Monday, April 7, 2008
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Though national primary polls don't mean much at this point: Obama: 49%, Clinton: 39%
See the poll here: http://people-press.org/reports/questionnaires/407.pdf
Also, for the General matchups:
Obama: 50, McCain: 43
Clinton: 50, McCain: 43
Latest PA Polls:
Latest NC Polls:
Hopefully we'll have some Indiana polling soon.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Summary from the post:
The most interesting aspect of these surveys is the states that explain those differences. Let's consider first the states where Obama does better than Clinton:
* Obama moves three states from lean McCain to strong Obama: Colorado, Iowa and Oregon
* Obama moves two states from strong McCain to lean Obama: Nevada and North Carolina
* Obama leads in two states that are toss-ups in a Clinton-McCain race: New Mexico (lean) and Washington (strong)
* Obama moves four states from strong McCain (against Clinton) to toss-up: Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Virginia
On the other hand, Clinton does better than Obama in a smaller number of states:
* Clinton moves one state from strong McCain to strong Clinton: Arkansas
* Clinton moves one state from strong McCain to lean Clinton: West Virginia
* Clinton leads in the two states that are toss-ups in an Obama-McCain race: Florida (strong) and New Jersey (lean)
* Clinton moves one state from strong McCain to undecided: Tennessee
* Clinton moves one state from lean McCain to undecided: Pennsylvania
Summary from the post:
Chris Bowers notes that Barack Obama clearly has both a larger base and more potential swing states. To get to 270, Obama simply needs to defend New Hampshire, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, while picking up Ohio, Florida, or two more medium-sized states like Iowa and Virginia. Hillary Clinton has to play defense in the same places, but she also has to spend time and energy defending the Northwest and the Upper Midwest in a way that Barack Obama does not. Her only real pickup opportunities are Ohio, Florida, West Virginia, Arkansas, Iowa, and Missouri. Obama has Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, North Carolina, South Carolina, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, and Texas. Okay, even I don't believe he has a shot at all of those states, but he has a much better chance there than Clinton does in Mississippi or Kentucky or Oklahoma.
In addition, in the states with the ten most competitive Senate races, Obama does better than Clinton in eight of them; only Kentucky and Louisiana are better for Clinton (and, seriously, if Mary Landrieu can't win 25% of the white vote in Louisiana, she's got bigger problems). There's also the third tier of Senate races, in places like North Carolina, Nebraska, Kansas, South Dakota (that's a defense), Texas, and Idaho, where Obama does better in four of five and ties Clinton in the fifth. Should Rick Noriega or Scott Kleeb catch lightning in a bottle, it would be better to have Obama at the top of the ticket. Put Tom Daschle or Ed Rendell as VP and he'll be unstoppable.
At the moment, Barack Obama is the better general election nominee. Period. Full stop. He will have to spend less time defending blue states. He's competitive in a larger number of red states. And he's more competitive in states that have Senate elections. Barack Obama: because this is the year to bust the map wide open.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
- SurveyUSA has been very accurate so far this year
- Obama has to work on PA, WV, MI, and NJ. I think he could close that gap once he's the nominee
Hillary vs. McCain:
Obama vs. McCain
Monday, March 3, 2008
Ohio: Clinton: +5.9
TX: Obama +0.2
Rhode Island seems to be getting closer, with Obama now only down 5 according to the latest polls, and Vermont looks to be an Obama lock, with him up 15-20% The cold, hard facts for Hillary Clinton is that if these margins were to hold up, she probably would not cut into Obama's delegate lead at all, and could perhaps lose delegates.
"I think you'll be able to imagine many things Senator McCain will be able to say, He’s never been the president, but he will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put forth a speech he made in 2002.”
This is far, far over the line. Perhaps she should just drop out now, and be the first to declare herself as a candidate for the 2012 Republican nomination. I know I'm a raving Obama supporter, but I used to have a lot of respect for Hillary Clinton... that respect, of late has been in exponential backoff mode.
Olberman and Rachel Maddow responded:
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Friday, February 29, 2008
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Monday, February 25, 2008
OH (PPP): Obama 46%, Clinton: 50%
If these hold up it would be the end of Hillary Clinton's campaign, as superdelegates would flock to Obama, and pressure would mount on her to withdraw.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Rhode Island: Clinton 52%, Obama 40%
Vermont: Clinton: 34%, Obama 60%
Friday, February 22, 2008
TX: Obama 57%, Clinton: 43%
OH: Obama 54%, Clinton 46%
Here's to hoping!
Full speech text: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9743.htm
These are words that our next president needs to understand. However, the next president also needs to understand that this is no longer "the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking", there is both a better way, and a better road.
Thanks Thom Hartman for playing this clip on your show!
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Ohio: Clinton 50%, Obama 43%; Texas: Clinton: 48% to Obama: 47%
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
- Pre Super Tuesday: South Carolina
- Super Tuesday: California, New Jersey, Missouri
- Post-Super Tuesday: Wisconsin
This is supposed to be one of Barack Obama's key constituencies, and it has been through the election so far. The question we should ask here, however is whether his support has solidified with Black voters over the course of the election.
Pre Super Tuesday election: South Carolina
In this pre Super Tuesday marquee matchup, Barack outperformed pre-election polling very slightly by 4%.
- In pre-election polling by SurveyUSA, Barack had a 73% to 18% edge over Hillary amongst likely black voters, for a gap of 55%
- In post-election exit polls reported by CNN, Barack won the Black vote 78% to 19% over Hillary, for a gap of 59%
In this 2/5 matchup, Barack significantly outperformed pre-election polling by 14%
- In pre-election polling by SurveyUSA, Barack had a 76% to 22% edge over Hillary amongst likely Black voters, for a gap of 54%
- In post-election exit polls reported by CNN, Barack won the Black vote 82% to 14% over Hillary, for a gap of 68%
In this Super Tuesday matchup, Barack significantly outperformed pre-election polling by 17%
- In pre-election polling by SurveyUSA, Barack had a 74% to 22% edge of Hillary with likely Black voters for a gap of 52%
- In post election polls reported by CNN, Barack won the Black vote 84% to 15%, for a gap of 69%
In this Super Tuesday matchup, Barack significantly outperformed pre-election polling by 13%
- In pre-election polling by SurveyUSA, Barack had a 72% to 25% edge of Hillary with likely Black voters for a gap of 47%
- In post election polls reported by CNN, Barack won the Black vote 78% to 18%, for a gap of 60%
In this post Super Tuesday matchup, Barack significantly outperformed pre-election polling by 13%
- In pre-election polling by PPP, Barack had a 72% to 25% edge of Hillary with likely Black voters for a gap of 47%
- In post-election exit polls reported by CNN, Barack won the Black vote 78% to 18%, for a gap of 60%
Latino voters, and White voters will be covered in later blog posts.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Also, data from recent exit polls (courtesy of cnn.com):
- VA: Obama: 54% Clinton: 46%
- MD: Obama: 45% Clinton: 55%
- NM: Obama: 36% Clinton: 62%
- CA: Obama: 32% Clinton: 67%
- OH: Clinton +9 (last poll was Clinton +17)
- WI: Obama +10 (not that I trust ARG, but last poll showed Clinton +6)
- NC: Obama +10 (older poll)
General election matchups
- VA: Obama +6 vs. McCain; McCain +3 vs. Clinton
- IA: Obama +10 vs. McCain; McCain +11 vs. Clinton
- WI: Obama +10 vs. McCain; McCain +7 vs. Clinton
Monday, February 18, 2008
Detailed description of the voting districts: http://www.burntorangereport
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Thursday, February 14, 2008
However my brother asked me to do a projection based upon the number of donations this year, and I think that's a good idea so we can get a rough estimate. According to Time, Obama raised over $100 Million last year from about 470,000 unique donors. According to this blog Obama has an average donation size of about $250. If we do the math, it comes out to $117.5 million, so I suspect the actual average donation was smaller: something like $215 per donor.
According to http://barackobama.com, nearly 437,000 people have donated so far this year, which is nearly as many has have donated last year, and we're only in the middle of the first quarter. According to the figures from the Obama campaign, they raised $32 million in the month of January from 250,000 donors, which is an average donation of $128 per donor. I would guess that donation amounts have increased since then, just based upon repeat donations due to Obama's success in the recent primaries. However, I don't have any hard data on this, so I'll just provide some rough estimates given a few scenarios:
- Low estimate: Average donations stayed at $128/donor: ~$56 million
- Medium estimate: Average donations went to $175/donor: ~$76.5 million
- High estimate: Average donations increased to $215/donor: ~94 million
- Very high estimate: Average donations increased to $300/donor: $131 million
- Low Q1 estimate: Average donations stayed at $128/donor: ~$106 million
- Medium Q1 estimate: Average donations went to $175/donor: ~$150million
- High Q1 estimate: Average donations increased to $215/donor: ~$188 million
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Even counting FL, Obama leads
Interesting tally today on First Read, noting that even counting the votes of Florida and Michigan, Barack Obama is leading Clinton in popular votes. And even with Clinton's (hypothetical) net Florida advantage of 38 pledged delegates, Obama would still be ahead of Clinton in delegates. Here's the overall vote:
Total Vote %
Obama 9,373,334 50%
Clinton 8,674,779 46%
Others 726,095 4%
Total Vote %
Obama 9,942,375 49%
Clinton 9,531,987 46%
Others 984,236 4%
With Florida and Michigan
Total Vote %
Obama 9,942,375 47%
Clinton 9,860,138 47%
Others 1,249,922 6%
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Black vote (12% of the result): Obama: 62%, Clinton: 24%
Monday, February 11, 2008
According to wikipedia, Missouri and Ohio have very, very similar demographics. The table below illustrates this:
(includes ~2% hispanic)
So the question is: Does similar demographics in the two states mean that voters will vote the same way in the primary election? I don't think this can be answered right now, especially given Obama's broad base of support in various parts of the country. However, we can look at how the two states voted in the past and try to use this as a predictor.
Missouri and Ohio have voted the same way in the presidential elections since 1960, with similar margins
So in every election after Kennedy vs. Nixon, both Missouri and Ohio voted for the same candidate, who was also the winner. Interestingly, the margins were actually very similar, as the table below illustrates.
|1964: Johnson (J) vs. Goldwater (G)||J: 61.05%||J: 64.05%||J: 62.94%|
|1968: Nixon (N) vs. Humphrey (H)||N: 43.42%||N: 44.87%||N: 45.23%|
|1972: Nixon (N) vs. McGovern (M)||N: 60.67%||N: 62.29%||N: 59.23%|
|1976: Carter (C) vs. Ford (F)||C: 50.08%||C: 51.10%||C: 48.92%|
|1980: Reagan (R) vs. Carter (C)||R: 50.75%||R: 51.16%||R: 51.51%|
|1984: Reagan (R) vs. Mondale||R: 58.77%||R: 60.02%||R: 58.90%|
|1988: Bush (B) vs. Dukakis (D)||B: 53.37%||B: 51.83%||B: 55.00%|
|1992: Clinton (C) vs. Bush (B)||C: 43.01%||C: 44.07%||C: 42.91%|
|1996: Clinton (C) vs. Dole (D)||C: 49.23%||C: 47.54%||C: 47.38%|
|2000: Bush (B) vs. Gore (G)||*B: 47.87%||B: 50.42||B: 49.97%|
|2004: Bush (B) vs. Kerry (K)||B: 50.73%||B: 53.30%||B: 50.81%|
Analysis: Really, I want to answer the following questions:
1) Does Missouri vote like Ohio in the general election
2) Does Missouri vote like the US in the general election
3) Does Ohio vote like the US in the general election
In order to tests these things, I ran 3 independent paired two tailed t-tests with an alpha of .05 with the following results:
1) Missouri vs. Ohio: p=.1952, No significant difference. Average margin of absolute difference 1.41%
2) Missouri vs. US: p=.0442, Missouri votes significantly different than the US. Average margin of absolute difference = 1.65%
3) Ohio vs. US: p=.4311, No significant difference. Average margin of absolute difference 1.17%
So the conclusion from this is that Missouri doesn't vote differently from Ohio significantly in presidential elections, but Missouri does vote significantly different than the US. Ohio doesn't vote significantly different than the US in presidential elections (actual this result showed that Ohio is more likely to closely mirror the presidential outcome than Missouri is likely to mirror Ohio's result).
It's really difficult to use previous primaries to help predict this race, simply because the previous contests have happened at different points in the election where the race might have already been decided, and therefore the voting would have been different if we had a situation like we have here in 2008. So until I can figure out a method to make these results meaningful, I'm just going to leave them out.
Using demographic data and absolute margin of difference to predict Ohio
Model #1: Using Missouri to model Ohio
If we just make the assumption that the electorates are the same between the two states, and will vote the same in Ohio as they did in Missouri with a margin of error of the absolute difference +- 1.41%, then it's very easy to predict the outcome:
- Missouri 2008 primary: Barack Obama 49.40% vs. Hillary Clinton 48.18%
- Model #1 Ohio 2008 primary projection: Barack Obama 50.81% to 47.99% vs. Hillary Clinton 49.59% to 46.77%
We've already determined that using the actual vote percentages from the entire US vote have historically been a better predictor of the Ohio vote than using Missouri for this. Given this, the second model just uses the current vote percentages in the states that have voted so far and the absolute historical difference between the US presedential vote and the Ohio presidential vote of 1.17%.
- US vote percentages so far: I don't have a good source for this, but I think I saw on TV that Obama has a lead of about 250,000 votes out of 16 million cast, or 1.56% total. So just to plug in some numbers, let's say Obama is at 48.56%, and Clinton is at 47.00%
- Model #2 Ohio 2008 primary projection: Obama: 49.73% to 47.39% vs/ Clinton: 48.17% to 45.83%
I question the accuracy of this kind of approach without fully understanding the demographics. We've seen Obama appeal to the whitest of white voters (Maine), so I can't begin to understand how we could use this as predictive. Revisit this
This race looks to be a very tight one with a slight edge to Obama based upon this analysis. Even without doing this analysis I doubt very much that either candidate will blow the other one out here, which is bad news for both candidates, but perhaps worse news for Clinton. Missouri turned out to be not as great as I had hoped in being a predictor, as the US election seems to be superior, but it is better than nothing. One limitation is that we don't know how much past voting behavior in presidential elections can predict voting in primary elections, but since Ohio has an open primary, I suspect they will be similar.
In a follow up post, I'll try to use model #1 (Difference from Missouri) and model #2 (Difference from US) and see how well it fares against contests that have already been decided
...and 23% in Maryland (my home state, yay!): http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=1db1f4a4-0829-40a3-8b0e-5b18754118b5
Given that where huge leads were observed, Obama typically outperformed his expectations, I would not be surprised to see a 25% margin in each, and a 40-50% margin in DC.
Rasmussen has this at 5%: http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/daily_presidential_tracking_polling_history
Of course, what really matters are the state polls, and we have no data for important states such as Ohio or Texas, but Poblano came up with an imperfect, but pretty good regression model that shows a 10% Obama victory in Ohio, and a 10% Clinton victory in Texas.
Saturday, February 9, 2008
The actual caucus is today, so we'll see how accurate these are.
Friday, February 8, 2008
This shows the results of several recent polls that compare matchups of Clinton vs. McCain and Obama vs. McCain
As you can see, Obama is favored to win the nomination in most polls, and Hillary is projected to lose. Actually there is almost a 6% absolute average difference between the margin of victory from these polls as the chart below indicates:
This is a strong argument that I hope the Obama campaign makes repeatedly. Saying you believe in polls doesn't play well with the American people, but there's a clever way to frame this without even mentioning a poll.
SurveyUSA (O: 59 C:39)
InsiderAdvantage (O:52, C:37)
As I mentioned previously Obama will do very well in the next several states, and he could emerge before the Ohio and Texas primaries with a 100-150 delegate lead.
Thursday, February 7, 2008
I know they were in the chamber today, so they *could* have voted on this if they wanted to, so I wonder why they didn't. I suppose it's because they believe the plan they proposed was better? Sounds to me like Clinton is voting present on this one, along with Obama.
What's funny to me is that she earlier in the day railed against McCain for missing the vote, when she missed the vote as well. This is hillary putting her foot in her mouth for sure.
From the article:
"Mrs. Clinton: 7,427,700, or 48.83 percent;
Mr. Obama: 7,369,798, or 48.45 percent;
John Edwards: 411,740, or 2.70 percent."So, a 57,911 vote difference between Obama and Clinton with over 15 million votes counted. This does not include all of the votes yet, and it doesn't include Alaska. It's really amazing how close this race is!
So below find my projections for the Feb 9th to Feb 12th races. Note these aren't based upon much data... all we have recently is the Survey USA poll out of Washington from Feb 4th 2008 showing Obama with a 13% lead over Clinton (53% to 40%, with 7% undecided). Since Survey USA has actually been one of the more reliable polls this time around, I'm going to trust them, and assume a 55% to 43% final margin in Washington. For the rest of the data I simply am using some intuition, and general knowledge about the electorate and knowledge of how the past contests have gone.
The chart below shows projected vote percentages in each state. Again, this isn't based upon much data yet, though I do plan to revisit it when more data is available. Instead, it's based upon mainly understanding the demographics of the areas.
Rationales for each state:
- Washington: Latest poll by Survey USA showed Obama with a 13% lead over Clinton.
- Louisiana: According to Wikipedia, the Black population Louisiana is somewhere around 34%. So this is even more than Georgia, and Georgia went for Obama 67% to 31% for Clinton. I was conservative in giving Obama 60% of the vote. In actuality, this may turn out to be a huge win, perhaps with Obama winning 65-70%.
- Nebraska: I don't have a good sense of this state, but I think we can assume it will be like the other caucus states and go for obama heavily. I am just assuming it will be like nearby caucus states such as Kansas and North Dakota, where Obama won 74% and 61% of the vote respectively.
- Maine: I have no idea here, but I suspect it will go to Obama. But just to be conservative, I gave Clinton the benefit of the doubt here with a 49% to 48% victory
- Virginia: I would guess VA would go for Obama also by a thin margin given the number of college towns and the large Black population. However, the black population is not nearly as large (about 20% of the electorate) as states like Maryland, Georgia, Louisiana (all around or above 30%), so I'm just giving the benefit of the doubt to Clinton again with a 52% to 47% victory. Note: Updated to a 59% to 40% victory for Obama based upon newer polling data.
- Maryland: Should be pretty solid for Obama given that it has very similar demographics to Georgia, and perhaps a more progressive electorate in general than some of the southern states.
- DC: Very solid for Obama. I'm giving him an 85% to 15% victory in DC. This is because 60% of the population of DC is Black, and Obama will probably win 85% of these votes. I might have overstated the margins here, but I doubt by very much.
The below chart is a *very* naive approach to calculating the number of delegates coming out of these states. I just took the number of available pledged delegates and multiplied it by the proportion of the vote that the candidate received. Very simplistic, but I don't have the interest in analyzing each voting district.
This shows the number of delegates won overall when all is said and done in these states.
This is a stacked graph showing delegates already pledged, projected from these upcoming primaries/caucuses, and superdelegates. A note about superdelegates though: I think including these is very suspect by the TV networks, as these delegates can change their minds whenever they want. Also, as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) superdelegates votes will not even count if the race is decided before the convention. So even though I think it's misleading, I'm including it for the sake of no information hiding.
Below, I included the actual raw data I used.
More to come later.
Thanks a lot to Poblano from daily kos (http://poblano.dailykos.com) for the inspiring me to work on this.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
I don't plan to post until I have something interesting to say that's faster than sending an e-mail.
- ► March (8)
- Lots of new polls in TX & OH
- New RI poll
- New Zogby/Reuters TX/OH polls
- Quinnipiac PA poll
- SUSA Ohio poll
- New PPP Texas Poll
- Rasmussen Ohio Poll
- SUSA TX poll
- Ohio (PPP) and Texas (CNN) polls
- New 3/4 ARG polls
- New polls in Ohio
- Rhode Island and Vermont polls
- Hard-to believe Texas and Ohio polls show Obama wi...
- Great texas projection
- Words our next president should listen to
- ABC/WP Texas & Ohio poll
- Newest Texas Polls, show Obama within striking dis...
- Analysis of Obama's performance vs. polls: Black v...
- An actual Hawaii poll
- Is Hillary's Hispanic Support Dropping?
- New Poll numbers, 2/19/08
- Beautiful new poll numbers for Texas
- Obama with bigger lead in WI
- A very nice description of the insane Texas primar...
- Now the lines have really, really crossed
- Texas momentum
- How much Money has Obama raised in 2008?
- Now the lines have *really* crossed
- Initial Ohio Polls
- The lines have crossed
- Obama now leads in popular vote including FL
- Barack leads in NC, Clinton leads in OH
- Great poll of potomac primary
- Obama with a 11% lead in WI
- Final Obama MD & VA Polling Numbers
- Can Missouri tell us anything about Ohio?
- Obama won every county in Washington
- Looking good for dems to gain in congress in 08
- Obama with huge leads in MD and VA
- The lamest campaign ad ever!
- National polls, and Poblano's multiple regression ...
- Washington: 5% lead for Obama among registered dem...
- Maryland poll gives obama a 19% edge over Clinton
- Current data suggests obama is the best candidate ...
- New polls out show Obama with a double-digit lead ...
- Washington govenor endorses obama
- Both Obama and Clinton abstain from economic stimu...
- The actual vote counts
- Delegates: Explained
- What the race will look like on Feb. 13th, 2008