rule is applied evenhandedly.  It might not have "averages" of states' polls, but it shows the most current state of the race, per the wildly fluctuating state polls.  Sometimes the map misrepresents Obama's strengths, sometimes it misrepresents Clinton's strengths.  There is no nefarious intent behind it and the maps have been that way as far as I can remember.

FWIW, if the maps do change as part of a site overhaul, I would also add that MyDD removes or at least displaces the fake delegate counter that incorrectly portrays an "official" count incorporating the democratic obscenity of excluding Florida and Michigan.  The 50 state + territories counter should be the official one and the one that selectively excludes states should have the asterisk.  

by BPK80 2008-05-14 02:47PM | 0 recs
Re: The Maps

I've never seen the maps overrepresent in favor of Obama.  Ever.

by ProgressiveDL 2008-05-14 05:10PM | 0 recs
Re: The Maps

I am not sure?

But the map give AR to republicans, even in Clinton-McCain matchup.  That's because the last poll done (quite a while ago) is also the only one in which Clinton doesn't have the lead.  

I think the maps come from a certain site.  If I could remember it, I shall give a link.

by ghost 2 2008-05-14 05:55PM | 0 recs
Re: The Maps

You shouldn't have to remember it. You should be able to click on the state and get information about what poll was used, when it was taken, etc.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-14 05:59PM | 0 recs
Open Left has a good explanation

The maps rely almost exclusively on state polling done by Rasmussen and Survey USA. Both pollsters tend to lean conservative, whether by design or the way they state their questions. Until other reputable pollsters start regularly polling the states, the maps are over-reliant on two pollsters with a conservative slant. If you go to pollster.com and real clear politics, you can see that Obama is winning some states that the MYDD maps do not reflect, so the electoral projections are bogus. The point of the maps on the site is to benefit Clinton. Once Clinton officially concedes, we'll see if the maps change.

http://www.openleft.com/

by jadegirl 2008-05-15 09:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Open Left has a good explanation

Don't hold your breath.  Even if Clinton's goal is not to destroy Obama so she can win in 2012, it IS the goal of many of her supporters.

by ProgressiveDL 2008-05-15 01:45PM | 0 recs
Re: The Maps

What poll is currently giving Illinois (of all places) to McCain over Obama?????

That's just nuts.

by David in NY 2008-05-15 01:17PM | 0 recs
why remove ability to recommend diaries?

Removing ability of some users to recommend diaries seems to only serve a partisan political purpose.

If MyDD management did this, they disappoint me.

by Carl Nyberg 2008-05-14 11:08AM | 0 recs
I can't either.

Nor mojo.  Jerome neutered my account when it was only a few days old.

by McNasty 2008-05-14 11:50AM | 0 recs
Re: I can't either.

Mine too, we are legion.  And I had the poxiest amount of comments - two or three pro-Obama, one in which I dared to mock the great and powerful Alegre, and another which was pro-Clinton and then I was castrated.  But I still come here for the entertainment!!

by boondoggle 2008-05-14 05:30PM | 0 recs
Re: why remove ability to recommend diaries?

Believe it.  I'm a victim.

by chinapaulo 2008-05-14 12:18PM | 0 recs
Re: why remove ability to recommend diaries?

I lost it for a while, then wrote a diary yesterday that had a bunch of comments from people in the same boat.  Jerome came in and made a witty little comment, and then BAM, I had it back.  Toying with us mere mortals.

by minnesotaryan 2008-05-14 01:18PM | 0 recs
myself as well.

barumba. Is it trolling if we make new accounts just to be able to rec people?

by RisingTide 2008-05-14 01:34PM | 0 recs
Re: why remove ability to recommend diaries?

Mine too.

by Jordache 2008-05-14 03:15PM | 0 recs
Re: why remove ability to recommend diaries?

Me too. I can still read hidden comments, so mine was removed because I'm an Obama supporter.

by Agent77 2008-05-14 03:24PM | 0 recs
I DOUBT if that is the reason you had problems..

Maybe there is something you are not telling us, Agent 77?

by architek 2008-05-14 03:34PM | 0 recs
Re: I DOUBT if that is the reason you had problems

Nope. Like dozens of other Obama supporters, he's been SELECTIVELY DISENFRANCHISED.

Why do you think this is? It started happening when too many Pro Obama diaries started making the rec list.

Now as a Hillary supporter you might be tempted to support this. But actually I appreciate the debate, that's why I'm here, and I would abhor it if your rec'cing or rating powers were taken away, Architek. I'd write to the admins.

Democracy only survives through reasonable DISSENT.

And here on a democratic blog - just words - these principles are not only vital, they're existential

by duende 2008-05-14 05:16PM | 0 recs
yep, it's all a corn-spiracy

by then unedumacated hillbilly racists. not a chance it could be because of your behavior. nah, not a chance, after all you are a saint...LOL

by zerosumgame 2008-05-14 05:53PM | 0 recs
I'm so naughty

Behavior? What do you mean? By being elitist and actually having the gall to string a coherent sentence together? And I was so rude congratulating Hillary supporters for their victory last night, and complimenting them on their candidate.

Sorry, dude. Don't fit the stereotype. Go and find someone who does.

by duende 2008-05-14 06:07PM | 0 recs
Re: yep, it's all a corn-spiracy

And just what is this comment other than a smack down to Obama supporters?  How you maintain your ratings ability is the question, it is not as if you go around spreading cheer and good will amongst Democrats.

by temptxan 2008-05-15 05:42AM | 0 recs
Re: why remove ability to recommend diaries?

then you must be very disappointed in dkos.

by zerosumgame 2008-05-14 05:51PM | 0 recs
Smile.

Ah. A whiff of nostalgia. You took me all the way back to January when that insult only merely lame. Now it's completely moribund.

But thanks for the memories.

by duende 2008-05-14 06:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Smile while you can

kos is as bad as freeperville in allowing only viewpoints that agree with the mis-admins and kos.

by zerosumgame 2008-05-14 06:18PM | 0 recs
Who's talking about Kos?

This is about the MYDD electoral maps. If you have an issue with the Orange Satan, have the bravery to take it there.

by duende 2008-05-14 06:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Smile while you can

The refuseniks weren't banned at Kos, only outnumbered.   They left of their own accord (and are still obsessing over it).  

by interestedbystander 2008-05-15 08:24AM | 0 recs
Just pretend

I recced this too.  I am also under the Obama supporter ban on being able to rec diaries.  

It's like a special brother/sisterhood.  

Rise up....all ye unable to rate be proud of your scars of war!

by nextgen 2008-05-14 11:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Just pretend

Me too.

How feeble of who ever is doing that to Obama supporters.

by lockewasright 2008-05-14 11:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Just pretend

Basically Jerome is doing this to anyone who "Serially Recs" diaries in such a fashion as to intentionally delute the Permanent diary holders (alegre, texasdarlin, teresa)

thats all it is plain and simple.

his site will have many problems, just read the comments here:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/13/1842 51/009

by GeorgeP922 2008-05-14 11:19AM | 0 recs
It is his site.

I'm sure that's how I rose to his attention.  It's lame, but whatever.  I think this site will be under new management before too long anyway.

by McNasty 2008-05-14 11:52AM | 0 recs
Re: It is his site.

I hope  so.  

Well, what's to be expected given the example their candidate has set?

Classy.

by lockewasright 2008-05-14 11:55AM | 0 recs
Persecution complex, or faux-outrage..

Take your pick..

by architek 2008-05-14 03:37PM | 0 recs
all these widdle feetsies

and so many tantrums in one thread :)

by zerosumgame 2008-05-14 06:19PM | 0 recs
False choice

As I've said elsewhere, I'd stick up for Hillary supporters who were selectively disenfranchised. But your sense of democracy is only partial, clearly.

by duende 2008-05-14 06:21PM | 0 recs
Re: It is his site.

I hope  so.  

Well, what's to be expected given the example their candidate has set?

Classy.

by lockewasright 2008-05-14 11:55AM | 0 recs
Re: It is his site.

with a comment like that, you wonder why?

by canadian gal 2008-05-14 12:00PM | 0 recs
Wonder why what?

Do I wonder why Jerome's gone so far out on a limb that he's going to have to hide himself away until 2009 if he hopes to be listened to in the future?

Or:

Do I wonder why discourse here has been so uncivil and disconnected with reality for so long?

Yes, I wonder about both things, but our comments have caused neither of them.

by McNasty 2008-05-14 12:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Wonder why what?

i wasnt referring to your comment - the person that insulted both jerome and HRC in a few short words.

by canadian gal 2008-05-14 12:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Wonder why what?

Why is everyone who is so upset at Jerome still posting here?

If you are upset, leave.

There are many other blogs.

I think he's kind of full of it on Clinton's chances, but I understand where he's coming from.

Move on if you are so miserable here with your frozen or "neutered" accounts.

by reggie44pride 2008-05-14 12:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Wonder why what?

So you think Jerome is right to be a baby and take away people ability to REC,  thats it, to REC a diary.

Why the hell would he take that away.

Jerome needs to keep stepping,  I for one will stay here until he stops this shit.

This website is far too dangerous to be left alone with oppressive censorship like this.

I would rather be apart of helping heal this site, then destroying it on other blogs (as HUNDREDS of people are doing on ALL progressive blogs).

If Jerome changes the mission of this blog, puts his weight behind the republicans then I will leave.

Advice to anyone, if you are going to start a blog, dont have a "top boss"

by GeorgeP922 2008-05-14 12:26PM | 0 recs
Why don't you start your own blog?

The Internet beckons. You can start your very own Obama echo chamber in around five minutes.

blogger.com

blogspot.com

etc..

by architek 2008-05-14 03:39PM | 0 recs
perhaps why rec'ing power is removed

I don't have the time to go digging for it, but a few days ago someone commented on an Alegre diary that he or she delibrately rec's all Alegre diaries without reading them so it can be used as a platform to make fun of Clinton supporters and continue to "prove" what a sham the site is.

I hurriedly checked the rec's on that particular diary and the majority came from new user names who posted slash and trash comments...aka TROLLS.

I strongly believe the site is infected with Republican trolls who take the position of a "supporter" of one candidate or the other to keep flame wars going, keep the best diaries off the rec list, especially those posts and comments making the case for unity.  

by grassrootsorganizer 2008-05-15 03:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Wonder why what?

i could not agree more.

by canadian gal 2008-05-14 12:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Wonder why what?

with reggie that is.

by canadian gal 2008-05-14 12:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Wonder why what?

Yes, but you're usually wrong.

by lockewasright 2008-05-14 12:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Wonder why what?

What does that have to do with anything?  This is a site for electing Democrats.  It's not an arm of the Clinton campaign.  Clinton supporters aren't even in the majority - they just have all the reccing ability.

by Agent77 2008-05-14 03:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Wonder why what?

I think what happens is that people start to think of this place as a true, democratic, sounding board kind of place and forget that in fact its a highly partisan, subjectively slanted place run by one particular person who for reasons that many of us are still trying to fathom, has cast his lot with Clinton to the exclusion of everything else. And yes, the level of dialogue has suffered as a result.

That being said, I still think its one of the best, most thoughtful blogs on the web, which isn't saying much these days civility wise, but still...

by wasder 2008-05-14 05:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Wonder why what?

It's worth fighting for

by duende 2008-05-14 05:20PM | 0 recs
Go away

That's the last recourse of a scoundrel. To which the only reply is: make us

I've been here four years, probably long before you came here. And I'll still be here when you're long gone I'd wager.

by duende 2008-05-14 06:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Wonder why what?

What McNasty said.

by lockewasright 2008-05-14 12:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Wonder why what?

Efficiency is a virtue... Well if it's not it should be.  I'd rather read a short insult than a long winded one.

by matchles 2008-05-14 02:18PM | 0 recs
Re: It is his site.

Canadian girl. You're missing the point. I've never trolled you. I disagree vehemently with a lot of what you say, but I COMPLETELY defend your right to say it.

If you told me you'd been censored, or your powers circumscribed I would defend you, just as I defended you yesterday from an Obama supporter who said you had no voice here because you are Canadian.

Dissent, on a democratic blog, is indivisible.

by duende 2008-05-14 05:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Just pretend

It isn't that simple.

I only recced a handful of diaries and only gave one troll rating and was silenced.

by wrb 2008-05-14 11:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Just pretend

What we need to do is put up a diary every day, and all people wearing the "restricted" arm band can post a daily reminder of Jerome's iron fisted policies.

I wouldnt care so much if he was outright about it, but no he plays 'politician'.

He has never answered why remove REC privledges.

All these people still have trusted user status, yet Jerome doesnt think they can REC.

by GeorgeP922 2008-05-14 12:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Just pretend

Insignificant bloggers from insignificant states.

by jaiwithani 2008-05-14 12:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Just pretend

:invisible-2:

Thanks for that idea.

by bookish 2008-05-14 12:36PM | 0 recs
Just pretend you care...

Don't make me laugh.. You folks are the ones who seem obsessed with burying information that doesn't show your candidate in a glowing light with meaningless diary after meaningless diary. If something you don't like makes it onto the rec list, you try to 'bury brigade' it away. There are probably far fewer of you than the user IDs indicate, my guess is you use proxies or similar to multiply yourselves.

Of course, not having the server logs, I could never know.

Is that dishonest? yes.

>"What we need to do is put up a diary every day, and all people wearing the "restricted" arm band can post a daily reminder of Jerome's iron fisted policies."

Words don't describe how stupid some of you sound on here.

Do you really think you are doing your candidate a favor?

You are not.

by architek 2008-05-14 03:49PM | 0 recs
Tin foil hat, architek?

Suck it up, buster. It'll be all better after your brief period of grieving.

Doing my candidate a favor? I think you'd be doing yourself a favor to quit expecting Obama supporters like myself to feel guilty that your candidate ran such a poor campaign that she is now the presumptive loser in the nomination battle. I'm not apologizing and certainly wouldn't expect you to if the tables were turned. To think that we need to act nice in order to earn your vote is ridiculous.

If you want to vote against what I perceive is your best interest, then by all means, show me your best example of reverse evolution.

by bookish 2008-05-14 04:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Tin foil hat, architek?

Thankyou. I'm tired of this kind of emotional bullying, and your response hits exactly the right notes.

by duende 2008-05-14 05:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Just pretend you care...

Thank you for showing me the error of my ways. The wool has finally been pulled from my eyes, and for the first time I can see that the candidate I've been supporting for over a year and researching from well before that is obviously a fraud, that the entire campaign is nothing but a cult.

What have I been doing? The server farms subtly manipulating blogs over tor networks, the lies, the secrecy - all for naught! I repent! I repent! Please, let me bask in the glory of your candidate!

by jaiwithani 2008-05-14 08:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Just pretend

I'm wearing the arm band

Kudos to you George for leading this.

by duende 2008-05-14 05:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Just pretend

Same for me.

I came here to support Obama, for sure, but in a respectful manner.  I want Democrats to come together and focus on the big prize; I'm not here to pick a fight.

I troll-rated ONE person for calling another commenter a RACIST.  Seemed to me that was completely in line with the rules for troll-rating.

And suddenly I can't rate?  Pretty silly, if you ask me.  And disappointing.  I'm enjoying contributing to the discussion, but I don't like feeling like a second class citizen.

by tastycakes 2008-05-15 07:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Just pretend

I stand with you, brother (or sister)!  This Obama supporter had only positive mojo, but I lost rec and rate privs for no apparent reason, with no warning, with no explanation.

Double plus ungood!

by MattHucke 2008-05-14 09:33PM | 0 recs
I'm among that number

I can understand the disciplinary measure of taking away the ability to rate comments based on abuse (though that seems to be applied selectively), but diaries? Not that this site is all that user friendly anyway (new windows for everything), but denying people the opportunity to provide positive reenforcement seems a little inane.

by bookish 2008-05-14 11:31AM | 0 recs
Re: I'm among that number

::invisible 2-rate::

by jaiwithani 2008-05-14 12:19PM | 0 recs
Re: I'm among that number

The privileges probably come together.

by Falsehood 2008-05-14 01:17PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

Just for clarification, how does one recommend a diary? I'm no sure if I'm just unclear on how to do it or I was never given the ability to do so in the first place.

by werehippy 2008-05-14 11:40AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

You should have a place to click on the top right of the diary.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-14 11:49AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

If you have permission, look for the "Recommend" button in the upper right frame. There is also a link there so you can see who else recommended the diary.

Personally, I recommend diaries rarely, only when I think the diarist has a unique perspective, or information I have not seen elsewhere. I also give mojo rarely, and TR/Hide ratings almost never. Ratings and recommendations have been abused pretty badly during the primary season - by Obama and Clinton supporters alike. But I see it most from people who have spent alot of time at dkos - ratings and recs over there seem to be the basis of some sort of "Lord of the Flies" style culture.

by itsthemedia 2008-05-14 11:56AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

Yep.  Me too on both points.

by bosdcla14 2008-05-14 12:06PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

I am only a week or so here and have never given a TR or HR...I can still mojo but apparently can't rec, looking everywhere for the button and can't find it. also an Obama supporter. Maybe I should have waited for Hillary to drop out before I joined, but I figured I'd get a couple weeks head start...

by terra 2008-05-14 12:17PM | 0 recs
HEY! HEY, JEROME! Come down from the tower

for a minute and tell us why we can't recommend diaries. You owe us an explanation if for no other reason than that we're providing content to your site.

by bookish 2008-05-14 12:43PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

Mine is gone too, finally.  I am back here to say that mydd's maps are a joke.  They still have Obama and Clinton winning Indiana while losing Michigan and Wisconsin.  For awhile they had Obama winning North Dakota while losing NEW YORK.

by Skaje 2008-05-14 12:54PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

I, too have lost the ability to 'rec' and rate. Oddly, I still have the ability to read hidden comments, so I am still a "TU". I have contacted admin twice asking why, but have received no response. I am becoming convinced it is censorship. 'Rec' an pro-Obama diary or 'mojo' a pro-Obama comment, lose your priviledges.

by awobbly 2008-05-14 01:29PM | 0 recs
Mine too, I can't rate or Rec

Mine too, I can't rate or Rec anymore.

I bet a lot of Obama supporters have the same problems.

Oops... I bet after this post I won't be able to post either.

by DaveDial 2008-05-14 02:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Mine too, I can't rate or Rec

The telling part is that I have yet to see a Clinton supporter complain about the same thing.  Leads me to believe none of them lose it.  Coincidence?

by ProgressiveDL 2008-05-14 05:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Mine too, I can't rate or Rec

Some were banned a month or so ago for linking to right wing sites.

But Jerome obviously still needs up and our site traffic, so we're second class citizens but not exiled.

Oh. But I was exiled along with Bob Johnson for point out this manipulation of the rec list, which is on a par with the manipulation of the delegate counter (been going on for three months now) and the egregious manipulation in the last month of electoral map.

We can get editorialised spun BS on the MSM. We don't need it here.

by duende 2008-05-14 05:24PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

They should just use Poblano's maps.

by Bobby Obama 2008-05-14 10:57AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

Nah. They wouldn't like the truth. You know facts are stubborn things.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-14 10:59AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

Well, I'm acting under the assumption that most people would prefer to have information that is recent, accurate, and which they can assess.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-14 11:00AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

yeah yeah yeah, but Poblano has been so damn accurate, and Obama's doing better in his maps.... That's just not fair!

by luckymortal 2008-05-14 11:49AM | 0 recs
Poblano's maps are awesome.

I love Poblano's maps, and his overall approach to aggregating polls according to their reliability and recency.

For the record, they show Obama vs. McCain and Clinton vs. McCain to both be very very close, and essentially equal (Obama wins 49.6% of simulated contests, Clinton wins 49.3%), though with differents combinations of states.

peace,
lilnev

by lilnev 2008-05-14 12:06PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

I used to assume the same.  But then Jerome demagogued the popular vote metric myth, and nary a Clinton supporter spoke up about its inequities.

I'm thoroughly disgusted.  There's always a danger of the echo chamber on political blogs, but at the best ones, posters police each other.  You'll get lots of comments like "I strongly support X, but I think it's unfair to count things in his favor the way you do."  Not here.  Has anyone here ever seen a Clinton supporter criticize their candidate for her lies and hypocrisy about Michigan?  I haven't.  I've asked them to acknowledge it and gotten laughs in return.

by deminva 2008-05-14 12:48PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

Not only has Poblano proved himself to be a god, but his maps are a welcome break from the bipolar ones here or at electoral-vote.com .  This far out from the election, turning a state red or blue is silly enough, much less if a poll shows a 1 point margin.  Poblano's portrayal as shades of blue and red based on odds is much more useful.

by CA Pol Junkie 2008-05-14 01:22PM | 0 recs
I second this.

With the breadth of controversy surrounding this site,  I would suggest using third party analysts just in the sake of ethical journalism.

by GeorgeP922 2008-05-14 10:58AM | 0 recs
an alternative proposal

I vote that Hillary's map be entirely blue, and Obama's map be entirely red. Beeton and steve468 could use some cheering up, a ray of sunshine...

by watchgeek868 2008-05-14 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

Todd has been a fair and reasonable Clinton supporter (no comment on steve468 and others), so let's not go after him. I also think his on-the-ground reporting from campaign events has been outstanding.

by DPW 2008-05-14 11:06AM | 0 recs
Re: reasonable?

"Reasonable" went out the window last night with the tirade against Chuck Todd. sorry. Just callin' them like I see 'em. If you haven't read that one, you really should.  

by watchgeek868 2008-05-14 11:11AM | 0 recs
Re: reasonable?

yea, it was pretty rediculous.

Whatever you do DONOT READ this thread, you might lose your lunch.

If you do read EVERY comment, you will see this site is in trouble:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/13/1842 51/009

by GeorgeP922 2008-05-14 11:14AM | 0 recs
Re: reasonable?

Hehe. Excellent example. "Reasonable" is getting harder and harder to find. Sadly, "quixote" had it about right in that thread -- "jumped the shark."

by watchgeek868 2008-05-14 11:22AM | 0 recs
Re: reasonable?

Wow!  Those with a financial interest in this place should do some serious thinking.

by lockewasright 2008-05-14 11:22AM | 0 recs
Re: reasonable?

I disagreed with that post by Todd, but I don't think it was wildly irrational or anything.

It's also worth noting that before he announced that he voted for Clinton in the CA primary, he was frequently called an Obama shill by Clinton supporters on this site. Even I was surprised by his declaration of support for Clinton. Much of his coverage reflected enthusiasm for Obama's candidacy, and I even recall him saying something like he "loves the guy." (I can't go back and find it, as it was just a comment in a thread. But, I'm confident about my recollection.)

That said, I think it's good to challenge Todd and criticize him. I just wouldn't lump him in with the truly delusional and nasty folks. Indeed, Todd knows who the real enemy is, as the following post illustrates:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/10/2154 48/685

by DPW 2008-05-14 11:29AM | 0 recs
Re: reasonable?
I heard him say it in person last year. Had a pretty good conversation with him about the then-nascent race while liberally drinking at Drinking Liberally. But his complaint about "made up metrics" is the height of irony, considering it was made on the front page of MyDD. The only way that could have been more hysterical would be if it had been written by Armando and posted on TalkLeft.
by Jay R 2008-05-14 11:41AM | 0 recs
Re: reasonable?

FTR, I would never go so far as to label any of Todd's stuff "nasty." I agree that would be patently unfair. The book is not, however, closed on "delusional." Spraying bullets in Chuck Todd's direction and complaining about "made up metrics" certainly wanders into the "delusional" neighborhood.  

by watchgeek868 2008-05-14 11:52AM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

Hey hey hey, if you've got a problem with Jerome and Todd, why are you here then? MYDD is a good progressive blog and they're just supporting their candidate like we are. Holding them accountable for these maps that seem to misrepresent the situation is necessary, as well as pointing out their errors about Obama, but lay off of them personally, please. Remember these are good folks who we'll be glad to have on our side once HRC endorses Obama.

by luckymortal 2008-05-14 11:53AM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

Seeking information outside of the echo chamber that supports you candidate is a good idea. You should try it some time.  The clarity that it brings might show you why we come here and laugh at you.

by lockewasright 2008-05-14 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

Just to clarify, I'm an Obama supporter. I come here to have discussions with members of the progressive community who just happen to think their candidate is better than mine, not to laugh at anyone. And I hardly consider MYDD a pro-Obama echo chamber....

by luckymortal 2008-05-14 12:48PM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

It's a pro-clinton echo chamber. One that will shortly have plummeting revenue as Jerome has made the place into a joke on the other web sites.  He's pushed away a lot of people and helped a bunch of others to become misinformed.

btw, plenty of people come here to laugh at whatever ludicrous, low info shit they can find being spouted by some of the most delusional supporters of the hysterical NAFTA lady that you'll find anywhere.  I copy and past comedy from here all of the time.

by lockewasright 2008-05-14 01:14PM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

I disagree somewhat.  I'm an Obama supporter, but I left the orange monster primarily because it was an unabashedly pro-Obama echo chamber.  Anyone who thinks otherwise has not read Kos' own diaries.  I don't fault him for it; he never pretended to be neutral in this primary.  What I really dislike is all the users there who shout down anyone who says anything negative about Obama or his campaign or anything positive (or just not negative enough) about Hillary.  

MyDD WAS a pro-Clinton echo chamber up until about a month or two ago.  Now users on both sides shout each other down.  It's more balanced now, though partly because so many Obama supporters came over from the orange site.  I think most of us are here for real debate and discussion and maybe because we are a bit politically sado-masochistic.  I mean, come on, we ARE Democrats after all.  We must like being pummeled.

by ProgressiveDL 2008-05-14 05:23PM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

i think you may have just explained why so many have lost their privileges. ;)

by canadian gal 2008-05-14 05:53PM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

I'm not sure what that means.  Which part explains it?

by ProgressiveDL 2008-05-15 01:43PM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

that the admins may want to stop mydd from having the same problems that kos has.

by canadian gal 2008-05-15 04:14PM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

If that were the case, I imagine they would have done something 2 months ago when this place was a Clinton echo chamber.

by ProgressiveDL 2008-05-15 06:54PM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

here here!

by canadian gal 2008-05-14 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: personal?

Well, I fail to see how poking a little fun at the objectivity of the maps and the rationality of some recent threads qualifies as some brutal, personal assault. No one here has suggested they are anything but "good folks." I would have thought this is a perfectly appropriate place to challenge a blog author in polite terms, or at least discuss it with other readers. But perhaps not. Point taken.

by watchgeek868 2008-05-14 12:02PM | 0 recs
Re: personal?

I agree, and perhaps I wasn't clear when I said multiple times in this thread that the maps in question are biased and well, silly. And there are other times when this blog's rabid anti-Obama rants are ridiculous. Those too should be questioned. But, there were some more personal attacks on Jerome and Todd. That is not called for.

by luckymortal 2008-05-14 12:51PM | 0 recs
I agree

and the fact that people complain shows they want to be here but just under some form of fair treatment.  There are posers here who will remain unnamed who post racist links and Obama Muslim smears who retain full posting, rec'ing and post rating privilege while it appears Obama supporters are disproportionately  limited in their ability to give feedback on posted content.  

How that fosters a quality community and healthy dialog escapes me.

One sided editorial actions leads to more of the very acrimonious interaction they say they are trying to minimize.  

by nextgen 2008-05-14 12:29PM | 0 recs
Re: I agree

My only beef is with these hideous diaries that make the Rec.List.

Alegre (canadian girl, too) prove you can piss of Obama supporters without smearing and spreading false rumors. That's ok and it's good for debates. That being said, some other supporters which will remain unnamed are doing more damage to their candidate and this blog that they think. The fact that they have a squad of commenters who never post a single thing and only come on this blog to rec their filthy and dangerous propaganda is mindboggling. One commenter in specific goes on nasty and racists rants consistently and even had the gall to rec. that nasty piece of work by Pagan Power.

You know who I'm talking about.

They are making this blog look bad and it's sad.

Jerome and Todd are respectful in the way they go about doing things and I have no real beef with them. But I admit more control is needed with some of these Clintons supporters who are completly out of line.

by spacemanspiff 2008-05-14 01:14PM | 0 recs
Re: I agree

Canadian girl anyway.

by lockewasright 2008-05-14 01:23PM | 0 recs
Re: I agree

You have a point. Ever since Hillary lost all chance at the nomination and began making lame excuses and crazy spinning subistituted fact she has been on a downward spiral.

I was a silent user who admired her past diaries even though
I didn't agree with them. Now, they just make me cringe.

by spacemanspiff 2008-05-14 06:07PM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

I thought the diary was pretty fair - it asked for information and said that would facilitate discussion.

Maybe it was some of the comments you were objecting to?

by TL 2008-05-14 01:10PM | 0 recs
Re: an alternative proposal

YEs, to clarify, the comments, not the OP. The OP was fair and brought up a necessary topic.

by luckymortal 2008-05-14 01:41PM | 0 recs
If you use pollster.com averages...
you'll come up with different results as well. For example, they have McCain winning WI against both Clinton and Obama, Clinton losing both IA and WA, Obama winning NV and a number of other differences. Transparency would be good!
by kjblair2 2008-05-14 11:04AM | 0 recs
using Pollster.com would be fine

with me. No questions about partisanship by the management at MyDD.

by Carl Nyberg 2008-05-14 11:10AM | 0 recs
Re: If you use pollster.com averages...

True, but Obama has lead in 8 of the last 10 Wisconsin polls, so more transparency would better demonstrate his greater strenth in that state.

http://www.pollster.com/08-WI-Pres-GE-Mv O.php

by DPW 2008-05-14 11:10AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

Rec'd.

I'd love to see the numbers they're using.

The electoral maps that I've seen with McCain ahead of Obama at this point have all been, at best, flawed.

But perhaps they have some different information.

by DeskHack 2008-05-14 11:10AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for

I actually like the maps as they are.

The explanation for them was posted the same day they went up.

I like they way they change day to day reflecting the last poll done without anyone playing with the numbers.

I also look at pollster.com for the averages ect.

I don't think they are meant to be taken as the be all end all but as a dynamic of the day to day changes.

I also know that who you are supporting is reflected in how you feel about the maps.

The internet is a big place, there are plenty of sites with polls, graphs, maps and analysis for everyone.

by J Rae 2008-05-14 11:14AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for

Ahhh a little troll rating abuse?

Come back and be an adult and explain your troll rating.

Explain what was troll worthy here.

by J Rae 2008-05-14 04:46PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for

yeah, a negative rating was pretty damn unfair, especially a HR.  mojo'd to help compensate.

by semiquaver 2008-05-15 04:24AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for

Proably a mistake - that poster rarely HR's.  I have occasionally TRd by mistake when intending to give mojo, when I don't hold the cursor down long enough.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-15 08:43AM | 0 recs
A virtual rec

because I no longer have a rec button...

by obscurant 2008-05-14 11:14AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

If they were transparent - -
How would we see them?

Ba-ba-ba boom.

Yes, a link would be nice.
I generally ignore the maps here and reference electoralvote.com.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Cl inton/Maps/May14.html
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Ob ama/Maps/May14.html

by johnnygunn 2008-05-14 11:15AM | 0 recs
Good point

Hmm...then a call for translucency instead!

by ProgressiveDL 2008-05-14 05:26PM | 0 recs
MyDD electoral vote maps

The funny thing is that Jerome's only comment about the counters is that they use "the most recent poll" so they have no bias.  Of course, without knowing what polling firm did the most recent poll, they have no reliability or accuracy either.

by map 2008-05-14 11:15AM | 0 recs
Re: MyDD electoral vote maps

I don't know why MyDD can't use the pollster or RCP numbers since they use composites.

by bookish 2008-05-14 11:37AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

Transparency is feared by those who can not accept a reality-based political discussion.

by ImpeachBushCheney 2008-05-14 11:15AM | 0 recs
it'd be better to get rid of them

We need to come together as a party and collectively see that the Clinton campaign is a sinking ship. By putting these EV maps up without transparency as well as delegate counters that include unsanctioned contests, this board puts forward the notion that Hillary Clinton is the only way for this party to win in November, which is detrimental for activist morale. Obama will get the nomination, there is no need to continue to reduce his chances when he is going to be our only hope of stopping Bush-Cheney-McCain in 2008. So transparency is good, but it would be even better to remove the things altogether.

by irish09 2008-05-14 11:18AM | 0 recs
Re: it'd be better to get rid of them

My goodness! Resistance is futile, I guess. LOL

by Little Otter 2008-05-14 11:22AM | 0 recs
Re: it'd be better to get rid of them

We are the Obama. You will be assimilated. We will add your demographic and geographic distinctiveness to our own. Your website will adapt to service us.

:-p

by itsthemedia 2008-05-14 12:07PM | 0 recs
Re: it'd be better to get rid of them

mojos for making me lol.

by canadian gal 2008-05-14 06:05PM | 0 recs
Re: it'd be better to get rid of them

Yeah, well this whole diary put me in kind of a silly mood. Anybody who has been around  the block knows not to put much stock in polls 6 months before the election, so why are these normally smart, savvy folks complaining about "transparency" in the method for creating these maps?

I can think of only one reason - for the last few weeks, Obama has been doing worse against McCain on the MyDD maps than Clinton. They could chalk it up to random statistical noise, or shrug it of as a transient thing (which is probably is). But instead, it has to be some dark conspiracy between Jerome and Todd to make Obama look bad. We won't let the bastards get away with it! Let the blogswarm begin!!!

by itsthemedia 2008-05-15 08:23PM | 0 recs
Re: it'd be better to get rid of them

Personally, I'd rather have the information available. I just want information that is deeper and richer and more detailed.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-14 11:26AM | 0 recs
waaaaaaaaaaaaaa

but but but.... it shows that Clinton can win and Obama can't.  We can't have facts screwing up our fantasies.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-14 04:24PM | 0 recs
Re: waaaaaaaaaaaaaa

I think the point is that the plethora of national polls show no such thing.

by ProgressiveDL 2008-05-14 05:27PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

I'm fine with them being generated using only the most recent poll. It obviously decreases their precision and adds a ton of horse-race excitement generating noise to them, but that is a valid choice. I just wish that clicking on a state brought up some sort of info on what poll was used and what the poll results were, rather than the current functionality where it allows us to play fantasy election with the maps and flip-flop states (that's fun too, but not very meaningful).

by letterc 2008-05-14 11:20AM | 0 recs
A call for a pro-Obama electoral vote map

such as you can find at poblano's site?

The map provided by mydd is very similar to the one at electoralvote.com. That site just takes the latest non-party-affiliated poll and apportions electoral votes on that basis. No weighting by the pollster and therefore no pollster biasing involved.

by fairleft 2008-05-14 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for a pro-Obama electoral vote map

But there's no way of knowing when it was last updated and what poll was used. In this day and age, people want to be able to have access to information about the polls, at least I do.

Furthermore, such information would serve the purpose of building trust at mydd, since there has been controversy about the data used to generate the map.  If we all know what poll was last used, that would provide a good basis for shared data and the ability to discuss that and other polls.

These maps, to use social science lingo, "reify" the data -- they make them look like really solid, concrete findings, when like any other poll numbers, they are open to error, change, and contradiction.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-14 11:25AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for a pro-Obama electoral vote map

It sure looks like it's derived or at least patterned after the way electoralvote.com does things. It would be nice if they said so explicitly.

by fairleft 2008-05-14 12:53PM | 0 recs
This one is close


http://www.electoral-vote.com/

For fun I googled electoral vote and this site on the first page.  It shows Obama 237 McCain 290 and Hillary 280 McCain 241.

It's only off 11 EVs for each.  It could be what there using.  I remember looking at this site in 2004, but I don't know who runs it or anything.

Does anyone know?

by chewie5656 2008-05-14 11:26AM | 0 recs
Re: This one is close

That dude is a republican.

He does detail his formula on that site, however.

Poblano's is better.

by DeskHack 2008-05-14 11:52AM | 0 recs
Re: This one is close

Thanks Man!!!  I had no idea.

by chewie5656 2008-05-14 12:34PM | 0 recs
Re: This one is close

That site does things by just taking the latest non-candidate-affiliated poll and making that the basis of electoral vote distribution. Only exact ties are not awarded to one candidate or another. It is not possible to introduce 'bias' into such a way of doing things.

Poblano, on the other hand, assesses each poll under poblano's mathematical weighting system based on the poll's accuracy and other factors. In other words, if you trust poblano, who's a strong Obama supporter, fine. Otherwise, stick with the more primitive, but impossible to bias, electoral vote dot com.

by fairleft 2008-05-14 12:56PM | 0 recs
Poblano has proven himself many times

he might have some unconscious bias, but I truly think he strives for accuracy. He's getting a reputation that he has to defend now.

by grass 2008-05-14 08:28PM | 0 recs
Re: This one is close

Poblana shows Obama losing the electoral vote too. Is there any site that offers a ray of hope if we pick Obama?

by redwagon 2008-05-14 01:20PM | 0 recs
Re: This one is close

Why troll rate a request for a pro-Obama electoral map? Why not just post links?

Look, I didn't find one. You think I like McCain?

You cannot even question the Obama orthodoxy around here without getting troll rated!

by redwagon 2008-05-15 08:36AM | 0 recs
Re: This one is close

Actually I'm pretty sure that the person from www.electoral-vote.com is a Democrat.  The person who runs www.electionprojection.com is a Republican.  I still enjoy his site though, as watching the race updates in 2006 was pretty exciting!

by jlgarsh 2008-05-15 06:03PM | 0 recs
Re: This one is close

Even that map would be better, it is at least more telling.  Assuming that the weak and strong states go for their respective candidate.

Obama has 228 votes locked up
McCain has 170 votes locked up

In play there are 140 votes up for grabs in either barely republican, neutral or barely dem states.

On Hillary's map,

Hillary has 251 votes locked up
McCain has 196 votes locked up

There are only 91 votes in play.

Does Hillary look stronger at the moment? Sure. But there is much more room for improvement on Obama's map than Hillary's. Not to mention Obama has more strong dem states than she does.

The best point has already been addressed, at least this guy lets you know the method he uses to draw the map.  

by matchles 2008-05-14 02:38PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

I've long been curious what the source of those maps is.  It would be nice to have a clickable link that said "about these maps" and explained that.  It sounds like Jerome posted a description when they were first put it, so it could even be a link to that posting.

Thanks for bringing this up.

by markjay 2008-05-14 11:40AM | 0 recs
The "maps" are a joke on this site

...one of many, I might add. It's been apparent since the day he put them up that Jerome cherrypicks polls the way he cherrypicks the rating abilities of Obama supporters.

It's just another sign of how far this site has fallen from anything resembling a progressive blog.

But as I've said before, I look forward to him continuing to handdraw the maps once Clinton drops out of the race. Why should the foolishness stop when she concedes?

by Firewall 2008-05-14 11:49AM | 0 recs
its the latest poll

from each state.

by sepulvedaj3 2008-05-14 11:50AM | 0 recs
Re: its the latest poll

That's what is said, but I'd like to know what poll it is, so I can look at the reputation of the pollster, over what period of time the data was gathered, the trend, the margin of error, etc.  

by politicsmatters 2008-05-14 11:54AM | 0 recs
translation: show any map in which obama wins

I guess your cry for transparency is as genuine as Obama's denouncing of uncle Wright. You can go to electoral vote.com and get the latest map. I dont think it is going to be particularly more transparent or more relevant than this one is. At the end of the day these are all based on polls. We know how accurate the polls have been this primary season. All maps (however trasparent the methodology is) are going to have some caveat or the other and will give you cause to complain about them until obama starts looking like he wins the electoral college. Im sure at that point, however bad or good the maps are, we are not going to hear form the obama folks on how unfair anything is. Im sure from time to time some electoral map is going to show him winning as well. So, you might just get what you want with this map itself at some point anyway. No need to cry for faux transparency.

by pdxarch 2008-05-14 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: translation: show any map in which obama wins

How can asking for more information about polls translate into asking for a particular version of the map?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-14 12:08PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

I support this call for transparency. I like to read the number behind the charts and to get a sense of trend.  

I am a strong Clinton supporter, and VERY proud of it too.

by observer11 2008-05-14 12:17PM | 0 recs
Pay attention

Jerome/Todd/whomever have repeatedly said that the EV maps are based on the most recent poll in each state.

Go to www.electoral-vote.com.  They used the same metholodolgy, archive the poll results, and come to just about the same calculation.

by DaveOinSF 2008-05-14 12:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Pay attention

Yes, they do usually reflect the way this website draws the map; however, there is no link.  And they don't update it every time the maps change.  It's dishonest to say the least that they do not reveal where the information comes from.

by The Distillery 2008-05-14 03:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Pay attention

I agree,  Need to have a link and explanation as to how the electoral maps are calculated.

by hienmango 2008-05-14 06:38PM | 0 recs
Irrespective of the particular poll used

coloring a state blue or red based on a one-point lead by a candidate in one poll is patently ridiculous.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-05-14 09:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Irrespective of the particular poll used

I agree, although that would be ok if you could click on the map and see the result or have the numbers pop up when you run your cursor over it.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-15 03:19AM | 0 recs
I think using real clear politics

or pollster's composite would be better because some junk polls have been featured on electoral vote, such as the Target point poll dhowing Obama losing colorado (only poll showing that all season) or the Marist poll from NY or the poll that had Obama up in ND...

That is the problem with electoral-vote is that they are mroe susceptible to outliers.  270towin is better or poblano's work or going through the RCP/Pollsters aggregates...

by Student Guy 2008-05-14 01:12PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

hmmm, with delegate counters that were the absolute LAST to show Obama leading, is anyone really surprised the Electoral Maps are a little . . . odd, around here?

by pholkhero 2008-05-14 01:52PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

Thank god. Big on you for saying this, finally. We've been living in cloud cuckoo land here, and you had the gall to make a call for reality.

by duende 2008-05-14 03:45PM | 0 recs
The maps should be made more transparent

but at this point the scoreboard is meaningless.  It's not even halftime yet.

by jkfp2004 2008-05-14 03:54PM | 0 recs
Re: The maps should be made more transparent

I agree.

by hienmango 2008-05-14 06:37PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

Some fun with numbers: If Obama wins all of Kerry's states, plus Iowa and New Mexico (carried by Gore) he only needs to take Nevada to tie the electoral votes 269-269, putting it in the House where we win.

Or he can take Colorado and win outright, without even needing Ohio or Florida.

by Skaje 2008-05-14 04:09PM | 0 recs
so do one of your own

if you don't like these.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-14 04:16PM | 0 recs
Re: so do one of your own

So you prefer that this site have maps that don't give you information about what data was used to generate them?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-14 05:08PM | 0 recs
Re: so do one of your own

This site is read by a lot of people. So it seems to me that we have a shared interest in having information provided be of the quality that it allows better analytical discussion.  Improving the depth of the data will come with more transparency in the electoral vote maps.

Why not make this an even better site than it is?  

by politicsmatters 2008-05-14 05:17PM | 0 recs
Re: so do one of your own

Teresainpa is low information voter.  You have to respect that.

by hienmango 2008-05-14 06:30PM | 0 recs
Re: so do one of your own

As someone loves to learn and loves to debate, it's very hard for me to understand why someone would not want to know more rather than less.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-15 05:10PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

YES YES YES!

thank you. this bias nonsense is getting out of hand. please correct the maps.

by scorinaldi 2008-05-14 09:43PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

YEAH!  Make them say Obama will win, no matter what!!!

by PlainWords 2008-05-15 01:31PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

That is NOT what I asked for. If there's transparency, everyone can look at the basis of the presentation.

If I'm interested in the actual state of the race and not some faked up fantasy about how it's going, I want to see the numbers and I want to know where they came from.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-15 05:08PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

This is my first post here and it will prob be my last. I have watched the battle between Clinton and Obama supports and it is quite sad what has happened.

Everywhere I go I find Obama beating McCain, including electionprojection.com a very conservative  pseudo blog who really has his shit together. Hes pretty much nailed the last two elections. See http://electionprojection.com/elections2 008.html

Yet here for some odd reason you all find ways to try and make Obama look like he is not doing well.

I can understand disagreements on policy but complete fabrication as can be seen at the top of this blog. Well thats almost downright GOPish.

I dont know what happened that no one can be honest anymore but its a shame. I use to be so proud of how the Democratic blogosphere and particularly Jerome and Markos handled our grassroots crashing the gate now I wonder if we can even get out of the parking lot.

by John a Va Dem 2008-05-15 10:41AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

If you're proud of that toilet bowl DailyKOS, I can see why fresh air makes you uncomfortable.

But you know, we'll all find out in November.  It will be a landslide, for McCain.  I guess then you'll have to take the blinders off.

by PlainWords 2008-05-15 01:34PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

I also find the delegate counter's slow updating to be somewhat curious.

by KyleJRM 2008-05-15 12:56PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

Have you posed these same questions over at RealClearPolitics?  If not, then this is just a pro-Obama rant, and you just don't like what the maps show.

by PlainWords 2008-05-15 01:29PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

realclearpolitics is not a blog.

But, yes, I have e-mailed the people who run the site from time to time about how they figure their poll averages.  

by politicsmatters 2008-05-15 05:09PM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

Okay.  Fair enough; I believe you really want to know.  I hope you are satisfied with the response from MyDD.  I assume you saw it.

by PlainWords 2008-05-16 09:49AM | 0 recs
Re: A call for transparency - MyDD electoral vote

This is a better site for maps

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

by wolff109 2008-05-15 04:34PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------