No, his site maintained an updated assessment of the current probability. I'm not really sure what the article means when it says he 'called it' in March. He was probably just showing Obama with a greater chance of winning.

He showed Obama with a higher percentage except for immediately after Palin, and then he explained that it was a bump that promised to diminish.

What impressed me about his site isn't just his predictions, but how good he was at predicting how his model would change in the future. He could predict how his model would change every day for a week in advance, and he was almost always right as to how the "market" would react.

Uh, no. The final result was not predicted from March's data. For one thing, remember how the polls changed in October when the Economy hit the fan?

Doh. Yes that would make more sense. The article was probably referencing his day-before predictions. Thank you for the correction.