June 22, 2004
Election Projections - a fun way to waste time
A lot of websites have joined the fun of predicting the 2004 presidential elections based on current state and national poll results, 2000 election results, and whatever else is determined relevant. Some use simple polls, and some use complex formulas. Some leave any close states as undecided, and some will predict a state on the basis of a 0.01% lead for one candidate.
Despite the differences, they all pretty much say that the election is much too close to call on June 22.
The Blogging Caesar's (Scott Elliott) Election Projection probably uses the most complicated math of all the projections I found. His formula uses the following three adjustments to the poll data: the Baseline Adjustment derived from the 2000 election result, the National Adjustment resulting from a compilation of various national polls, and the State Adjustment calculated from the results of state polls. The overall formula is too complicated for me to explain here, but the results are pretty interesting. As of today, this methodology predicts an electoral tie, 269-269. This tie includes projecting Florida for Bush due to a 0.01% adjusted lead there. Also, the Blogging Caesar predicts an overall popular victory for Kerry of 2.2%
I commend the Scott on how thoroughly he explains his methodology and shows his base data. There is a lot of interesting data here. Also, I commend Scott in not letting his strong support for Bush affect his numbers.
Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball does not have as much data, but he has nice description of each state. He predicts every state, no matter how close, but the methodology is not explained. His current prediction is 274-264 for Kerry, with West Virginia being the advantage for Kerry here compared to the Blogging Caesar's.
Another State-by-state poll projection has Kerry winning 275-259 (with New Hampshire's 4 votes unallocated). This site doesn't have a pretty map, but it does show the poll numbers used to create the projection. It has Kerry winning Ohio but losing Wisconsin as the difference with the Caesar.
MyDD :: President 2004 Analysis predicts a surprisingly strong win for Kerry, 301-237 (Florida and West Virginia being the difference with Caesar's). There's a strong pro-Kerry bias throughout the site, but I think the prediction is pretty unbiased. This site also shows an interesting table showing how various regions of the country have changed over the last few decades in their voting patterns. For example, it shows explicitly how the Deep South has become more and more Republican, but California has gone from Republican to solidly Democratic.
The Cook Political Report's Current Electoral College Outlook doesn't explain its methodology, but it leaves nine states as toss ups: Florida, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Outside those state, Kerry has a slight 228-211 lead (Bush has a slight 174-165 lead in solidly-held states). The 99 Electoral Votes from the 9 undecided states will probably decide the election.
The Current Electoral Vote Predictor shows a large Kerry lead, 302-232 (with New Hampshire's 4 votes again undecided). It has Kerry winning Ohio and New Mexico but losing Wisconsin as the difference with the Caesar. The data is available as a spreadsheet.
The Iowa Electronics Market takes a completely different approach. It has a fake market, like a stock market, in which people place money on who will win. This doesn't predict the electoral college, but right now Bush has a 9% lead here.
The Poll of Polls doesn't predict electoral votes, but it is a good compilation of other poll results, showing an average of those poll results over time.
In summary, none of the electoral predictors show a Bush victory, but none show an insurmountable lead for Kerry. All say that the same group of states (Arizona, Missouri, West Virginia, Ohio, Florida, Nevada, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Oregon will decide the election.
And none of this matter at all, because we still have four full months of campaigning and events to go.
Posted by LawnBoy at June 22, 2004 12:26 PMThis is great research. Thanks for putting it together. I am concerned that this election is going to be decided by Americans who get their news and information from television and social circles - and this is where Bush beats Kerry in many places. Bush has empowered the Christian churches in America to get their congregations to support him. For the average American, he comes across as a likeable guy - kind of like the dumb guy in town that everyone loves but tolerates because he doesn’t know any better. Kerry has been painted by the media as a stiff, wealthy, out-of-touch politician despite the impressive campaign his staff has put together, I hate to say it, but the media’s portrayal of Bush and Kerry between now and November is what is going to decide this election.
Posted by: Cameron Barrett at June 22, 2004 12:59 PMLawnboy:
Thanks for compiling all that data and information about the possibilities of how the election might turn out. I think I’ve got the summary of it all: It could be Bush or it could be Kerry. Is that about right?? LOL
Posted by: joebagodonuts at June 22, 2004 02:37 PMI’m not going to update this all the time, but one interesting change happened today on one of the polls. Current Electoral Vote Predictor showed a big change after I posted the original post. It now shows a Bush lead of 285-253, with New Hampshire, Arkansas, Wisconsin, and New Mexico moving to Kerry, but Michigan and Ohio moving to Bush.
It shows how fluid the current status is, and also how little we can trust any of these to know the future.
Posted by: LawnBoy at June 22, 2004 03:47 PMI’m not going to look at any numbers and I will predict my state, Utah. It’s going to… George W. Bush.
Seriously, though, it would be funny if GW gets elected again but loses the popular vote again. And by funny, I mean sad.
Posted by: Joseph Briggs at June 22, 2004 08:20 PMHI Lawnboy…it looks like your DNC chairman Terreyyyyy, who picked Kerreyyyyy is now tapped Johnyyyyy for your VP. And you libs have a problem with Bush running the country? Ill take Bush and Dick Cheney over Terry McAullife and his crew anytime. You libs dont select who runs your party…McAullife does…whose strings are then pulled by your God…Bill Clinton. Thank You
Posted by: Perry Timkin at June 23, 2004 12:36 PMPosted by: Perry Timkin
I know I’m not supposed to feed the trolls, but this one has me stumped. This broadside was in response to a non-partisan meta-post that reviewed and discussed media interpretation of the election. I didn’t say a single thing supporting Kerry or attacking Bush, but I get told that Bill Clinton is my God, and the leaders of my party are ridiculed. “Perry” might as well go to my personal blog and make fun of Gore because I installed Linux last week.
Oh well. This is the internet, and they let anyone in.
Posted by: LawnBoy at June 23, 2004 06:55 PMI agree—all signs seem to indicate that Kerry’s going to pick Edwards as the Democrats throw themselves once again on the pyre of supposed “electability.” Edwards will most likely fail to deliver his homestate of NC, where he’s not that popular and probably couldn’t even be reelected to the Senate, but will likely ensure West Virginia for the Democrats.
Edward’s problem is that he has no foreign policy experience in an election which is shaping up to be all about foreign policy. In the primaries, his whole schtick was to harp on the disasterous economy in a wholly imaginary “other America,” a line which is becoming more indefensible every day in the fact of a booming economy. However, he’ll look good in a debate against Cheney although Cheney will give him a good sound spanking on the issues because he’s just the more likable and charismatic figure. It’s the same reason that Bush is going to murder Kerry in the debates the same as he did Gore.
The current polls are an undicipherable hodpodge—some showing Bush as many as ten points ahead, other showing Kerry 3-7 points ahead. My bet is still on Bush, truth, justice and the American way. Bush has not only charisma, but truth on his side—a formidable combination.
Posted by: Martin at June 24, 2004 01:40 AMSure is funny how we all insist that truth is on our side. Someone’s got to be wrong.
Posted by: dave at June 24, 2004 10:23 AMTwo factors will play a major role in the November election: events and Kerry’s perceived personality. If, the Bush administration is lucky and the mess in Iraq turns (relatively) peaceful until after the lection or a major event occurs to distract the electorate. The Bush administration looks as if it is trying to orchestrate such an event with the early trial of Sadaam. Kerry must change the public’s perception of his personality; he comes off wooden and much like Al Gore, too sophisticated and intellectual. Sorry to say, but America is anti-intellectual. Kerry has to become more human and more regular guy to win.
Posted by: dennis mccowan at June 24, 2004 12:30 PMKerry will likely try very hard to change the public perception of his personality.
The problem is that the public perception is of a flip-flopper and panderer—and every move to “change” will be percieved as just that. Heads, Bush wins. Tails, Kerry loses.
Posted by: Martin at June 25, 2004 01:47 AMI think the common perception of Kerry is that of a humorless, blue blood intellectual. At this point, he cannot pass the, would I sit down and have a beer with him, test. Unfortunately, I do not believe a great many voters decide on a presidential candidate for his policy views but rather on likeability and trustworthiness. Many Americans do not trust overtly smart people. That is why Clinton was such a successful politician. He was [is] smart but threw in folksy sayings, bible quotes and made a point of stressing his lower class roots, which created the perception he was more of a regular guy.
Posted by: dennis mccowan at June 25, 2004 12:05 PMUgh… I think I’ve been a little too optimistic the last few days about a sure Kerry victory—what with seeing Fahrenheit 9/11 and reading a lot of news. For a moment I forgot that the majority of Americans will not be swayed by the film because they won’t see it, and are very poorly informed about, well, everything—even in election years.
Thanks for putting me back in check. Bush really…could…win…couldn’t he? Oh God oh God oh GOD OH GOD OH GOD!!!!!
I’m going to bed.
