Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Forecast: Mitt Romney Will Likely Win Ohio
Disreport ^

Posted on 11/06/2012 9:29:15 AM PST by Arthurio

by Trevor Antley and Calvin Roberts.

Forecast: Mitt Romney Will Likely Win Ohio

Abstract: Actual reported early voting data requires that early voting will represent no more than 32% of total vote in Ohio, while virtually every poll was weighted for early voting to occupy ~35-40% of total votes cast. The smaller-than-expected number of early votes means one of two things: 1) 2012 will see historically low voter turnout in Ohio; or 2) Mitt Romney has a much better chance at Ohio than polls assumed.

Late Monday night the Ohio Secretary of State released the “final” early voting results from Ohio’s counties. The results got the attention — and slight consternation — of the New York Times’ Nate Silver. Dave Wasserman kindly put the data into a spreadsheet here, which tabulates early voting results by county and compares that data to early voting results from 2008. Wasserman’s spreadsheet also notes Kerry’s 2004 margins and Obama’s 2008 margins, allowing one to effectively deduce the partisan-leanings of each county.

In a discussion on Twitter, Silver and Wasserman focused largely on the surprise changes in turnout in many of Ohio’s counties. While total early voting in Ohio only increased by 2.44% from 2008, early voting in counties that voted heavily for Kerry/Obama declined 4.1% while counties that voted heavily Bush/McCain increased their early voting by a shocking 14.39%. Wisserman, while still predicting an Obama victory, suggested that trend meant a tighter race in Ohio than expected and suggested it might undercut Nate Silver’s famous forecast. Nate Silver’s response: “I’ll stick with the 538 forecast in OH. I disagree that the early voting data there provides much reason to doubt the polls.”

Seemingly overlooked by Silver, however, during the discussion of county-by-county results was the simple number of total reported early votes: a meager 1,787,346. As stated above, this number shows a 2.44% increase in early voting from 2008 — but the number is still surprisingly low. Virtually every Ohio poll this cycle was weighted on the basis that early voting would occupy a massive chunk of the total Ohio vote. Rasmussen’s final poll ceded 40% of the total vote to early voters (EVs). PPP gave EV’s a more reasonable 35%. The Columbus Dispatch calculated early voting to take up an astounding 47% of the total Ohio vote. Almost every other Ohio poll seems to have weighted early voting between 35% and 45% of the total vote.

The reported early voting numbers, however, show that virtually every single Ohio poll overestimated the amount of early votes cast. If early voting is calculated at 1,787,346, in order for total voter turnout to rival 2004 numbers, early voting cannot occupy more than 32% of the total votes cast — and even in that scenario, that high of a percentage means that total voter turnout will be lower than it was in 2008. In order for turnout to match 2008 levels, early voting can only account for 31% of total votes cast.

The next important piece of data is what the polls consistently report: Obama leads by huge margins among early voters but trails Romney among those who say they will vote on election day. This inverse in voting segments is why the proportion of early votes in the total votes — and that virtually every poll overestimated this proportion — is so tantamount. In most polls (which usually only have Obama leading by a small margin, although some give him a more comfortable ~+5%), lowering the percentage of early votes in the polling sample means lowering Obama’s lead drastically. And when Obama’s lead is only one or two percentage points, that can mean handing the election to Mitt Romney.

Our forecast is based largely on the reported margins between Romney and Obama among early voters and election day voters as reported by the Columbus Dispatch, Rasmussen, and other polls (all polling data considered is represented in the graphic below). The Columbus Dispatch gives Obama +15% among early voters; Rasmussen gives him a much wider 23%. Other polls for Ohio EVs: CNN/Opinion Research, Obama +28; Gravis Marketing, Obama +13; PPP, Obama +21. For our forecast we assumed a more conservative Obama +18 among EVs, averaging Rasmussen and the Columbus Dispatch.

In 2008 Obama won 58% of early voting against John McCain, who had virtually no get-out-the-vote infrastructure in Ohio; our model, giving Obama a 18% lead, again assumes he will win that 58% of early voters despite the fact that Mitt Romney is putting forth a much more competitive get-out-the-vote campaign and disregarding the GOP-leaning trend in early voting results of individual Ohio counties. When one considers the results from individual Ohio counties this cycle, Obama’s actual margin among EVs may actually be much lower (although without specific partisan data, it’s also possible that Obama’s margins have actually increased — although this seems extraordinarily more unlikely). But because this is impossible to determine without actual breakdowns of the early vote, which are not yet available, those implications are not included in this model.

In determining the margin among election day voters, the same polls were considered. For election day voters, Rasmussen has Romney +15; Columbus Dispatch, Romney +11; and CNN/Opinion Research, Romney +13. PPP and Gravis Marketing both had Romney’s election day margins at a much smaller +3. For our forecast, we assume Romney’s election day voter margins at 13%, an average of the first three polls. The consistency and disparity between the first three and the latter two polls made it difficult to average them since margins of error do not explain such a clear discrepancy between the two groups.

In this scenario — which seems to be supported by the majority of polls and early voting trends (but is notably not supported by all polls, as seen in the previous paragraph) — Romney should win Ohio. Based on these assumptions — which in turn are based on a combination of polling data and the state’s actual reported early vote — if early voting accounts for 32% of the vote (a very conservative number which would place total voter turnout slightly below that of 2004), Romney wins by a whopping 50.9% to Obama’s 47.8%. The higher voter turnout is — and therefore the lower the percentage of early votes in total votes — the higher Romney’s margin becomes.

In this scenario, even if we assume our model’s margins between Obama and Romney among early voters and election day voters are somehow skewed in Romney’s favor, Romney still has padding that those margins could be reduced and he still wins. If early voting is only 31% of the total vote — putting Ohio’s total vote at just above 2008 levels — Romney has incredibly more wiggle room.

The lower-than-anticipated turnout among early voters suggests the Obama campaign’s lead in Ohio was largely hot air. And this does not even seriously consider the county-by-county early voting results, which appear to be even more damaging to Obama.

Reasons Why This Projection May Turn Out to be Wrong

In the case that the final early voting numbers reported by the Ohio secretary of state are incorrect and the final early voting results will include statistically significant additions, obviously this projection will have no meaning. As seen above, some of the polling data used in the projection (such as Romney’s margin among election day voters) is supported by several independent polling organizations but not by some others. If it turns out that the fewer polls’ results were right, then obviously our entire model is skewed too heavily towards Romney. Some have raised the possibility that effects from Hurricane Sandy stifled early voting in the final days and these early voters will simply vote for Obama on election day, increasing his election day margins beyond what polls indicated. In this scenario the polls are essentially still correct; Obama’s early voting margin was simply reallocated to his election day margin. There is no solid data to show that this is the case, but it is certainly possible. There is always the chance that the government and electorate will decide simply to defer to Nate Silver’s forecast and forget this whole voting nonsense. Since our forecast is based largely on actual votes, not subjectively weighted aggregates of polls, this would make our projection essentially meaningless. About these ads

Share this:

Like this: Like Be the first to like this.


TOPICS: US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: election2012; obama; ohio; romney

1 posted on 11/06/2012 9:29:17 AM PST by Arthurio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

Duh


2 posted on 11/06/2012 9:34:42 AM PST by scooby321 (AMS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

I predict Ohio turnout will be 6 million. I said that yesterday. 1.8 million total early voters is about 30% of total turnout.

That’s my prediction.

8 million registered voters I believe for a 75% turnout of registered voters - outstanding.


3 posted on 11/06/2012 9:34:56 AM PST by Ravi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

for later


4 posted on 11/06/2012 9:34:56 AM PST by Doctor 2Brains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

Likely? Wow, strong language. /s


5 posted on 11/06/2012 9:35:23 AM PST by CatOwner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

Best news all day! Based on hard data and rigorous, conservative analysis. Let’s hope it holds up.


6 posted on 11/06/2012 9:36:28 AM PST by BlueStateRightist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

This author should be a rocket scientist.


7 posted on 11/06/2012 9:39:48 AM PST by Huskrrrr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ravi

Ravi. Still optimistic for Ohio today?


8 posted on 11/06/2012 9:41:30 AM PST by snarkytart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

Idk about all of this. From everything I’ve read, Nate Silver is typically pretty spot on. So I’ll take his viewpoint over the supposed weighting disparity in early polls. I guess we’ll see tonight who was right!


9 posted on 11/06/2012 9:41:50 AM PST by MyHub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatOwner

Why don’t you go hide under covers today? You are so miserable in every thread.


10 posted on 11/06/2012 9:42:25 AM PST by snarkytart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All



Happy with FR now?

How about Contributing Today?

11 posted on 11/06/2012 9:43:03 AM PST by onyx (FREE REPUBLIC IS HERE TO STAY! DONATE MONTHLY! IF YOU WANT ON SARAH PALIN''S PING LIST, LET ME KNOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snarkytart

Oh, yes based on all the data I’ve seen. It all comes down to turnout.


12 posted on 11/06/2012 9:43:34 AM PST by Ravi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MyHub

Nate Silver is going to get his ass handed to him today.


13 posted on 11/06/2012 9:44:13 AM PST by HerrBlucher (Praise to the Lord the Almighty the King of Creation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MyHub

Where’s the sarcasm tag?


14 posted on 11/06/2012 9:44:33 AM PST by Ravi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio
Late Monday night the Ohio Secretary of State released the “final” early voting results from Ohio’s counties.

"Results" is not quite accurate. We know how many absentee ballots were requested & how many were cast. But we do not know how they actually voted.

15 posted on 11/06/2012 9:46:07 AM PST by gdani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio
This inverse in voting segments is why the proportion of early votes in the total votes — and that virtually every poll overestimated this proportion — is so tantamount.

LOL... wut? Paramount, maybe? Even that word is awkward in that place. And that's not the only place where his writing is clumsy.

I think the author is on to something and the numbers and conclusions are pleasant to my ear. However, he's trying, but failing, to put on that authoritative scholarly tone. Maybe it's just me, but I'm always a little suspicious of the motives of folks who do that.

16 posted on 11/06/2012 9:46:51 AM PST by Nervous Tick ("You can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

Is that someone’s blog?


17 posted on 11/06/2012 9:50:51 AM PST by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MyHub
Nate Silver is typically pretty spot on.

He's willfully ignorant.

18 posted on 11/06/2012 9:51:01 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Huskrrrr

I stopped reading after the second scenario. All I heard in my head was Charlie Brown’s teacher ‘Wha Wha Wha Wha’.


19 posted on 11/06/2012 9:52:10 AM PST by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MyHub
Nate Silver figured ONE election when he was 29. That was 2008. Everyone picked O’Bumbler by a mile. He actually under performed against the polls.

Nate Silver MISSED 2010. Totally. He missed WI THREE TIMES! He is a Leftist Punk who couldn't figure out how to count to eleven if he wasn't a man.

20 posted on 11/06/2012 9:56:04 AM PST by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town

JOKE TRANSLATION: He needs to take his pants off to count to 11.


21 posted on 11/06/2012 10:04:10 AM PST by Doctor 2Brains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: HerrBlucher

“Nate Silver is going to get his ass handed to him today.”

I hope so. But at the same time, I ask myself “He’s so high on an Obama win. What does he know that the other pollsters don’t?”


22 posted on 11/06/2012 10:10:51 AM PST by MplsSteve (General Mills is pro-gay marriage! Boycott their products!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

And let’s not forget the Reagan Quote: “Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.”


23 posted on 11/06/2012 10:11:52 AM PST by Blue Turtle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

While I’m a “forget polls, go vote” kind of person, I would trust time tested polls like Rassmussen and Gallop over a new kid on the block like Silver. He hasn’t been around that long.


24 posted on 11/06/2012 10:15:41 AM PST by ShovelPenguin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blue Turtle

Rush said this 4 minutes ago: early count in Ohio, McCain/Bush counties up 14%, and in Obama counties - it is down 2 1/2%.

Yup, Nat Silver and the DUmmies are going to get their butts handed to them.


25 posted on 11/06/2012 10:16:35 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MplsSteve

He doesn’t know Jack Schidt, he screwed the pooch on 2010 and wisconsin, he is going to screw the pooch today also. He doesn’t understand the concept of a heavy pubbie turnout, he thinks turnout will be like 08. It won’t.


26 posted on 11/06/2012 10:18:21 AM PST by HerrBlucher (Praise to the Lord the Almighty the King of Creation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MplsSteve
What does he know that the other pollsters don’t?”

Silver sees DU psychotic visions.

27 posted on 11/06/2012 10:19:27 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MplsSteve

Nate Silver compiles fatally flawed polls that assume a historic turnout for Obama. According to early voting numbers and other less tangible signs (such as crowd sizes etc) that turnout is not going to materialize.


28 posted on 11/06/2012 10:21:11 AM PST by trappedincanuckistan (livefreeordietryin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

At least they didn’t write “catamount”.


29 posted on 11/06/2012 10:23:25 AM PST by rfp1234
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MplsSteve
But at the same time, I ask myself “He’s so high on an Obama win. What does he know that the other pollsters don’t?”

Liberals are famous for believing only what they want to believe.

Why should Silver be any different?

30 posted on 11/06/2012 10:27:02 AM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA; Ignorance on parade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

But Nate Silvah, the pencil-neck pointdexter numbers guru for the loony left, says.... no way Bonzo loses Ohio.

This “forecast” is heavy on guesswork and wishful thinking, but it’s no less legit than Silvah’s projections from blatantly biased media polls.

Romney *should* win Ohio (he better, or he’s toast unless PA comes through despite monkey shenanigans in Philly), but I can’t believe that the Rats are focusing ALL of their vote fraud efforts on PA and they’ve somehow forgotten about Ohio.

Mitt’s triumphant internal poll from yesterday, with the massive, overwhelming ONE point lead in Ohio sure isn’t enough to offset ghetto vote fraud. At least the Ohio SOS is a Republican, but we’ll see if he has the cojones to disallow the fraud.


31 posted on 11/06/2012 10:31:28 AM PST by PermaRag (If Trayvon had a father, he'd look just like Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Too early to say anything.


32 posted on 11/06/2012 10:36:12 AM PST by yield 2 the right (2012, the election year that stinks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks Arthurio.


33 posted on 11/06/2012 10:41:37 AM PST by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson