« Movin' on Down | Main | Four New Swing States »
Tuesday, August 17, 2004
State-by-State Odds of Kerry Victory
Posted by Chris BowersUsing the post-Edwards poll information provided by mattb25 in a recent diary over at Dailykos, I have combined it with the information I collected during my investigation into the Incumbent Rule. The resulting numbers are estimates of the chance Kerry would have to win every state if the election were held tomorrow. If a state is not listed, that is because the odds of victory are either 100% or 0%. If a state is listed that Matt did not list, I did the poll calculations myself:
Chance of Kerry Victory By State
Pennsylvania: 98%
New Hampshire: 89%
Wisconsin: 89%
Minnesota: 89%
Hawaii: 88%
Florida: 80%
Iowa: 79%
Maine: 77%
Missouri: 73%
Nevada: 59%
Tennessee: 59%
West Virginia: 59%
Ohio: 55%
Arizona: 37%
Arkansas: 37%
North Carolina: 20%
Colorado: 10%
Virginia: 10%
South Carolina: 4%
Without these states, Kerry has 204 and Bush 134. At 88% or higher, Kerry���s states equal 253 electoral votes. At 73% or higher, Kerry���s states equal 302 electoral votes. At 55% or higher, Kerry���s states equal 343 electoral votes. Florida, with an 80% chance of a Kerry victory, puts him over 270.
This is crude, but it is a start. As soon as I finish the Access database with a complete list of around 600 final polls in races with well-known incumbents that compares the polls to the election results, I will hopefully be able to calculate these percentages with far greater accuracy.
Posted at 12:43 AM in General | Technorati
Comments
I always get worried about these kind of statistics. They give the impression the choices of individual voters are random events, where in fact most people have firmly made up their minds.
Even the 'undecided' voters aren't going to be flipping coins to choose a candidate. When pushed they will give an answer, and the the answer they give will always be the same - irrespective of how many times they are asked. Could someone clarify for me exactly what these percentages mean?
What we really need to know is how accurately the polling samples reflect the true voting itentions of the population at large. Can anyone produce percentage figures for that?
Someone may have done this already, but I'd be interested to see what would happen to the predicted results from each state with varying degrees of national swing to one party or another.
Posted by: Dave Holden at August 17, 2004 08:16 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I've just noticed that Chris's calculations are cross-posted from MyDD. Since there are already a couple of comments there, I'll head on over there too.
Posted by: Dave Holden at August 17, 2004 08:30 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
How did you calculate these percentages? When I use recent polls to calculate statistics and apply a normal distribution curve, I get (as a current snapshot)
IA/MI/MN/NH/NM/OR/WA 100%
PA/WI 97%
FL 94%
ME 90%
TN 64%
WV 64%
NV 53%
MO 47%
OH 44%
AZ 11%
AR 3%
States not listed are at 100% or 0%. To convert these to electoral votes see http://synapse.princeton.edu/~sam/pollcalc.html
I can also add or subtract some across-the-board bias to see whether it can bring results closer to yours.
Posted by: Sam Wang at August 17, 2004 09:01 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Here's my predictions for Kerry's chances in the battleground states. They're not based on any numeric formula, just what my gut tells me about how the dynamics of this race are likely to unfold.
Arizona--35%
Arkansas--35%
Colorado--10%
Florida--40%
Iowa--65%
Louisiana--20%
Maine--75%
Michigan--80%
Minnesota--60%
Missouri--30%
Nevada--50%
New Hampshire--65%
New Mexico--60%
North Carolina--5%
Ohio--55%
Oregon--65%
Pennsylvania--65%
Tennessee--5%
Virginia--10%
Washington--80%
West Virginia--15%
Wisconsin--55%
Posted by: Mark at August 17, 2004 10:02 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
So Mark, it looks like you think W will repeat as President...based on your odds.
Man, some of you have some scary math skills.
Posted by: Michael at August 17, 2004 10:13 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I'm very suspicious of polls this early, and I get the impression that for many here the best and most accurate polls must be the ones that confirm our team is ahead. That might be comforting, but it will mean nothing if Bush wins in November. We'll have a much truer reflection of things with the debates--and if there is a terrorist attack between now and the election, then all bets are off.
Posted by: Pepe at August 17, 2004 10:51 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I'm very suspicious of polls this early, and I get the impression that for many here the best and most accurate polls must be the ones that confirm our team is ahead. That might be comforting, but it will mean nothing if Bush wins in November. We'll have a much truer reflection of things with the debates--and if there is a terrorist attack between now and the election, then all bets are off.
Posted by: Pepe at August 17, 2004 10:51 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I don't think it's 'scary math skills' as much as it is a more negative 'gut' feeling.
I don't think I could attach numbers to my gut feelings so quickly, but looking over Chris Bowers' table, there are some states that I 'know' have different odds.
I think the odds will be lower in Florida. It's shameful, but Bush has the opportunity to go there and get publicity, and appear decisive, compassionate, and generous . . . on FEMA's nickel, without tapping into RNC coffers. Considering Florida is a must-win for Bush, expect him to milk Charley for all he can.
The odds in Nevada -- much higher. Kerry hit a home-run with his message about Yucca Mountain. Wait for the next round of polling -- I'm convinced his position in Nevada will be much stronger.
The odds in North Carolina -- a little higher, but NC is still a longshot. NC has Mike Easley's gubernatorial race *and* Erskine Bowles' senate race, so Democrats in NC have an overwhelming reason to GOTV. Democratic turnout in NC in 2004 will be higher than in previous election years, throwing off the models that polling companies have been using.
Do I have a mathematical formula to justify these claims? Nope, because I'm not using one magic algorithm to cover the whole country; I'm arguing these three states based on circumstances specific to those states.
Posted by: osterizer at August 17, 2004 10:58 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Michael, au contraire. If my predictions are realized and Kerry wins every state where I give him odds of better than 50%, he wins 280-258. If he wins Nevada where I give him 50-50 odds, it becomes 285-253 Kerry. I give Kerry a slight electoral college advantage in my predictions, but with very little room for error.
Posted by: Mark at August 17, 2004 11:10 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Site has a new look doesn't it? I dig it.
Posted by: Steve at August 17, 2004 11:24 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
The original odds on this thread seem a little wacky. HI isn't 100% (a safe Kerry state)? TN is 59% (seems kind of high for a state that leans strongly Republican, I'd give it more like 39%).
I'll tell you what, the current snapshot is interesting, and certainly Kerry would easily win if the election were held today. But, what we really should be doing is analyzing polls towards the end of Sept, when the glow of the RNC has faded. At that point, if we see a similiar snapshot, then Kerry will be coasting to victory.
I do agree with the FL at 80% number. I really think Kerry is a strong favorite to win FL. For some reason Republicans are optomistic that they will win FL this year, I guess because Jeb won reelection pretty handily and is the Prez's bro. But, the teas leaves are definitely pointing to a Kerry win. Demographics are on Kerry's side in FL. No voter purge list, new influx of liberal northeastern and hispanic voters, less of a Cuban Republican vote this year, etc. Kerry is going to win FL, I can feel it.
Posted by: Rock_nj at August 17, 2004 11:28 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I love the idea of a blue Florida, but am acutely aware of the gauntlet Kerry has to run through to win there. Recent election cycles have shown Floridians who make up their minds at the last minute seem to go with the GOP, as was the case with Dubya in 2000 and Jeb in 2004. Also, there's little indication we're gonna see any fewer dirty tricks and/or fraud this year in regards to Florida's disastrously erroneous list of ineligible felons. In Leon County this year, only 33 voters on a list of 700 ineligibles were actual felons. If false data like this is consistent in every FL county, it could easily swing an election.
Then, of course, there's the hurricane relief issue and the 9-11 factor. Many of the "northeastern liberals" moving Florida are wealthy Jews, a demographic which to my understanding is much more favorable to Dubya now than in 2000 because of the 9-11 attacks in their old neighborhood. I put the odds for Kerry in Florida at 40%. I sure hope my skepticism is wrong, but my personal opinion is that Ohio is more likely to turn blue this year than Florida.
Posted by: Mark at August 17, 2004 12:18 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I love the idea of a blue Florida, but am acutely aware of the gauntlet Kerry has to run through to win there. Recent election cycles have shown Floridians who make up their minds at the last minute seem to go with the GOP, as was the case with Dubya in 2000 and Jeb in 2004. Also, there's little indication we're gonna see any fewer dirty tricks and/or fraud this year in regards to Florida's disastrously erroneous list of ineligible felons. In Leon County this year, only 33 voters on a list of 700 ineligibles were actual felons. If false data like this is consistent in every FL county, it could easily swing an election.
Then, of course, there's the hurricane relief issue and the 9-11 factor. Many of the "northeastern liberals" moving Florida are wealthy Jews, a demographic which to my understanding is much more favorable to Dubya now than in 2000 because of the 9-11 attacks in their old neighborhood. I put the odds for Kerry in Florida at 40%. I sure hope my skepticism is wrong, but my personal opinion is that Ohio is more likely to turn blue this year than Florida.
Posted by: Mark at August 17, 2004 12:18 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I quite agree with some of the above comments. Don't take much solace in these numbers. These are the probabilities IF THE ELECTION WERE HELD NOW. But it isn't being held now. In between there's a Republican convention, 3 more months of economic data, possibilities of tides turning in the wars (Iraq & Afghan). Any probability model that does not factor these in (and I don't see how these could be modeled) is misleading.
For instance, if the probability of Kerry winning Florida -- conditional on Bin Laden being captured -- is 20% and there's a 10% chance he will be captured before the election, then that brings Kerry's probability of winning FL down to about 70%. Factor in a pickup in the economy, a Kerry blunder, a successful GOP convention, and you can throw these #s out the window.
Posted by: Jason at August 17, 2004 12:19 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
To be honest, Mark's off the cuff numbers look more accurate to me than the empirical formulas which have too much certainty built in.
I can envision with the current dynamic that the Republicans have better than a 2% chance of winning Pennsylvania and greater than a 1 in 10 chance of peeling off Wisconsin. And you have to figure there odds of carrying Florida are better than 1 in 5.
I like Kerry's chances, but its a long way until November and this still seems like an election that could go either way, though I would rather be Kerry than Bush right now.
Posted by: Keith Brekhus at August 17, 2004 12:35 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Mark's comments are certainly on the money in regards to FL. Hard to say which way Florida will go this year?!? There are a lot of cross currents. If it goes for Bush, it will probably be because of the issues raised by Mark, than some of the other issues raised by Republicans like Jeb being Governor. I still think in the end the demographics are with Kerry in FL. Cubans were riled up to vote Rep in 2000 because of Elian Gonzolez. This year, if anything they're less disposed to vote Rep because of the new restrictions imposed by Bush on their contact with family members. More hispanics are in FL. I guess the wild card is which way the new arrivals from the NE vote?
The economic numbers probably won't be good for Bush over the next few months. Iraq looks like it might spin out of control and into some sort of civil war. The one thing that might save Bush's ass at the last moment is if they pull Osama Bin Laden out of a cave just before the election. Apparently Bush is putting pressure on Pakistan to find Bin Laden. It might just happen.
Posted by: Rock_nj at August 17, 2004 12:50 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I honestly don't feel that finding Bin Laden will somehow make that big of a difference in how this election turns out. A terrorist attack will have a far greater impact, IMHO.
Now with regards to Florida, that is a state truly up in the air. My understanding is that the economy down there has been booming over the past four years--that probably has at least something to do with Jeb Bush so easily winning re-election, despite the efforts of the Democrats to vote him out. If people vote with their wallets first (and I am not convinced that that is always the case), Florida should remain in Bush's column come November. The Florida Jewish vote will support Kerry, but it will be much more split than the African-American vote. No doubt the more conservative Jews favor Bush, because they feel that our war in Iraq is of great help to Israel. I have friends in Israel that believe George W. Bush is one of our greatest presidents--good thing most of our American Jews don't feel the same way! Still, I'm more optimistic about Florida narrowling going for Kerry than I am Ohio or Missouri. This election is a LONG way from being decided, folks!
Posted by: Pepe at August 17, 2004 01:22 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
USUALLY, the state of the economy is a good predictor. But remember back in 1968, when the economy was booming -- easy re-election, right? The sitting president (a Texan) had gotten the US embroiled in a quagmire of a war and, having cut taxes and increased govt. spending, ballooned the deficit. Sound familiar? By the way [not to compare Kerry with Nixon], but the challenger won Florida and Ohio and the election.
Posted by: Jason at August 17, 2004 01:48 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
The American people are emotional creatures. If Osama Bin Laden is captured just days before the election, it will sway enough Americans to vote for Bush to perhaps put him over the top.
FL has a booming economy. That's not the issue there. Probably the war and social issues are taking center stage. Kerry has a good shot at winning FL. One way or another, it probably won't be as close as 2000 though.
Posted by: Rock_nj at August 17, 2004 02:16 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Maybe the booming Florida economy won't take center stage, but then why did Floridians vote Dubya's brother back in office--and my such a large margin?
Posted by: Pepe at August 17, 2004 02:57 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Why was Jeb easily reelected? Why not? There was no reason to remove Jeb Bush from office in 2002. Sure, the Dems were angry about 2000, but so what? There weren't enough Dems angry enough to vote him out of office. The Dem anger actually probably motivated some Republicans to come out and vote and helped Bush's totals. Jeb coasted to reelection because the economy was strong and there was no compelling reason to remove him.
State and local elections are entirely different animals. Sure, the economy is still strong in FL, but there's been a war raging for a year and a half, and gas prices have risen dramatically. Also, social issues that aren't so important in state elections can have a much bigger impact on a federal elections.
Certainly, the Dem Gov candidate McBride never enjoyed the lead that Kerry enjoys in this race in FL. Florida is a tossup, but I think Kerry has an advantage. The Cuban population isn't as likely to vote for Bush this year, which could mean a shift of 10,000s of votes. Also, the voter purge effort in 2000, which worked as expected to keep the vote totals down for Gore, isn't happening this year. That's about 30,000 more votes in Kerry's column. Just those two factors alone help Kerry. Then, add the continuing influx of liberal northeasterners and hispanics from Latin America who have become citizens, and the demographics are really on Kerry's side. If I was putting money on it, I'd bet on Kerry to win FL.
Posted by: Rock_nj at August 17, 2004 03:24 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Maybe because Jeb is not an extremist; or maybe because he didn't get the US embroiled in a questionable war. The economy is all-important when there are no other overarching issues.
Posted by: Jason at August 17, 2004 03:29 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
In the UK in 1997 people had made up their minds long before the election. Just talking to ordinary people gives you a feeling of movement or lack of movement. The same applied to the 2001 election. People ignored a lot of the electioneering; there was nothing that they could be told. Abstentions were the highest ever. Blair will suffer in the same way next year. Decisions have already been made. Cynicism about elections and electioneering has something to do with it. So my advice is to engage ordinary people and just chat with them; it works best with strangers. Get a feel for how people are responding. Then look at the polls and compare them with your touchy-feely evidence.
I predicted 1997 and 2001 very acurately on this basis.
Malcolm
Posted by: MFfromUK at August 17, 2004 03:36 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Um just as a note, by scary math skills, I was referring to the fact that they could figure out all that info. Those are some scary math skills. I doubt I could do it.
Posted by: Michael at August 17, 2004 03:53 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
In regards to Jeb's easy win, I think you also have to look at times. The Republican;s but on a masterful get out the vote effore, claiming that the Democrats were keeping him from fighting the war on terror. 2002 Election night was one of the two worst election nights I have sat through, the other being 1994. Even 2000 was better because it left some hope. We lost a lot of ground that evening (I still remember James Carvelle with the bag on his head) because of Bush's campaigning. Jeb benefitted from this turnout AS WELL AS the fact his brother was in the 70s or 80s on Job approval and popularity. Those are the type of factors that gave him the win. Planes smashing into buildings tend to make some forget their anger in the short term. If not for 9-11, Jeb would have been gone.
Posted by: Michael at August 17, 2004 04:55 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Uh, folks, Osama bin Laden is more than likely dead. Has been since the invasion of Afghanistan. If not he'd be releasing videotapes instead of audiotapes. Good speculation is that OBL's son is doing the tapes.
Posted by: Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) at August 18, 2004 01:02 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I'm not from Missouri but SHOW ME the proof he is dead. While it is a convincing argument, I think it would be a mistake to assume he is dead.
Posted by: Michael at August 18, 2004 10:43 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Even the video tapes he was releasing before were in an archaic format that the media had some difficulty converting to modern video. This means that he probably had one ancient video camera. I find it more likely that the video camera died than that he did.
Posted by: Ben Schak at August 18, 2004 11:58 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment