# What if 538 is right, and Romney loses by 60+ electoral votes **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [August 31, 2012, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316 "2012-08-31T23:22:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2012, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/141 "2012-09-03T20:04:23Z")
I saw a note that Romney could finally start spending money he raised for the general election campaign now that he is officially the candidate. Up til now he has only been able to spend that which was raised for the primary campaign. I presume Obama has the same issue. Now we’ll see the yard signs and bumper stickers just explode all over the place and the tv ads in the swing states increase to an unbearable level. ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2012, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/142 "2012-09-03T20:36:12Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > They’re spending big in Ohio _now_, sez the article, and will keep spending right up to the end. Where have you seen anything about a pullback there? That would be suicidal. Thanks for the NYT link. My wife says she heard Chuck Todd on MSNBC say that the conservative superpac American Crossroads was reducing its presence in Ohio…but you’re right, that’s obviously not representative of the campaign as a whole. Perhaps she misheard, or Chuck is wrong…or, maybe it’s true, because the Romney campaign prefers to concentrate its direct campaign resources in such a crucial state, and leave the “indirect” superpac stuff for other regions. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2012, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/143 "2012-09-03T21:14:19Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > A correction and a question: > > I phrased this poorly. Better than “prediction” might have been “fitting the training data” (or “post-diction” to use **DSeid** ’s term). Note that some problems, perhaps _including this one_, come with such a meager amount of useful historical data that one may not have the luxury of setting some aside for testing. > Question: > Are Nate Silver’s predictions based on _an election held today_? The real danger for Obama is not noise in the polling results, or even normal voter shifting, but some unforeseen October Surprise that changes sentiment drastically. I think the possibility of a Surprise is why Intrade still gives Romney a 42% chance. > > What will the Surprise be? I don’t know, that’s why they call it a Surprise! 🆒 1. Again post-dictions do not need to be limited to fitting the training data. If a hypothesis generated out of “the training set” leads to results in other past data sets that were not considered in developing the hypothesis then the hypothesis can be considered strengthened. 2. The 538 model traditionally is a forecast of what will be on election day; he has just added a “now cast” that states what would be if the election was held today. The forecast factors in that a current poll will be influenced by a transient factor, like a convention bump, that the now cast does not adjust for. He of course cannot factor for unforeseen events; he can merely state that the odds of one occurring that is large enough to change the results are below a certain percent. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2012, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/144 "2012-09-03T21:16:02Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > I saw a note that Romney could finally start spending money he raised for the general election campaign now that he is officially the candidate. Up til now he has only been able to spend that which was raised for the primary campaign. I presume Obama has the same issue. > > Now we’ll see the yard signs and bumper stickers just explode all over the place and the tv ads in the swing states increase to an unbearable level. I believe the primary spending is limited by state. That could limit some of the spending. But overall, there’s really no difference. The candidates are going to spend lots of that primary money on general election stuff, like ads attacking their opponent from the opposite party, anyway. So it doesn’t matter that much. They’re probably going to spend most of it now because voters don’t pay as much attention until after Labor Day. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2012, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/145 "2012-09-03T22:21:21Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > What do you mean, “not particularly optimistic about their preference”? He’d prefer if we stiff had slavery or separate water fountains. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2012, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/146 "2012-09-03T22:59:57Z")
I read it as a statement of how little power Blacks have - if they as a group all want something to occur bet on the opposite to happen. The only other read is that if they all wanted something to occur the rest of America would find it s threatening they’d all vote against it. ---
**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:** [September 3, 2012, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/147 "2012-09-03T23:49:50Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > For Romney to pick up 132 electoral votes against a sitting president indicates the level of unhappiness with the economy we’re in. It could also mean the electorate did not like McCain as a candidate. You can’t just assume it’s about the economy. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/148 "2012-09-04T01:13:04Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > I read it as a statement of how little power Blacks have - if they as a group all want something to occur bet on the opposite to happen. The only other read is that if they all wanted something to occur the rest of America would find it s threatening they’d all vote against it. I read it to mean that if 100% of blacks are for something it means they are all group thinking and incapable of evaluating objectively that one candidate has made it clear he doesn’t give damn about them as a group…I’d like to clarify. I’ve seen the argument before that blacks are racists since they voted for Obama (of course, white people voting for our few hundred years straight of white presidents are of course, voting on the issues only). I’d like to hear the explanation of what he actually meant, which is why I asked… ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/149 "2012-09-04T13:29:12Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > What happens if Obama wins by 60 electoral votes? It’s a huge achievement for Romney. > > That’s because Obama won in 2008 by 192 electoral votes. For Romney to pick up 132 electoral votes against a sitting president indicates the level of unhappiness with the economy we’re in. > > But expecting Romney to pick up 193 electoral votes, more than double what McCain garnered? Nearly impossible. The math in this thread is all weird. Obama won 365-173. 193 is not twice 173. If Obama wins by 60 electoral votes he wins 299-239, which would be a pickup of 66 electoral votes for the GOP. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/150 "2012-09-04T13:32:13Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > I read it to mean that if 100% of blacks are for something it means they are all group thinking and incapable of evaluating objectively Strangely, that would mean he’s saying that MORE support means it should carry LESS weight. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/151 "2012-09-04T13:41:08Z")
> [@moonshot925](#): > > The University of Colorado predicts Romney will win. > > > [@](#): > > > > The model, the only of its kind to use more than one state-level economic indicator, has correctly predicted the winner of every presidential election since 1980. This nonsense again? These people did not, in fact, predict anything in 1980, or 1984, or 1988, or… well, which part of this progression escapes you? Retroactive “predictions” are nothing more than “Bible Code” twaddle. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/152 "2012-09-04T13:45:21Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Huh? > > When you have a variable, and a few other variables you think cause it, you can find a model that fits better than another. > > My ice cream model, for example. The best model shows ice creams sales increasing with temperature outside, using past data. It predicts the future fairly well. That’s fine, but until you demonstrate that it actually works it’s still just a hypothesis. As it happens I think your hypothesis on ice cream is likely correct, but then we have a rather enormous amount of data, not just one day of sales every four years. I am far less impressed by the “we looked at a bunch of past elections and concluded from some disparate economic indicators who will win” is as sure a bet as summer and ice cream when the model isn’t proven,\*\* especially when current polls state Obama will win the election.\*\* I said it in the other thread and will again here; all this nattering over this or that demographic don’t matter when the current polls, and a good, solid analysis of how the polls line up by state, say Obama’s winning. However Romney is doing with a given demographic, he’s not doing well enough. He has to do BETTER than this or he’s going to lose. \*\*Elvisl1ves \*\*notes: > [@](#): > > Without PA, Romney needs OH, FL, and VA. All of them. The math is really simple and it has nothing to do with how Romney does with white lesbian homeowners in the top income bracket or Hispanic males who cheer for the Dolphins and have car loans; it’s about swing states. 35 states are out of play, realistically, and those give Obama about 230-240 EVs and Romney about 190-200. Romney must win the remaining states, the big ones, and win almost all of them. Pennsylvania is probably lost, which means Romey must win Ohio, Florida and Virginia, and that still wouldn’t be enough; he also has to flip Wisconsin, Colorado, AND Nevada, or if he misses one of those, get both Iowa and New Hampshire. Right now all those states are polling slightly for Obama. He is losing. He’s losing even after the convention bump. It ain’t over yet, here’s two months to go, but a model that says he’s going to win is flying in the face of the fact that he is currently set to give a concession speech. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/153 "2012-09-04T13:50:46Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > I don’t know what a good standard is. Well, then, pay attention and learn. As has been repeatedly explained in this thread, a “model” that “predicts” the data used to create the model, and only the data used to create the model, (e.g. the “Bible Code”, the U of CO “model”) is worthless. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/154 "2012-09-04T14:02:33Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Well, then, pay attention and learn. As has been repeatedly explained in this thread, a “model” that “predicts” the data used to create the model, and only the data used to create the model, (e.g. the “Bible Code”, the U of CO “model”) is worthless. So you can’t ever look at past data relationships and use them to predict the future? That’s just science. You look at the relationship between CO2 levels and global temperature in the past. And then you look at CO2 level trends today. Boom - global warming theory. Not all models are good, but I don’t see why this is the only reason it wouldn’t be. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/155 "2012-09-04T14:02:46Z")
> [@Maeglin](#): > > I have no idea what that is supposed to do with the Bickers-Berry model under discussion. Simple: Bickers-Berry = “predictions” of the events used to build the model = junk science Silver = predictions of _new_ events not used to build the model = real science ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/156 "2012-09-04T14:04:35Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > That’s fine, but until you demonstrate that it actually works it’s still just a hypothesis. Of course. > [@](#): > > As it happens I think your hypothesis on ice cream is likely correct, but then we have a rather enormous amount of data, not just one day of sales every four years. It’s a bit disappointing to learn that elections are that simple, but perhaps they are. > [@](#): > > The math is really simple and it has nothing to do with how Romney does with white lesbian homeowners in the top income bracket or Hispanic males who cheer for the Dolphins and have car loans; it’s about swing states. 35 states are out of play, realistically, and those give Obama about 230-240 EVs and Romney about 190-200. Romney must win the remaining states, the big ones, and win almost all of them. I agree. I wouldn’t pick the CO model over polls, or even over other models. I’m just defending the idea of models in general. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/157 "2012-09-04T14:06:54Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Simple: > > Bickers-Berry = “predictions” of the events used to build the model = junk science > > Silver = predictions of _new_ events not used to build the model = real science Nope. If you build a model that explains past events, it’s very good at explaining past events. Why did the dinosaurs die out? A meteor? If it fits, it’s a model. Doesn’t matter that it isn’t (and can’t be) tested because we have no new dinosaurs to watch go extinct. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/158 "2012-09-04T14:08:41Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > This nonsense again? These people did not, in fact, predict anything in 1980, or 1984, or 1988, or… well, which part of this progression escapes you? Retroactive “predictions” are nothing more than “Bible Code” twaddle. Sigh. It simply means that it fits the data that was used to create it. Which is understood. They aren’t saying they actually predicted anything. If the model had been around in 1980, it would have predicted the elections. That’s all. That makes it a decent model. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/159 "2012-09-04T14:08:55Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > So you can’t ever look at past data relationships and use them to predict the future? Yes, you have to use one set of data to develop a model that predicts another set of data (e.g. compare temperatures and CO2 levels for 1970-1990 and see how it predicts observations for 1990-2010). You can’t use the same data set for both, or you’re just Bible-Coding a circularity into your logic. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2012, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316/160 "2012-09-04T14:12:24Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > If you build a model that explains past events, it’s very good at explaining past events. That’s true enough, for things we can’t observe future events for. Ideally what we would do is build a model based on known data for a subset of past events and then see if it predicted other known past events. That is, fit to a lot of data and then use the resulting model to make predictions against other known data sets (or predictions about past events we don’t yet have evidence of but might some day - new fossils, for example). What you don’t want to do, however, is fit to all of the known data (particularly if you have more variables than data points) and then _use it to predict future events_. It just doesn’t work well that way. I would really like to see Silver do an analysis of the full paper when it comes out - he generally is very fair, but tough, on these sorts of things. One particular thing I’d like him to try is to remove one election from the procedure, run the regression, and then use the result to predict the “removed” election - how well does this match up with the true result. This is the kind of robustness I’d require before giving the model any weight in making future predictions. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-538-is-right-and-romney-loses-by-60-electoral-votes/633316.md?page=9)