A new approach to determining which candidate will win the most electoral votes in the U.S. Presidential race factors in lessons learned from the 2004 election and uses sophisticated math modeling. The research will be presented at the annual meeting of the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS).
As of September 16, the margin in electoral votes could be as high as 282.8 votes for Senator John McCain against 255.2 for Senator Barack Obama, depending on the forecasting scenario.
Operations researcher Sheldon H. Jacobson, a professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, along with a group of students and collaborators at Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville, created
http://election08.cs.uiuc.edu/ , a math model that dynamically forecasts the outcome of the election.
Prof. Jacobson and colleagues will present their findings at the INFORMS annual meeting, which takes place in Washington, D.C. at the Marriott Waldman Park Hotel and Omni Shoreham Hotel from October 13 – 15, less than three weeks before the election.
Jacobson's model applies a mathematical model to state polling data, using a dynamic programming algorithm to forecast electoral results.
"The results from the 2000 and 2004 presidential election suggested that it can be difficult to predict the winner of the presidential election based on popular vote," says Jacobson. "In fact, it is possible that the popular vote and the Electoral College vote can lead to significantly different results."
Jacobson's model employs Bayesian estimators (which help scientists make decisions when conditions are uncertain) to determine the probability that a candidate will win each state. He obtains state polling data from Rasmussen Reports, the Quinnipiac University Poll, and SurveyUSA. State-by-state probabilities are then used in a dynamic programming algorithm to determine a probability distribution for the number of Electoral College votes that each candidate will win in the 2008 presidential election.
Professor Jacobson believes that this model provides a more realistic method of predicting the results. In 2004, when most other polls showed Kerry with a clear edge, his model consistently showed a Bush victory.
"We take into account 'safe' states— states that each candidate is basically guaranteed to win," says Jacobson. "In 2004, once you took into account Bush's 'safe' states, he had a much narrower gap to close to get to 270 electoral votes than Kerry."
In the model, a safe state is one in which the candidate has an 85% chance or greater of winning.
Jacobson's model also factors in undecided voters. It accounts for five different voting scenarios involving undecided voters, each considered individually. A "Neutral" scenario provides an unbiased handling of undecided voters. "Strong Republican" and "Strong Democratic" scenarios provide two extreme envelopes around which results can be judged and evaluated, while "Mild Republican" and "Mild Democratic" provide more realistic possibilities if late-breaking information surfaces that shift voter preferences.
"Undecided voters can have a significant role on the outcome of the election. In fact, they are likely to be the ultimate deciders of who will win this election," says Jacobson.
Source: Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences
Related stories:
6 of 9 presidential election forecasts predict Obama will win 2008 popular vote
Most of nine forecast models developed by political scientists predict a victory for Senator Barack Obama over Senator John McCain in the two-party contest for the popular vote in the 2008 presidential election. Obama is predicted to win an average of 52% of the vote with an 80% probability that he will gain more than half the total two-party popular vote.
Computer scientists track prediction markets in run-up to US elections
As voters prepare for the polls Nov. 7, computer scientists at the University of Chicago and Yahoo! Research are calling attention to the uncanny track record that an Irish securities trading market has for accurately predicting the outcome of U.S. elections.
Health care reform: No revolution in sight
A new study involving health care systems in 21 countries -- and the prospects for change in response to such common pressures as rising costs and aging populations -- casts doubt on the possibility of major overhauls of any of these systems because of the history and traditions that created them.
Numbers Game: NC State Research Gives New Look to Election Statistics
(PhysOrg.com) -- As the nation watched the results of the 2008 election roll in, political devotees were faced with a host of graphs and charts reflecting polling data from around the country. Now political aficionados have a new way to dissect election statistics, thanks to a North Carolina State University computer scientist.
Numbers Game: NC State Research Gives New Look to Election Statistics
(PhysOrg.com) -- As the 2008 election draws to a close, political devotees have a new way to dissect election statistics, thanks to a North Carolina State University computer scientist.
A pretty face can make a difference in whom you vote for
First it was Hillary Clinton, and now Sarah Palin. Everyone is talking about the year the glass ceiling finally cracked, if not shattered, in U.S. politics. According to new Northwestern University research, it is not at all surprising that everyone also is talking about the great looks of vice presidential hopeful Palin.
How nonverbal cues in presidential debates are interpreted by voters
Research on nonverbal vocal communication in the presidential debates, published by two Kent State University sociology professors, demonstrates that subtle, non-consciously perceived cues in candidates' voices may provide a clue to dominance in electoral contests.
Researchers find negative cues from appearance alone matter for real elections
(PhysOrg.com) -- Brain-imaging studies reveal that voting decisions are more associated with the brain's response to negative aspects of a politician's appearance than to positive ones, says a team of researchers from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), Scripps College, Princeton University, and the University of Iowa. This appears to be particularly true when voters have little or no information about a politician aside from their physical appearance.