I find that the newspapers are *very* bad at reporting on the state of the race from an electoral college standpoint.  They rest excessively on assumptions that the real numbers don't support, and it warps coverage.  I can't tell you how many stories I've seen that treat Pennsylvania as though it were up for grabs, despite Obama's consistently high numbers there.  The Tribune Newspapers map is similar.  It begins be coloring all of Bush's states won by more than 10 points, I think, as red.  Thus, the map starts out putting Virginia in McCain's column despite Virginia's pretty decisive swing toward Obama so far in this campaign.  It's as though they've never heard of Silver's website.  Well, maybe they haven't.  Why not?!  It's the only game in town that I'm aware of that actually does comprehensive and rigorous meta-analysis of the polls.

What's funny is that they use RCP's figures as a source.  RCP has it 277-158, with 103 EVs in the toss up category.  Very weird filter they have at the Washington Post.

I'm doing a class project right now where we're supposed to project the outcome of the election. Everyone's conception of what constitutes a swing state is WAYYY off unless they're familiar with Nate Silver and Fivethirtyeight. There are still so many people who think Pennsylvania is in play and North Carolina is a lock for McCain. That's because things like the Cook Political Report and the like are soooo freaking slow to adjust their battleground states to new polling.

Every time someone over there tries to update it, Fred Hiatt sneaks in afterward and changes it back.

Well, as an Obama supporter, I guess I care about the polls to the extent that they influence actual votes. I don't want anyone not voting because they think their state is a lock for someone, but, again, I suspect that Obama voters are, on the whole, more likely to vote regardless, being a generally enthusiastic bunch. Also I wouldn't want the Obama people to rely on bad info when deciding where to put their resources. But then they probably have good info.

So if I don't have to worry about that, then I'm just fine with a huge November suprise. Changing the polls doesn't help. It's like standing on a scale and sucking in your gut. I don't get it.

If Obama holds the Gore 2000 states (which includes NM and IA and seems likely), then he needs to win ONE of the following: CO, FL, OH, VA, and NC.

psantillana:  I guess I agree as a fellow Obama supporter, but I find it interesting as an example of media incompetence.  People like me routinely criticize the media for excessive focus on the horse race as opposed to issues.  Here's evidence that they can't even cover the horse race accurately.

jhildner.  Nate's not quite the only game in town, though he's certainly the most thorough.  The guys over at pollster.com are also pretty good.

The level of polling illiteracy from reporters and news organizations that regularly report on them is pretty disappointing.  From the pre-existing biases (PA is virtually carved in stone in most people's minds as a swing state) to misleading comments about races being "statistical dead heats," to commentary about how a candidate's ground game advantage is showing up in the polls (polls tell you basically nothing whatever about ground operations)..  I'm not expecting reporters to understand all of the methodology that someone like Nate Silver uses, or controversies about weighting by party ID, cell phone only users and the like.  But is it really so much to ask for a basic understanding of what polls tell you?

jhildner is right on. If you remember how the press covered the final three months of the Democratic primary, it was clear that the vast majority of American political reporters, both in print and on TV, had neither any idea how the rules of the game worked, nor the ability to do simple algebraic math. I continue to submit that as far as the horse-race aspect of things go, Americans would be better served by replacing all the political reporters with an equal number of sports reporters. Even the worst sports reporters at least understand the importance of knowing the rules of the game and are capable of doing the simple math required to calculate league standings.

Anyone who both knew how the contest worked and was capable of calculating a league standings table knew in late February that Obama was going to be the Democratic nominee. Likewise, anyone with those basic aptitudes understands now that there are other states than Ohio that are worth watching.