Presidential election minus one day
My tip: Obama to win 303-235, carrying Ohio, Virginia, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Colorado and Nevada.
If you’re a Crikey subscriber, you can observe my reading of the situation here, which concludes thus:
I don’t see any reason to bet against the view shared by FiveThirtyEight and the RealClearPolitics state polling averages: that Obama will win the electoral college 303 to 235, carrying Ohio, Virginia, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Colorado and Nevada, while falling short in Florida and North Carolina.
Something to hide?
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2012/nov/05/texas-arizona-threaten-international-election-obse/
(Pedantry spreading from grammar to probability theory.)
Aristotle
Well, most of the time, if the election were held 12 times a very large number of times.
Does 538 not cover the congressional elections?
If not, what would be the most authoritative site that covers the congressional elections?
Does Obama have a chance at all there?
What happens with the Congress anyhow. Can Obama hope to achieve any real reform without it? Like reforming the tax system, or bedding in healthcare, or any number of other reforms.
William (et al.):
Well here we are, at the end!
There is a good chance you and Carey will be right with 303, but I am sticking with my long-held prediction of 323 (your prediction + Florida for Obama).
Interestingly, Nate Silver has just coloured Florida blue (53% chance Obama win)!!!!
What data do we have:
1. 2008 margin was 2.5% to Obama (or 230k votes)
2. Party registration: 40% Dem to 35.6% Rep (vs. 42% : 36% in 2008) a 2% margin drop
3. New registrations: 300k more Hispanics, 150k more Blacks and 166k more whites
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/27/floridas-voter-registration-statistics/
Given the voting intentions of these demographics from this latest poll:
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_FLNC_1105.pdf
New white voters (166k) would given Romney a new 25k (PPP 40-59)
New black voters (151k) would give Obama a new 124k (PPP 91-9)
New Hispanic voters (305k) would give Obama a new 20k (PPP 53-47)
4. Early voting: 42.9% Dem to 39.1% Rep (vs. 45.6% : 37.3% in 2008) a 4.5% margin drop
….. however, given 53% of the 2008 turnout has already voted this lead is “in the bank” whereas Romney must catch up
5. Already voted numbers: Obama 52% to Romney 47%
50% PPP respondents said they had already voted, very similar to the 52.7% based on early voting numbers which compare 2012 early vote to the 2008 turnout
6. Turnout: The early vote turnout is almost exactly what it was in 2008, despite the Republican state government severely limiting early voting opportunities….not suggestive of a massive drop in interest and so this is good news for Obama.
So what does all that mean? Despite evidence to the contrary in the polling, I am sticking with a very narrow win for Obama. Normally a Florida win would mean an early night (clear Dem victory) but in this case it is going to be a nail biter and so we will still be up until Colorado and Nevada numbers come in.
http://www.electionprojection.com/index.php
This is another site with a good track record (although he is a self-confessed Republican)
It has been showing an essential status quo- there has never been a time when the Dems were close to the 25 or so seats they need to gain control of the House
Probably not, unless he wins a breakout landslide that was not predicted
The only hope is a clear Obama win in the national and electoral college vote and the Senate 55-45 etc and a good showing in the House (+15seats) and the reasonable Republicans assisting in the interests of the country.
Although this sounds optimistic, it is actually possible as some of the Republicans were scared off by Tea Party threats (support the Dems and we will defeat you in the Primaries and you wont even be allowed to be our candidate let alone win the election – see Lugar being defeated by the moronic Mourdock in Indiana and turning a definite Republican Senate seat into a definite (?) Senate seat for the Democrats!!!!
@mimhoff – interesting link – look like the result will be a late night for the US and prime time for Australia
The article on early voting in Colorado, referenced by William at 47, has me puzzled as to what is a registered Democrat, Republican or Independent.
For voting in the primaries, I assumed you registered with the appropriate party as a supporter, if not an actual member.
However this article seems to imply that for today’s election you tell the returning officer, who is presumably a government official, which party you are registered with. Or are you registered as a Democrat etc. and shown as such on the public electoral roll?
It seems like an interesting situation.
Obama – unimpressive
Romney – worse
Obama 295 electoral votes.
I don’t think even conservatives think the Republicans can win the Senate at this stage. They have blown both feet off by picking too many teabaggers like Akin and Mourdock.
Is there such a thing as a “reasonable republican” ?
I suspect if Obama tries to up taxes on the rich, the republicans will vote to a man.
Don’t you mean 332? Florida has 29 votes.
Obama doesn’t have to do ANYTHING to increase taxes on the rich. All he has to do is let the unfunded Bush tax cuts EXPIRE.
At the same time he simply proposes a new tax cut for middle class voters and dare the Republicans to block it.
For those who want to scrutinise county returns tomorrow here is a link to a summary of voting patterns for the swing states:
http://poliquant.com/us-presidential-election-swing-state-voting-guide-summaries/
Indeed. Thanks
Again….indeed!
Don’t they still have an issue with the debt ceiling?
There “were” might be the best answer to this.
The ranks are somewhat diminished now compared with previous elections.
I think it is wrong to think of the Republican party through the prism of the Tea Party. I used to think that Reagan was a right wing redneck, but compared with the Tea Party types he is a socialist.
Remember, Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.
Yes, both sides in fact.
They keep hitting it and they keep coming up with excuses to raise it.
What will it be 28? times now?
The U.S. have some very serious monetary problems that they are just completely ignoring.
To their peril.
Well you don’t hear many Republicans mention that over Reagan’s 8 years U.S. government debt almost tripled (tax cuts very rarely pay for themselves).
Oh, and although he cut income taxes, he actually increased 18 other taxes to offset the loss of revenue.
And it’s very difficult to stand tall with both feet blown off.
He’d be a typical Democrat now.
Surely a little bit better than that!
Why of course. I mean he signed into law the bills that sold 30 year government bonds to fund the construction of the First Transcontinental Railroad, so that clearly makes him a socialist.
He also signed the law enacting the Yosemite National Park, so that clearly demonstrates he was an extremist Green environmentalist.
Minhoff @ 40
Reminds me of a previous US election called in the wee hours of the morning. (it’s not 2000/4)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCIDHvns_aQ&feature=relmfu
WWP
Very true. I should have said he’d fit in best with the Democrats.
SO
Lincoln enacted the law making Yosemite a protected park but California owned it. Teddy Roosevelt was the one who made Yosemite a National Park.
I went to Yosemite National Park when I was 15. It was the first time I saw snow and the place was absolutely magical.
My waffle:
http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2012/11/thoughts-on-forecasting-and-us-pres.html
I think more likely than not now Obama >300. It’s all coming back to where it was before the first debate and it just doesn’t look close. 303 seems to be the most common call but FL has just stuck its neck in front on 538.
Of course this is an amazing position for Obama to be in.
Of course Presidents NORMALLY get a second term (about 2/3 of them), but the economic fundamentals are completely against him, yet the polls, betting markets, and simulations say that he is a 3/4 or better chance of winning.
I think that is a tribute to Obama’s likability. Even when he was getting some bad polls, his approval always stayed around 45 – 50, because whatever his limitations it seems Americans like him a lot more than they liked Bush.
Polls open and Romney out to $5.1
Probably just sentiment now the clock has run down.
I think the economic fundamentals being against him matters less because the nation is recovering from a crisis that was not his fault.
Note also that in the last 100 years, [i]parties[/i] have nearly always got a second term. Democrats in 1980 is the lone exception (in the 19th C it was common). And this is similar to the pattern in Aus, NZ, UK etc – single-term administrations are not common.
I do think Obama is especially good at political self-disguise.
US markets look like opening up slightly.
Even Intrade is getting in on the 303-235 act
http://www.intrade.com/v4/misc/electoral-map/
I wonder about the accuracy of “already voted statistics”?
We don’t really have any way of knowing whether respondents who say they have already voted are not telling the truth or not. We cannot use the final results as we know early voters are not representative of all voters (early vote margins are not the same as final margins in many states). However, WHY would someone (in fact hundreds or thousands of people) lie about this?
So far:
1. Ohio: Obama wins the “already voted” margins by double digits
2. Colorado: Obama ahead by 3% among those reporting they have already voted
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_21914514/poll-obama-romney-still-essentially-tied-colorado
Note: The “early voting” stats from the amazing gmu site only records the party affiliations of early voters (which has Obama behind by 2% vs. being ahead by 2% in 2008) not HOW they actually voted, and the non-party affiliated voters are a big chunk of the electorate
3. Nevada: Obama ahead by 11% among those reporting they have already voted
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_CONV_1105.pdf
Ohio, Colorado and Nevada means Obama could lose EVERY SINGLE OTHER SWING STATE* and still win the election. Indeed, he could even lose Wisconsin and still win the election!
*Iowa, New Hampshire, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida
I agree with many like Socrates and Fran B
Obama has been weak and ineffective and a vast let down
I have US friends who think he should have lauched criminal actions the major bankers and Wall Street operatorsaftre Lehman Bros collapse3
The voters would have loved that
His health reforms were minimal and perhaps more understandable given the manic Repugnantg opposition
In fact no one is able to tell the US people the truth
The US Empire is draining the economy in a vast outflow of money
Perhaps Obama might seek to end the foreign wars
I believe that he will be able to move outside the borders set out in the M$E by Israel…which as one reent report said is a great danger to the US
There will be no war in the Gulf against Iran
But how does he make the big cuts to the military that are the ME needed .
and how does he bring in a just tax system…so that the rich 1% of voters pays a share
Perhaps nothing can save the US from deeper and deeeper financial ruin …if the tax system can’t be fixed
Traveling in the USA to visit family there…I have been struck by the deterioration of much of the infrastructure
… Europe/China/Japan or even Russia…and a school system in decay
I thought The Economist’s lukewarm endorsement of Obama was a good read:
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21565623-america-could-do-better-barack-obama-sadly-mitt-romney-does-not-fit-bill-which-one
Writer and Crtic James Kinstler from the USA…looks at this critical moment in US history as they also try to come to terms with”the tides of history” in the aftermath of the Great Hurricane
btw…he sees much pain and suffering for the million or more with ruined homes who may soon face the callous acts of the insurance companies whould will wriggle out where they can…and leave a great number with ruined homes and ruined lives…and this will he think trigger a huge public angrer in places like NY and N Jersey with a more dynamic crowd of victims than the poor blacks of New Orleans who were just ignored by the powers that be
Great dangers ahead…but as great read
http://kunstler.com/blog/2012/11/the-tides-of-event.html
mod Lib # 67, well said. You’ll recall of course that Obama in his victory speech was very specific in acknowledging Lincoln the republican. Oh that we might see the party of Lincoln rise again.
Governor Christie, Mayor Bloomberg, your nation and thus the world await.
Meanwhile, my money is on the high 290s, would be delighted to see the 300 plus result dump the tea party into the drink and have some sortt of return to sanity.
I wonder if the tea party will be dumped into the drink though. Assuming Romney loses they are likely to argue that the strategy of picking a mainstream Republican has failed again, as they said it would all along, and that a more radical candidate is needed next time. I’m guessing the radical right will feel vindicated not chastised by a Romney loss, especially if it’s not close.
KB, yes they will think that I agree but in my view it will be like the idiots in late 45 trying to continue WWII with no Wehrmacht and I think the saner heads will have very good prospects of taking their party back …
The tea party or some derivative thereof has a lock on the Republican party primary voters
Take the favs/unfavs of the Tea Party in the exit polls of the initial GOP primaries/caucuses this year
(Fav/Neutral/Unfav)
IA (64,24,10)
NH (51,30,17)
SC (64,27,8)
Despite what the GOP “establishment” may think of the tea party and its impact on electability at the general election, they will still have to navigate through these voters in primaries.
http://www.politico.com/2012-election/map/#/President/2012/NH
Obama winning Carroll county (New Hampshire) 65% to 32%
(was 54% to 45% in 2008)
….however, I should say only 43 votes counted so far!
Good night
@Mod Lib/92
I still think Obama will win.
The strange thing about Dixville Notch is that it used to be a joke, but it actually now has become a significant indicator. NH used to be such a one-sided Republican state that its votes didn’t mean much. In 1964 Goldwater carried Dixville 8 votes to 1 against LBJ. But now NH is a marginal state, as Republicanism is dying out in New England. That’s why in 2008 Obama became the first Dem ever to carry Dixville. So the fact that it’s a draw this time might actually mean that Obama won’t carry NH. Then again it might not.
It’s 6.17pm here in France so I will have to sit up all night to watch the results.
Which leads to me ask: is the unbearable Wolf Blitzer still anchoring election nights at CNN?
The vibe on Twitter, for what it’s worth, seems to be that turnout is high.
I think it’s just you and I, William.
Indeed, here’s a big slab of a Twitter search on “turnout”, minus irrelevancies:
And not even me for much longer …
By which of course I mean, you and me.