tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post6424228603665763626..comments2024-03-26T05:22:08.256-04:00Comments on Frontloading HQ: The Electoral College Map (10/8/08)Josh Putnamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06301836432446874997noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-82070425863105389742008-10-09T08:40:00.000-04:002008-10-09T08:40:00.000-04:00Jack,I had to go with the extreme example there. ...Jack,<BR/>I had to go with the extreme example there. The GOP was so behind Bush in 2000 that it is nearly impossible for me to think of that campaign deteriorating. It was too well run (...against that field of candidates).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-89635112235071064002008-10-09T08:37:00.000-04:002008-10-09T08:37:00.000-04:00Scott, I think you brought up the key point here. ...Scott, <BR/>I think you brought up the key point here. This idea of averaging. So we see a general trend here when all the elections are averaged together, but when we differentiate between types of elections is when we see some differences. I've got the data from Tom Holbrook from the 1984-1992 elections in front of me. <BR/><BR/>1984 was the blowout, but there was a very small oscillation around the 15 or 16% mark (margin between the two candidates) through that entire year. Yes, that's just one election, but there was no narrowing effect.<BR/><BR/>And you're right, 1988 is the most like this year (...as 2008 stands now). Since we have entered the general election phase, I think the tendency has been to think of 2008 as akin to 1980 in a lot of ways. During the primaries, though, it resembled 1988 an awful lot and there are parallels between the two in the general election as well. <BR/><BR/>Most importantly, it is an "open seat" election, so there is a need to get to know the candidates. In that scenario, the environment counts. The first Bush was following a popular president in 1988 and the opposite is true for McCain now. Throw in the economy and Obama has a real advantage. And it only took an economic meltdown to get his poll numbers to where they "should" be according to some of the forecasts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-2429627942778484192008-10-09T08:15:00.000-04:002008-10-09T08:15:00.000-04:00I've looked up the answer to my own question, by d...I've looked up the answer to my own question, by discovering the <A HREF="http://www.gallup.com/poll/110548/Gallup-Presidential-Election-TrialHeat-Trends-19362004.aspx" REL="nofollow">Gallup trends from previous years</A>.<BR/><BR/>1988 looked the most like this year in terms of polling, and the candidate who started to poll away in October widened their lead at the end.<BR/><BR/>Over all, some elections close, and some widen. It looks to me like the much vaunted "Presidential elections close toward the end" rule is based on an average that includes the extreme case of 1968, which was clearly an anomalous year.<BR/><BR/>It's certainly not a compelling trend that should color are expectations significantly for this year.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14690577323454357276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-1930840395709695852008-10-09T00:12:00.000-04:002008-10-09T00:12:00.000-04:00I feel so stupid.For some reason, when you said, "...I feel so stupid.<BR/><BR/>For some reason, when you said, "keeled over," I thought you meant that Bush's campaign deteriorated. It never struck me that you meant "died."Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04365194237710177589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-63381863844036278232008-10-08T22:38:00.000-04:002008-10-08T22:38:00.000-04:00I know that on average the race usually tightens c...I know that on average the race usually tightens coming in to election day, but I'd like to see statistics if that's true in blow out years, and particularly years which start close and build toward blow out. I know, I know--small N. But I'd just like to know how universal that trend is. At 49:46, I can imagine "buyer's remorse" settling in. But at 51:44, and widening? There's such a thing as a bandwagon effect, too.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14690577323454357276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-68008020697986590602008-10-08T21:32:00.000-04:002008-10-08T21:32:00.000-04:00Oops, just realized I made quite a mistake there. ...Oops, just realized I made quite a mistake there. I should have said, "I think that if the race tightens, MO and IN will go Republican."Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04365194237710177589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-39244457334123239972008-10-08T21:19:00.000-04:002008-10-08T21:19:00.000-04:00"Yeah, I don't consider 376 likely either. I think..."Yeah, I don't consider 376 likely either. I think that if the race tightens, MO and IN will go Democratic, and Omaha really only goes blue in a landslide. A little more tightening puts NC in the McCain column.<BR/><BR/>Florida is probably next to shift, but even that would bring Obama down to only 311. To get any further than that would require a fundamental shift in the race."<BR/><BR/>I will take a leaf out of McCain's book by saying: the fundamentals of what we agree on is strong.Rationalisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16361274433657090420noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-80927026314474828152008-10-08T21:16:00.000-04:002008-10-08T21:16:00.000-04:00Yeah, I don't consider 376 likely either. I think ...Yeah, I don't consider 376 likely either. I think that if the race tightens, MO and IN will go Democratic, and Omaha really only goes blue in a landslide. A little more tightening puts NC in the McCain column.<BR/><BR/>Florida is probably next to shift, but even that would bring Obama down to only 311. To get any further than that would require a fundamental shift in the race.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04365194237710177589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-70320983930000221412008-10-08T21:10:00.000-04:002008-10-08T21:10:00.000-04:00"I thought you were a lifelong Republican supporti..."I thought you were a lifelong Republican supporting Chuck Baldwin?"<BR/><BR/>Heh, no thanks.<BR/><BR/>"And I do personally think there's a pretty good chance that Obama will get that many. If I was to predict the result of each state, I'd have Obama at 338, with 376 the maximum."<BR/><BR/>378 = Kerry States + Iowa + Missouri + Indiana + Ohio + Florida + New Mexico + Colorado + Virginia + North Carolina + Nevada + Omaha.<BR/><BR/>Possible but not very likely at all.<BR/><BR/>338 is believable if his numbers keep solid although I feel it is an upper bound for Him.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-11820899313125227662008-10-08T21:09:00.000-04:002008-10-08T21:09:00.000-04:00I don't want to please our liberal readers too muc...I don't want to please our liberal readers too much by going back down the macabre avenue I pursued before. However, in the 2000 election counterfactual I constructed, Bush had a presence in the race. His keeling over and involuntarily ceding the nomination to McCain wouldn't meant that "maverick" was working for McCain. <BR/><BR/>Now, if Bush hadn't existed McCain may have been able to go that route and have been successful. Perhaps he was just doing that to counter Bush, though. Now we are in "if a tree falls in the woods and no one's there to hear it, does it make a sound" territory. And that strays awfully close to a <A HREF="http://books.google.com/books?id=LQkMAAAAIAAJ&dq=inauthor:James+inauthor:David+inauthor:Barber&lr=" REL="nofollow">James David Barber</A> typology of presidents and presidential aspirants.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-43683129899740280402008-10-08T21:03:00.000-04:002008-10-08T21:03:00.000-04:00Anonymous: "I do like going to other sites and see...<I>Anonymous: "I do like going to other sites and seeing Obama with upwards of 360 electoral votes."</I><BR/><BR/>I thought you were a lifelong Republican supporting Chuck Baldwin?<BR/><BR/>And I do personally think there's a pretty good chance that Obama will get that many. If I was to predict the result of each state, I'd have Obama at 338, with 376 the maximum.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04365194237710177589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-29322820604510086502008-10-08T20:43:00.000-04:002008-10-08T20:43:00.000-04:00^^^^^oops, that is actually Wayne^^^^^oops, that is actually WayneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-74181313998277680212008-10-08T20:42:00.000-04:002008-10-08T20:42:00.000-04:00"Wayne,I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks."Con..."Wayne,<BR/>I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks."<BR/><BR/>Conservative models do have their advantages. I do like going to other sites and seeing Obama with upwards of 360 electoral votes (as a partisan) but I don't feel it is realistic on election day.<BR/><BR/>"And don't forget about Iowa. Kerry states + NM + CO + IA. That's all Obama needs."<BR/><BR/>Oops, quite right. Because of the strong polling in Iowa all year, to a greater degree of Kerry states like Pennsylvania or Michigan, I pretty much assumed in my head that it was a Kerry state.<BR/><BR/>"I've come around on VA as a possibility, but I'm glad that our average hasn't moved NC in too far given recent polling. I'm not sold on the Tar Heel going for Obama. But it will certainly be closer there than it has been in a long, long time"<BR/><BR/>Agreed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-56142936424271805652008-10-08T20:32:00.000-04:002008-10-08T20:32:00.000-04:00"McCain 2000 he is not. But McCain 2000 never got ..."McCain 2000 he is not. But McCain 2000 never got this far either. I suspect if George Bush had keeled over during the primaries and McCain had gotten the nomination, we would have seen something of a move away from that McCain a lot sooner."<BR/><BR/>Reasonable reasoning [I'm too lazy to rephrase that], but if McCain had gotten the nomination, then that would have meant that Mavericky McCain was working, and there would have been no need to be Sell Out On All My Principles McCain.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04365194237710177589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-86272943537135821032008-10-08T19:54:00.000-04:002008-10-08T19:54:00.000-04:00Jack,I actually thought and thought about that com...Jack,<BR/>I actually thought and thought about that comment for a while. I typed McCain 2000 at least three times and deleted it.<BR/><BR/>McCain 2000 he is not. But McCain 2000 never got this far either. I suspect if George Bush had keeled over during the primaries and McCain had gotten the nomination, we would have seen something of a move away from that McCain a lot sooner. <BR/><BR/>But hey, that image from 2000 made him the best possible candidate for the GOP given the conditions during this cycle. He's ridden it pretty far.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-58729989117086562872008-10-08T19:51:00.000-04:002008-10-08T19:51:00.000-04:00Wayne,I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks.And ...Wayne,<BR/>I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks.<BR/><BR/>And don't forget about Iowa. Kerry states + NM + CO + IA. That's all Obama needs.<BR/><BR/>I've come around on VA as a possibility, but I'm glad that our average hasn't moved NC in too far given recent polling. I'm not sold on the Tar Heel going for Obama. But it will certainly be closer there than it has been in a long, long time.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-13442546610124221812008-10-08T19:46:00.000-04:002008-10-08T19:46:00.000-04:00McCain not wanting to compromise his postions? Thi...McCain not wanting to compromise his postions? This isn't 2000, Josh.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04365194237710177589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-61718459939963406332008-10-08T19:44:00.000-04:002008-10-08T19:44:00.000-04:00Scott, I'm trying to see the other side to this on...Scott, <BR/>I'm trying to see the other side to this one [in true devil's advocate fashion]. On the one hand McCain would probably not want to compromise his positions to do something like that. On the other, he is very competitive and is this close to the White House. That dichotomy is a recipe for a Greek tragedy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-70834991567898402742008-10-08T19:30:00.000-04:002008-10-08T19:30:00.000-04:00Scott: if McCain starts looking like he's listenin...Scott: if McCain starts looking like he's listening to Palin that would be suicidal. And frightening.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04365194237710177589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-49822452182380366912008-10-08T18:43:00.000-04:002008-10-08T18:43:00.000-04:00I agree that there will be a narrowing, that is so...I agree that there will be a narrowing, that is somewhat inevitable as undecideds come around to backing somebody.<BR/><BR/>I think a realistic situation is something similar to what the map is today. I don't feel that some other projections (538.com or electoral-vote.com) are realistic in the context of what will happen on the day actual day although they do accurately predict the current situation.<BR/><BR/>I feel a realistic situation is something on the lines of Kerry States + New Mexico + Colorado + Ohio or Florida (or both) and possibly Virginia. I don't think states like North Carolina, Indiana, Missouri or Georgia will realistically flip blue although they will be narrow.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-15274153174960123702008-10-08T18:18:00.000-04:002008-10-08T18:18:00.000-04:00This seems like a good time for idle speculation. ...This seems like a good time for idle speculation. :)<BR/><BR/>So here's a possible "shake-up" scenario:<BR/><BR/>The McCain-Palin ticket starts pushing themselves as a quasi-co-presidency. They spin Palin's problems as arising from being initially pummeled by the MSM, but now she's decided enough is enough. She challenges McCain on a number of issues of interest to the base, and he agrees to a high-profile "conversion" on one of them--probably ANWR. Palin goes a-mavericking, and McCain focuses on foreign policy and a few other issues. The idea would be to get the base in a frenzied froth, take some independents who see a Hollywood movie come to life in the Palin story, and somehow hold on to a few moderates by using McCain as the counter to Palin.<BR/><BR/>The whole thing would be so jury-rigged it would be bound to fail, but it sure would provide one last twist. And it's not made up out of whole cloth; their campaign has been moving in that direction. The question is how far they decide to take it.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14690577323454357276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-29603091228256374712008-10-08T17:57:00.000-04:002008-10-08T17:57:00.000-04:00Let me attempt to find a middle ground here and pl...Let me attempt to find a middle ground here and place this in a political science context. [I know, I can't help myself.] I have to agree with Nate at 538's assessment of <A HREF="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/what-is-obamas-ceiling.html" REL="nofollow">Obama's ceiling</A> today. How much further can Obama go up? <BR/><BR/>[I should also add that a similar point was made over at the blog of the <A HREF="http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/03/obamas-red-ceiling/" REL="nofollow">Princeton Election Consortium</A> over the weekend.]<BR/><BR/>I suspect that we'll see a narrowing effect in play as we traverse the last 27 days of the race. This is a model that <A HREF="http://www.polsci.buffalo.edu/faculty_staff/campbell/" REL="nofollow">James Campbell</A> at SUNY-Buffalo has been using for a while now. And it fits in with what both Nate and Sam over at PEC are talking about. Recall that Obama peaked toward the end of June and the beginning of July and that the race had narrowed to a virtual tie at the outset of convention season. <BR/><BR/>McCain had the upper hand after that, but I suspect that that lead would have gradually worked its way back to that pre-convention level.<BR/><BR/>...if not for the economic crisis. That shook the race up [Maybe you noticed. Ha!]. The difference is that the convention bounce is expected to fade, but the economic situation, excuse me, fundamentally changed the race. So while I think the margin between McCain and Obama will draw closer over the next few weeks, it won't likely be to that virtual tie we saw in mid-August.<BR/><BR/>Of course that assumes something else doesn't come along to change the race...again.<BR/><BR/>Never say never with this election.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-14954177434691851722008-10-08T17:33:00.000-04:002008-10-08T17:33:00.000-04:00I agree that it looks difficult for McCain/Palin, ...I agree that it looks difficult for McCain/Palin, but 27 days ago we saw a very different map than we have now, and we have that many days between now and the election.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03379192575044761972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-12631857418705326162008-10-08T15:52:00.000-04:002008-10-08T15:52:00.000-04:00Great post.The electorate is really solidifying be...Great post.<BR/><BR/>The electorate is really solidifying behind Obama and the Democrats. I wonder if we will see much volatility in the last month of the campaign following 2004 and 200? I don't think we will unless there is some sort of foreign policy game changer or Osama bin Laden is found or something (:P)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com