VANITY: Way to early for an election prediction, but I'll do one anyway (Romney 270)

Saturday, July 21, 2012 | rightcoast

[rightcoast]

Yes, there is still four months to go, and an electoral map prediction seems ill-advised and premature... But what the heck...

I based my projections on a modified RCP poll average: I included only recent polls of likely voters, ignoring RV polls. I also used a more conservative version of the "incumbent rule" for the undecideds in these LV polls. Certain theory holds that 80% of undecided voters will break for the challenger. For this analysis, I was more conservative and assume that 65% of undecideds will ultimately vote for Romney.

Based on these criteria and assumptions, I've arrived at a prediction of exactly 270 votes for Romney, just enough for election. Two states remain very tight and too close to call: Colorado and Ohio.

Click here for my custom RCP map.

It's worth noting that money of the "close states" could end up breaking for Romney, especially in the Midwest; a "Rust Belt sweep" that includes Michigan and Pennsylvania, as well as the aforementioned Ohio, is still quite possible at this point.

[max americana]

You didn’t build that prediction...it was made by everyone else. (s/)

[South40]

The liberal will win. It’s guaranteed.

[rightcoast]

Here is a corrected link to my RCP map - I had omitted Hawaii by simple oversight.

[doc1019]

You are correct a liberal will win.

[One Name]

You must have had government help coming to such a conclusion. No one is smart enough to figure this s_it by themselves...

Don’t rest, exhort and proselytize!

It ain’t over, but I share your feeling that the groundswell is with us...

Press on!

[2ndDivisionVet]

That’s what he said, Romney. Better that than the anti-American, anti-capitalist communist winning, don’t you think?

[The Duke]

Does this factor in Democrat voter fraud?

[103198]

A month and a half ago I told my wife and a small gathering of friends that my x+1 choice for Republican candidate will win in a blowout. I made the mistake of not posting it here. I stand by that prediction today.

[goldstategop]

285-253. IND and OH, NC should return to the GOP as FL.

But there are enough brain dead morons on the Left Coast and the Northeast to make it a close race - unless the economy is coming underwater by Election Day.

[goldstategop]

I forgot to add VA... no way its going D this year - in 2008 you had a very liberal electorate. Bamster is facing very skeptical voters - he’ll do better than Jimmy Carter simply because the demographics exist to keep it close.

But he’ll lose and I see the GOP keeping if not modestly expanding its House majority and the GOP should take over the Senate.

[goldstategop]

I forgot to add VA... no way its going D this year - in 2008 you had a very liberal electorate. Bamster is facing very skeptical voters - he’ll do better than Jimmy Carter simply because the demographics exist to keep it close.

But he’ll lose and I see the GOP keeping if not modestly expanding its House majority and the GOP should take over the Senate.

[imemyself]

Virginia could be a problem - Marylander’s are moving there in droves to get away from outrageous taxes and regulations.

No way to know how they will vote but, if they’re from the suburbs, it will go Republican. If they’re from the City and beltway area’s to DC, it will go Democrats.

[presently no screen name]

I forgot to add VA.

Maybe Barry will keep Mitt off the ballot in VA. After all, Romney did it to Newt. This is about which one, Barry or Mitt, will be reaping what they have sown first. Nothing about America.

[radpolis]

I have my map say 336-202 in favor of Romney.

And I don’t consider myself a self-deluded wishful thinker.

I wish it could be an even bigger blow out if there was some way Chris Christie could get a win for Romney in New Jersey.

But that is where I cross the line from possible into the realm of the absurd.

[nathanbedford]

Good work. I think your methodology is on the right track. Certainly, discarding registered voter polls is indispensable. I had also been thinking about your 65% rule for the undecideds. What have you done about the 4% or 5% who are turning up as third party?

Have you made any assumptions concerning turnout?

Why do you suppose that Colorado and Ohio, but not Virginia or Iowa, are too close to call? In other words, what is the margin which puts a state in one category but not in the other?

We know that both Pennsylvania and Ohio on election day will not be too close to call but will actually be called by actual votes. So the result will not be 270 for Romney it could be as high as 308 for Romney or as low as 232 with your analysis still controlling.

That means that in these very close states the results will actually be called and one side or another can very rapidly win or lose big. If we extend questionable projections to the Virginians and the Iowas, Romney is a very vulnerable, but if we consider, as you do, that Pennsylvania and certainly Wisconsin or perhaps even Michigan could go the other way, it is Obama who now looks vulnerable.

I think this latter scenario will be the one that actually plays out but is that belief more than just a hunch? I think this will be a wave election much like Ronald Reagan's victory in 1980 but I want to be wary of mere wishful thinking. I am not usually a Pollyanna in these matters, I believe that if the Republicans can win this one it will only be a one time aberration from the demographic norm caused by Obama's ham-fisted overreach. I am on record on these threads years in advance in predicting the debacles of 2006 and 2008. But I think the forces that dominated in 2010 will be no less powerful in 2012, although I concede that Obama in a presidential race will be able to turn out his base with more success than was possible in 2010. I still think that the balance of forces generating turnout will be with the Republicans.

Therefore, I think it will break at the end for Romney. I think the sweep could very well include Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and perhaps even beyond. I believe Romney will easily be pulling crowds in excess of 20,000 by the time of the convention.

All of this subject to Romney avoiding gaffes and performing adequately in the debates and Obama not contriving an October surprise.

Thanks for a good job.

[Jyotishi]

Thanks for your prediction but does it take liberal dirty tricks into account?

[Irenic]

"All of this subject to Romney avoiding gaffes and performing adequately in the debates and Obama not contriving an October surprise."

____________________________________________________

I fret over the debates. Romney came off rather frazzled in the primaries.

His face would change colors, his hair would become a mess and he would start to stammer and show a bit of a temper.

Romney was able to land a couple of decent punches but overall he didn't appear too impressive or likable in the debates.

I hope team Romney puts Romney through the paces before the debates.

And for gosh sakes, I hope they get that hair under control! It makes him look very stressed and not in control when it starts flopping around.

He needs to play offense not defense--confident and unshakeable.

[2ndDivisionVet]

You don’t see the economy as being “underwater” now? Real unemployment is at least 17% and that’s only because they don’t count those millions of people who have given up looking for work, been granted a disability, gone on welfare, moved into a tent city or live completely off the grid. Black youth unemployment, for example, is over 50%. That means that less than 1 in 2 or 3 blacks under 25 have any kind of a over the table job. Lookout for a crack house might pay a couple of bucks, but it’s not really a career, is it?

[Irenic]

Perhaps they could get Gingrich to debate with Romney—poke and prod until Romney can keep his cool, stay smooth and unflappable.