10/3 Election Model PDF (TIA): Obama 354EV; all the latest state/national polls

[tiptoe]

2008 ELECTION MODEL
A  Monte Carlo  Electoral  Vote  Simulation

TruthIsAll

Updated: October 3    6:20PM

2
3
4
5

6

7
8
9


10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

 

Current Summary Statistics
Sensitivity Analysis
National Model
State Model

Election Calculator Model

2004 Election Model
State Model
National Model

2008 Graphics
Aggregate State Polls and Projections
National Moving Average Trend
State vs. National Trend  
Electoral Vote and Win Probability
Electoral Vote and Vote Share
Sensitivity Analysis: Effects of Undecided Voters
Battleground States: Polls and Projections
Battleground States: Win Probabilities
Monte Carlo Simulation: Electoral Vote Frequency
Monte Carlo Simulation: 5000 Election Trials
Uncounted and Switched Votes: Effect on Electoral Vote
Uncounted and Switched Votes: Effect on Vote Share

Current Summary Statistics

State Model
Aggregate Average
Projection (2-party)
Electoral Vote
Monte Carlo Trial Wins

National Model
5-Poll Average
Projection (2-party)

 

Obama
49.34
52.59
354
4999


49.60
54.40

 

McCain
45.24
47.41
184
1


42.40
45.60

 

weighted average based on 2004 recorded vote
Base case scenario: 60% Undecided Vote to Obama
EV = Σ win probability (i) * EV(i), i=1,51 states




60% Undecided vote to Obama

[NYC_SKP]

1. Why can't Obama break the 400 EV ceiling?

:rofl:

[Blondiegrrl]

4. He can't close the deal! It must be those blue-collar voters! n/t

[flamingdem]

2. Plouffe is a genius!

yea

[tiptoe]

9. kick! nt

[Undercurrent]

3. I don't want to rain on our parade,

and I know in my heart, head, and gut that Obama will win, but these same folks projected this in 2004:

Final Projection
Last update: Nov.1, 2004 7:00 pm


Kerry 337 EV / 51.8%
Bush 201 EV / 48.2%

http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/

[tiptoe]

5. If you believe not that Bush won '04 fraudulently, then your gripe is sound. Otherwise, baseless n/t

[tiptoe]

6. "Any model which correctly calculates the True vote is doomed to fail in a rigged election."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7159446

An excellent breakdown of election night 2004 issues is presented above (see "Fixing the polls: Party ID, Voted in 2000, RV vs. LV"). Assess the integrity of the election, before you condemn any analyst for "getting it wrong". Consider, too, election models whose "reliability ratings" fail to even consider election fraud as a factor in their analyses. Absurd; such models could be esteeming the "successful" predictors of fraudulent election outcomes. See also John Zogby's Final prediction on Election 2004 that was never presented by PollingReport.com.

[Undercurrent]

7. You are absolutely correct,

which is why I have the feeling we need to be ahead in the these projections by a good 8 points.

I'm hoping our lead stretches out to 10 points. Maybe then I can then get some sleep!

[tiptoe]

8. Agree ... and

I just noticed I need to correct and clarify something, because of a typo further down in the reference-linked that might confuse. (In the State Model table "353" should be "337". For a table header with the correct figure, see near the bottom here )

The 2004 Election Model's Final Pre-Election Projection of 337 EV for Kerry matched exactly the 337 aggregate state electoral vote count (column "EV") calculated using voter-response data from the first-of-three Preliminary "Unadjusted Exit Polls" on election night, identified "WPE Method" in the chart available within here:

http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/MatchingFinalExitPollToTheVote.htm

Pollster Edison-Mitofsky provided four aggregate state exit poll measures: the three "unadjusted" Preliminary Exit Polls and a Final "adjusted" poll (which, by standard operating procedure, would be a "poll" 'forced' to match the official recorded vote count).

The "WPE Method" Preliminary Exit Poll is a "pristine" poll, purely voter-response-based for 1250 representative sample precincts around the states. ("...the relevant data has not been made available for independent analysis"). The other two, later preliminary exit polls are modifications of the pristine poll results by degrees of incorporation of incoming vote counts and pre-election poll data.

Kerry won the first three exit polls; Bush won the Final "poll":

Exit Poll

Vote Share

EV based on
states WPE

1)    WPE

    51.8 – 47.2%

337 – 201

   (unadjusted)

2)    GEO

    51.0 – 48.5%

 

   (modified with incoming recorded votes)

3)    Composite

    50.3 – 49.1%

 

   (12:22am – modified with pre-election polls)    (13,047 random sample, 1% Margin of Error)

4)    Final

    51.1 – 48.5%

 

   ('forced' to match the official recorded vote count)

 

 
TIA's 2004 Election Model* final pre-election projection of Kerry 337 Expected EV exactly matched the unadjusted 'WPE Method' exit poll's 337 calculated aggregate EV, based upon the state WPE data provided by pollster Mitofsky (re-presented in chart, column "WPE").

The official 286 electoral votes awarded to Bush in 2004 -- of relevancy through the standard pollster procedure of 'forcing' the demographics of all final exit polls in order to match the recorded vote count from which EV derives in aggregate (regardless the former demonstrably fraudulent-because-impossible!) -- isn't close to results of either 1) TIA's Election Model projection of 337 expected EV based on pre-election polling data or 2) a calculated 337 aggregate EV based post-election on Mitofsky unadjusted exit poll data. The latter two independent measures matched exactly; the official 286 EV is what is "out of whack", unsurprising, since based on an impossible recorded vote.

The chart's first column is the official recorded vote count, to which the Final Exit Poll was 'forced' to match, with the adjustments resulting in mathematical impossibilities and implausibilities for explaining Bush' 3Million official-vote margin mandate, implying the official recorded vote used for the matching of the Final exit poll was fraudulent.


*page 3-5