Showing posts with label fivethirtyeight. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fivethirtyeight. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 - I Voted Today



I Voted Today
by Sinclair Noe

DOW + 133 = 13,245
SPX + 11 = 1428
NAS + 12 = 3011
10 YR YLD +.06 = 1.74%
OIL + 2.80 = 88.45
GOLD + 31.90 = 1717.90
SILV + .84 = 32.12


Normally, I spend the first couple of hours of each day throwing back some coffee and reading, maybe a little writing. Not today. I still had a cup of mud, but I showered fast and headed out the door. I drove to the local high school and I voted. I like going to the polls on election day. It's more satisfying than mailing the ballot in early. And I like going to the local school to vote. Even though it was early morning, there were several young students on the campus. They saw people going into the polling place, and I hope it made them think about the process. I missed the crowds. I think many voters were dropping off kids at the school and then going inside to vote, but I beat the rush, if there was a rush. I didn't see any lines. Maybe that means something about the outcome or the voting patterns; I don't know what. I put my ballot into a ballot scanning machine, and a poll worker said “thank you” and he handed me a sticker that reads: “I Voted Today”. I stuck it on my shirt and told the fellow “thank you.” I felt good, I felt like a citizen.

Yes, I know my one little vote doesn't count for much, but I like going through the motions. The whole idea of voting has been drummed into my head for so long that I really believe it makes some kind of difference. I'm not crazy enough to imagine that any one election hinges on my vote. I'm part of a mass collective, a big pot of bubbling citizenry: messy, neat, stupid, brilliant, natty, informed, clueless, proud, bigoted, cruel, compassionate, hardworking, lazy, simple, complex, determined, and easily led astray. And we all go into voting booths and try to force one another to create a world that we would prefer. And we all go into voting booths and negate one another's delusions. That's the card we have to play, and we play it. And my card is as strong as yours, and yours is as strong as the billionaire’s, and the billionaire's is as strong as retiree, which is as strong as..., pick anybody.

And somehow, it seems to work. Go figure.

It's not perfect. The two major parties get their pockets stuffed by monied interests, and the list reads different but the interests aren't. Even if a person sneaks into political office with a pure heart, I doubt they can escape without heavy baggage. It all seems like a big, expensive game. Even if I think I'm voting for right and light and goodness, all I'm really doing is expressing my preference that it is better than wrong and darkness and evil. But I don't think it is really a game, and certainly not a race. So, I don't always try to pick a winner when I vote. Sometimes it turns out that way; sometimes not. I try to vote my conscience and the result is that I never feel like I've wasted my vote.

If you are looking for the horse race aspect of the election, here it is. A guy named Nate Silver has been running a website called fivethirtyeight.org. He looks at all the polls and pools them all together.

The national polls now range from showing a 1-point lead for Mr. Romney to slightly more than a 4-point advantage for Mr. Obama. The FiveThirtyEight forecast of the national popular vote is within this range, projecting Mr. Obama’s most likely margin of victory to be two or three percentage points, approximating the margin that George W. Bush achieved in defeating John Kerry in 2004.
Averaging polls together increases their sample size - making them much more powerful statistically than any one poll taken alone. But the errors in the polls are sometimes correlated, meaning there are years when most of them miss in the same direction. Mr. Romney remains close enough to Mr. Obama that he could fairly easily win the popular vote if there is such an error in Mr. Obama’s favor this year. Mr. Romney’s chances are less, however, of winning the Electoral College. The large majority of polls in battleground states over the past three days have shown leads for Mr. Obama. On Monday, for example, 19 battleground state polls found leads for Mr. Obama, as compared with just three for Mr. Romney.
Among 12 national polls published on Monday, Mr. Obama led by an average of 1.6 percentage points. Perhaps more important is the trend in the surveys. On average, Mr. Obama gained 1.5 percentage points from the prior edition of the same polls, improving his standing in nine of the surveys while losing ground in just one.
Mr. Romney’s chances of winning the Electoral College have slipped, and are now only about 8 percent according to the forecast model - down from about 30 percent 10 days ago.

I don't know if the odds will play out as predicted. It will be interesting. I'll be watching the news reports tonight, maybe even late into the night. The major networks probably are going to take their time in declaring a winner; once bitten, twice shy. The odds-makers and prognosticators have made their calls but anything could happen.

I read Der Spiegel this morning, the German newspaper has already called the election; they say America lost the election:

Regardless of who wins the election, total capitalism is America's true ruler, and it has the power to destroy the country. Romney, the exceedingly wealthy business man, and Obama, the cultivated civil rights lawyer, are two faces of a political system that no longer has much to do with democracy as we understand it. Democracy is about choice, but Americans don't really have much of a choice.

The German newspaper goes on to say: “The truth is that we simply no longer understand America. Looking at the country from Germany and Europe, we see a foreign culture. The political system is in the hands of big business and its lobbyists. The checks and balances have failed. And a perverse mix of irresponsibility, greed and religious zealotry dominate public opinion. The downfall of the American empire has begun. It could be that the country's citizens wouldn't be able to stop it no matter how hard they tried. But they aren't even trying.”

I know my one vote doesn't determine any election but I know that elections are determined by the people who show up to vote. The only way the politicians know what's important to me is if I tell them and the only time they have to actually listen is when I tell them with the ballot.

And so, on the first Tuesday in November we all vote. If you're fed up with politics and you don't vote, you have still voted. There is no such thing as not voting. If you prefer to spend the day cleaning lint out of your navel rather than casting a ballot, you have effectively doubled the value of someone else's ballot. The powers that be realize that if you don't vote, it doubles their vote. Maybe someday everybody will be so disgusted and ill-informed and cynical that you just throw up both your hands and quit voting. Bad politicians get elected by people who don't vote.

I think my vote has value. If it doesn't then why has there been $6 billion dollars spent on this election to try and influence my vote? There have been efforts to suppress votes, and they inevitably fail. People will stand in lines for hours; people will wade through flood-waters, and we've seen that people around the world are willing to risk their lives to have their voices heard by way of the democratic process that we seem to take for granted.

I think your individual vote is more important than ever. There have been millions and billions spent this past year in a cynical pursuit of power and influence. So far, the money seems to have purchased lies, smears, mud-slinging, distortions, counter-lies, manipulation, and more than a healthy dose of cynicism, but it's still a better alternative than violence to determine a government. Unfortunately, that seems to be the choice. We either make democracy work or things turn really nasty. We know that bullets can change the course of history; we've seen it played out in World Wars, Civil Wars, and in all sorts of gruesome deaths.

Ballots can change history, too. It's this crazy, radical idea that we can change things without destroying everything. And everyone is included; we can all throw our ideas and dreams and visions in a box, shake it up and live with the results until such time as we have the chance to vote again. It is a crude, imperfect process and sometimes I'm personally displeased but it has produced the most prosperous civilization in history; if we can hold onto it.





Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - It Could All Come Down to Pahrump


It Could All Come Down to Pahrump
-by Sinclair Noe

DOW + 5 = 13,557
SPX + 5 = 1460
NAS + 2 = 3104
10 YR YLD +.09 = 1.81%
OIL - .19 = 91.93
GOLD +1 .60 = 1750.90
SILV + .24 = 33.30
PLAT + 22.00 = 1672.00


Listen live or archived audio at MoneyRadio.com

The best site I've found for election polling data is http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

A CBS News/Knowledge networks poll of undecided voters who watched the debate found 37 percent giving an advantage to President Obama, 30 percent favoring Governor Romney and 33 percent calling the debate a tie. That represents a narrower lead for Mr. Obama than Mr. Romney had after the first debate in Denver, when a similar poll gave Mr. Romney a 46-22 edge.

A CNN poll of registered voters who watched the debate — not just undecided voters, as in the CBS News survey — also gave the debate to Mr. Obama by a seven-point margin, 46 percent to 39 percent. Mr. Romney had won by a much larger margin, 67 percent to 25 percent, in CNN’s poll after the first debate.

Meanwhile, 73 percent of voters in the CNN poll said Mr. Obama performed better than they expected, against just 10 percent who said he did worse; chalk that up to diminished expectations.

Two other polls gave Mr. Obama a somewhat clearer advantage. A Battleground poll of likely voters in swing states who watched the debate had him winning 53-38.

A poll by Google Consumer Surveys gave Mr. Obama a 48 percent to 31 percent edge among registered voters.

A Public Policy Polling survey of Colorado voters who watched the debate found 48 percent declaring Mr. Obama the winner, and 44 percent for Mr. Romney. Mr. Obama’s advantage was clearer in the poll among independent voters, who gave him a 58-36 edge. However, the candidates were roughly tied when Public Policy Polling asked them how the debate swayed their vote, with 37 percent saying the debate made them more likely to vote for Mr. Obama, with 36 percent for Mr. Romney.

The most recent odds put Mr. Obama winning a second term at 65%, down slightly in the past few days from 67%; but those odds do not include the results from last nights debate. Those are the odds, not the percentage of votes; that calculation is much closer, right about a 2-percentage point advantage for Mr. Obama in popular vote. The actual vote might be closer still. And of course, the winner is not determined by the popular vote but by the electoral college; so, swing states become key battlegrounds. And that means that an individual John or Jane Public in Pahrump Nevada might actually cast THE decisive vote.

NBC News reports that so far, $807 million has been spent on political ads for radio and television: local and national, cable and broadcast. Team Romney is outspending Team Obama by $455 million to $355 million. I say Team, because you have to factor in outside money that is now part of the campaigns due to the Citizens United Ruling. The actual Romney campaign has spent around $164 million. The actual Obama campaign has spent almost $300 million. The rest of the money has come from outside sources, the SuperPacs.

I find the debates and the election hoopla to be lots of fun and very entertaining. The debates are less expensive than going to a movie, so they seem cheap; but sometimes what's cheap is dear.

Few events have reshaped the nation over the last half-decade as much as the housing crisis—particularly in key battleground states such as Florida, Ohio, and Nevada. But neither the Obama nor the Romney campaign has had very much to say about it.

Housing’s absence from the campaign debate has led to lots of head-scratching among pundits, though there is an obvious explanation for why it has taken a back seat: housing is a political loser.

Mr. Romney faces a delicate balancing act. He has criticized Mr. Obama’s housing-rescue efforts as simply kicking the can down the road and says that he would focus on growing the economy instead. But that leaves an impression that he might recommend doing even less for at-risk homeowners looking to the government for more help. If your opponent is unpopular for promising to fix the problem and then falling short, it could be risky to advertise that you would offer even less.Mr. Obama has learned how difficult the housing problem is to fix, while Mr. Romney has discovered how hard it is to talk about in a sound-byte-driven campaign cycle.

The Commerce Department reported housing starts hit a four-year high. Groundbreaking on new homes jumped 15 percent in September, the quickest pace since July 2008. The surge in housing starts was viewed as evidence that the housing sector's fledgling recovery is bolstering the recovery of the broader economy.

And it makes the Federal Reserve look good. In September, when the Fed FOMC decide to announce an open ended mortgage backed securities bond buying binge, QE to infinity and beyond, they ended up propping up an economic sector that was already trending higher.

What came first, the Fed stimulus or the housing recovery? Many Fed officials reckon that as the housing market’s problems have been a big reason why the recovery has been so tepid, targeting the sector with direct aid can make a big difference for the broader economy. On the flip side, the Fed has the good fortune the housing market is showing signs of life when they are trying to stimulate the housing market. Policymakers hope positive housing momentum will help overall activity rise, which in turn should help boost job growth and lower unemployment. It still remains to be seen if the housing recovery has legs, and then if it has enough legs to lift the broader economy; but there is little doubt the housing market once again has momentum.

So does the housing rebound, joined with improving job market data, change economists’ estimates of how far the Fed eventually takes QE Infinity? There is already a lot of Fed monetary policy easing priced into the market and with the data improving there’s a risk the central bank could stop short of what’s expected, which could unsettle markets. Of course, it might be just a bump in a long term nasty market; even with improvements, the housing market remains far from normal. One of the tells would be an improvement in new home construction, that would demonstrate real demand; this month's report is a step in the right direction but not yet a trend.

So, for now, and with today's data, the old axiom, “Don't fight the Fed,” would certainly apply.

The S&P 500 rose for the third consecutive day. 3Q Earnings Season: IBM said revenue fell short of expectations. The stock dropped almost 5 percent, exerting an 81-point drag on the Dow industrials. IBM has an outsized influence on the Dow, which is a price-weighted index. IBM's stock closed at $200.63. Intel lost 2.5 percent to end at $21.79 a day after giving a weak revenue outlook.


Early in the 3Q reporting season 14% of S&P 500 companies have already reported earnings, and of those companies, 65 percent have beaten analysts' expectations, ahead of the long-term average of 62 percent. However, a majority - 54.3 percent - of the companies in the S&P 500 Index that have reported results so far have missed analysts' revenue forecasts, The top line is shrinking even as the companies are delivering bottom line results.


What gives? Earnings expectations have been lowered so far that it hasn't been hard to beat them. Once revenue starts missing and you can't cut costs anymore, I think this is the crack in the armor. If you then see earnings start to miss already lowered expectations, that's when you have a problem. Part of the answer is that the economy is in better shape today than it has been for some years. It is in a turnaround even if it is not as strong as we'd like it to be.


But that's already old news; we're already well into the fourth quarter. How does next year look? Well, companies are cautious about 2013 earnings targets. You can see how a CEO would want to reign in expectations for next year; it would be difficult to push profit margins higher when revenue growth is slowing. Margins are already considered pretty rich. If you have slowing revenues and you've already cut costs as much as possible; and I think it's safe to say that US businesses are running lean; then there's not a whole lot that can be done to grow earnings.