Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 29, 2014, 05:49:09 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Presidential Election Trends (Moderators: Mr. Morden, Bacon King)
| | |-+  4.86% Swing in 2012
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: 4.86% Swing in 2012  (Read 1927 times)
Yelnoc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6553
United States
View Profile WWW
« on: October 30, 2011, 09:56:51 pm »
Ignore

According to Leip's swing data for 2008, voters swung to the Democratic Party by 9.73%.  The below scenario assumes a half-back swing; 4.86%.  The 4.86% has been distributed evenly, subtracted from Obama and added to the Republican in all 50 state + D.C.  As you can see, that produces a very tight election. 



Republican:280
Democrat:258

States with a 1% Margin
Colorado
Iowa
Minnesota
Pennsylvania
New Hampshire
Logged

Goodbye
5280
MagneticFree
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2671
United States


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: October 30, 2011, 10:00:50 pm »
Ignore

I have a 99.9% guess that's what the map will look like come end of election night in November.
Logged

Paul/Cruz 2016!
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13354


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: October 30, 2011, 10:37:05 pm »
Ignore

According to Leip's swing data for 2008, voters swung to the Democratic Party by 9.73%.  The below scenario assumes a half-back swing; 4.86%.  The 4.86% has been distributed evenly, subtracted from Obama and added to the Republican in all 50 state + D.C.  As you can see, that produces a very tight election. 



Republican:280
Democrat:258

States with a 1% Margin
Colorado
Iowa
Minnesota
Pennsylvania
New Hampshire

Didn't Colorado vote for Obama by a larger margin than the country as a whole? And I'm pretty sure VA was close enough to still stay Democratic as in your scenario Obama wins the popular vote by about 2 points.
Logged
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4466
Thailand


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: October 30, 2011, 10:56:11 pm »
Ignore

virginia = 6.3, so no(4.86*2>6.3). Iowa and NH on other hand would be a really close states. Based on regional trends I would say that CO and IA would stay democratic though. But I really doubt the swing would be this big, because of the demographic change, it would be somewhere between 3-4%.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13354


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: October 31, 2011, 09:03:16 am »
Ignore

virginia = 6.3, so no(4.86*2>6.3). Iowa and NH on other hand would be a really close states. Based on regional trends I would say that CO and IA would stay democratic though. But I really doubt the swing would be this big, because of the demographic change, it would be somewhere between 3-4%.

I thought that is what he was trying to do, but in that case there wasn't a 9% swing to the Democrats in 2008. It was more 9.5/2= 4.25.

In any case this map makes sense, only NV and WI would probably flip as well. And there is a chance IA or CO might not.
Logged
vern1988
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 271
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.48, S: 0.87

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: October 31, 2011, 09:16:45 am »
Ignore

This map is wrong. First off you need to take each state and apply their trend. A simple swing toward the Republican candidate will not happen because each state has a different trend.
Logged
Scottish Robb Stark
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30231
France


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: October 31, 2011, 11:59:41 am »
Ignore

According to Leip's swing data for 2008, voters swung to the Democratic Party by 9.73%.  The below scenario assumes a half-back swing; 4.86%.  The 4.86% has been distributed evenly, subtracted from Obama and added to the Republican in all 50 state + D.C.  As you can see, that produces a very tight election. 



Republican:280
Democrat:258

States with a 1% Margin
Colorado
Iowa
Minnesota
Pennsylvania
New Hampshire

If you subtract 4.86 points to Obama and give them to the GOP candidate, this produces a 9.72 swing toward the GOP. In order to have a "half-back swing", you need to substract only 2.43 points.
Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Yelnoc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6553
United States
View Profile WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 31, 2011, 02:45:25 pm »
Ignore

This map is wrong. First off you need to take each state and apply their trend. A simple swing toward the Republican candidate will not happen because each state has a different trend.
Well, sure.  I'm just a lazy bastard.

@Everyone questioning my methodology: I subtracted 4.86% from Obama on the 2008 maps and gave it to McCain, who has been renamed "GOP Candidate."  Is that not the same thing as "reverse swing"?
Logged

Goodbye
bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13710
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

View Profile
« Reply #8 on: October 31, 2011, 02:55:23 pm »
Ignore

^ That would be a full swing. You said it was a half-swing initially.

A half-swing to the Republicans would be: 9.72/2=4.86. Subtract 4.86 from the D margin in 2008 (7.26-4.86=2.40).

So a "half" swing back to the Republicans would result in a D +2.40 election.

Does slicing off 4.86 from Obama and adding 4.86 to McCain result in this margin? No,  it results in R + 2.45. Which is  the 2004 margin, meaning it's just a full reverse swing.

I think that's the source of confusion, at least. I don't know really know what you were trying to do.
Logged

only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58783
India


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: October 31, 2011, 04:32:40 pm »
Ignore

In other words, you drew a map where the Republican won by the same margin as in 2004, only the vote distribution was kinda (but not really, uniform swing being what it is) like in 2008.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4466
Thailand


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: October 31, 2011, 05:40:01 pm »
Ignore

In other words, you drew a map where the Republican won by the same margin as in 2004, only the vote distribution was kinda (but not really, uniform swing being what it is) like in 2008.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13354


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: October 31, 2011, 06:24:29 pm »
Ignore

^ That would be a full swing. You said it was a half-swing initially.

A half-swing to the Republicans would be: 9.72/2=4.86. Subtract 4.86 from the D margin in 2008 (7.26-4.86=2.40).

So a "half" swing back to the Republicans would result in a D +2.40 election.

Does slicing off 4.86 from Obama and adding 4.86 to McCain result in this margin? No,  it results in R + 2.45. Which is  the 2004 margin, meaning it's just a full reverse swing.

I think that's the source of confusion, at least. I don't know really know what you were trying to do.
^^^
Yup, that's what confused me. You basically reverted back to 2004, when I thought you were trying to say you were going halfway between 2004 and 2008.
Logged
Yelnoc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6553
United States
View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: October 31, 2011, 06:46:19 pm »
Ignore

^ That would be a full swing. You said it was a half-swing initially.

A half-swing to the Republicans would be: 9.72/2=4.86. Subtract 4.86 from the D margin in 2008 (7.26-4.86=2.40).

So a "half" swing back to the Republicans would result in a D +2.40 election.

Does slicing off 4.86 from Obama and adding 4.86 to McCain result in this margin? No,  it results in R + 2.45. Which is  the 2004 margin, meaning it's just a full reverse swing.

I think that's the source of confusion, at least. I don't know really know what you were trying to do.
Yeah, I was confused because it said the total swing to Obama was 9.73%.  But that would have resulted in a ridiculous Republican landslide.  So I divided it by two, which I thought was half.

For heck's sake, here is a "real" "half-swing" map.



Obama 291
Republican 247
Logged

Goodbye
5280
MagneticFree
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2671
United States


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: October 31, 2011, 07:11:27 pm »
Ignore

A half swing equals an Obama win, which doesn't add up to his approval rating of 45%.  No president in the history of US presidential elections has ever won with a disapproval rating almost 10 points above approval.

The first map makes sense.
Logged

Paul/Cruz 2016!
Yelnoc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6553
United States
View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: October 31, 2011, 07:38:04 pm »
Ignore

Here is a 1 and 1/2 swing (7.29%).



Obama 212
Republican 326
Logged

Goodbye
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13354


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: October 31, 2011, 08:05:01 pm »
Ignore

A half swing equals an Obama win, which doesn't add up to his approval rating of 45%.  No president in the history of US presidential elections has ever won with a disapproval rating almost 10 points above approval.

The first map makes sense.

Yes, according to current approval ratings, Obama would lose by about 4-5 points to Romney. Would probably be about even with the rest of the crew though, even an Obama win. Though if the economy continues to make about 100-200k jobs on average till next year, and the unemployment rate is near 8.5%, he could get re-elected. What happens in Europe basically determines what happens to Obama.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13354


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: October 31, 2011, 08:06:40 pm »
Ignore

Here is a 1 and 1/2 swing (7.29%).



Obama 212
Republican 326

I would think a Romney vs Obama map would look a lot like this currently, though Obama wins MN.
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32026
United States


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: October 31, 2011, 09:28:28 pm »
Ignore

Here is a 1 and 1/2 swing (7.29%).



Obama 212
Republican 326

I would think a Romney vs Obama map would look a lot like this currently, though Obama wins MN.

This is pretty close to the range I was look at.
Logged

J. J.

"Actually, .. now that you mention it...." 
- Londo Molari

"Every government are parliaments of whores.
The trouble is, in a democracy the whores are us." - P. J. O'Rourke

"Wa sala, wa lala."

(Zulu for, "You snooze, you lose.")
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4466
Thailand


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: October 31, 2011, 09:52:32 pm »
Ignore

Here is a 1 and 1/2 swing (7.29%).



Obama 212
Republican 326
This would require 2010 wave again. Not going to happen.
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2671
United States


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: November 01, 2011, 12:49:29 am »
Ignore

Here is a 1 and 1/2 swing (7.29%).



Obama 212
Republican 326
This would require 2010 wave again. Not going to happen.
It could if Obama doesn't get his act together and do something besides pushing his jobs bill around, which I believe is really campaigning.
Logged

Paul/Cruz 2016!
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13354


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: November 01, 2011, 05:44:14 am »
Ignore

Here is a 1 and 1/2 swing (7.29%).



Obama 212
Republican 326
This would require 2010 wave again. Not going to happen.

With the exception of MN, you won't need that high of a margin to get this result. 4-5 points Republican should do it. A 7 point Republican win, like in 2010, would lead to MI and NM flipping and NJ, OR and WA being pretty close.
Logged
phk
phknrocket1k
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12975


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

View Profile
« Reply #21 on: November 01, 2011, 03:35:20 pm »
Ignore

Uniform swings = Laziness. Though its true of course that it would be some hard work in seeing the swingability of every state.
Logged

Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13354


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: November 01, 2011, 05:36:50 pm »
Ignore

Uniform swings = Laziness. Though its true of course that it would be some hard work in seeing the swingability of every state.

Very true, but it's almost ridiculous to try to predict now how the states will swing. Some we do have an idea though. NH will be trending Republican in 2012. WI and MI too probably, but that's only because Obama did so ridiculously well there.
Logged
Yelnoc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6553
United States
View Profile WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 01, 2011, 06:44:59 pm »
Ignore

Uniform swings = Laziness. Though its true of course that it would be some hard work in seeing the swingability of every state.
Well, sure, I'm not actually going to devote that much time to this.  You go ahead though Wink
Logged

Goodbye
bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13710
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

View Profile
« Reply #24 on: November 01, 2011, 09:04:53 pm »
Ignore

Here is a tie election, with each candidate getting 49.24% (indie/third party total remained the same):



272-266 Obama. Does the EC favor the Democrats now?
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines