Postscript: Burkeman countdown ...

I won! kindof ...

On the subject of contests: about a hundred years ago I posted a list of 20 election spoofs you may have missed, and bemoaned the fact that there didn't seem to be any good Joe Biden-related comedy around. I offered Guardian merchandise to whoever could locate the funniest counter-example. Three commenters -- toypadlock, PaulCanning and Elishabet -- did their very best, suggesting What if Joe Biden Said What He Was Really Thinking?, an episode of Red State Update about Biden, and a Joe Biden blues number. I fear they basically proved my point, though, since... well, I don't want to be ungrateful for your efforts. And the blues song, while not that funny, is pretty darn good, you betcha. But none of them made me laugh as much as watching -- not for the first time -- Biden's excellent debate response to a question about his loquaciousness, which PaulCanning also mentioned (see above). Turns out there's no Biden spoof as funny as Biden being intentionally funny, which is a rare thing to say of a politician. Anyhow, I'll happily distribute Guardian t-shirts to all three of you if you email me a postal address.

UPDATE: Biden's also pretty funny when he's swearily berating the news media.

Yay! Teeshirt (I hope it fits ... ) I like the line about 'a hundred years ago'. But he's right, there are no funny Biden spoofs ;[

The only poll that counts

Yet again reading in the sundays UK coverage of the Presidential election "race tightening" and nothing but reporting of the national poll numbers.

None of this matters as the only poll that counts is the electoral one. Huh? This is the one George Bush won in 2000, despite having less votes nationally than Gore. Each state gets so many 'electors' and it's the total of them which decides the winner. Not called the 'United States' for nothing.

And in that poll - the only poll that counts - currently stands at:

Obama 301 McCain 224 Ties 13

So it's no wonder that the cool heads at Intrade, who put money on outcomes, currently have:

Obama win 311 to 227

Obama has been leading, by these sorts of margins, in these real-world polls since June. Of course this could change but every indicator is that it's not exactly 'tight'. Bear this in mind as you read non-stop UK coverage about a so-called 'tight' race .... journalists have a vested interest in ignoring the only poll that counts.

~~~~~~~

On Palin, this is what she's up against in the vice-presidential debate. I predict a knockout:



Postscript: I've been reminded that the pollsters also have an interest in this being 'tight'. Plus the New York Times has more today on that electoral vote map showing places like the Dakotas 'in play'.

Postscript: Here's another reality check. Obama will have 1.5 million organisers on the ground for the election - thanks to the web, all the groundwork which I've been documenting. This is something like 5X what Karl Rove ever managed.

Palin may indeed 'energize the base' but these numbers, alongside the sustained voter-registration effort, which has driven Democrat-aligning voter sign-ups for months, is yet more evidence that all the evidence is pointing to Obama winning.

Postscript: A point raised by a commentator as well as some pundits is the 'Bradley effect', where people say they'll vote for the African-American candidate to pollsters but don't. Short answer to this is that no-one knows until November 5th. But, as I note, those betting money on the outcome still hold that this will be negligible and are betting Obama. I'd also add that the evidence from the primaries shows a negligible to non-existent Bradley effect.