More Maureen Dowd:
More women voted than men. Five women were newly elected to the Senate, and the number of women in the House will increase by at least three. New Hampshire will be the first state to send an all-female delegation to Congress. Live Pink or Dye.
Meanwhile, as Bill Maher said, “all the Republican men who talked about lady parts during the campaign, they all lost.”
Great line from today’s Maureen Dowd:
Team Romney has every reason to be shellshocked. Its candidate, after all, resoundingly won the election of the country he was wooing.
Mitt Romney is the president of white male America.
* * * * * * * *
Until now, Republicans and Fox News have excelled at conjuring alternate realities. But this time, they made the mistake of believing their fake world actually existed. As Fox’s Megyn Kelly said to Karl Rove on election night, when he argued against calling Ohio for Obama: “Is this just math that you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better?”
From the NY Times: REJmme
(Credit to the WSH for turning me on to Nate Silver)
Karl Rove’s inability to acknowledge the facts on the ground in Ohio may be belief perseverance–“maintaining your original opinions in the face of overwhelming data that contradicts your beliefs.” (All of us–not just conservative Republicans–engage in it.) Yesterday he predicted Romney would win with 285 electoral votes to Obama’s 253. In contrast the NY Times’ Nate Silver, who conducts state-by-state statistical analysis of all the major polls, predicted Obama would win with 314 electoral votes. (With Florida’s 29 electoral votes up in the air as of this writing Obama leads the electoral college 303 to 206.) Last Friday Silver reported that Obama’s chances of winning were better than 4 in 5 (83.7%, actually):
[The polls] represent powerful evidence against the idea that the race is a “tossup.” A tossup race isn’t likely to produce 19 leads for one candidate and one for the other — any more than a fair coin is likely to come up heads 19 times and tails just once in 20 tosses. (The probability of a fair coin doing so is about 1 chance in 50,000.)
Instead, Mr. Romney will have to hope that the coin isn’t fair, and instead has been weighted to Mr. Obama’s advantage. In other words, he’ll have to hope that the polls have been biased in Mr. Obama’s favor.
Silver explains that polls might provide an inaccurate election forecast due to statistical sampling error, voters changing their mind after the “snapshot in time” the poll represents, and statistical bias (“the polls are not taking an accurate sample of the voter population”). He states
The FiveThirtyEight forecast accounts for this possibility. Its estimates of the uncertainty in the race are based on how accurate the polls have been under real-world conditions since 1968, and not the idealized assumption that random sampling error alone accounts for entire reason for doubt.
In other words, either the polls on the Friday before the election show Obama is the odds-on favorite or they contain statistical bias outside the range Silver accounts for in his models.
Karl Rove spit the bit when Fox News called the election for Obama last night. Fox’s number-crunchers read the Ohio returns the same way as their counterparts at ABC, NBC, CNN, & CBS. With about 75% of the vote reported there were not enough possible Romney votes, and too many expected Obama votes from heavily Democratic districts, for Romney to overcome Obama’s lead. Rove wouldn’t accept the handwriting on the wall. He disagreed with the data geeks, which caused Fox’s Megyn Kelly to walk down the hall with a cameraman to interview them. They explained their analysis, confirming what the data told them–Romney could not take Ohio and Obama had the necessary 270 electoral votes.
This election alert from the Wall Street Journal shocked me because it signals a significant upset:
It links to this headline: