# What about the freaking Electoral Vote **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 15, 2008, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099 "2008-10-15T22:02:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/21 "2008-10-16T18:35:16Z")
Does anyone remember the very similar threads that preceded the 2004 election and consisted of confident predictions of a Kerry victory? I guess not. ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/22 "2008-10-16T18:41:17Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Does anyone remember the very similar threads that preceded the 2004 election and consisted of confident predictions of a Kerry victory? > > I guess not. Do you remember any serious electoral predictions that showed anything other than a close race? > [@mallocks](#): > > I’ve been visiting 538 quite a bit over the past week since I first saw it linked here, loving all the numbers and graphs and suchlike, and certainly the blog posts make the preference of the site operators pretty clear; does that worry any Democrats as to the veracity of their information? Or is their methodology transparent enough to resist tampering? No, these guys are statisticians first, and Nate has a reputation to uphold. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/23 "2008-10-16T18:46:53Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Does anyone remember the very similar threads that preceded the 2004 election and consisted of confident predictions of a Kerry victory? > > I guess not. Some members of this board were overconfident once, so now anyone that thinks Obama looks likely to win are overconfident? You would have a point, albeit still a weak one, if Kerry and Obama were in relatively the same position poll-wise. But they aren’t. Obama is in a much, much better position than Kerry was. About 7-8 points better, _at worst_, nationally, and with better electoral college outs and a better ground game. People feel confident in an Obama victory based on the overwhelming amount of evidence that a victory is likely. That doesn’t mean the situation can’t change, and I see no one saying that. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/24 "2008-10-16T18:48:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Does anyone remember the very similar threads that preceded the 2004 election and consisted of confident predictions of a Kerry victory? > > I guess not. I think you must have dreamed it. This board was very pessimistic about Kerry’s chances. There were no similar threads, and there were certainly no similar poll numbers. ---
**Author:** ![mallocks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f4b2a3/32.png) [@mallocks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mallocks)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/25 "2008-10-16T18:48:50Z")
> [@ultrafilter](#): > > No, these guys are statisticians first, and Nate has a reputation to uphold. Thanks for the answer, much appreciated. I realised only after posting that this thread was in the pit, more sensibly I’d have asked it elsewhere. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/26 "2008-10-16T18:53:53Z")
For anyone whose memory is foggy, compare the following two graphs: [RealClear Politics - Polls](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/chart3way.html) (showing Bush ahead from September through the election) and [Pollster](http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/08-us-pres-ge-mvo.php) (showing Obama ahead from mid-September and gaining) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/27 "2008-10-16T18:58:53Z")
Also [http://www.electoral-vote.com/](http://www.electoral-vote.com/). (Today showing Obama leading with 352 EVs, McCain with 171, 15 ties.) ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/28 "2008-10-16T19:30:58Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Does anyone remember the very similar threads that preceded the 2004 election and consisted of confident predictions of a Kerry victory? I don’t. Hook me up with a link? ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/29 "2008-10-16T19:32:36Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > If the popular vote margin is greater than two points, it’s all but mathematically certain that the electoral vote result will match the popular vote result. First off, I want to assure you I am not disputing you, but could you please elaborate on this a bit? ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/30 "2008-10-16T19:47:15Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > If the popular vote margin is greater than two points, it’s all but mathematically certain that the electoral vote result will match the popular vote result. This isn’t obvious to me either. Practically speaking, it’s very likely true, but I don’t see exactly how the math plays out. ---
**Author:** ![Baldwin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baldwin/32/7264_2.png) [@Baldwin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baldwin)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/31 "2008-10-16T20:04:35Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Does anyone remember the very similar threads that preceded the 2004 election and consisted of confident predictions of a Kerry victory? > > I guess not. Gosh, I sure don’t; I’d also love to see those threads, if you wouldn’t mind linking to them. (Of course, if Kerry had had these poll numbers, and not been running against an incumbent with a war on, such threads would have been justified.) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/32 "2008-10-16T22:02:46Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Some members of this board were overconfident once, so now anyone that thinks Obama looks likely to win are overconfident? > > You would have a point, albeit still a weak one, if Kerry and Obama were in relatively the same position poll-wise. But they aren’t. Obama is in a much, much better position than Kerry was. About 7-8 points better, _at worst_, nationally, and with better electoral college outs and a better ground game. > > People feel confident in an Obama victory based on the overwhelming amount of evidence that a victory is likely. That doesn’t mean the situation can’t change, and I see no one saying that. Well, yes. For what it’s worth, I was predicting a Bush win in 2004 and am predicting an Obama win this year. [But…](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5327313&postcount=19): > [@](#): > > I take polls with a lot of salt. For someone to give projected vote totals down to the units digit is preposterous and that pollster must have been asleep in statistics class when “significant figures” was discussed. The polls use scientific samples of the voter rolls, and different groups are represented according to their tendency to come out and vote. With the huge influx of new voters this year as witnessed by many media stories of the interest in this election, these new voters may not vote as you might demographically expect. Also, you can count on the right coming out in droves every year. The pro-life crowd, the anti-gun control crowd, and the anti-gay acceptance crowd all vote and all vote Republican. But now the rest of the voters are energized and those that typically don’t vote are coming out. My bet is that they all break Democratic and Kerry wins in a walk. > [@](#): > > Originally Posted by Bosda Di’Chi of Tricor > Big turnouts have almost always been bad for incumbents. > Indeed. The article linked by the votemaster today is interesting. > > [http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?...articleId=8694](http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?...articleId=8694) > > . . .in incumbent elections, the incumbent’s percentage of the vote is a far better indicator of the state of the race than the spread. In fact, the percentage of the vote an incumbent president receives in surveys is an extraordinarily accurate predictor of the percentage he will receive on election day – even though the survey results also include a pool of undecided voters. Hence the 50-percent rule: An incumbent who fails to poll above 50 percent is in grave jeopardy of losing his job. . . > > Think of it this way: The percentage that Bush receives in polls represents his ceiling of support; he may get a little less, but won’t get more. In contrast, Kerry’s percentage represents his floor, and he will almost certainly do better on election day. Assuming that Ralph Nader and other minor candidates will receive about 2 percent – which is what current surveys suggest – 49 percent becomes the critical line of demarcation in this election. If Bush can get to 50 percent or above in the polls, he should be able to win. At 49 percent – where he is today – we’re probably looking at another photo finish, lots of recounts, and narrow state-by-state victories dictating the Electoral College outcome. And below 49 percent, Bush is almost certain to lose. > [@](#): > > Update from [http://www.electoral-vote.com/](http://www.electoral-vote.com/), 10/5/04: > > Quote: > American Research Group has more data on the debate. Kerry gained in all three panels they used. In the random telephone interviews, Kerry now leads Bush 49% to 46%. > [@](#): > > … I didn’t find anything to support your supposition that there was no post-debate Kerry bounce, and you didn’t bother pointing out what was there. > > And now that post-debate numbers are starting to come in, we can analyze this some more. As BrainGlutton has pointed out, Kerry is trending upwards since the debate in Iowa, Ohio, and New Mexico. > > I’m not going to say he’s taken the lead in those states, because the lead is still within the MOE. And there’s also Pennsylvania, where Bush now leads by one in a seven-day poll ending October 3, which obviously includes pre-debate numbers. (Iowa’s and Ohio’s also use pre- and post-debate numbers as well, but the difference is that before the debate they were on Bush’s side by 4 and 3%, respectively, and now they’re on Kerry’s side. Just click on ‘Previous Day’ to see how things looked yesterday.) > . > . > But it is safe to say that polls can indicate trends. And if you continue to claim there’s no post-debate bounce, contrary to the numbers that have come in (however imprecise and meager they are), then perhaps it is you who would rather not see. > [@](#): > > Update: According to [http://www.race2004.net/](http://www.race2004.net/) today (10/7/04), the electoral vote tally is now 215 for Bush, 239 for Kerry, 84 undecided. > > Quote: > If the election were held today we project: > > Kerry wins the presidency with 280 electoral votes. Bush places second with 258 electoral votes. > > Kerry wins the popular vote with 55,259,224 votes (49.51%). Bush places second with 54,180,415 votes (48.55%). > > If Colorado ballot initiative #36 passes, 4 electoral votes switch from Bush to Kerry. The new total is 284 for Kerry, 254 for Bush. > > Current polling data suggests the initiative is likely to pass. > On the other hand, [http://www.electoral-vote.com](http://www.electoral-vote.com) gives the tally as 253 for Bush, 264 for Kerry. Lots more. Lots of quoting favorable polls, interpreting info favorably their way, and studiously ignoring reality. Now, this time, think that Obama’s probably going to win. But it irks me that there’s seemingly no recollection of how confidently some folks here pooh-poohed a Bush victory in 2004. If you’re going to be certain, be right. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/33 "2008-10-16T22:33:05Z")
**Bricker** , I think one of us is misunderstanding the other. I have no doubt that some people were overconfident about Kerry. It isn’t clear to me what that has to do with current confidence in Obama. I maintain that current confidence in Obama is extremely well-founded, unlike confidence in Kerry. So why are you drawing a parallel? ---
**Author:** ![spinky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@spinky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spinky)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2008, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/34 "2008-10-17T02:41:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Does anyone remember the very similar threads that preceded the 2004 election and consisted of confident predictions of a Kerry victory? > > I guess not. I actually don’t recall that, but boy it sounds like those people made some pretty unfounded predictions. That’s a great story. Very relevant. ---
**Author:** ![spinky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@spinky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spinky)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2008, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/35 "2008-10-17T02:47:21Z")
Missed the edit window, but I can’t wait to find out if **this** prediction comes true: > [@OK, Beeyotches, You've Made Up My Mind For Me](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-beeyotches-youve-made-up-my-mind-for-me/462002/1): > > when [McCain] wins, I am going to crow for a week. You think I crowed after 2000? I remember that, and I remember 2004 too, when you pussies whined about how shocked and hurt you were and begged me stop rubbing your pathetic faces in your loss. That will be a walk in the park compared to what’s coming up. I’ll fucking buy ad time on this board to crow about a McCain victory. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2008, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/36 "2008-10-17T13:58:42Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > **Bricker** , I think one of us is misunderstanding the other. I have no doubt that some people were overconfident about Kerry. It isn’t clear to me what that has to do with current confidence in Obama. I maintain that current confidence in Obama is extremely well-founded, unlike confidence in Kerry. So why are you drawing a parallel? The parallel was a very simple and surface one: look at how confident you (collectively) are now about an Obama victory – but remember how equally confident you were about a Kerry victory. I’m probably the wrong person to throw the stone, because I share the view that Obama will win, although it’s not a view of brimming confidence. But you’re right – confidence NOW is well-placed; confidence THEN was insanely speculative. So I withdraw the observation. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2008, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/37 "2008-10-17T14:00:36Z")
> [@ntucker](#): > > Missed the edit window, but I can’t wait to find out if **this** prediction comes true: I have already repudiated that prediction, and that promise. I did so in the very thread from which it came, within a day or so of posting it. McCain may still win, of course, unlikely as it is. But I won’t be crowing. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2008, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/38 "2008-10-17T14:05:02Z")
18 days is a long time and a lot of things can happen that change, even reverse the polls. I’ll wait until the late afternoon of Nov. 4th. to call a winner. ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2008, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/39 "2008-10-17T14:17:10Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > First off, I want to assure you I am not disputing you, but could you please elaborate on this a bit? Don’t take my word for it–check out the elaborate simulation just run at [538](http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/06/popular-vote-v-electoral-vote.html). Once the popular vote margin surpasses four percent, **not even one** out of a thousand simulations results in the leading candidate losing the election. In some theoretical United States, it might be possible to win the popular vote by a large margin and still lose the election. It isn’t possible in the real United States. The balance of “wasted” votes in safe-red (Texas) and safe-blue (California) states is too even, and there are too many swing states. As the popular-vote margin passes three or four percent, too many of the swing states swing the same way, and the electoral vote ends up accentuating the popular vote. Bush 41 beat Dukakis by seven points in the popular vote, but 426-112 in the EC. Clinton pasted Bush and Dole by similar margins. ---
**Author:** ![spinky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@spinky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spinky)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2008, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099/40 "2008-10-17T15:51:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I have already repudiated that prediction, and that promise. I did so in the very thread from which it came, within a day or so of posting it. I’ll have to take your word for it. I gave up after two pages of bile. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-about-the-freaking-electoral-vote/468099.md?page=3)