Economic forecasting model: Obama will lose in near-landslide

#1
golfballs

golfballs

Mostly Peaceful Poster
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
75,414
Likes
57,668
#1
Economic forecasting model predicts Obama will lose in near-landslide | AEIdeas

080212obamareelex-462x338.jpg


The only postwar presidential election results not well explained by the Bread and Peace model are 1996 and 2000. In 1996 the vote received by the incumbent Democrat Clinton was 4% higher than expected from political‐economic fundamentals, whereas in 2000 the vote for the incumbent Democratic Party candidate Gore was 4.5% less than expected from fundamentals. I am tempted to argue that idiosyncratic influence of candidate personalities took especially strong form in those elections, with the ever charming Bill Clinton looking especially attractive when pitted against the darkly foreboding Bob Dole in 1996, and the unfailingly wooden Al Gore paling by comparison to an affable George W. Bush in 2000. Alas, this line of reasoning is entirely ad hoc and without scientific merit.
Click to expand...

Looks like the only way Obama can win is if the markets take an unprecedented reversal and Obama and the media can make Romney out to be a big of a stiff as Gore and Dole.
 
#2
#2
Campaign politics is a bit more complicated than simply the economy.
 
#5
#5
Doesn't account for Gary Johnson effect. The explanation of the 2000 miss doesn't even acknowledge the Nader effect.
 
#7
#7
golfballs said:
soldier deaths too.

Look how closely it's correlated. And his model's track record.
Click to expand...

You're underestimating the "why" and the solution to fix the economy. That is where politics come into the equation. It is not a simple as the economy is bad, incumbent is out. Especially with dumb@$$ electorate that cares more about perception than policy.
 
Last edited:
#8
#8
Don't understand how this can be when Obama leads in the key states of Penn, Ohio,and Fla, and by significant margins.
 
#11
#11
lawgator1 said:
Don't understand how this can be when Obama leads in the key states of Penn, Ohio,and Fla, and by significant margins.
Click to expand...

Yep. Obama is the best I've seen from a campaign politics platform. Simply amazing.
 
#12
#12
PKT_VOL said:
You're underestimating the "why" and the solution to fix the economy. That is where politics come into the equation. It is not a simple as the economy is bad, incumbent is out. Especially with dumb@$$ electorate that cares more about perception than policy.
Click to expand...

those random variables exist every election. but over time a few key components will stand out. that's what these models attempt to explain.
 
#13
#13
lawgator1 said:
Don't understand how this can be when Obama leads in the key states of Penn, Ohio,and Fla, and by significant margins.
Click to expand...

No way voter turnout is the same makeup it was in 2008. Thats what those polls base their sampling off of. It's extremely flawed
 
#14
#14
golfballs said:
those random variables exist every election. but over time a few key components will stand out. that's what these models attempt to explain.
Click to expand...

I am well aware of what it is trying to convey and I believe it normally holds true in most elections. Obama is just different. He is a cut above the rest when it comes to campaign politics. You throw in the GOP's mistake of nominating Romney, you have conditions to break the trend.
 
#15
#15
golfballs said:
No way voter turnout is the same makeup it was in 2008. Thats what those polls base their sampling off of. It's extremely flawed
Click to expand...


I figured that it was likely that shortly before the election we would see the GOP squirming and trying to sound upbeat heading to voting, some kind of convoluted, bend over backwards theory about why all the models are wrong.

Just didn't expect it so soon.

Its okay, you aren't alone. I saw Krauthammer on Fox last night trying to glibly explain to Hannity why all the polls are wrong and Romney is in fact a shoe-in. I swear it looked like he was about to cry, trying to come up with some lame argument on it.

My guess is that as soon as the red light went off both he and Sean started cussing up o a storm about how it was, exactly, the GOP looked the greatest gift horse ever right in the mouth .... and came up with Romney.
 
#16
#16
lawgator1 said:
I figured that it was likely that shortly before the election we would see the GOP squirming and trying to sound upbeat heading to voting, some kind of convoluted, bend over backwards theory about why all the models are wrong.

Just didn't expect it so soon.

Its okay, you aren't alone. I saw Krauthammer on Fox last night trying to glibly explain to Hannity why all the polls are wrong and Romney is in fact a shoe-in. I swear it looked like he was about to cry, trying to come up with some lame argument on it.

My guess is that as soon as the red light went off both he and Sean started cussing up o a storm about how it was, exactly, the GOP looked the greatest gift horse ever right in the mouth .... and came up with Romney.
Click to expand...

GS- conservative loon.

LG- liberal loon.

VolNation has both sides covered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#19
#19
lawgator1 said:
I figured that it was likely that shortly before the election we would see the GOP squirming and trying to sound upbeat heading to voting, some kind of convoluted, bend over backwards theory about why all the models are wrong.

Just didn't expect it so soon.

Its okay, you aren't alone. I saw Krauthammer on Fox last night trying to glibly explain to Hannity why all the polls are wrong and Romney is in fact a shoe-in. I swear it looked like he was about to cry, trying to come up with some lame argument on it.

My guess is that as soon as the red light went off both he and Sean started cussing up o a storm about how it was, exactly, the GOP looked the greatest gift horse ever right in the mouth .... and came up with Romney.
Click to expand...

So you think voter turnout will be the same as 2008?
 
#21
#21
golfballs said:
So you think voter turnout will be the same as 2008?
Click to expand...


Depends on what you mean by "the same."

You mean number for number? Seems unlikely.

You mean close enough to the pattern in 2008 that it won't change anything? Could be. Don't know.

You mean not close enough to the pattern in 2008 that it will change the outcome? Its in the realm of possibilities, sure.

But the issue is not turnout across the country. Its turnout in the battleground states that will determine the outcome. The three key states are Penn, Oh, and Fla., and Obama leads by 6 in the latter two, and by a whopping 11 in Penn.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/u...sylvania-ohio-and-florida.html?pagewanted=all

Things can change of course between now and the election. But I can't work off of what if Iran blows up a nuke or Euro crashes type scenarios. If those things happen, we can address the numbers then.

My personal impression right now, based on the polls, the demeanor of the campaigns, and my own perception of what's going on is that

1) the needle on those who hate Obama has remained pretty much consistent since about 2010. Romney needed to not only win over the base, but expand it. And he has not been able to do so thus far.

2) Romney's support is very soft once you get past the hard cores. Very, very soft.

3) Obama's support past his own hardcores isn't through the roof, but its not terrible and, most important, the soft middle isn't leaping towards Romney as the solution.

Bottom line: There is more than enough dissatisfaction with Obama for him to lose. A decent candidate from the GOP would probably be ahead right now. But you picked Romney (not that any of the others was really all that much more appetizing -- maybe Newt if it weren't for the baggage).
 
#22
#22
Be honest. Voter turnout this time around won't be nearly as beneficial to Obama as it was last time.

Those polls are based on the opposite being true, which makes them flawed.
 
#23
#23
#25
#25
Eh, I hate agreeing with LG but I think he's right. Romney had zero support minus the "anti-Obama" vote. Nobody is excited for him and he is just not doing it for independents. I think independents are much more prone to either staying home, writing in, or voting third party; all of which is a win for Obama.

Bottom line, Obama would win fairly easily if the vote was held today. That is a huge win for the Obama campaign given the disastrous record he has to run on. Barring something crazy happening, I don't see the poll numbers changing in any significant way between now and election day. Unlike a non-incumbent election or a non-modest election, virtually everyone who is going to vote in November already has made up their mind. Bad news for Romney.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top