Comments on: Obama’s red ceiling http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/03/obamas-red-ceiling/ A first draft of electoral history Fri, 06 May 2011 06:45:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4 By: Mark http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/03/obamas-red-ceiling/comment-page-1/#comment-944 Mark Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:16:16 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1542#comment-944 I'd really like to see some fresh polling data for Louisiana by someone like CNN with a sample of 8-900. The ARG poll 9-12 September (ie. before the crash) had McCain +7; the Rasmussen margins have been much greater but they look skewed. It could be that Louisiana is much closer than people assume; Georgia has also narrowed by about 5% since Sept 15. On that basis, if ARG were right, Louisiana would be within the margin of error. I’d really like to see some fresh polling data for Louisiana by someone like CNN with a sample of 8-900. The ARG poll 9-12 September (ie. before the crash) had McCain +7; the Rasmussen margins have been much greater but they look skewed. It could be that Louisiana is much closer than people assume; Georgia has also narrowed by about 5% since Sept 15. On that basis, if ARG were right, Louisiana would be within the margin of error.

]]> By: Matt McIrvin http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/03/obamas-red-ceiling/comment-page-1/#comment-916 Matt McIrvin Thu, 09 Oct 2008 03:28:41 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1542#comment-916 Elsewhere, people are starting to speak of landslides. This annoys me because it clearly isn't going to be a landslide in the traditional, Reagan sense. Electorally, if current patterns hold Obama will have a solid win somewhere near the Bill Clinton level, made somewhat more impressive because of the lack of the confounding effect of Ross Perot. But we've become so used to knife-edge squeakers that this looks immense. Elsewhere, people are starting to speak of landslides. This annoys me because it clearly isn’t going to be a landslide in the traditional, Reagan sense. Electorally, if current patterns hold Obama will have a solid win somewhere near the Bill Clinton level, made somewhat more impressive because of the lack of the confounding effect of Ross Perot. But we’ve become so used to knife-edge squeakers that this looks immense.

]]> By: Sam Wang http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/03/obamas-red-ceiling/comment-page-1/#comment-913 Sam Wang Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:05:16 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1542#comment-913 Fokko, I noticed that. I agree that the CI bounds should be monotonically increasing. I think there might be a rounding error lurking in there. If you know MATLAB (you gave an email address that suggests this possibility) you are welcome to pore over the data. I’ll look into it. R Clayton, agreed. Fokko, I noticed that. I agree that the CI bounds should be monotonically increasing. I think there might be a rounding error lurking in there. If you know MATLAB (you gave an email address that suggests this possibility) you are welcome to pore over the data. I’ll look into it.

R Clayton, agreed.

]]> By: R Clayton http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/03/obamas-red-ceiling/comment-page-1/#comment-909 R Clayton Wed, 08 Oct 2008 21:57:36 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1542#comment-909 Interesting analysis -- of course. Weakness is that it presumes national swings would be uniform across the nation. However, it is possible that Obama's lower-performing states are those in which he has more support-growth potential than the higher-performing. Further, of course, one would expect differentials in support growth based on how much the campaign invested in advertising, organizing, candidate and surrogate time, etc. So a five-or-more point swing in a given state seems at least theoretically possible even with only a minor national swing, or none at all. Of course, it may be that in the states where Obama is now performing poorly, there are virtually no persuadable voters due to the state's particular demographics and political culture. That suggests a state-by-state analysis would be necessary to truly evaluate Obama's EV ceiling. Interesting analysis — of course. Weakness is that it presumes national swings would be uniform across the nation. However, it is possible that Obama’s lower-performing states are those in which he has more support-growth potential than the higher-performing. Further, of course, one would expect differentials in support growth based on how much the campaign invested in advertising, organizing, candidate and surrogate time, etc. So a five-or-more point swing in a given state seems at least theoretically possible even with only a minor national swing, or none at all. Of course, it may be that in the states where Obama is now performing poorly, there are virtually no persuadable voters due to the state’s particular demographics and political culture. That suggests a state-by-state analysis would be necessary to truly evaluate Obama’s EV ceiling.

]]> By: Fokko van de Bult http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/03/obamas-red-ceiling/comment-page-1/#comment-907 Fokko van de Bult Wed, 08 Oct 2008 20:37:10 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1542#comment-907 I am confused as to why the upper and lower bounds of the 95% percentage interval would not be an increasing function of the percentage of swing Obama gets. You can clearly see in both graphs these bounds move generally up, but sometimes they dip a little. Can anyone explain this? I am confused as to why the upper and lower bounds of the 95% percentage interval would not be an increasing function of the percentage of swing Obama gets. You can clearly see in both graphs these bounds move generally up, but sometimes they dip a little. Can anyone explain this?

]]> By: Dave http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/03/obamas-red-ceiling/comment-page-1/#comment-854 Dave Tue, 07 Oct 2008 08:00:33 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1542#comment-854 "This is incorrect. Each Senator gets a vote, and the Senate will be decidedly Democratic. There is zero change of the Senate electing Palin VP. There is a very small chance of a McCain/Biden administration, but not Obama/Palin." I think from a political standpoint, no senator would choose Palin over Biden, not to mention the 99.9% chance of a democratic senate. Even Lieberman isn't going to vote for Palin if McCain has no shot. McCain/Biden will only happen if multiple one-vote-majority democratic delegations, from states that voted for McCain, have a representative turn red on them. They should know this by the time the electoral college meets. If that's going to be the case, Obama can instruct his electors to put McCain forward for VP, so that the house can vote for Obama and the senate for McCain. That's fairly unlikely, but may be Obama's only play if multiple democratic congressmen can't face rebuking their constituents' presidential choice. “This is incorrect. Each Senator gets a vote, and the Senate will be decidedly Democratic. There is zero change of the Senate electing Palin VP. There is a very small chance of a McCain/Biden administration, but not Obama/Palin.”

I think from a political standpoint, no senator would choose Palin over Biden, not to mention the 99.9% chance of a democratic senate. Even Lieberman isn’t going to vote for Palin if McCain has no shot.

McCain/Biden will only happen if multiple one-vote-majority democratic delegations, from states that voted for McCain, have a representative turn red on them.

They should know this by the time the electoral college meets. If that’s going to be the case, Obama can instruct his electors to put McCain forward for VP, so that the house can vote for Obama and the senate for McCain. That’s fairly unlikely, but may be Obama’s only play if multiple democratic congressmen can’t face rebuking their constituents’ presidential choice.

]]> By: Steko http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/03/obamas-red-ceiling/comment-page-1/#comment-835 Steko Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:38:46 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1542#comment-835 "At best, he can top Clinton’s performance in 1992 (370 EV) but probably not his performance in 1996 (379 EV)." From a polling standpoint perhaps. But we've seen what one sided advertising did for McCain in MN. If the current margin is maintained in this campaign, McCain will throw all his money at FL/OH/VA while Obama (who has more money to begin with) will have the WV/TX/MT airwaves all to himself. “At best, he can top Clinton’s performance in 1992 (370 EV) but probably not his performance in 1996 (379 EV).”

From a polling standpoint perhaps. But we’ve seen what one sided advertising did for McCain in MN.

If the current margin is maintained in this campaign, McCain will throw all his money at FL/OH/VA while Obama (who has more money to begin with) will have the WV/TX/MT airwaves all to himself.

]]> By: Sam Wang http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/03/obamas-red-ceiling/comment-page-1/#comment-809 Sam Wang Sun, 05 Oct 2008 19:11:13 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1542#comment-809 Michael S. Cullen, you are quoting individual polls, which vary for three reasons: (1) true movement, (2) methodological differences among pollsters, and (3) random variation. In this case the extreme poll was conducted by the Minneapolis Star-Tribute. Local polling organizations often do not use standard practices to make their results more accurate. Newspapers seem to be particularly bad offenders. You should do what we do here, which is take a median of recent polls. The median of the last three polls in MN is currently Obama +11%. Michael S. Cullen, you are quoting individual polls, which vary for three reasons: (1) true movement, (2) methodological differences among pollsters, and (3) random variation.

In this case the extreme poll was conducted by the Minneapolis Star-Tribute. Local polling organizations often do not use standard practices to make their results more accurate. Newspapers seem to be particularly bad offenders. You should do what we do here, which is take a median of recent polls. The median of the last three polls in MN is currently Obama +11%.

]]> By: Michael S. Cullen http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/03/obamas-red-ceiling/comment-page-1/#comment-807 Michael S. Cullen Sun, 05 Oct 2008 17:56:32 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1542#comment-807 Gotta question. Real Clear Politics today gives a spread in Minnesota of 18 points to Obama, two days ago McCain led by ONE point. 19 points in two days? Can anybody explain? Michael S. Cullen Berlin, Germany Gotta question. Real Clear Politics today gives a spread in Minnesota of 18 points to Obama, two days ago McCain led by ONE point. 19 points in two days? Can anybody explain?
Michael S. Cullen
Berlin, Germany

]]> By: Sam Wang http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/03/obamas-red-ceiling/comment-page-1/#comment-803 Sam Wang Sun, 05 Oct 2008 16:22:41 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1542#comment-803 Andy F., that's an excellent point. The disparities between the national polls and the Meta-Analysis is pretty interesting indeed. In general, national swings seem to be "attentuated" in the Electoral College. A few weeks ago the post-RNC bounce in national polls seemed to be disproportionately concentrated in red states. I wrote about it at the time, and it's the phenomenon you have noticed. Today, if you look at the Pollster.com data, big battlegrounds such as OH, VA, and FL do seem to have swung less than national opinion. It could indeed be because of advertising, of which I don't see any in low-voter-power NJ. Andy F., that’s an excellent point. The disparities between the national polls and the Meta-Analysis is pretty interesting indeed. In general, national swings seem to be “attentuated” in the Electoral College.

A few weeks ago the post-RNC bounce in national polls seemed to be disproportionately concentrated in red states. I wrote about it at the time, and it’s the phenomenon you have noticed.

Today, if you look at the Pollster.com data, big battlegrounds such as OH, VA, and FL do seem to have swung less than national opinion. It could indeed be because of advertising, of which I don’t see any in low-voter-power NJ.

]]>