Colorado Algorithm Predicts a Romney Triumph

Computers at the University of Colorado have crunched data from all fifty states and are picking a winner in the 2012 presidential race - Republican Mitt Romney. Before you dismiss the computer's binary conclusion as wishful thinking, the same program has accurately predicted presidential winners beginning with Ronald Reagan's stunning and satisfying victory over Jimmy Carter in 1980. If that is not impressive enough for you, the program also predicted that in the election of 2000, Al Gore would win the popular vote but lose to George W. Bush in the Electoral College.

If you happen to reside in a swing state (I live in Florida), you cannot help but notice President Obama's campaign commercials are shrill and, well, a tad panicky. One pro-Obama spot asks me, in effect, to hate Romney because he pays an 18% capital gains tax rate. I just wish the Republican Party would come out for an18% flat tax to jump-start our dying economy. Given enough time, however, the Tea Party will oust enough RINOs that it won't be too long before a flat tax becomes a key issue for the so-called "conservative" party.

Back at the University of Colorado, political science professor Michael Berry, co-creator of the presidential-predicting software, stated, "The president is in electoral trouble," but he threw Obama a bone. "The economy has seen some improvement since President Obama took office," said Berry, "What remains to be seen is whether voters will consider the economy in relative or absolute terms. If it's the former, the president may receive credit for the economy's trajectory and win a second term. In the latter case, Romney should pick up a number of states Obama won in 2008."

It falls to Obama's media boosters to convince America's unemployed, the masses upside-down on their mortgage and facing foreclosure, the dwindling middle-class and those newly added to the welfare rolls that the greatest economic calamity since the Great Depression is really a "sluggish recovery."

Just in case you've been living under a rock the past few weeks, here's a news update: Thanks to the efforts of the world's big-government stimulators, we are entering a global recession. "2 percent [U.S.] growth is not a recovery," says CNBC host Larry Kudlow, "Many economists would call it a growth recession. When you get that low, there's little margin for error. A shock from Europe ... or almost any unexpected event could push us back into negative territory for an official double-dip recession."

Technically this model hasn't predicted anything, since it was made after 2008. It retroactively matches the elections, just like global warming models are always tweaked to “predict” past data.

Very good observation - it's just a back-testing "fitting" model.

Here are better, more realistic ones.

From Fighting False Promises - B, by Thomas Donlan, 2012 August 18

< snip > ..... The "13 Keys to the White House," a system devised by American University Prof. Allan J. Lichtman and explained in a book of that name, says that President Barack Obama has a lock on the election because he has at least eight of the keys, maybe as many as 11. Lichtman has used his system to predict the last seven winners of the popular vote for president. In back-testing, it also correctly identifies the winner of the popular vote in every election since 1860. Those popular winners were also the victors in the Electoral College, except in 2000, 1888 and 1876.
Here's how the 13 keys apply to Obama's bid for re-election. The eight that favor him: He is the incumbent. There's no contest for his renomination. There's no third-party candidate. He achieved a major change in policy during his first term. There's no rioting in the streets or social unrest. His first term is unaffected by major scandal. There's no major failure in foreign or military affairs. The challenger isn't charismatic or a national hero on the level of Grant or Eisenhower.
Two firm negatives for Obama: The Democrats lost heavily in the midterm voting two years ago. And real per-capita economic growth in his first term is below the average during the two previous terms. ..... < snip >
..... Random news events could change the keys and the prediction before Election Day. Also, predicting an election by statistics doesn't constitute proof, no matter how many times it's successful. But it's the way to bet, if you are the kind of person who bets on elections. ..... < snip >

Everybody understands that the race will be tight / close and focused mostly on a handful of EC states, more similar to 2000 and 2004 elections, which Bush nearly lost despite having dull, unexciting opponents and with the economy and other voters' concerns hugely favoring him both times.

Here is the "Excitement Factor" table for elections since 1976:

*** = Excitement Factor (to vote FOR)

^^ = Near Win / Loss

Presidential Candidate	VP Candidate
Republicans
Gerald Ford	Bob Dole
Ronald Reagan ***	George H. W. Bush
George H. W. Bush	Dan Quayle ()*
Bob Dole	Jack Kemp ***
George W. Bush ^^	Dick Cheney ***
John McCain	Sarah Palin ***
Mitt Romney	Paul Ryan ***
Democrats
Jimmy Carter	Walter Mondale
Walter Mondale	Geraldine Ferraro ***
Michael Dukakis	Lloyd Bentsen
Bill Clinton ***	Al Gore
Al Gore ^^	Joe Lieberman
John Kerry ^^	John Edwards ()*
Barack Obama ***	Joe Biden

For decades now the GOP establishment played the game of having the "Excitement Factor" on the VP side of the ticket, with similarly dismal results. Independents don't really vote en masse for VPs.

From Obama-Romney Race Is Focused on 7 States - AP, by Thomas Beaumont, 2012 August 25

With 10 weeks to go, neither Obama nor Romney are within reach of needed 270 electoral votes
On the eve of their national party conventions, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are locked in a close race to amass the requisite 270 Electoral College votes for victory. And the contest is exactly where it was at the start of the long, volatile summer: focused on seven states that are up for grabs.
Neither candidate has a significant advantage in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Ohio, Nevada, New Hampshire and Virginia, which offer a combined 85 electoral votes, according to an Associated Press analysis of public and private polls, spending on television advertising and numerous interviews with Republican and Democratic strategists in battleground states.
The analysis, which also took into account the strength of a candidate's on-the-ground organization and travel schedules, found that if the election were held today, Obama would have 19 states and the District of Columbia, offering 247 votes, solidly in his column or leaning his way, while Republican Romney would have 24 states with 206 votes. ..... < snip >
..... [Romney] must win most of the seven most competitive states — Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Ohio, Nevada, New Hampshire and Virginia — in order to reach the magic number. For instance, he can lose Ohio's 18 electoral votes and still become president if he wins the other six and hangs onto those already in his grasp. It's difficult to see a scenario where Romney wins without a victory in Florida, which offers 29 electoral votes. ..... < snip >

Intrade odds, most likely, reflect these models today. Doesn't mean that Romney can't win (he is also making a play for Wisconsin and Michigan, which would increase his odds) but anyone thinking "blowout" or "wipeout" over Obama is likely to be disappointed by the outcome.

Choosing a caricature of a Republican as your candidate doesn't help - white stiff über-rich banker/financial CEO with "shady" offshore accounts and "possible" tax-avoidance issues, who keeps trying to buy elections and whose privileged life "regular" people can't relate to and may resent - but that's the Grand Old ["Stupid"] Party for you.

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.

Republicans

Democrats