Posts Tagged ‘Turnout’

A Pyrrhic Victory: We nailed the election’s “Rosetta Stone” … really!

November 12, 2012

My official forecast was wrong, but I did post what was, perhaps, the key decoding ring for the election.

Here’s what I said on November 3 in my post The election’s “Rosetta Stone” … really!

The polls have been bouncing all over the place, and pundits are broadly whining that the reason is difference in “turnout models”.

That is, how many more (or less) Democrats will show up to vote for Obama.

To understand the issue, I framed a related – but inverted — analysis by asking the question: by how much does Dem turnout (in swing states particularly) have to exceed GOP turnout for Obama to win?

The answer: Dem turnout has to be more than about 4 percentage points higher than GOP turnout for Obama to win.

Here’s my summary chart … below it are the assumptions and analytical logic.

From the chart: if Dem turnout is about 8 percentage points more than GOP turnout (as it was in 2008), Obama wins by about 4%; if Dem turnout is less than 4 percentage points greater than the GOP’s, Obama loses.

It’s as simple as that …

But, like many others,I thought that GOP enthusiasm would drive turnout and keep the spread to less than 4%.

Exit polls put the differential at about 6%.

Looking back, the enthusiasm was either overstated, or enthusiasm doesn’t necessarily drive turnout.

Right analysis; wrong core assumption.

The red line is what happened …

image

More re: turnout forecasts …

November 6, 2012

According to HotAir.com

Rasmussen’s national polling of party affiliation now shows the biggest Republican advantage since at least 2004:

  • R = 39.1%
  • D = 33.3%
  • I  = 27.5%

In modern times, the GOP has never had a turnout advantage in a presidential election.

The closest they came was drawing even with Democrats at 37 percent in 2004.

Given Romney’s lead with independents, if GOP stays even with Dem turnout, Romney wins.

If the GOP hits Rasmussen’s numbers, it’s a landslide.

The election’s “Rosetta Stone” … really!

November 3, 2012

The polls have been bouncing all over the place, and pundits are broadly whining that the reason is difference in “turnout models”.

That is, how many more (or less) Democrats will show up to vote for Obama.

To understand the issue, I framed a related – but inverted — analysis by asking the question: by how much does Dem turnout (in swing states particularly) have to exceed GOP turnout for Obama to win?

The answer: Dem turnout has to be more than about 4 percentage points higher than GOP turnout for Obama to win.

Here’s my summary chart … below it are the assumptions and analytical logic.

From the chart: if Dem turnout is about 8 percentage points more than GOP turnout (as it was in 2008), Obama wins by about 4%;  if Dem turnout is less than 4 percentage points greater than the GOP’s, Obama loses.

It’s as simple as that … especially on a swing state by swing state basis.

image

= = = = =
Assumptions & Analysis

While there has been a lot of bounce in the numbers, a couple of things appear to be pretty stable.

First, both Romney and Obama capture over 90% of their party’s votes.

Second, independents are generally about 1/3 of the total voting base … and, independents seem to be breaking towards Romney 55% to 45%.

In a nutshell, that means that Obama has to overcome a 3.3% Romney vote advantage with over-performance in Dem turnout.

  • 10 percentage point independent vote differential times 1/3 of the voting population equals 3.3%

Let’s run through a couple of examples:

1) Assume that the turnout is evenly split among Dems, GOP, and independents; that Obama & Romney each get 95% of their party’s votes; and that independents vote Romney 55% to 45%.

Under these assumptions, Dems have no turnout advantage (because that’s what we assumed) … and Obama loses by 3.3%.

image

= = = = =

2) Same assumptions as example #1, except assume that the Dem turnout is 8 percentage points greater than the GOP’s … roughly comparable to 2008 voting patterns.

Under these assumptions,  Obama wins by almost 4%.

image

= = = = =

3) Same assumptions as example #1, except assume that the Dem turnout is 3.7 percentage points less than the GOP’s.

Under these assumptions, the race is tied … we’ve found the sweet spot … if the Dems turnout advantage is more than 3.7 percentage points, Obama wins; less than that and he loses.

image

= = = = =
Final Notes

1) It’s simply math magic that the relationship works out to be linear … as displayed on the summary chart.

2) If you don’t like my assumptions, plug in your own … my conclusion: the numbers are pretty robust to changes in the assumptions

3) Nobody seems to be predicting Dem turnout comparable to 2008 … In fact, some are predicting that GOP will have a turnout advantage,

4) You haven’t seen an analysis like this anywhere else, right?  Only in the Homa Files …

* * * * * *

How “intensity” turns a tie into a 6 point lead … here’s the math.

November 1, 2012

The election polls results are all over the place.

My take: the election is a dead heat nationally (slight Romney edge in the popular vote) and in key swing states (slight Obama lead in pivotal swing states, lead in electoral votes).

But … the fat lady hasn’t sung yet.

To get a better understanding of the dynamics in play, I dug into this week’s NPR poll.

Why NPR?

Because, if anything, it leans left, so no cookin’ the books for Mitt.

Also, it reported some interesting metrics that provide a basis for some interesting analysis.

  • Note: my primary intent is provide a calibrated analytical structure, not a prediction.

= = = = =
Topline Results

First, NPR reports Romney leading Obama by 1 point … 48% to 47% for all respondents … dead heat.

And, 48% + 47% = 95%, so 5% are still undecided, voting for another candidate, or hopelessly confused … or all three.

So, 5 points are arguably up for grabs.

Conventional wisdom says they break mostly for the challenger … advantage Romney.

image

Looking deeper – into the footnotes, NPR says:

  • ALL results are based on 1000 weighted cases, MoE = ±3.10

In other words, Romney’s score could be as high as 51% or as low 45%.

Obama’s score could be as high as 50% and as low as 44%.

Bottom line: Either candidate might be leading … Romney could be leading by as  many as 7 points … 51% to 44%.

Or, Obama could be leading by as many as 5 points … 50% to 45%.

That doesn’t tell us much, right?

= = = = =
Independent Voters

Let’s look at the Independent voters (above chart).

Romney leads with independent voters by 12 points … 51% to 39%,

Is that lead statistically significant?

Well, NPR says:

  • IND results are based on 309 respondents, MoE = ±5.58 percent.

So, Romney could be as high as 56.5% or as low as 45.5%.

Obama could be as high as 44.5% or as low as 33.5%.

Bottom line: Romney has an unequivocal, statistically significant lead among Independents.

= = = = =
Voter Intensity

Here’s where things get interesting …

NPR asked:

  • On a scale of one to ten, with one being “not at all enthusiastic” and ten being “extremely enthusiastic,”
    how enthusiastic are you about voting in the Presidential election this November?

image

In marketing research, there’s a principle called the “top box effect”.

In essence, it says to focus on folks who check the highest level allowed … and pretty much ignore the rest as insignificant.

So, what do the numbers tell us?

Republican “intensity”, i.e. “extremely enthusiastic”, is 76% – 10 percentage points higher than the Dems 66% … and 22% higher than Independents 54%.

That’s a big intensity advantage for the Republicans.

How might it translate to votes?

We need another piece of data and some basic arithmetic.

= = = = =
Turnout Assumption

You’ve probably been hearing the grumbling—mostly from Republicans – that recent surveys have been skewed Democratic … that they implicitly assume that Dems will turnout more than Republicans.

  • Of course, the turnout is a function of both party registration (“mix”) and voting propensity.  Most surveys of party affiliation peg the Dems & Republicans at about even.

The NPR “mix” is 35% Republicans, 33% Independents, and 31% Republicans.
image

We’ll test the sensitivity of those numbers later … for now, let’’s use NPR’s assumption.

= = = = =
”Hard Support”

OK, now let’s play with the numbers.

Here’s the summary chart … below, I’ll explain it.

image

What we’re trying to get to is “Hard Support” … folks who are “intense” (“extremely enthusiastic”) and favor Romney or Obama.

To get at that, we have to look at Republicans, Independents and Democrats separately.

For example, 76% of Republicans are “extremely enthusiastic” … and 96% of Republicans say they’ll vote for Romney.

Multiply those 2 numbers together, and they imply that 73% of Republicans are both “extremely enthusiastic” and inclined to vote for Romney (76% X 96% = 73%).

Since the sample “mix” is 31% Republican, Romney’s hard support from Republicans is equivalent to 22.6% of all voters (since 73% X 31% = 22.6%).

Applying the same calculations to the other classifications (Independent & Democrat) … and the data indicates that of Romney’s total of 48%,  32.9% is “hard support” and 15.2% is “soft support” that is less likely to show up at the polls.

Repeating the process for Obama, the data indicates that of Obama’s total of 47%. 29.1%% is “hard support” and 17.9% is “soft support”.

So what?

Romney has a 3.7 percentage advantage in hard support – the folks who are most likely to show up at the polls.

That’s a statistically significant number, given the polls 3 point margin of error.

Bottom line: If we factor in intensity, Romney has statistically significant advantage.

= = = = =
Another mix scenario

Let’s add one more twist.

What if the mix of Dems and Republicans is roughly equal at 33% … instead of 35% to 31%?

image

Big change!

Romney’s lead increases to 5.6% percentage points … Romney 50.6% to Obama 45%.

And, Romney’s hard support lead increases to 6.4 percentage points … well outside the margin of error.

= = = = =

Punch line

Yes, the headline number may signal a dead heat … within the margin of error.

But, if you factor in intensity and party mix … the numbers change pretty dramatically.

The Republican’s intensity advantage and lead among Independents seem pretty consistent across polls.

So, the key for Republicans is delivering on the intensity advantage … making sure that the “extremely enthusiastic” Republican & Independent voters turnout to vote.

For Dems, the turnout effort is even more critical since they have to close the intensity gap.

Dems claim that their turnout machine gives it substantial competitive advantage that will close the gap … or more.

I guess we’ll see next Tuesday.

>> Latest Posts