Guest Post: A Final Selection Day Update

Tyler Durden's picture

Via Pater Tenebrarum of Acting-Man blog,

A Close Race?

Predictions regarding the election outcome are all over the place. Dennis Gartman for instance thinks that 'Romney will win quite handily'. While this opinion may be largely informed by wishful thinking in this case, there are two interesting points made by Gartman. One concerns poll errors, something we have previously discussed in the context of the 1948 election, which was a pretty glaring failure of the polls. According to Gartman:

"First, he uses the the 1980 election as an example where Carter had a 2-3% point lead over Gov. Reagan. Carter was expected to win the race, but he did not."

If this is meant to illustrate the general principle that polls can be in error, then fair enough. If it is meant to equate Obama with Carter and Romney with Reagan, it is way off the mark. Just as a reminder: the 1980 election took place at the tail end of an inflationary economic crisis and Carter had to fend off a democratic challenger for the nomination (Ted Kennedy), who viciously attacked him for eight months. In addition there was of course the Iran hostage crisis and the botched rescue attempt, which hurt Carter's reelection chances immensely.

It goes without saying that Romney is no Reagan.

Another point made by Gartman concerns the Bradley (or Wilder) effect, which we had not heard of before. Apparently this is a kind of 'political correctness effect'  (i.e., it is not motivated by racism, but by the fear of people that they might be seen as racist). It seems though that this effect may have been far greater in the 1980's when it was first posited to exist. Nowadays people are probably generally more relaxed about the race of political candidates.

“Gartman also refers to the Bradley/Wilder Effect, a theory where non-white candidates do better in the polls than the final election results show.” 

Jim Cramer is taking the exact opposite view from Gartman's, expecting a 'landslide' victory for Obama. Of course Cramer wouldn't be Cramer if his forecast didn't stand out for being a bit extreme.

The Princeton election consortium's latest update of the meta-analysis of the  electoral vote count on the eve of the election continues to predict an Obama victory as well, but clearly the race is getting tighter. The median estimator has dropped to the lower end of the 'strike zone' (a 68% confidence interval of probable outcomes based on today's polls).


According to the PEC's 'meta-analysis', Obama still enjoys a fairly comfortable margin, but it is not as big as it once used to be.


Intrade odds look fairly good for Obama, although they actually should be far higher this close to the election if traders were to hew more closely to what the analysis of the polls reflects. As Sam Wang of Princeton explains here, the election contracts traded at intrade suffer from inefficiencies that are likely due to the political biases of traders.


Obama's intrade odds are now at 65.8%, but they should actually be far higher based on the meta-margin analysis.


Of course the time when intrade bets pay off best is when the majority of traders turns out to be completely wrong and one has taken the other side of the trade. The rational trade in this case would be to buy the contract, but the bigger pay-off would result if one sold it short and it turns out on election day that the polls had it wrong. It would be a chance for Mr. Gartman to swing for the fences.


An Election Already Lost

If you want to get an impression of how some Europeans see the US and how deeply ingrained the socialist mentality is in Europe, we point you to an article in Der Spiegel, colorfully entitled 'America has already lost Tuesday's election'. The author opines that the 'outcome of the election won't matter to Europe', which is fair enough – it won't matter to anyone, after all. The only sense in which it matters to us is in how the markets might react in the short term to the outcome.

However, the author's theory that 'total capitalism' rules America and that it will 'destroy the country' is so utterly ridiculous as to almost leave one speechless. To equate the statist system that is in in place in the US of today with 'capitalism', much less 'total capitalism', is well beyond ridiculous. One might perhaps call it 'crony capitalism', but the problem with using such definitions is that they obscure the true meaning of the term capitalism. 'Crony capitalism' is a term that is employed as a euphemism for the more precise 'fascism', for fear that the latter might sound too extreme. The author of the Spiegel article informs us that the 'government is powerless in the US', an assertion that would probably induce slack-jawed amazement in most US citizens. 

As George Reismann reminded us back in 2008:

“Under laissez-faire capitalism, the state consists essentially just of a police force, law courts, and a national defense establishment, which deter and combat those who initiate the use of physical force. And nothing more.”


“[...] the politico-economic system of the United States today is so far removed from laissez-faire capitalism that it is closer to the system of a police state. The ability of the media to ignore all of the massive government interference that exists today and to characterize our present economic system as one of laissez faire and economic freedom marks it as, if not profoundly dishonest, then as nothing less than delusional.

In Europe many people are more than just delusional regarding this particular point. There is unfortunately no constituency for economic freedom in most of Europe. Statism is too deeply ingrained (an exception to this rule are a number of former Eastern Bloc countries, where many people have developed an abiding hatred of the State due to suffering under communism's yoke for decades). There is however one point which the 'Spiegel' author gets right, namely his characterization of the stance of the two major US political parties and their candidates on foreign policy. He inter alia writes:

“In any case, it is wrong to characterize Republicans as the party of warmongers and Democrats as the party of peace.”

He has certainly got that right – as Justin Raimondo of often stresses, one can regard the two parties as the two faces of the same party, which he simply refers to as the 'war party'.

Speaking of statism, we want to refer readers to an excellent article at 'The Agitator', entitled 'Reminder: The Media Isn't Liberal, It's Statist'. The author shows by means of a few examples that it is actually incorrect to simply accuse the mainstream media of a 'liberal' (i.e., left-wing) bias, when the real problem is their utterly vicious statism, which can of course express itself in their  reportage of both left-wing and right-wing causes. The examples he brings bring this point home in rather glaring fashion.


Bring Back Her Smile

Finally, there is at least one thing the end of the election circus will achieve: it will bring back little Abby's smile. She has simply had enough of the two clowns – they have driven her to shed desperate tears of frustration:


Little Abby is really tired of hearing about Obama and Romney


Also, Barton Hinkle of the Richmond Times-Dispatch reminds us 'Why the wrong side absolutely must not win'.



Nobody is somebody we could vote for in good conscience.
Nobody cares and tells the truth, that should be good enough for us. 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tsunami Wave's picture

What does Goldman's flow desk recommend?

macholatte's picture


The Progressives leave nothing to chance.....


It only takes $26 to hack a voting machine

redpill's picture



By the way, does it strike anyone else as odd that the nation collectively spends billions of dollars on campaign races, yet we have old, half-dead volunteer grandmas running our polling stations?

TruthInSunshine's picture

Whisper rumor that The Bernank is boldly swaggering around 33 Liberty Street, raiding candy dishes and flirting with the cleaning lady. As he grows more confident of a pending Obama victory, he's even insisting that staff address him as Buzz Lightyear.

redpill's picture

Why are they always wearing blac...oh, I get it now!


AgShaman's picture

No....not really

They can't find the gold that was under the trade centers....or Gaddafi's.....or anyone else's apparently

zerozulu's picture

In a close race like this result will be determined by hacked electronic polling machines.

Urban Redneck's picture

Subverting the lawfully established line of succession of the State, used to be High Treason. Art 3 Sec 3 ended that notion in the US along with Corruption of Blood. But the crime and punishment could be re-introduced with a simple act of Congress under a different legal nomenclature.

Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

America:  Beacon of Democracy!

cougar_w's picture

Not having my glasses on I first read your comment as "Bacon of Democracy"

Which notice still works.

redpill's picture

At this point I'd just take bacon and call it a day.

fonestar's picture

Nothing will change as a result of this election or the political process.  Things will however revert to the mean in spectacular fashion:

               - Gold, the money of kings

               - Silver, the money of gentlemen

               - Copper, the money of beggars

               - Paper, the money of con men

               - Debt, the money of slaves

Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Today's UST auction was a success!  We did it!  We bought one more day for the MIC to keep that oil flowing from the Mid-East!

Orly's picture

Mind if I steal your list from time to time?

slaughterer's picture

Let's just short the coal sector and let the Choomer win.  This election is starting to make me cry like a little girl.  

FL_Conservative's picture

Cramer = extremely WRONG, not just "extreme".

As for no "hostage crisis", well we're ALL being held hostage.  So how is this different again?

knukles's picture

Nobody comin' to rescue us...

zerozulu's picture

"nobody" is your friend.

New_Meat's picture

I'm taking great comfort in Cramer's expressed view. - Ned

New_Meat's picture

No, that's "Ned the Bull", so you'd be safe.

- Ned

{Not that there's anything wrong with that.}

Deo vindice's picture

Polls: how to ... influence people.

You can't manipulate an election where the polls show a wide margin between candidates.

Helix6's picture

Yes, but the margin is not wide in quite a few key states.  Thus election fraud has the cover of plausible deniability in these states.  And these states will determine the outcome of the election.

Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Two cheeks of the same ass.

TeamDepends's picture

It's all about free, open, and honest markets, which none of us have ever known.  If we can get back to that, the sky's the limit.

JustObserving's picture

The Princeton election consortium's latest update of the meta-analysis of the  electoral vote count on the eve of the election continues to predict an Obama victory:

They have been predicting an Obama victory with a certainty of 100% since yesterday:

Probability of Obama re-election: Random Drift 99.2%, Bayesian Prediction 100.0%

The massive inflation with an Obama victory will explain the big move in gold today. $2000 gold by December and at least $40 silver by inauguration.


cougar_w's picture

Surely you do not mean to suggest that Romeny would turn off the printers?

Gold is up, but not because of the outcome of the election. I think more likely that the "go easy on the prining" window is about to close only because the election season is at an end, and whoever ends up president will get a visit from The Fed with "recommendations" on how hard to lean on CNTL-P. And it won't be "lightly and with due considerations".

Next week they are going to print fiat like mo'fos.

CharlieSDT's picture

Buying an ounce of gold is like 100 votes for Ron Paul.  That is the only way to take down these motherfuckers.

pods's picture

What does the NAR and BLS forecast?


Lost Wages's picture

My wife and I are arguing today. I'm voting for no one by not going to the polls at all and she wants to go stand in line to vote for "None of the Above." So I'm thinking, "Why do I always want to do things the easy way and you always have to do things in such a way that they are as big of a pain in the ass as possible?" And then it became about not just voting, but life in general.

knukles's picture

Simplify things.
Cut her tongue out and break her fingers. 

Wraithlord's picture

Come now, how will she make him a sandwich with broken fingers?


Orly's picture

May I just say that your tactic, while possibly true, was not very wise on your part.  Now you'll have to live with it.


Helix6's picture

Ah, but at least she cares enough to register her non-vote.

francis_sawyer's picture

I'm waiting for the swimsuit competition before casting my vote...

HD's picture

I did that with Bush and Gore. I STILL have nightmares.

RiotActing's picture

Sounds like Gartman is a racist... What a clown, those are the two reasons he gives for Romney winning? Someone should tell this guy to stop eating crack for breakfast....

RiotActing's picture

Vote me down you fucking moron Romney supporters.... You are all a bunch of idiots...

CaptainObvious's picture

I down-voted you and I wrote in Ron Paul this morning.  So what's my label, then?

Blankenstein's picture


Why so upset that he gave reasons why he thinks Romney will win?  He didn't give reasons why you should vote for him.  Jim Cramer took the opposite stance, but no problem with him?  Are you so bellicose because Gartment didn't choose your color team?


Down arrow for believing there is a choice. 

crusty curmudgeon's picture

Election prediction:  we lose.

RiotActing's picture

And everyone else besides the asshole Democrats....

Flaming Ferrari's picture

The best indicator I have ever know for anything is a free market. And yes there is a free market on who will will the presidency.

Intrade 70% Obama, 30% Romney.

$6.5m real money traded.

Press and partisans have their own motivations for saying its close. Fact is it isn't close.

RiotActing's picture

Exactly, only idiots and morons who watch TV think Romney is going to win...