Superman (It’s Not Easy) — Five for Fighting

I’m as shocked as you are:

And talk about hooking a brother up; for “Three Strange Days” (School of Fish) they ran a link to my piece on the Folly of David Axelrod’s Turnout Model … I don’t have the words:


  1. Tom
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:30 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Congrats! Keep up the fantastic work.

  2. Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:30 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Go Keith! Go Keith! Go Keith!
    ~ Brittany

  3. NHConservative
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Congrats! Soon you will be getting on the NYT’s to replace Nate Silver…good stuff.

  4. Blackcloud
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

    It’s funny the link to your piece is right above the link to the one by Jonathan Chait. You describe a fantasy, Keith, while Chait writes one. There are other descriptions of Chait’s essay I could use, but this is a family blog, so I won’t.

    • displacedRhodeIslandConservative
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 5:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Unfortunately my eye fell to that Chait piece, I did not bother to click on it though.

  5. JGS
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:34 pm | Permalink | Reply


  6. John Fisher
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

    This was your best one yet.

    Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:36 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Keith your Axelrod article was also listed as most viewed last 24 hours (lower left corner of RCP home page) earlier today. Not there anymore – quit slacking and write something new. 🙂

    • Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I did not know that. Thanks so much for pointing that out. I’m a lucky guy these days.

      • Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

        Luck has nothing to do with it, you earned all the recognition you’ve gotten and will continue to get! 🙂
        ~ Brittany

  8. Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Congrats again Keith! You’re becoming a superstar!

    I know your resources are somewhat limited now, but I’m curious to get your interpretation on the new Marquette Poll.
    Here’s a little more on the new Marquette Law School Poll with Obama out in front again over Romney 51-43.

    The party ID in the new survey is D + 5 (Dem 49, Rep 44, Ind 5) The party ID in the Oct 17 survey was D +1 (Dem 47, Rep 46, Ind 6) versus 2008 of D +6 (Dem 39, Rep 33, Ind 29) and 2004 of R +3 (Dem 35, Rep 38, Ind 27) in 2004. Now Obama leads Romney with Independents 46-41.
    I’ll let Keith and others smarter than me interpret all this in depth.

    • housebroken dad
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 5:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

      First of all, D +5 is ridiculous. Wis is about 50/50 as it gets, give or take a point. Could end up being anywhere in between D +1 and R +1. Also, I think the LV screen is little too lenient on this poll judging by their early voting numbers. O leading indys is a slight concern though as I do believe whichever way the Indys go, Wis goes. Two days ago, Ras had it all even. I think its still somewhere around there. At most, O has a one or two point lead.

      • Posted October 31, 2012 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

        I agree that the D+5 seems way off. What I don’t get is the wild swing in the I’s that this poll states, especially since almost every other poll have I’s breaking overwhelmingly for Romney.

    • liberalslie
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 6:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’m wary of any poll that is Ind 5. 5??? 2008 was Ind 29. If anything we’ve seen party identification move more towards Ind than choosing R’s or D’s.

  9. easternimm
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

    congrats again for your work! you are in the loop now!

  10. Aaron
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Keith, do you have any numbers on how many hits you’re getting daily? Would love to see how many visitors (overall and unique) the site is racking up.

  11. Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Maybe Keith can at least replace Dick Morris…I can’t believe RCP would link an article by that guy. He is wrong about basically every election yet people on our side keep listening to him because he says what we want to hear.

  12. Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:50 pm | Permalink | Reply

    UI poll finds Romney has slight edge among Iowans in race ‘too close to call’ R-45.2 O-44.4

    • EpiphoneKnight
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:58 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Good news… I think Mitt should win IA, given all the endorsements. Would like to see another Rasmussen take there though.

    • Posted October 31, 2012 at 5:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I think Iowa and Colorado are looking pretty good. I am confident R/R will win CO, Iowa isn’t a sure thing, but I think it is a better than 50/50 proposition. An incumbent polling at 45% this close to the election will not win.

    • Posted October 31, 2012 at 5:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

      iowa, Colorado, New Hamshire don’t matter WITHOUT Ohio.

      Unless he HIGHLY UNLIKELY flips MN, WI, PA, or MI…we will all be saluting and pledging our loyalty to Dear Rule Obama for the next 4 years.

      • Jim S.
        Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:34 pm | Permalink

        How is WI highly unlikely? GOP won big in the Walker election, GOTV operation in WI is said to be top tier for the GOP, Ras has it 49-49, and most important, both campaigns are making big appearances which right there tells you the internal polling has it close.

  13. MattWestfall
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:52 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Keith, congrats as always, but at this point I can hear Bear Bryant’s sage advice, “Act like you been there before, son.” Time to accept your stature and move on, buddy.

    • TheTorch
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 4:58 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Well done Keith, terrific to see that article on RCP, I read that earlier and hoped that would get some coverage, it is clear what those polls are intended to do, and they are indeed fantasy.
      Again, great work.

  14. Haus
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 5:00 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Take a look at the Cuyahoga county (Heavy Dem County) early voting results. The turnout for the last two days has dropped dramatically. ~10% drop (30850 in 2008 vs 27865 in 2012)

    This could be the result of terrible weather or frontloading EV. Something to keep an eye on…

    I should probably post this on the last Ohio write-up.

  15. R. A. Easton
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 5:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Is there am e-mail address for Keith Backer…would like to forward him an e-mail I sent to RCP…


    • Posted October 31, 2012 at 5:47 pm | Permalink | Reply

      i receive emails at battlegroundwatch “at” gmail “dot” com

  16. David Burks
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 5:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Keith, you deserve both fame and fortune. Well done, sir!

  17. petep
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 5:10 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Congrats! You deserve it. Since I discovered this site about a month ago, I have not really found much better analysis of the polls. RCP needs you to help them redo their average and minimize the junk polls.

  18. Utah Libertarian
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 5:16 pm | Permalink | Reply


  19. Posted October 31, 2012 at 5:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Keith, I watched Jay Cost become a nationally trusted election expert. I corresponded with him back when he was being used by the RNC as the best source to determine the winner of the Ohio race in 2004. The rest was history for him. You may well start to get the recognition you deserve. And, who knows, there may be a place at the Weekly Standard for you, too!

  20. Ranger375
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 6:00 pm | Permalink | Reply

    This does not surprise me — what did surprise me was that you weren’t used more across the political sites. It took me just one evening of looking through your Blog to see just how good you were in explaining some fairly complex issues in a way that everyone could understand them.

    Well done!

  21. Buckeye Bob
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 6:03 pm | Permalink | Reply


    Congrats on the well-deserved recognition. A quick rant on the RCP averages. When I saw Romney had lost his edge, I had to check which Democrat poll caused it. I saw that it was the National Journal Poll showing a 5-point Obama advantage. Looking for the internals, I saw there was none for the poll. Instead, the always biased Ron Brownstein (famous for AP’s Bush bashing while he was there) elaborated that they used the 2008 party breakdown for the poll, giving Ds a eight point edge. I suppose a Republican-leaning firm could get in on the worthless RCP averages if they used a 2004 party breakdown to skew it back. What has happened at RCP? Do they treat all polls the same no matter how poor they are? I mean National Journal admitted they didn’t know what the correct party breakdown should be, so they winged it based on 2008. Yet, this one poll skews the average for the RCP poll of polls, which will become the latest talking point for the political shows tonight. RCP has cetainly changed since the early years; it’s become a place where the biased poll firms know their numbers will be accepted with no questions asked (PPP etc). Hopefully, in four years, some other web site will provide some perspective and balance for those slanted polls. Keith, you ready?

    • AC
      Posted October 31, 2012 at 8:47 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I agree with what you’re saying. If Romney wins this election, then many pollsters and pundits will have egg on their faces — big time! And it will be time to issue a lot of pink slips.

  22. Posted October 31, 2012 at 6:45 pm | Permalink | Reply

    You deserve the recognition, but it’s good to see modesty in this age of general shameless self-promotion :).

  23. Tom
    Posted October 31, 2012 at 9:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Keith, I’m not surprised. I just recently found your website (trhough RCP) and considering what a political junkie I am, have never seen such comprehensive and thorough analysis as you display. What is your background?

  24. Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Congrats Keith but frankly, your site is a lot more substantive than theirs.

    • Posted October 31, 2012 at 11:40 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Flattered by the compliment but please be nice to them. They have been very very good to me.

  25. Suzanne Morris
    Posted November 1, 2012 at 10:51 am | Permalink | Reply

    Go Keith! Well deserved sir!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: