The scenarios: 3-Rasmussen is right

Byline: | Category: 2012 | Posted at: Saturday, 3 November 2012

(With three days left before the election, I foresee see five possible scenarios.  Each day leading up to Election Day, we’re going to explore one of the scenarios.  This post is the third installment of the series.)

If this scenario comes to pass, it shouldn’t really be a surprise.  Not since 1936 has an incumbent’s attempt at re-election succeeded against the scale of the job losses we’ve seen these last four years.  Abroad, America has struggled as well.  While the war in Iraq is over, in Afghanistan it lingers on with no prospect for success in sight.  The Middle East is in full-scale collapse, while economic woes in Europe and China risk dragging us deeper down.

In light of all that and more, it was a testament to how well liked Barack Obama is that he could keep this race as close as it was.  Or was it?  After the election, exit polls reveal that women and Jews weren’t as enamored with abortion as they were of jobs.  Coal miners and electricians didn’t care as much about the collective bargaining rights of government employees as they cared about jobs.  Hispanics cared less about immigration reform if the man promising to bring the reform couldn’t let them stay in a country with jobs.  Unemployed recent college graduates didn’t care as much about being cool as they cared about something as banal as jobs.  Upon closer inspection of turnout data, the election’s results are really a testament to how well liked Obama is by black Americans that he was able to keep his numbers as high as they were.  In spite of bearing the greatest brunt of the recession, Obama lost not a bit of their vote.  In every other demographic, support and enthusiasm for the President were markedly down.

In the end, Ohio didn’t matter.  Yes, Mitt Romney won it, but with wins in Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire, Virginia, and Wisconsin, Ohio was just the Buckeye-flavored frosting on Romney’s already baked election day cake.  Even Mondale’s Minnesota teetered on the edge of breaking the GOP’s way.  Alone among most lists of swing states, Nevada chose Obama.  Final Results:  Romney wins 51% to 48% and takes 295 electoral votes.

scenario_3.jpg

The President’s poorer-than-expected performance lost his party the Senate as well.  Virginia’s George Allen returns after a six-year absence.  Bill Nelson can’t resist the tide.  The Upper House ends up 51-49 while the Lower House sees only two net Republicans go away, leaving it 240-195.

See all the scenarios:

Scenario 1:  Nate Silver is right

Scenario 2:  RCP is right

Scenario 3:  Rasmussen is right

Scenario 4:  Gallup tracking poll is right

Scenario 5:  Gallup electorate poll is right

And the prediction is . . .

Share this post:

8 Responses to “The scenarios: 3-Rasmussen is right”

  1. Lorenz Gude Says:

    I just went over the latest Rasmussen EV and they seem to have all those critical sates – 95 EV worth – listed as tossups. So I can’t see how you have connected your scenario to Rasmussen. Or am I misunderstanding the intent of your post?

    Ed: If Rasmussen’ consistent* Romney 2-3 point lead in the national polls occurs, this is approximately how the states will break. Ignore the polls of the states. In fact, even within a single polling company, the margins in the states aren’t squaring with the margins nationally. This year a lot of polling methodologies are going to have to go back for an overhaul because there are two very different kinds of results. I’ve never seen anything like it. But then again, it’s only in the last couple cycles that we’ve had this many polling companies producing this many polls conducted this frequently. More is not always better.

    *Yes, I know that Rasmussen has the race tied at 48, but ever since Monday when the hurricane was about to hit the coast, I’ve been skeptical of what a poll shows. When this is over, I think that we’re going to be left wondering what really happened, because we’ll have a week’s worth of unreliable data right before the election.

  2. John K. Says:

    yeah, I agree with Lorenz. Rasmussen has moved the race drastically to a tie from his earlier position. Your analysis only makes sense if Rasmussen/Gallup have the national vote favoring Romney. Lets see what Gallup says (and see if Rasmussen’s #s move the next few days).

  3. blahblahblah Says:

    Lorenz and John,

    It seems Rasmussen has recently began playing with the turnout numbers to get that result though. Just a couple days ago, they witnessed a +3D turnout turn to +6D turnout without the actual results changing. (and no reason for the change to 2008 levels of Democrat enthusiasm provided)

    I really think there might be something going on here, maybe along the lines of Gallups recent threats and subsequent change of method to suit the White Houses desires.

    I mean, just look at absolutely any poll you would like. Inside you will almost certainly find that Independents are favoring Mitt by anything from 10-20%. Meanwhile we have Rasmussen, Pew and Gallop all saying there is a +1R to +4R trend in the identification, which State Registration numbers and Early Voting trends back up this vastly shrunken to completely flipped Democrat turnout lead as well. Yet most all polls still factor for Democrat advantages ranging anywhere from +3D to +12D as if the enthusiasm gap everyone feels themselves and is backed up in the numbers doesnt actually exist?

    As a stats geek, I can only say something very, very strange is going on here…

    Ed:
    I think that it has something to do with a propensity to lie about having already voted. I think that I’m seeing it in Ohio where polls consistently overstate the number of EVs and Absentee. However, the data from OH is not as conclusive as I would like. I’ve also seen it in TN in the past where we have had early voting for quite a while. I’ve pulled the by-name data daily from the board of elections and then made calls in the evening to only those who have not voted (that data is available in TN; don’t know about other states), only to find a respondent tell me that he has already voted when I know it’s not true. It’s not uncommon. And I think that when you’re in Ohio and you’re TIRED OF THIS DAMNED ELECTION, it’s easier just to tell people you’ve already voted and try to get them off the line. What screws with pollsters is if the people who are blowing smoke at you are of a significantly different opinion from those who are telling the truth.

  4. Trent Telenko Says:

    >What screws with pollsters is if
    >the people who are blowing smoke at
    >you are of a significantly
    >different opinion from those who
    >are telling the truth.

    Given how telemarketers have poisoned the well for telephone pollsters. Why do you expect any different?

    I have a land line phone number that has not changed in 30(+) years and I average 1-2 telemarketer calls a day at dinner time — usually from non-profits that were given donations years ago — even though the number is now unlisted and I put the number on the “Do not call lists”.

  5. Lester Says:

    I definitely blow some at my 4-6x per day polling callers. I ask them for their names then tell them I will write them in.

  6. Michael Brislin Says:

    This is just like my map as of 2:30 on November the 5th, except I think Mitt pulls out PA.

  7. Election Predictions « Red State Chick on the Peninsula Says:

    [...] the official prediction. If you’d like it a little more scientifically packaged, check out Bob Krumm’s 5 Scenarios. There are you basic possibilities based on the crazy polling we’ve [...]

  8. The Last Scenario: Bob Krumm Makes the Call | Daily Pundit Says:

    [...] of Romney over Obama by 50.4% to 48.6%.  In other words, I am projecting a result similar to Scenario 3, giving Mitt Romney approximately 295 electoral [...]