The 2008 Election Model assumes that current polls reflect the will of the electorate and a fraud-free election is held today. Obama has a solid margin in virtually all of the battleground states. Obama won all 5000 Monte Carlo simulation election trials with an expected (average)

**367**–

**171** electoral vote margin. His median EV was 371; the mode (most frequent trial result) was 372. He has a

**99%** probability of winning at least

**330** electoral votes.

View the

**State vs. National vote share projection Trend**.

National polls are current; state poll lag by a week or more. Obama’s projected aggregate state 2-party vote (

**53.64%**) is approaching the national average (

**54.56%**) as the time lag between the polls decreases.

The three most critical states weighted by the electoral vote and poll spread are

**OH** (20.9),

**NC** (20.90) and

**FL** (14.3). The values represent the optimal percentage of campaign resources to be allocated to these states. The percentages change when the polls are updated.

For McCain to win, he needs to switch at least

**8%** (1 in 12) of Obama’s votes to his column.

**National Model**

Tracking Poll Average

Projected Vote (2-party)

Actual Projected

**State Model**

Aggregate Poll Share

Projected Vote (2-party)

Actual Projected

**Electoral Vote**

Poll

Projected

Expected value

**Obama**

50.00

54.56

52.16

50.09

53.64

51.24

372

372

367.12

**McCain**

42.40

45.44

43.84

43.99

46.36

44.76

166

166

170.88

Calculation method (base case)

Rasmussen, Gallup, Research 2000, Hotline, Zogby

Poll average+ 60% of undecided (UVA) to Obama

4% to third parties

Weighted average of state polls (2004 recorded vote)

Poll aggregate+ 60% of undecided (UVA) to Obama

4% to third parties

Unadjusted Poll Leader

Poll + 60% undecided (UVA) to Obama

EV = ∑ (Projection win probability (i) * EV(i)), i=1,51 states

**Monte Carlo Simulation** **(60% UVA to Obama, 5000 election trials)**Mean

Median

Mode

Maximum

Minimum

367.20

371

372

417

299

170.80

167

166

121

239

Average Expected EV

Middle value

Most frequent EV

**Obama Electoral Vote Win Probabilities**Minimum Electoral Vote

Winning Trials >Min EV

Probability (EV > Min)

**270**

5000

100.0%

**310**

4996

99.92%

**330**

4953

99.1%

**350**

4475

89.5%

**370**

2546

50.9%

**390**

179

3.6%

**410**

5

0.10%

Projected Vote Shares, Electoral Votes and Win ProbabilitiesElectoral-vote.com and

RealClearPolitics now closely match the Election Model. As indicated in a prior update, these sites assign the full electoral vote to the state poll leader (regardless of the spread); they avoid using

**state win probabilities** in calculating the EV. In the past, their EV totals were low and volatile compared to the Election Model; the polls were close and

**they did not allocate undecided voters**. Now that Obama has pulled ahead in every battleground state, the Election Model undecided voter “kick” has virtually no impact on his expected EV; he is already projected to win.

The discrepancy in win probabilities between the Election Model (100%) and

FiveThirtyEight (90%) is due to fundamental differences in methodology. The 538 model adjusts state poll projections based on pollster rating weights as well as other factors. They forecast Election Day result. The Election Model assumes the election is held today and is fraud-free. The Election Model does not rank pollsters, but it does adjust the latest state poll average for a range of

undecided voter allocations (40–80%) — a sensitivity “what-if” analysis.

Ranking pollsters based on prior election results is a two-edged sword. If a pollster (Rasmussen) comes close to the recorded vote in a rigged election, does that mean he was more accurate than one who correctly projected the

**True Vote** (Zogby)? Compare their performance in the 2000 election (Zogby was correct, Rasmussen was way off) to the totally corrupt 2004 election (Rasmussen was “correct” and Zogby was off). This was the

electoral-vote.com EV map on Nov 1, 2004.

Compare the FiveThirtyEight

Electoral Vote Distribution chart to the Election Model

Electoral Vote Simulation Frequency chart.

The Election Calculator Model

In May, the

**2008 Election Calculator** projected that Obama would win the True Vote by

**71–59m**.

May 2008

Estimated vote share

2004

DNV

Kerry

Bush

Other

Total

Turnout

—

95%

95%

95%

113.7

Voted

17.2

60.5

51.6

1.6

130.9

Mix

13.1%

46.2%

39.4%

1.2%

100.0%

130.9m

Obama

59%

89%

11%

70%

54.1%

70.8m

McCain

40%

10%

88%

11%

44.7%

58.5m

Other

1%

1%

1%

19%

1.2%

1.6m

On October 14, the Calculator was updated to include new information:

1) An increase of over 20% in new registered voters, the great majority of whom are Democratic.

2) A slight increase in the estimated Obama share of returning Kerry and Bush voters.

3) An increase in third party vote share.

Obama is now projected to win by

**80**–

**58** **million votes** in a fraud-free landslide.

2004

DNV

Kerry

Bush

Other

Total

Turnout

—

95%

95%

95%

113.7

Votes

29.9

60.6

51.6

1.6

143.7

Mix

20.8%

42.2%

35.9%

1.1%

100.0%

143.7m

Obama

59%

92%

11%

64%

55.7%

**80.1m**

McCain

35%

5%

86%

11%

40.4%

**58.1m**

Other

6%

3%

3%

25%

3.9%

5.6m

The model sensitivity analysis indicates the following, assuming other vote shares are held constant:

If Obama wins just

**9%** of returning Bush voters and

**90%** of Kerry voters, he would win by

**17.5m** votes (

**54.2**–

**41.6%**).

If he wins just

**55%** of new voters and

**90%** of Kerry voters, he would win by

**17.2m** votes (

**54**–

**42%**).

If he wins by

**52**–

**44%**, he would win by

**74.7–63.4m**.

If he wins by

**50**–

**46%**, he would win by

**71.8–66.2m**.

The

**1988-2004 Election Calculator** was developed as a response to the

**Final 2004 National Exit Poll**.

The

**Final NEP** was

**'forced' to match** the

**recorded vote** using

**impossible weightings**.

In the

**Final** NEP (see '13660'), 43% of 2004 voters --

**52.6m** -- were former

**Bush 2000 voters**; 37% were Gore voters.

**But Bush only had ****50.5m** votes in 2000.Approximately 2.5m died by 2004, and another 2.5m did not return to vote in 2004.

Therefore,

__only__ **45.5m** **Bush 2000 voters** __could have returned to vote in 2004__.

**The ****Final NEP** overstated the Bush vote by **7 million** __in order to match__ a __corrupt__, __miscounted vote__.The 2004

**True Vote** calculation was based on an estimated 100.1m returning 2000 voters, calculated as:

Total votes cast in 2000 (110.8m)...less voter mortality (5.4m)...times 95% turnout (100.1m).

Vote shares were based on the

**12:22am** National Exit Poll (

**13047 randomly selected, 1% MoE** ).

The model determined that Kerry won by

**66.9**–

**57.1** million.

Kerry did slightly better (53.2%) than the unadjusted state exit poll (52.0%) aggregate.

The results indicate that

**5.4m** votes (

**8.0%** of Kerry’s total) were

**switched** from Kerry to Bush.

2004

DNV

Kerry

Bush

Other

Total

Cast

Turnout

—

95%

95%

95%

100.1

Votes

25.6

49.7

46.6

3.8

125.7

Mix

20.4%

39.5%

37.1%

3.0%

100.0%

125.7m

Kerry

57%

91%

10%

64%

53.2%

66.9m

Bush

41%

8%

90%

17%

45.4%

57.1

Other

2%

1%

0%

19%

1.4%

1.7m

Recorded Vote share

Recorded Vote

Unadjusted Exit Poll

Deviation from True Vote

122.3

48.3%

59.0

52.0%

1.2%

50.7%

62.0

47.0%

+1.6%

1.0%

1.2

1.0%

-0.4%