Comments on: The exuberance of likelier voters http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/12/the-exuberance-of-likelier-voters/ A first draft of electoral history Thu, 12 Nov 2009 02:35:25 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Sam Wang http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/12/the-exuberance-of-likelier-voters/comment-page-1/#comment-2394 Sam Wang Sat, 15 Nov 2008 08:15:57 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2638#comment-2394 <b>Frank</b> - Look at the history plots. I don't see any such event there. All the horserace-moving events of the campaign that I can identify are labeled. Frank – Look at the history plots. I don’t see any such event there. All the horserace-moving events of the campaign that I can identify are labeled.

]]> By: Sam Wang http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/12/the-exuberance-of-likelier-voters/comment-page-1/#comment-2391 Sam Wang Sat, 15 Nov 2008 07:57:10 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2638#comment-2391 <b>bks</b> - the post contains a graph that you can inspect to see if this is true. bks – the post contains a graph that you can inspect to see if this is true.

]]> By: bks http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/12/the-exuberance-of-likelier-voters/comment-page-1/#comment-2390 bks Sat, 15 Nov 2008 06:32:08 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2638#comment-2390 Did you try plotting just the states that McCain won versus just the states that Obama won, leaving out the close contests? I would predict that the effect was stronger in the Obama states. --bks Did you try plotting just the states that McCain won versus just the states that Obama won, leaving out the close contests?
I would predict that the effect was stronger in the Obama states.

–bks

]]> By: Frank http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/12/the-exuberance-of-likelier-voters/comment-page-1/#comment-2383 Frank Fri, 14 Nov 2008 20:00:20 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2638#comment-2383 All right, here's one for you. On p 78 of Remnick's article on Obama in the latest NYer, an assoc of Axelrod is quoted as saying "When Barack came back from Europe and he was using that line about how he didn't look like all the other Presidents on American currency, his numbers went down." Is this reflected in your numbers? All right, here’s one for you. On p 78 of Remnick’s article on Obama in the latest NYer, an assoc of Axelrod is quoted as saying “When Barack came back from Europe and he was using that line about how he didn’t look like all the other Presidents on American currency, his numbers went down.” Is this reflected in your numbers?

]]> By: Sam Wang http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/12/the-exuberance-of-likelier-voters/comment-page-1/#comment-2369 Sam Wang Fri, 14 Nov 2008 04:50:10 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2638#comment-2369 <b>Ockham</b> - Your model doesn't seem all that parsimonious to me. But I do agree that market forces might encourage pollsters to make races look closer. I don't think it's done on purpose, though. <b>Steve Roth</b> - If the lagging candidate catches up, (a) that's at the national level, not state; and (b) it's in the opposite direction as the effect I am describing. Also, see <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/110548/Gallup-Presidential-Election-TrialHeat-Trends-19362004.aspx" rel="nofollow">Gallup's history of trial heats, 1936-2004</a>. It shows the leader pulling away in 1996, 1988, and 1936. So although there is a tendency in the direction you indicate, these exceptions show that it's not reliable by any means. Ockham – Your model doesn’t seem all that parsimonious to me. But I do agree that market forces might encourage pollsters to make races look closer. I don’t think it’s done on purpose, though.

Steve Roth – If the lagging candidate catches up, (a) that’s at the national level, not state; and (b) it’s in the opposite direction as the effect I am describing.

Also, see Gallup’s history of trial heats, 1936-2004. It shows the leader pulling away in 1996, 1988, and 1936. So although there is a tendency in the direction you indicate, these exceptions show that it’s not reliable by any means.

]]> By: Bill http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/12/the-exuberance-of-likelier-voters/comment-page-1/#comment-2367 Bill Fri, 14 Nov 2008 04:08:45 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2638#comment-2367 I tend to agree with post 18 from William Ockham at 5:30 pm. Could it prove informative to gather up a bunch of polling data from lower profile races (house, state legislature, ballot propositions?) and compare it to the outcomes. Fewer polls over all, but lots of potential races to choose from. As a non-statistician, I'm not sure how those factors would effect everything. I tend to agree with post 18 from William Ockham at 5:30 pm.

Could it prove informative to gather up a bunch of polling data from lower profile races (house, state legislature, ballot propositions?) and compare it to the outcomes. Fewer polls over all, but lots of potential races to choose from. As a non-statistician, I’m not sure how those factors would effect everything.

]]> By: William Ockham http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/12/the-exuberance-of-likelier-voters/comment-page-1/#comment-2363 William Ockham Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:30:46 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2638#comment-2363 I will posit an alternative explanation for this feature. In any non-close race, everyone with a megaphone in a presidential campaign (leading candidate, trailing candidate, and the press) has a vested interest in making the race look closer than it really is. The leader wants to turn out his voters, and so must ward off complacency. The losing side wants to avoid a rout and hope for lightening to strike. The media needs a contest to get viewers/sell papers/pump their web traffic. Pollsters respond to this demand by tweaking their results to shave a little bit (or in the case of a really big lead, a lot) off the leader's margin. Nobody, except elections nerds like us, really cares if you miss a 20 point win by 5 points. If my explanation is correct, then the bigger the real margin, the more it will be understated. That looks right to me from that graph, but I'm not entirely sure I'm reading it correctly. I will posit an alternative explanation for this feature. In any non-close race, everyone with a megaphone in a presidential campaign (leading candidate, trailing candidate, and the press) has a vested interest in making the race look closer than it really is. The leader wants to turn out his voters, and so must ward off complacency. The losing side wants to avoid a rout and hope for lightening to strike. The media needs a contest to get viewers/sell papers/pump their web traffic.

Pollsters respond to this demand by tweaking their results to shave a little bit (or in the case of a really big lead, a lot) off the leader’s margin. Nobody, except elections nerds like us, really cares if you miss a 20 point win by 5 points.

If my explanation is correct, then the bigger the real margin, the more it will be understated. That looks right to me from that graph, but I’m not entirely sure I’m reading it correctly.

]]> By: Jack Rems http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/12/the-exuberance-of-likelier-voters/comment-page-1/#comment-2362 Jack Rems Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:15:06 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2638#comment-2362 Sam- I got your book yesterday (2nd printing!). I’m looking forward to settling down with it once my election fever passes. But I hope you’ll give the Georgia runoff the full meta-analysis treatment. It will be fun to see how the pollsters do; there are a lot of weirdness factors. One key will be early voting, but that is only a 3-day week due to Thanksgiving, and I would suggest the GOTV people offer to take voters to the poll and then give them a ride to the mall, grocery store, foodbank—if that’s legal. Funding should go to finding people who need their hand held and taking them to vote early. Election day many polling stations will be scary places, especially if your “papers are not in order” or you think they might not be. I read this on fivethirtyeight, from “soozle” in GA, thought it was useful: “Having lived for many years in a community that routinely had runoffs for local office, it is our experience that they are won or lost in the 5 days after the general election. That's the time that the candidates get their postcards in the mail to constituents for requesting absentee/mail ballots for the runoff. In the afterglow of the election, with uncertainty in the outcome, the voter gets his postcard, sends it in, and he received his ballots later. He is far more likely to vote with the ballot in his hand than if it requires a trip to the polling place. we would go so far as to color code the postcards, so a glance at the pile in the city clerk's office would tell us what parts of the city were responding, and whether they were ours or theirs. “Runoffs are an art form unto themselves; most candidates/campaigns make the mistake of waiting to find out the final tally, etc., before they figure out how to position themselves to win the runoff. We found it better to have our runoff postcards ordered and a draft at the printer on election night awaiting only the final details so we would have them in the mail in a day or two. Granted these were local elections, but the scale shouldn't make a difference.” [November 13, 2008 10:14 AM] Sam- I got your book yesterday (2nd printing!). I’m looking forward to settling down with it once my election fever passes.

But I hope you’ll give the Georgia runoff the full meta-analysis treatment. It will be fun to see how the pollsters do; there are a lot of weirdness factors.

One key will be early voting, but that is only a 3-day week due to Thanksgiving, and I would suggest the GOTV people offer to take voters to the poll and then give them a ride to the mall, grocery store, foodbank—if that’s legal. Funding should go to finding people who need their hand held and taking them to vote early. Election day many polling stations will be scary places, especially if your “papers are not in order” or you think they might not be.

I read this on fivethirtyeight, from “soozle” in GA, thought it was useful:
“Having lived for many years in a community that routinely had runoffs for local office, it is our experience that they are won or lost in the 5 days after the general election. That’s the time that the candidates get their postcards in the mail to constituents for requesting absentee/mail ballots for the runoff. In the afterglow of the election, with uncertainty in the outcome, the voter gets his postcard, sends it in, and he received his ballots later. He is far more likely to vote with the ballot in his hand than if it requires a trip to the polling place. we would go so far as to color code the postcards, so a glance at the pile in the city clerk’s office would tell us what parts of the city were responding, and whether they were ours or theirs.
“Runoffs are an art form unto themselves; most candidates/campaigns make the mistake of waiting to find out the final tally, etc., before they figure out how to position themselves to win the runoff. We found it better to have our runoff postcards ordered and a draft at the printer on election night awaiting only the final details so we would have them in the mail in a day or two. Granted these were local elections, but the scale shouldn’t make a difference.” [November 13, 2008 10:14 AM]

]]> By: Steve Roth http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/12/the-exuberance-of-likelier-voters/comment-page-1/#comment-2360 Steve Roth Thu, 13 Nov 2008 19:45:06 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2638#comment-2360 Let me put that more accurately: the lagging candidate's vote percent always seems to come in higher than the final polls. (The leader may come in even further ahead.) Let me put that more accurately: the lagging candidate’s vote percent always seems to come in higher than the final polls. (The leader may come in even further ahead.)

]]> By: Steve Roth http://election.princeton.edu/2008/11/12/the-exuberance-of-likelier-voters/comment-page-1/#comment-2359 Steve Roth Thu, 13 Nov 2008 19:38:38 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2638#comment-2359 Sam, I think (?) this relates to a curious thing I noticed in this NYT Op-Art: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/11/01/opinion/01blow_ready.html The lagging candidate always seems to catch up some compared to the final polls. This doesn't sample many polls, but still. Thoughts? Sam, I think (?) this relates to a curious thing I noticed in this NYT Op-Art:

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/11/01/opinion/01blow_ready.html

The lagging candidate always seems to catch up some compared to the final polls.

This doesn’t sample many polls, but still. Thoughts?

]]>