9/20 ELECTION MODEL (TIA): 98.5% OBAMA EV WIN PROBABILITY (4926 WINS/5000 SIMULATION TRIALS)

[tiptoe]

2008 ELECTION MODEL
A  Monte Carlo  Electoral  Vote  Simulation

TruthIsAll

Updated: September 20

Press REFRESH after linking to a graph to view the latest update

Chart   State Poll Aggregate + Projection Trend

Chart   National 5-Poll Moving Average Projection

Chart   State vs. National: Vote Share Projection Trends

Chart   Battleground-State Polls

Chart   Battleground-State Win Probability

Chart   Obama Electoral Vote Simulation Frequency

Chart   Electoral Vote + Win Probability Trend

Chart   Electoral Vote + Projected Vote Share Trend

Chart   Undecided Voter Allocation + Win Probability

Chart   Monte Carlo Electoral Vote Simulation Trials

 2008 Election Model Fraud Analyzer 

Uncounted  &  Switched Votes

Chart   Effect on Obama Projected Vote Share

Chart   Effect on Obama Projected Electoral Vote

 

“I’m glad that TIA raises the questions. A Top 10 list.”  — Sancho

 

This
State
National
State
National
Monte  Carlo
Simulation

Update
Poll
5-Poll
2-party
2-party
Expected

9/20/2008
Aggregate
Average
Projection
Projection
Electoral Vote

Obama
McCain
 46.62 (50.36) 
 45.95 (49.64) 
 48.20 (51.83) 
 44.80 (48.17) 
51.08
48.92
52.40
47.60
 323 
 215 

    

15-Poll

End

Sample

Poll

NATIONAL MODEL

 

Pre  UVA
5-Poll Mov Avg

 

2-Party Projection  (60% UVA)
5-Poll Mov Avg

Trend
                            
Rasmussen
Gallup
Hotline/FD
Quinnipiac
CBS/NYT

Zogby
Ipsos
Pew Research
Newsweek
AP/gFk

FOX News
NBC/WSJ
CBS/NYT
CNN
ABC/WP

Registered V
vs     Likely V
Poll Averages

Date
            
9/19
9/19
9/18
9/16
9/16

9/15
9/15
9/14
9/11
9/10

9/09
9/08
9/07
9/07
9/07

Size   
              
3000 LV
2796 RV
915 RV
987 LV
800 LV

1008 LV
1046 RV
2307 LV
1038 RV
812 RV

900 RV
1000 RV
655 RV
942 RV
1000 LV

RV avg
LV avg
Total

MoE
         
1.79%
1.85%
3.24%
3.12%
3.46%

3.09%
3.03%
2.04%
3.04%
3.44%

3.27%
3.10%
3.83%
3.19%
3.10%

Obama
            
48
50
45
49
49

47
45
46
46
44

42
46
44
48
47

45.6
47.7
46.4

McCain
            
47
44
44
45
44

45
45
46
46
48

45
45
46
48
49

45.7
46.0
45.8

Other
            
5
6
11
6
7

8
10
8
8
8

13
9
10
4
4

8.8
6.3
7.8

Spread
            
1
6
1
4
5

2
0
0
0
(4)

(3)
1
(2)
0
(2)

(0.1)
1.7
0.6

 

Obama
            
48.2
48.0
47.0
47.2
46.6

45.6
44.6
44.8
44.4
44.8

45.4
45.0
44.6
45.0
43.8

McCain
            
44.8
44.4
44.6
45.0
45.2

46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.4

46.6
46.6
48.4
47.2
46.0

Spread
            
3.4
3.6
2.4
2.2
1.4

(0.4)
(1.4)
(1.2)
(1.6)
(1.6)

(1.2)
(1.6)
(3.8)
(2.2)
(2.2)

 

Obama
            
52.40
52.6
52.0
51.9
51.5

50.6
50.2
50.3
50.2
50.1

50.2
50.0
48.8
49.7
49.9

McCain
            
47.60
47.4
48.0
48.1
48.5

49.4
49.8
49.7
49.8
49.9

49.8
50.0
51.2
50.3
50.1

Spread
            
4.8
5.1
4.1
3.8
3.0

1.3
0.5
0.6
0.3
0.2

0.4
0.1
(2.4)
(0.6)
(0.2)

Win Prob
               
99.6
99.7
89.1
88.1
80.5

65.8
56.2
62.1
54.1
51.8

54.8
51.0
27.0
42.2
48.0

 

 

Obama’s EV and Popular Vote Win Probability

Assuming the election is held today, Obama’s win probability as calculated by fivethirtyeight.com (71.5%) is not consistent with their projected 303–235 EV.

The Election Model uses a 5000-election trial Monte Carlo simulation. The model projects that if a fraud-free election is held today, Obama would win 323–215 Electoral votes with 51.1% of the two-party vote. The EV win probability is a simple calculation: Obama won 4926 of 5000 simulated election trials; his win probability is therefore 98.5% (4926/5000). It’s a snapshot which changes slightly every day.

The model indicates that for the same 303-235 EV split, Obama’s EV win probability is 92% (assuming he wins just 50% of the undecided vote). Since the probability calculations in both models are based on the latest state polls, there is obviously a difference in methodology between the models.

The Election Model base case scenario assumes that Obama will win 60% of the undecided vote. And this is conservative, as he is presumed to be the challenger (McSame is running for the third Bush term).

View the Election Model Electoral Vote Simulation Frequency chart. Note that 4926 (98.5%) of the 5000 simulated election trials are over 270 for Obama. Compare this result to the equivalent fivethirtyeight.com chart in which 28.5% of the trials which McCain won are in red, while the 71.5% Obama won are in blue. The chart should be 98.5% blue.

Obama also leads the National projection model (based on the average of the latest 5 national polls) with 52.4% of the 2-party vote. Note that the national polls lead the state polls, so that we can expect a rise in Obama’s expected EV and win probability. The national model also assumes that he will win 60% of the undecided vote. The probability that he will win the popular vote is over 98%.

As of Sept.20, electoral-vote.com has Obama leading by 273–265; realclearpolitics has him losing by 202–216 (120 tossup); fivethirtyeight.com has Obama by 303–235. But the 2008 Election Model (EM) had Obama leading: 323–215. Why the difference?

Why Election Model projections differ from the Media, Academia and the Bloggers

There are a variety of election forecasting models used in academia, the media and internet election sites. The corporate MSM (CNN, MSNBC, FOX, CBS, etc.) sponsors national polls to track the “horserace” and state polls to calculate the electoral vote.

And why don’t they mention the fraud factor? If just 2% of votes cast are uncounted (2.74% were in 2004) and 4% of Obama’s votes are switched electronically to McCain, McCain will win by 293–245 EV with 51.2% of the two-party vote.

• The EM uses Monte Carlo (MC) simulation method to calculate the probability of winning the electoral vote. Monte Carlo is widely used to analyze diverse risk-based models when an analytical solution is impractical or impossible. The EM is updated weekly based on the latest state and national polls. The model projects the popular and electoral vote, assuming both clean and fraudulent election scenarios. The EM allocates the electoral vote based on the state win probability in calculating a more realistic total Expected EV.

• Corporate MSM pollsters and media pundits use state and national polling data. Electoral vote projections are misleading, since they are calculated based on the latest state polls regardless of the spread; the state poll leader gets all of its electoral votes. This is statistically incorrect; they do not consider state win probabilities. And there is no adjustment for the allocation of undecided voters.

For example, assume that McCain leads by 51–49% in each of five states with a total of 100 electoral votes. Most models would simply assign the 100 EV to McCain. But that is an oversimplification: Obama could easily win one or more of the states, since his win probability is 31% :

• The state projected vote share V(i) is the state poll share PS(i) plus the undecided voter allocation UVA(i):
  
  
  V(i) = PS(i)+UVA(i),   for i=1,51 states
  
  
  For this example, a final Obama projected vote share V(i) = .49 for all states is assumed (with distinct state poll shares PS(i) and respective undecided voter allocations UVA(i) implied). Five states total 100 EV.



• The probability P(i) of winning each state assuming a 4% polling MoE (95% confidence):
  
  
  P(i)  =  NORMDIST ( V(i),  0.5,  .04/1.96,  true )
  
  
  .31 = NORMDIST( .49,  0.5,  .04/1.96,  true)  for each of the 5 states       (the NORMDIST function is available in Excel)
  
  The 2008 Election Model would allocate 31% of 100 EV to Obama and 69% of 100 EV to McCain.

• Bloggers also track state and national polls and do not adjust for undecided voters. A few use Monte Carlo simulation, but the EV win probabilities and frequency distributions are NOT consistent with the polling data. Either the state win probabilities and/or the simulation algorithm is incorrect.

• Academic regression models predict the popular vote but are run months prior to the election. They are typically based on economic and political factors rather than state or national polling data. They do not project the electoral vote. In 2004, virtually all of them forecast Bush to win by 5-10%. But since the election was stolen, the models had to be wrong — they didn’t factor election fraud as an independent variable in the regression. In fact, they never even mentioned the F-word in describing their methodologies.

Fixing the polls: Party ID, Voted in 2000, RV vs. LV

There has been much discussion regarding the recent McCain “surge” in the national polls. Most national and state polls are sponsored by the corporate MSM. Gallup, Rasmussen and other national polls recently increased the Republican Party ID percentage weighting. This had the immediate effect of boosting McCain’s poll numbers. But there are 11 million more registered Democrats than registered Republicans. USA Today/Gallup changed the poll method from RV to LV right after the Republican convention. Party-ID weights were manipulated to favor McCain as well.

There is a consistent discrepancy between Registered Voter (RV) and Likely Voter (LV) Polls. The Democrats always do better in RV polls. No wonder: Since 1988, Democratic presidential candidates have won new voters by an average 14% margin.

The manipulation of polling weights is nothing new. Recall that the 2004 and 2006 Final National Exit Polls weightings were adjusted to match the recorded vote miscount. But all category cross-tabs had to be changed, not just Party ID. Of course, the Final Exit Poll (state and national) is always matched to the Recorded vote, even though it may be fraudulent — as it was in 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2006. This cannot be emphasized enough. Say it loud, again and again.

In 2004, the 12:22am National Exit Poll (NEP) had a 38–35 Democrat/Republican 'Party ID' mix.

Kerry won  the 12:22am Preliminary NEP by 51–48%.    ( 13,047 random sample, 1% MoE )

The mix was changed to 37–37 in the Final NEP  to 'force' a match to the Recorded vote;

Bush won  the 1:25pm 'forced' Final NEP by 51–48%.

Likewise, the Gore/Bush 'Voted 2000' weights were changed from 39–41 to 37–43 in the Final    ('13047' & '13660' here).

Bush was the official winner by 50.7–48.3% with 286 EV.

The final 2004 Election Model projection indicated that Kerry would win 337–201 EV with 51.8% of the 2-party vote.  In their Jan. 2005 report, exit pollsters Edison-Mitofsky provided the average exit poll discrepancy for each state based on 1250 total precincts. Kerry won the unadjusted aggregate state exit poll vote share by 52.0–47.0% (2-party 52.5%) with 337 electoral votes — exactly matching the Election Model!

In the 2006 midterms, the 7pm Preliminary NEP had a 39–35 Democratic/Republican weighting mix. The Democrats won that NEP by 55–43%. But the weights were changed to 38–36 in the Final NEP in order to match the 52–46% recorded vote; the Dem 12% margin was cut in half. Once again, the 'Voted 2004' weights were transformed: from Bush/Kerry 47–45 at 7pm to 49–43 in the Final. The landslide was denied; 10-20 Dem seats were stolen.

The “dead heat” claimed by pollsters, bloggers and the media is a canard — unless they are factoring fraud into their models and not telling us. The media desperately wants a horserace, and so they fail to adjust the polls for undecided and newly registered voters. They avoid McCain’s gaffes, flip-flops and plagiarisms, while he supports the most unpopular president in history.

Polling data source:
Electoral-vote.com
RealClearPolitics.com

THE 2008 ELECTION MODEL

Last
Aggregate
5-poll
2-party
2-party
Monte  Carlo
Simulation

Update
State
National
State
National
Expected

9/20/2008
Average
Average
Projection
Projection
Electoral Vote

 
 
 
60% UVA
 
 

Obama
McCain
46.62
45.95
48.20
44.80
51.08
48.92
52.40
47.60
 323 
 215 

 

2004 Final
 
 
75% UVA
 
 

Kerry
Bush
47.88
46.89
47.80
46.60
51.80
48.20
51.77
48.23
 337 
 201 

 


Sensitivity Analysis — Impact of Uncounted and Switched Votes on Obama

Uncounted
1%
2%
3%
Switched
2%
4%
6%
Vote%
50.1
49.0
48.0
EV
292
259
226
Vote%
49.8
48.8
47.8
EV
276
245
212
Vote%
49.6
48.5
47.5
EV
261
230
199

 

Sensitivity Analysis — Impact of Aggregate State Projected Vote Share

Undecided Voter Allocation Scenario
 
 
Base Case

Obama
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%

 

Projected 2-Party Vote Share

Obama
McCain
49.6
50.4
50.3
49.7
51.08
48.92
52.2
47.8
52.6
47.4

 

MoE
Obama Popular Vote Win Probability (Normdist)

1.0 %
2.0 %
3.0 %
21.4
34.6
39.6
74.7
63.0
58.8
98.3
85.5
76.0
100.0
98.4
92.4 
100.0
99.4
95.3

 

Obama Electoral Vote (Monte Carlo - 5000 election trials)

Mean
Median
283.4
283
303.5
303
322.6
324
343.9
345
350.8
353

Maximum
Minimum
372
176
393
223
398
236
409
262
415
278

 

Obama Electoral Vote Win Probability (Monte Carlo)

Trial Wins
Probability
3441
68.8
4577
91.5
4926
98.50
4998
99.96
5000
100.0

 

95% EV Confidence Interval
Upper
Lower
335
232
352
255
368
277
384
304
389
313

 

States Won
Obama
 
23
 
24
 
27
 
29
 
29
 

 

Full Update, with State Model:    http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

If nominating, click here to recommend the full update above