Obama more likely to be Hayes than Tilden

According to Five Thirty Eight, there is now an 8.55% chance of Obama losing the popular vote, but winning the electoral vote -- with Colorado the most likely state, by far, to put him over-the-top in the Electoral College.

The chances of McCain winning an electoral-popular "inversion" -- the scenario I envisioned back in April -- are rated at just 0.38%. (Actually, I envisioned something more drastic: a "Samuel Tilden" scenario, in which Obama would lose the election despite earning a popular-vote majority, not just a plurality, and winning by a substantial PV margin over McCain -- say, 2 or 3 percent. That possibility now seems vanishingly small.)

The most likely "tipping point states," according to present projections, are Colorado (63%), Ohio (30%), Virginia (24%), Michigan (15%), Nevada (13%), and Pennsylvania (10%). All other states have a 5%-or-less chance of single-handedly "deciding" the election. (Florida is at 4%, if you were wondering.) The odds of a "recount" scenario -- i.e., one or more decisive states being decided by less than 0.5 percent of the vote -- stand at 6.96%.

Meanwhile, the odds of a 269-269 Electoral College tie are increasing. This probability is now listed at 3.2%. Why? Well...

[T]here is one specific scenario that is driving this outcome. That is the scenario wherein Barack Obama wins the Kerry states plus Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado, but loses New Hampshire. Of the 320 times [out of 10,000] that our simulation ended in a tie, this particular scenario was responsible 294 times. Indeed, we presently have Obama winning precisely the Kerry states plus Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado, so all that would be needed to make a tie occur is to flip New Hampshire back to McCain, an entirely reasonable possibility.

Also worth noting: "about 80 percent of the tie outcomes involve McCain winning the popular vote. This is by far the messier of the two scenarios. Since the Democrats will almost certainly control a plurality or a majority of House delegations in the incoming Congress, a tie accompanied by an Obama win in the popular vote will lead to a lot of fanfare but ultimately little drama -- Obama will become the next President. But if McCain wins the popular vote, there will be far more pressure on Democratic Representatives to vote against their party."

Then there's this:

Sarah Palin may no longer be an asset to the ticket; in fact, she may be a liability. Averaging the candidates' favorability scores across four recent polls -- as one should always try and do when looking at favorability numbers since they can vary greatly depending on question wording -- Palin now has the worst net scores among the four principals in the race...

Palin's average favorability score is now a +7 -- about 10 points behind Joe Biden's numbers. [Biden is +17, Obama is +18, McCain is +9.] Perhaps more importantly, these numbers are 10-15 points behind where Palin's numbers were just a week or so ago. If voters come in not knowing very much about a candidate -- and the more they see of the candidate, the less they like of the candidate -- this is a major concern.

All along, Becky has continued insisting that Palin will end up being a liability to McCain; I have consistently disagreed, largely because I lack faith in the electorate to see through obvious bulls***. But perhaps Becky will end up being right. We'll see. 46 days and counting!

P.S. Not really related, but the above-linked Jonathan Chait piece encapsulates perfectly why I was, and am, so appalled by the Palin pick:

The main complaint against Palin has been her lack of experience. That's fortunate for her, since "experience"--especially measured in a linear way--fails to capture exactly what Palin lacks. Yes, two years as governor is less than you'd like, as is four years as senator. The real problem, though, is that Palin has no record of thinking about national or international policy. Bobby Jindal, another Republican veep contender, has barely more experience than Palin, but he is a respected policy intellectual. Pat Buchanan ran for president without ever having served in elective office, but he had engaged more deeply than most presidential candidates in policy questions.

Engagement, not experience, is the difference between Palin's qualifications and Obama's. Obama has a longstanding interest in national and (to a lesser extent) international issues, and has answered questions on all those issues in extensive detail. Palin has dealt almost exclusively with parochial issues in a wildly atypical state. (Her fiscal experience, which consists of divvying up oil lucre, offers better preparation to serve as president of Saudi Arabia than the United States.) It's possible Palin has harbored a long-standing, secret passion for policy wonkery, but the few signs available thus far--her convention speech that spelled out "new-clear weapons," her evident lack of familiarity with the term "Bush Doctrine"--suggest otherwise. The Republican intelligentsia is frantically tutoring her while they run out the clock until November 4.

I would have had no problem with McCain picking Jindal. And, no, it's not because he's a man, lest any hypocritical, gender-baiting, suddenly-P.C.-conscious "conservative" victimologists jump on that bandwagon. It's because, fundamentally, Jindal, like Biden and Obama and McCain (and, for that matter, Hillary Clinton and Condi Rice and Dianne Feinstein and Kay Bailey Hutchinson and plenty of other women on both sides of the aisle), is serious, such that it's instinctively reasonable to picture them as potential presidents. Palin is not serious in this way; or at least, there's nothing in her record to indicate that she is, nor have any nascent indications of seriousness yet emerged on the campaign trail.

Bottom line, the potential ascendancy of President Palin on January 21, 2009, is unimaginable and terrifying. She would, at least at first, be the female George W. Bush, times 100: an empty vessel for the policy preferences of the most influential (unelected) people around her. I say "times 100" because this is an unfair caricature, though with significant grains of truth, as applied to Bush, whereas it seems much more likely to be actually true with regard to Palin. I say "at least at first" because, presumably, a President Palin would eventually get her sea legs and run her own administration. But how would she run it? What are her core beliefs on the big issues of the day? We have no idea. And the McCain campaign appears committed to preventing us from learning, which only heightens my anxiety. Get Drunk and Vote 4 McCain? Make that "get drunk, vote for McCain, and pray the old bastard doesn't die." I think not.

P.S. If you don't believe me, consider the following scenarios. Suppose, God forbid, that Obama were to die soon, when there's still time for the national party to officially replace him as the presidential nominee. What would happen? Surely Hillary's people would make a play for the nomination, but in all likelihood, the mantle would pass to Biden, right? Certainly no one would consider ousting him from the ticket because he's not up to the job; if he were to be cast aside, it would only be because of Hillary's outsize influence and "18 million votes."

Now, on the other hand, suppose -- again, God forbid -- that McCain were to die soon. What would happen in that case? On the GOP side, there is no Hillary equivalent to challenge the veep as the obvious choice to replace McCain. But would the Republicans actually put Palin in the #1 spot? Or would they try to construct something like a Romney-Palin ticket (or perhaps, thinking outside the box, a Petraeus-Palin ticket)? At the very least, extremely serious consideration would be given to choosing someone other than Palin, precisely because she'd be seen by clear-eyed Republicans as too much of a lightweight to lead the national ticket. Be honest with yourself: I'm not wrong about this. Perhaps Palin would ultimately be elevated to the #1 spot (because otherwise the base would revolt), but if she were elevated, it would be with considerable reluctance in many quarters within her own party. Now, ask yourself: if that's true, then what the hell is she doing running for vice president?? If McCain dies in office, a year or a month or a day into his term, there's no Republican National Committee to second-guess whether she gets to take over the top spot. Although some supporters might wish it were not so, the reality is that she would just -- snap -- become president. On the spot. In a guaranteed time of crisis, no less. And then what? Who the hell knows? Exactly.