Intrade Shows Distorted View Of The Election
It just goes to show you how slanted the mainstream media is in this country and in Europe. Many of the people watching the news mistakenly believe that Obama will easily win because of the strong spin. There's a chance to make some money on intrade because of the massive inefficiencies, but can they be trusted to payout?
-Keyser
Quote: KeyserI was just looking at Intrade and was amazed at how distorted the presidential race is being shown. They have president Obama being re-elected at 62.8%!
It just goes to show you how slanted the mainstream media is in this country and in Europe. Many of the people watching the news mistakenly believe that Obama will easily win because of the strong spin. There's a chance to make some money on intrade because of the massive inefficiencies, but can they be trusted to payout?
-Keyser
I disagree, if anything I think the 62% number might be low for Obama. Too many people are factoring in the polls which only look at the popular vote, not the electoral college. I do think there is a small chance Romney could win the popular vote but will still most likely lose the election.
Quote: KeyserI was just looking at Intrade and was amazed at how distorted the presidential race is being shown. They have president Obama being re-elected at 62.8%!
It just goes to show you how slanted the mainstream media is in this country and in Europe. Many of the people watching the news mistakenly believe that Obama will easily win because of the strong spin. There's a chance to make some money on intrade because of the massive inefficiencies, but can they be trusted to payout?
-Keyser
If anything, perhaps your views are distorted?
RCP shows it pretty tight...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html
Both of them have a few more weeks to shine or not. I'd say that anyone who enters the booth on election day with ANY doubts about President Obama may just decide to that Romney isn't all that bad after all that day....
Quote: DRichI disagree, if anything I think the 62% number might be low for Obama. Too many people are factoring in the polls which only look at the popular vote, not the electoral college. I do think there is a small chance Romney could win the popular vote but will still most likely lose the election.
According to Real Clear Politics, Romney is winning the electoral college map as well. According to Gallup, Romeny is now up 52% to 45%.
If you look carefully at the internals, most people feel that Romney is the most qualified and the best person to get the economy back on track.
The latest debate, is also likely to move even more people towards Romney, given Obama's and the moderator's strange performance.
RCP Poll Averages
Obama vs. Romney
RCP Average
Romney47.7Obama46.7Romney +1.0
President Obama Job Approval
RCP Average
Approve49.4Disapprove47.8Spread +1.6
Generic Congressional Vote
RCP Average
Democrats45.4Republicans44.4Democrats +1.0
Direction of Country
RCP Average
Right Direction39.6Wrong Track55.0Spread -15.4
Email Print Share
Battle for White House
RCP Electoral Map
State Changes
No Toss Ups Map
State Changes
RCP Senate Map
Race Changes
Senate No Toss Ups
Race Changes
RCP House Map
..201 Obama/Biden
Toss Ups
131
Romney/Ryan 206
.142 28 31 131 39 91 76
270 Electoral Votes Needed To Win (Recent Race Changes)
Recent Elections: 2008 | 2004 | 2000 | 1996 | 1992 | 1988 | 1984 | 1980 | 1976 | 1972
Likely Obama (28)
Connecticut (7)
Maine (4)
New Mexico (5)
Washington (12)
Solid Obama
.Leans Obama (31)
Minnesota (10)
New Jersey (14)
Oregon (7)
.Toss Up (131)
Colorado (9)
Florida (29)
Iowa (6)
Michigan (16)
Nevada (6)
New Hampshire (4)
Ohio (18)
Pennsylvania (20)
Virginia (13)
Wisconsin (10)
.Leans Romney (39)
Arizona (11)
Missouri (10)
Montana (3)
North Carolina (15)
.Likely Romney (91)
Georgia (16)
Indiana (11)
North Dakota (3)
South Carolina (9)
South Dakota (3)
Tennessee (11)
Texas (38)
Solid Romney
..
He was spot on in 2008. The only state he called wrong was Missouri, which had the smallest margin in the country.
Quote: KeyserAccording to Real Clear Politics, Romney is winning the electoral college map as well. According to Gallup, Romeny is now up 52% to 45%..
If you check the "no toss ups" option out, it breask 294-244 Obama. Romney still needs some of the "leaners" to head in his direction...
Quote: KeyserAccording to Real Clear Politics, Romney is winning the electoral college map as well. According to Gallup, Romeny is now up 52% to 45%.
Maybe I am naive, but I don't see any way that Romney is ahead as of today in the electoral college. Heck, I am ready to wager on it if someone wants some action.
Give me an even bet and I will wager any amount on Obama today.
Quote: KeyserI wouldn't rely on anything from the NY times. They are very slanted towards the left. Even the Editor of the NYtimes admits the slant. Such media bias is the reason for the inefficiencies on Intrade.com
Ugh. Wrong. This has nothing to do with which way the New York Times slants. Nate Silver's poll aggregator has nothing to do with that.
How do you know that there are truly inefficiencies on Intrade.com? You seem to be one of those people who believes that the media is lying about Obama's standing in the polls. How do you know that at this point in the election cycle there isn't realistically a 63% chance Obama wins the electoral college? Because Fox News told you so?
Quote: KeyserThe latest debate, is also likely to move even more people towards Romney, given Obama's and the moderator's strange performance.
Also, HUH?!? You are truly living in the bubble, my friend.
Quote: ams288www.fivethirtyeight.com has the best analysis of the polls, IMO.
He was spot on in 2008. The only state he called wrong was Missouri, which had the smallest margin in the country.
What was his track record before 2008? There are others out there who have been pretty good at calling it right, too...
Here is another predictor that works out for Romney...
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/electoral-college-model-predicts-romney-will-win-even-bigger-than-previously-thought-in-2012/
We'll see what happens!!
Quote: ams288Also, HUH?!? You are truly living in the bubble, my friend.
No bubble...it seems both the FOX and MSNBC "undecideds" broke more for Romney after the debate.
Obama does have an easier path to the electoral college win based on the polls today. Polls don't vote; people do. When people step in the booth and are alone with their vote, they don't have to do "what is right" in the eyes of others...they just have to do what they feel is right. People who staunchly supported Obama in the last election are breaking away; do you really think that the folks he brought in with the hype are all that jacked up to vote for him right now???
Yes, Obama is the favorite in a lot of ways. Don't be surprised if the election breaks totally the other way.
Quote: RonCWhat was his track record before 2008? There are others out there who have been pretty good at calling it right, too...
Here is another predictor that works out for Romney...
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/electoral-college-model-predicts-romney-will-win-even-bigger-than-previously-thought-in-2012/
We'll see what happens!!
Haha, I believe he was a baseball statistician before 2008, which was the first year he used his model.
That predictor you posted is very vague. The Five Thirty Eight model is updated nightly based on current poll data and economic factors. That predictor also says Romney will win Pennsylvania and Ohio (Pennsylvania is very unlikely at this point, Ohio only slightly less so).
I agree polls don't vote, people do. But in the past two election cylces, the polls have been spot on. Or at least, Nate Silver's aggregation of the polls has been spot on.
Quote: ams288How do you know that there are truly inefficiencies on Intrade.com? You seem to be one of those people who believes that the media is lying about Obama's standing in the polls. How do you know that at this point in the election cycle there isn't realistically a 63% chance Obama wins the electoral college? Because Fox News told you so?
Answer: By looking at the math. By looking the internals that demonstrate that most people, by a very large margin, believe that Romney is the most qualified to get the economy back on track. (This year, most people consider the economy and the lack of jobs as the most important issue.) Romney leads in other areas that are important as well. Furthermore, the president's job approval numbers demonstrate that they are too low to win. Such detailed information has been posted from many different polling groups. Real Clear Politics is a great place to search. They have a source of several different polls, not just one. Rasmussen is another great source.
In short, the math doesn't support the intrade spread. I believe that most people placing bets on there are not looking at the math and are simply betting based on news sound bites and emotion.
------------
@ RonC,
Thanks for the links. :)
Quote: KeyserAnswer: By looking at the math. By looking the internals that demonstrate that most people, by a very large margin, believe that Romney is the most qualified to get the economy back on track. (This year, most people consider the economy and the lack of jobs as the most important issue.) Romney leads in other areas that are important as well. Furthermore, the president's job approval numbers demonstrate that they are too low to win. Such detailed information has been posted from many different polling groups. Real Clear Politics is a great place to search. They have a source of several different polls, not just one. Rasmussen is another great source.
In short, the math doesn't support the intrade spread.
------------
@ RonC,
Thanks for the links. :)
We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
I'm not saying Romney will lose, I'm saying based on the polls and economic indicators that are available to us today, Obama is slightly favored to win at this point.
PS - Rasmussen is known to have a Republican slant. Always has been. The FiveThirtyEight poll aggregator takes the various pollsters' left and right slants into account. I know I sound like a fanboy of that site, but it is always spot on.
being up for Romney in popular votes and the electoral
college, is really good news for Obama, not Romney.
Like when we invaded Germany at the end of WWII,
they took a poll in Der Fuehrer's bunker and it was
high fives all around, they had those pesky Allies
right where they wanted them.
Quote: ams288I'm not saying Romney will lose, I'm saying based on the polls and economic indicators that are available to us today, Obama is slightly favored to win at this point.
Economic indicators? While the President is lucky the unemployment rate snuck in under 8%, most everyone who is informed about anything realizes now that the number was skewed by part time jobs and other things and would be a lot higher had people not run out of unemployment benefits and/or stopped looking for work.
Today's news shows higher unemployment (again) and the "missing state" is factored back in.
The economy is not recovering very quickly, there aren't enough jobs, and the numbers tell the story.
If the vote was simply on whether or not President Obama had done a good job in working to fix the economy, the overwhelming vote would be "NO"...you hear it even in the voices of his staunch supporters.
Quote: RonCEconomic indicators?
Yes. The economic indicators that are factored into Nate Silver's aggregator.
Have you guys even looked at that site or did you see "NYT" and just write it off?
Quote: 24Bingo"Economic indicators" don't matter. The polls, as they stand, show Obama winning the electoral vote. Some of the margins are very close, which is why the line is only 60%. Keyser seems to have decided a priori that Obama is losing, and anything that suggests otherwise is media spin, because "isn't it obvious Romney would be better [than one of those 'certain people'?"
That's simply not true. The University of Colorado study, as well as numerous other studies clearly demonstrate that the economic indicators certianly do matter. source: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/23/university-of-colorado-prediction-model-points-to-big-romney-win/
Regarding my "priority"... Real Clear politics data proves my point. There calculations involve several polls combined. Source:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/elections/
The University of Colorado study is, on its own, a meaningless shot in the dark. Any number of other methods show the opposite; fishing through individual studies, any Anne Elk can find data to back their conclusions. A broader pool of metadata is needed.
I'm not saying Obama will win. I'm saying 63% - far from a sure thing - sounds about right.
RCP Electoral Map
State Changes
No Toss Ups Map
State Changes
RCP Senate Map
Race Changes
Senate No Toss Ups
Race Changes
RCP House Map
..201 Obama/Biden
Toss Ups
131
Romney/Ryan 206
.142 28 31 131 39 91 76
Now, regarding your comment that economic indicators don't matter.... Are you serious? Believe me, people care whether or not they can find jobs, and make a living. They will vote accordingly. There are several additional studies to back up this statement as well.
Of course, absent all other knowledge, economic indicators matter, but to the degree they affect the election, they're already present in the polls.
Quote: 24BingoThe polls, as they stand, show Obama winning
And with Obama out there hitting Romney hard
on the Big Bird/binder issues, who knows how
many will come over to his side. Dozens maybe.
Quote: KeyserI was just looking at Intrade and was amazed at how distorted the presidential race is being shown.
If the gambling market is distorted, the people able to identify the distortions are making millions, so congratulations to them
Quote: KeyserI've been excited about the idea of exploiting Intrade inefficiencies, but I don't believe that they (Intrade) are big enough to make any big money. I'm also worried that I wouldn't get paid on the big bets. For now they are like an online casino to me. I'm dubious.
The trade positions and take a cut from those trades. They don't care about the position taken. In theory (yeah, see what happened at Full Tilt) the money put up on the positions should be in the bank already, so you don't have to worry about not being paid. Caveat Emptor, though as it's an irish company, and who knows if it's legal to trade there from the US.
As there are 1100 shares for the win for sale at $6.37, that suggests there's around $6 grand of money ready to go -right now-, and about 1,000,000 shares in the market right now. Which means you must be batting for a lot cash to put up if it's not big enough for you.
I used them in the 2004 election, made some money on people selling Bush to win as the exit polls came in.
I think Romney is still a really good value at $35-40. Rasmussen and Gallup are the only polls that are worth a damn and they have it as tied, Romney +1, Romney +6. So it is probably tied or a slight Romney edge. That is a serious value, and it should get closer to 50 as the election day approaches. I might cash out before resolution, just to take some profit and forget about it.
People in here are getting too wrapped up in the electoral college thinking. If a candidate gets over 50% of the popular vote they do not lose the electoral college. It just doesn't happen.
For example, Republican candidate to win North Carolina is available for $7.80 right now, indicating a 78% chance for Romney. Florida is going for $6.50 for the same bet. Those are SERIOUS Romney values, as he is almost for sure going to win those places at this point. Early voting has already started and it is likely happening at these rates.
Quote: bbvk05If a candidate gets over 50% of the popular vote they do not lose the electoral college. It just doesn't happen.
Exactly. The reason it worked in 2000 with Bush is because
he won by a razors edge. It won't be close this time.
If nothing else, this Libya thing is very very bad
for Obama. New stuff every day. Do they think the
public is really that stupid?
Quote: ams288Haha, I believe he was a baseball statistician before 2008, which was the first year he used his model.
That predictor you posted is very vague. The Five Thirty Eight model is updated nightly based on current poll data and economic factors. That predictor also says Romney will win Pennsylvania and Ohio (Pennsylvania is very unlikely at this point, Ohio only slightly less so).
I agree polls don't vote, people do. But in the past two election cylces, the polls have been spot on. Or at least, Nate Silver's aggregation of the polls has been spot on.
Nate's a young guy. He didn't really start modeling elections (at least, professionally) until 2006. Fivethirtyeight.com launched for the 2008 election, and was bought by NYT last year.
Quote: bbvk05People in here are getting too wrapped up in the electoral college thinking. If a candidate gets over 50% of the popular vote they do not lose the electoral college. It just doesn't happen.
The electoral college is all that matters. If the loser's states are all unanimous, and each of the winner's decided by one vote, it doesn't change a thing. There's a first time for everything, and the search space for presidential elections is small. Trying to guess the election based on the popular vote as it related to past decisions is voodoo by comparison.
Quote: 24BingoThe electoral college is all that matters. If the loser's states are all unanimous, and each of the winner's decided by one vote, it doesn't change a thing. There's a first time for everything, and the search space for presidential elections is small. Trying to guess the election based on the popular vote as it related to past decisions is voodoo by comparison.
Nobody is disputing the importance of the electoral college. The point is that banking on some magic electoral college win where you lose 52-48 but somehow pullout the important states never happens and is extremely unlikely. If Romney gets 51% of the popular vote he is winning. The swing states will not deviate from the national norm that far.
Or maybe Intrade just has a dis-proportionate number of customers who are Dems. ;)
Quote: bbvk05Nobody is disputing the importance of the electoral college. The point is that banking on some magic electoral college win where you lose 52-48 but somehow pullout the important states never happens and is extremely unlikely. If Romney gets 51% of the popular vote he is winning. The swing states will not deviate from the national norm that far.
The thing is that I need a "why not" here. From the polls, it looks like Obama is doing better in the swingiest of the swing states than he is in the country as a whole. The swing states get a very peculiar perspective on the election, so that's not entirely a shock; indeed, a logical extension of "the swing states will not deviate from the national norm that far" would be "California will not deviate from the national norm that far." "Never happens" based on the past just doesn't work when we're talking about something that only comes around every four years.
Quote: bbvk05Nobody is disputing the importance of the electoral college. The point is that banking on some magic electoral college win where you lose 52-48 but somehow pullout the important states never happens and is extremely unlikely. If Romney gets 51% of the popular vote he is winning. The swing states will not deviate from the national norm that far.
Perhaps you should look for Ohio polls. Did you know that no Republican has won without carrying Ohio since 1856? I'll freely admit that I didn't know that until President Clinton said it yesterday...
Quote: 24BingoThe thing is that I need a "why not" here. From the polls, it looks like Obama is doing better in the swingiest of the swing states than he is in the country as a whole. The swing states get a very peculiar perspective on the election, so that's not entirely a shock; indeed, a logical extension of "the swing states will not deviate from the national norm that far" would be "California will not deviate from the national norm that far." "Never happens" based on the past just doesn't work when we're talking about something that only comes around every four years.
True...and it did happen just 4 elections ago (counting this year). And that wasn't the first time. The Electoral College is a very interesting institution.
Quote: Mission146Perhaps you should look for Ohio polls. Did you know that no Republican has won without carrying Ohio since 1856? I'll freely admit that I didn't know that until President Clinton said it yesterday...
I am very familiar with the Ohio polls. The only poll that matters among those available is Rasmussen and they have Obama at +1. RCP considers it a toss up.
The Ohio historical figure is interesting, but you have to remember that solid D states and Ohio have lost electoral votes to solid R states through reapportionment. This is the first election after the census and the dynamic is a little bit different and pro-R, at least by voter registration. Obviously I think Ohio is key, but Obama's lead there is tiny or nonexistant. Complete toss up--- and not deserving of the 62% vs 38% chance of victory given to Obama on intrade.
Do I think that Obama will win? Sure. Slightly more likely than not. But not a 62% chance.
As long as Obama continues to hold the lead in Ohio he is a strong favorite to win. Right or wrong that's the way it is. It's all about Ohio. Despite pretty big gains by Romney in many swing states, Obama is still up 2.5-3 pts in Ohio. The 3 polls that came out this week have Obama ahead 3, pts, 3 pts, and 1 pt, and one of the 3 point polls is Fox news (lean republican).
In addition to still holding a slight lead in Ohio, Obama has 3 other things going for him.
1.) Early voting is well under way and has been since before Romney narrowed the race, That means people began voting when Obama had a bigger lead. So far in the early voting democrats have voted by a 3-2 edge. That doesn't mean they all voted democrat, but one can project a strong start there for Obama.
2.) Tuesday was a huge day as far as Ohio, because the US supreme court ruled against Ohio's attempt to shut down early voting before the last weekend, when busloads of minorities usually vote. The court ruled the polls must remain open on that final sunday before election day.
3.) Obama has a stronger ground game in Ohio. More offices, More boots on the ground, better get-out-the vote effort. Even the Romney camp doesn't dispute this.
So Romney can win North Carolina, Florida, even Virginia, but if Obama wins Ohio, and wisconsin which he currently hold about 3 pt leads, he needs only one small state, like Nevada, or Iowa or New Hampshire (all of which he currently leads), to clinch.
Romney has made gains. I believe he will win the popular vote. The electoral vote will be closer than it looked a few weeks ago, but until Romney wins Ohio, it is a pretty long shot for him to win the presidency.
Quote: 24BingoThe thing is that I need a "why not" here. From the polls, it looks like Obama is doing better in the swingiest of the swing states than he is in the country as a whole. The swing states get a very peculiar perspective on the election, so that's not entirely a shock; indeed, a logical extension of "the swing states will not deviate from the national norm that far" would be "California will not deviate from the national norm that far." "Never happens" based on the past just doesn't work when we're talking about something that only comes around every four years.
I am not saying it is impossible. I am saying it is a bad betting strategy to trust swing state polls over national trends. Ohio is not one of those places that lacks clear line of demarcation. It really could break either way.
I say this as somebody who has worked in polling for a reputable outfit that focused on local elections. It is so much easier to sample for national trends than local.
Quote: kewljRCP has Ohio for Obama +2.5 as of 2 minutes ago! what are you reading?
As long as Obama continues to hold the lead in Ohio he is a strong favorite to win. Right or wrong that's the way it is. It's all about Ohio. Despite pretty big gains by Romney in many swing states, Obama is still up 2.5-3 pts in Ohio. The 3 polls that came out this week have Obama ahead 3, pts, 3 pts, and 1 pt, and one of the 3 point polls is Fox news (lean republican).
In addition to still holding a slight lead in Ohio, Obama has 3 other things going for him.
1.) Early voting is well under way and has been since before Romney narrowed the race, That means people began voting when Obama had a bigger lead. So far in the early voting democrats have voted by a 3-2 edge. That doesn't mean they all voted democrat, but one can project a strong start there for Obama.
2.) Tuesday was a huge day as far as Ohio, because the US supreme court ruled against Ohio's attempt to shut down early voting before the last weekend, when busloads of minorities usually vote. The court ruled the polls must remain open on that final sunday before election day.
3.) Obama has a stronger ground game in Ohio. More offices, More boots on the ground, better get-out-the vote effort. Even the Romney camp doesn't dispute this.
So Romney can win North Carolina, Florida, even Virginia, but if Obama wins Ohio, and wisconsin which he currently hold about 3 pt leads, he needs only one small state, like Nevada, or Iowa or New Hampshire (all of which he currently leads), to clinch.
Romney has made gains. I believe he will win the popular vote. The electoral vote will be closer than it looked a few weeks ago, but until Romney wins Ohio, it is a pretty long shot for him to win the presidency.
The problem with RCP is that it leads people to believe that polls are equal. They aren't. As I said, the only polling outfit in Ohio worth a damn is Rasmussen, which has Obama at +1. Having worked in this exact type of polling, I can tell you that polls are almost entirely a result of their sampling and data-collection methods. Rasmussen is the only one that has consistently made accurate samples and uses computer polling (proven more accurate).
Something else on RCP is that it includes the laughable PPP poll, which is a partisan outfit that used hilariously optimistic minority samples (more enthused than 2008? please). Of course it came out with Obama +5, and that is stuffed in your RCP average right with legitimate polls.
Interestingly, Romney had the lead when early voting began and the trend has moved slightly to Obama.
Long shot? Meh... if you define long shot as about 50/50.
Quote: bbvk05The problem with RCP is that it leads people to believe that polls are equal. They aren't. As I said, the only polling outfit in Ohio worth a damn is Rasmussen, which has Obama at +1. Having worked in this exact type of polling, I can tell you that polls are almost entirely a result of their sampling and data-collection methods. Rasmussen is the only one that has consistently made accurate samples and uses computer polling (proven more accurate).
Something else on RCP is that it includes the laughable PPP poll, which is a partisan outfit that used hilariously optimistic minority samples (more enthused than 2008? please). Of course it came out with Obama +5, and that is stuffed in your RCP average right with legitimate polls.
Interestingly, Romney had the lead when early voting began and the trend has moved slightly to Obama.
Long shot? Meh... if you define long shot as about 50/50.
I didn't reference the PPP poll. I referenced the 3 polls taken THIS week, of which 2 where Fox news and Rasmussen, both which lean republican.
If you think it is 50/50, I would be delighted to take your action. Any amount up to 5 figures. I would feel comfortable having Wizard hold the money, upfront.
Quote: bbvk05As I said, the only polling outfit in Ohio worth a damn is Rasmussen, which has Obama at +1.
You're going to have to show some real actual reasons why SUSA, PPP, and Fox aren't worth a damn. They're all top-notch pollsters. They use sound and standard practices. Do you actually have any reason, other than their poll result, that leads you to feel that they should be disqualified? Feel free to be technical...I'm very familiar with the industry.
Quote: kewljI didn't reference the PPP poll. I referenced the 3 polls taken THIS week, of which 2 where Fox news and Rasmussen, both which lean republican.
If you think it is 50/50, I would be delighted to take your action. Any amount up to 5 figures. I would feel comfortable having Wizard hold the money, upfront.
You stated the RCP average was 2.5. That average includes bullshit like the PPP. That is a reference to the PPP poll. Live with what you said.
I also reject your arbitrary "this week" line. Please.
Rasmussen does not lean republican. It leans accurate. Polls are notoriously D-leaning, so when you lean accurate you are an outlier among the group of polls. In the 2008 election even the small errors it made where more skewed in favor of Democrats than Republicans.
Polls are D-leaning because they ALWAYS buy into optimistic trends in minority voting. These have never panned out (even in 2008 which was an all time high). My firm was always the most accurate in my market because we threw cold water on optimistic minority projections. Also note: the fewer minorities in the state the more stable polling starts to get between different methods.
To be clear, the "about 50/50" number is keyed to your statement that Romney is a long shot to win the election. I am indifferent at this point to 50/50 action for two reasons: first, because I view it as a valueless bet. second, and more importantly, because there will other people that are giving me 62-38. I wouldn't waste money on a 50/50 bet when the thing is available much cheaper; the book down the street is giving better value.
Now please abuse my declining your challenge and pretend it is some proof I don't believe what I said.
