What is the current status of the 2012 Presidential election? [Reader Post]

Loading

It is confusing to determine where we are in the Presidential race. Headlines scream out: Obama up by four, Romney and Obama tied in latest poll. Then there are the confusing state poll results. On the same day a poll shows Romney leading in a national poll, a state poll will show Obama pulling away in a “battleground” state.

This article sets forth a model that can be used to accurately describe the current state of the Presidential race and who is likely to win in November.

The first thing that has to be considered is that since there is an incumbent running for reelection, that fact has a major impact on how the race unwinds. A very accurate indicator of how the incumbent will perform on Election Day is how people perceive his performance on the job. People’s perception of his performance is measured by his job approval numbers. Polling companies regularly take polls asking the question, do you approve or disapprove of the performance of the President. Those numbers are expressed as approval/disapproval numbers. Thus, a 52A/48D result would mean 52% of the sample approved of the President’s job performance and 48% disapproved of the President’s job performance.

Not surprisingly, there is a strong correlation (if not cause and effect) between the job approval numbers and the total vote percentage the incumbent receives in November. Historically, the President will receive between 0% and 1% more than his job approval numbers. For the purposes of this model, we will assume the “extra” percentage is 1%. Thus, if the job approval number for the President is 50%, then the President is very likely to receive 51% of the vote in November.

That takes us to today’s situation. I have taken a 30 day moving average of the job approval numbers for President Obama distributed by the Rasmussen Polling Service. Rasmussen has been the most accurate predictor for the last few election cycles and he uses a likely voter sample which is more accurate than registered voters and much more accurate than an all persons sample. Further, by averaging the last 30 days results, this smoothes out the results and practically removes all traces of sample error.

Using the 30 day moving average ending on July 30, 2012, President Obama has a job approval average of 47.57% (as a point of confirmation, the Real Clear Politics approval numbers are 47.4%). If we use the “extra” percentage described above of 1%, we can estimate that President Obama will receive 48.57% of the vote in November (47.57% + 1%).

However, our President is chosen by the Electoral College which means there are 51 (counting D.C.) state by state elections. How can we predict how those total national votes will be distributed through out the states? In this model, I use the factor of how the states have voted in the Presidential elections compared to the national vote totals.

For example, if a Democratic candidate received 48% of the vote nationally and received 46% in Iowa that would make that state a minus 2% state for the Democrats (48% – 46%). In this model, I compared the state voting patterns for the last three presidential elections versus the national vote total. I then added up the divergences and divided by three to come with whether a state was a plus or minus state for Democrats. In completing this average, I used 1.5 times the year 2008 divergence, 1 times the year 2004 divergence and 0.5 times the year 2000 divergence so the more recent results carry greater weight.

Using this approach, and the above projected vote percentage for President Obama of 48.57%, the Electoral College Votes should be divided 291 for Romney and 247 for Obama. As an example of how this model works, we will look at the battleground state of Ohio. In Ohio, the Democratic incumbent should perform 0.92% worse than his national totals. With Obama’s national vote total projected at 48.57% that would mean Obama should receive 47.65% of the vote in Ohio (48.57% – 0.92%). The State of Pennsylvania is a plus 2.05% Democratic State. The Democratic candidate should perform 2.05% better than his national vote total. Thus, President Obama should receive 50.62% of the vote in Pennsylvania (48.57% + 2.05%).

This model is far more accurate than the national polls where up to 15% of the vote is undecided. It is historically proven that most of the undecided vote goes for the challenger. That result is inline with the other historical fact that the incumbent receives essentially the same vote percentage as his job approval numbers. Those who are satisfied with the job performance would vote for reelection. Those who are dissatisfied with the job performance are split into two camps. The first camp is those who will vote for the challenger. However, there is until late in the election cycle a large percentage of voters who will not vote for the incumbent but have not made up their minds about the challenger. Even Ronald Reagan did not pick up many of the dissatisfied with President Carter voters until very close to the election. Thus, poll results that show Obama up 44% to 40% do not place Obama in the lead. In reality, when undecided voters are attributed to Obama and the challenger based upon historical results, that poll shows Romney with the lead.

As for the battleground states, here is how the model predicts the states to fall with the vote totals for President Obama:

Obama Vote Total Obame EC Romney EC
Virginia 0.4686 0 13
Florida 0.4727 0 29
Colorado 0.4755 0 9
Ohio 0.4765 0 18
Nevada 0.4918 0 6
Iowa 0.4945 0 6
New Hampshire 0.4959 0 4
Minnesota 0.5003 10 0
Pennsylvania 0.5062 20 0
Wisconsin 0.5063 10 0
New Mexico 0.5077 5 0
Oregon 0.5130 7 0
Michigan 0.5227 16 0
Washington 0.5261 12 0
Maine 0.5288 4 0
New Jersey 0.5355 14 0

Some may argue that states could change their voting pattern this time as shown in state polls. State polls are the least reliable because of the small sample sizes and the fact that only infrequently are state polls taken. Further, though states voting patterns change over time versus the national numbers, they do not change radically in one presidential election as a comparison versus the national numbers. For example, Oklahoma over time has become even more of a Republican State and Vermont has become a stronger and stronger Democratic State. That has no effect, as those states were already safely in their respective columns. Montana has become less hostile to Democrats over the last three cycles going from minus 15% to minus 10% to in 2008 minus 6% versus the national numbers for Democrats. However, that still does not place the state in the battleground area.

Thus, we need to examine the above battleground states to see if any of them have had significant movement that would lead one to believe that even though they may be barely in the Romney column, considering the historical trends, they should be moved to the Obama column and vice versa. Colorado, Nevada and New Hampshire (especially Nevada) have had significant movement in the last three cycles toward the Democratic ticket when compared to the national vote. The movement has been so strong I believe the small lead enjoyed by Romney for Nevada and New Hampshire above is not sustainable with Obama’s current job approval numbers. Colorado may provide Romney with enough of a lead to hold off the historical trend. Further, on the Romney side, Virginia has had a big move toward the Democratic side. But, like Colorado, I believe Romney holds a large enough lead there to hold off the historical tide.

On Obama’s side of the battleground ledger, no state has moved enough over the last three elections to indicate the model should be overridden. Pennsylvania has moved ever slightly toward the Republican fold and New Jersey has made some impressive moves toward the Republican side, but it is too far in the Obama camp to see the historical trend lead New Jersey to the Romney column.

Thus, if we subtract out Nevada and New Hampshire from Romney and add them to Obama, Romney should receive 281 Electoral Votes and Obama 257 in November.

Obviously, this projection is based upon President Obama’s current job approval rating. If that changes significantly, then the projections above using this model will change right along with it. It should be noted that Obama’s 30 day moving average has been stuck between 46.5% and 49% since February of this year, and the vast majority of the time it has been very close to his current approval numbers of 47.57%. Thus, unless big events occur in the economy or in the World, it is unlikely big changes in the job approval rating of Obama will occur.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
34 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Lots of factors can change the picture by election day. America tends to rally behind a President in wartime, so Iran could prove a useful tool. Perhaps Putin can be persuaded to allow us to make a show in Syria.

Also, don’t forget the billions poured into the voter-fraud machine as stimulus dollars. Many, many foreign citizens are sure to turn up as votes as a result.

The black vote seems to be a worry for Obama this time around. Unless the propaganda unit can stir up huge racial conflict by election day, most black voters will only vote once! Worse yet, some may just stay home on election day. I expect George Zimmerman will be found not guilty close to election time.

Sorry folks, grumpy mood this morning.

shawn thompson
thank you for this analyst quite to the point,
hope there is no dead people on the ballots, and hope the responsible for the votes counting
are not too much pressure for time spent, to do a truthful job and take the time to pick out the suspect votes,
even if they have to recount twice,
this is what have been said by many people the most important votes, so they have to be
counted the most carefuly, as any time in history of this GOD LOVING COUNTRY
BYE

Answer: Landslide victory for Mittens. See mainstream voter enthusiasm foreshadowed by Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day.

Great study — lotta work — hope it’s accurate!!

Folks keep talking about people changing their voting patterns, but I am proud to announce that neither my parents nor my grandparents ever voted Democrat…….. until after they died of course….

I just do not see the people come November saying we really want to do 4 more years of this. No Way. No How!

Wow! Excellent and thorough analysis. I just hope he’s right. But, I agree with DaNang67. If there is a war or something that could change the dynamics. And I never thought about it, but if George Zimmerman is found “Not Guilty” right before the Election, that could fire up the Black vote. Obama is not above capitalizing on it. (Never let a crisis go to waste.)

I just wish today was Election Day.

Tony in Texas
yes, the voters will make it so they can protect themselves,
bye

Jay T:
I am old enough to remember the election of 1980…the MSM had it too close to call 24 hours out. We know how THAT turned out. I may regret this in November…but I think it’s going to be a Romney landslide. Only a major war…or slime on Romney that can be proven will save The One.

If Obama is going down…look for war. Something to rally the nation behind our Moron in Chief.

If you want to know the odds, ask a bookie:

Right now, a $1 bet on the Dems only pays $.59 versus a $1 bet on the Republicans that would pay $1.40.

Your E.C final is possible but unlikely.I see Colorado to Obama— Nev. Iowa and Ohio absolutely too close to call. Fla,,N.H, Va. lean Romney.
As I’ve said many times if Mitt can win Fla. and Ohio ( Sen. Portman as veep would help) he’ll pull it off. If he loses either Obama wins.
There will be no landslide.E.C AND POPULAR VOTE WILL BOTH BE EXTREMELY CLOSE.

Danang67 I was in Danang early Nov.67 (coming in) and late Nov.68(heading home) Semper Fi

@ilovebeeswarzone: What happened to your syntax?

cubiclecommando
hi,
where did I MESS UP?
I re read my comments, and couldn’t find an error here.
if it’s about tax, I always paid my tax.
bye

Former baseball sabermetrician Nate Silver has a poll analysis/election prediction blog which was quite accurate in 2008 and 2010. Whether or not you agree with the conclusions, his methodology and data displays are quite interesting.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

openid.aol.com/runnsim
hi,
hope your father is doing good,
you know those numbers can change drasticly fast once closer to NOVEMBER,
MITT ROMNEY IS THE BETTER MAN, NO DOUBT ABOUT IT,
BYE

Thank you, Bees. He’s going to be 99 this Fall and still going very strong.

Here’s a youtube clip of him singing a song he composed 50 years ago:

And here’s a more recent one (a month ago), describing the origins of the butterfly swimming stroke (until very recently, he held the world’s age group record (95-99) in the 200 meter backstroke).

– LW/HB

openid.aol.com/runnswim
thank you, he is super man to reach so far and still so bright and with that great spirit,
to give of his knowledge,
that is impressing,
you follow in his mindset to reach the knowledge far as you can to control and eradicate the beasts of great sickness, of the SOCIETY, AND YOU ALSO WILL LIVE AS LONG, BECAUSE you carry the genes of longevity
all along the gift of great mind your father shown to you.
best to you.

@Greg:

I’m not a gambler and I’m not familiar with bookies. Does what you said mean that Las Vegas odds makers (or whomever) is saying the odds are FOR a Democrat win?

@Tony in Texas, #17:

That’s what they’re saying, based on the bets being taken in. More people are betting money on an Obama win than a Romney win. For whatever that information is worth.

Here is the STATUS of the 2008 Presidential Election – Compiled suscinctly by Michael Snyder for etffdailynews.com. It’s a long one so get ready:

And there are still some planning to vote for more of this?

James Raider
thank you for taking the time to give that very educative truth,
yes it’s long but it’s worth every words, if the rest of people still sold to OBAMA
DON’T GET IT, WITH THAT INFO, THEY ARE HOPELESS.
bye

@Greg:

Using Bookie bets 90+ days out to project the Presidential election results? You might as well use tea leaves or dowsing rods.

@Greg:

Thanks Greg. And, forgive my ignorance. LOL

LibertyAtStake
yes the growing awareness is leaning toward freedom being jeopardize
by the OBAMA AGENDA,,
MITT ROMNEY WON’T PUT UP WITH THAT KIND OF ATTACK ON THE PEOPLE
BY THOSE DEMOCRATS FOLLOWING OBAMA RESTRICTING IMPOSITION ON ANY CONSTITUTIONAL
BREACH OF ANY AMENDMENTS, THE PEOPLE ARE SPEAKING NOW AND SAYING;
OBAMA!!! DON’T YOU TOUCH MY STUFF.
BYE

THE PRESIDENT IS ONLY AHEAD BECAUSE HE SPEND MORE ON ATTACK PUBLICITY,
AND PROMISES BUT LACK OF CONCRETE ACTIONS,
WHILE MITT ROMNEY WILL TALK LESS BUT ACTIVATE HIS POLICY OF JOBS CREATION MORE,
EASY TO SEE WHO IS THE BEST TO LEAD THIS SUPER AMERICA.
AMERICANS TAKE THAT IN CONSIDERATION.
A TALKER OR A DOER? YOUR CALL

@openid.aol.com/runnswim:That was a detailed one! Obama, being the sitting President, is definitely the favorite but he will have to buck some historical trends. No president since 1936 has won re-election with the economy in this bad of shape. He will also be one of the few if not the first one to win re-election with a smaller share of the vote than when he was first elected. In addition, the last time we had three consecutive two term presidents their names were Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe. The pundits keep talking about how we like to re-elect our presidents (another did so a couple of days ago) and then point out how in recent times only two have lost re-election- Carter and Bush I. They seem to forget that Truman and Johnson both ran for re-election and never made it past their primaries. Taking that into account, since the end of WWII we have had 5 presidents win re-election, 4 lose, 1 who was assassinated, and 1 who never won election in the first place.

As Shawn stated, the best indicator of well a president will do when running for a second term is his approval rating on election day. If the election were held yesterday, based on the two latest polls, Gallup and Rasmussen, Obama would have received at the most 46% of the popular vote since his approval rating in both polls was 45%. That means the EC map would look like 1980 or at the very least, 1992. In order for Obama to win re-election with his approval ratings in the 40’s, he is going to have to convince voters that Romney is so undesirable as a president, that they don’t vote for him. In the end, the only poll that matters is the one on election day.

@Greg: How do you think the Packers are enjoying their 2012 Super Bowl rings? : )

Another Vet FYI Neither Truman in ’52 or Johnson in ‘ 68 chose to run for re-election. Both had been Veeps when FDR and JFK died in office.They served out remainder of shortened terms and were then elected for full terms in ’48 Truman and ’64 Johnson.
Fasten your seat belt on this one. Romney’s Veep pick is important
To suggest that BHO will only get 46% of the vote or E.C will look like ’80 is very unlikely. Would suggest that loser will receive over 48% and E.C will be correspondingly close .Romney must win Fla. and Ohio to secure Presidency.

@Richard Wheeler: Truman and Johnson both ran for re-election and then dropped out. Truman dropped out of the race after losing the NH primary in March 1952. Almost 16 years to the date that Truman dropped out, Johnson dropped out on the eve of the Wisconsin primary. Thus, both were elected to the office of President only once and where therefore never re-elected.

I didn’t suggest that Obama was going to get only 46% of the vote on election day, only that if the vote were held yesterday, that’s what he would have gotten. That number will no doubt fluctuate daily between now and the election. 90 days ago people were already calling the election for Obama and stating that he would win a landslide victory. The election day poll is the only one that matters.

Since you love politics so much, a good book you would enjoy reading is “Packaging the Presidency” by Kathleen Hall Jamieson. It covers the elections between 1952 and 1992 so it is a bit dated, but it is very interesting. It gets into such areas as strategies and how events unfolded. Especially interesting were the earlier elections and the first use of television.

Another Vet Don’t believe Obama would get only 46% of vote if held yesterday,last month or in 90 days. Did you factor in undecided? Only fools would have ever called a landslide for or against BHO.
I was in V.N in 68 when LBJ announced he wasn’t running. Both he and Truman were unpopular late in their first elected terms and decided very early on in nominating process(as you pointed out) not to seek re-election.
Thanks for the book suggestion.I’ve always loved politics. Televised early conventions were very interesting.

Semper Fi

@Richard Wheeler:Most undecideds go for the challenger as Shawn pointed out. Those first ads were definitely different than the ones of today. No glitz, glamor, or even good “acting skills”. They almost spoke in monotones!

@Richard Wheeler: Damn Rich! You just tweaked an old memory! I briefly met George Romney in Da Nang. I’m pretty sure it was on his “brainwashed” tour. I’ve got to see if I can dig up any pictures of that event. LoL!

Semper Fi

The way this election is focused on whether or not we should be taxed even more for ”roads and bridges,” reminded me of China’s ghost cities and North Korea’s ghost roads.
Someone else was too…..
http://www.gaypatriot.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/251824_621441593946_1468800237_n.jpg
A picture is worth a thousand words!

Everybody has an opinion:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/04/michael-tomasky-on-the-possible-coming-obama-landslide.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=cheatsheet_morning&cid=newsletter%3Bemail%3Bcheatsheet_morning&utm_term=Cheat%20Sheet

And while you do, bear in mind that Silver called 50 out of 51 states last time (counting D.C.; he missed only Indiana) and every single Senate race.

@openid.aol.com/runnswim:

A broken clock is correct twice a day.