« The Morning Rant | Main | CNN's Gay and Trans Festival Was Even Too Extreme for Liberal Gays »
October 16, 2019

Moody's Analytics' Very Accurate Election Model -- Which Has Only Been Wrong Once in 40 Years -- Points to Trump Victory, Possibly a Crushing One

Before getting to the current model, we should look at the one time the model broke down.

Which was... 2016. As the prediction stood on November 1, 2016:

Low gas prices and President Barack Obama’s high approval ratings are key factors that favor Democrat Hillary Clinton winning the White Hou:se in next week’s election, according to a model from Moody's Analytics that has accurately predicted the last nine U.S. presidential contests.

...

The Reuters-Ipsos States of the Nation project also predicts a Clinton win, with a 95 percent probability of her winning at least 278 electoral votes.

So it got that one wrong.

Moody's projection is largely based on underlying economic factors -- pocketbook, stock market, unemployment rate -- with a comparatively small dependence on polling information.

So, assuming the economy stays healthy, the current forecast is for a Trump victory even bigger than the one erroneously predicted for Hillary.

Moody's Analytics released the results of its 2020 prediction model on Tuesday showing Trump winning with 332 electoral votes, an increase over his 2016 win of 306, if voter turnout remains relatively close to the historical average.

...

"If the economy a year from now is the same as it is today, or roughly so, then the power of incumbency is strong and Trump's election odds are very good, particularly if Democrats aren't enthusiastic and don't get out to vote," the authors said. "It's about turnout."

I don't know if that proviso if voter turnout remains relatively close to the historical average is likely to be true. Seems to me 2020 will be abnormally passionate and have an abnormally high turnout.

But that doesn't necessarily cut against Trump too badly, as the forecast goes on to say.

Moody's forecast is here.

They explain that their erroneous prediction of a Clinton win was based on a 2-year graph of low gas prices, but, had they instead used a one-year frame....

Beginning in 2014, gasoline prices experienced their largest two-year decline leading up to a presidential election. Historically, two-year declines in gasoline prices have a strong statistical relationship with incumbent parties maintaining control of the White House. Therefore, we used the two-year decline in gasoline prices as an independent variable in the 2016 election model, and it was enough to offset many other explanatory variables that were working against Clinton at the time. However, if we had shortened the time frame for the decline in gasoline prices from two years to one year, the 2016 model would have instead predicted a Trump win. This owed, at least in part, to the timing of the decline in gasoline prices. Though the two-year drop was the largest leading up to an election, most of the decline occurred in 2014 and early 2015 (see Chart 2). This meant that the price decline in the 12 months before the 2016 election was barely noticeable, providing little boost to the then-incumbent Democratic Party.

Gas prices dropped a lot two years before 2016, but almost not at all since 2015. So the public was not feeling great about gas prices.

It's very easy to adjust a "forecasting" model post hoc and change your variables to retroactively "predict" past events you already know happened. Still, that's their explanation.

As to turnout: in an election with turnout near the historical average, Trump wins with 322 votes.

But even assuming maximum turnout seen in past elections (that is, the highest turnout one could reasonably expect), the Democrats are predicted to win -- but only barely. That projection suggests that Democrats would just barely cross the 270 threshold with 279, and Trump would lose with 259.

Even with maximum historical turnout, the Democrats can't afford to have any states wind up more Trump-leaning than average, or else they'll lose their slight edge.

Meanwhile, in a low turnout election (something I'm pretty sure will not happen), Trump wins with 380 electoral votes.

This is probably premature, but we get so much bad polling news, I thought it's maybe worth pointing out that a model based on economic modeling projects a likely Trump hold.


digg this
posted by Ace of Spades at 11:55 AM

| Access Comments




Recent Comments
King of Yonkers: "I see CA license plates pulled over daily. It warm ..."

Tom Servo: "389 "289 236 I haven't made plans to flee Californ ..."

Jewells45: "Night everyone. Eyes are getting blurry and I'm p ..."

Semi-Literate Thug: "384 And I wonder if our Judiciary would even stop ..."

Splunge: "[i]394 Let's put it this way: California's most re ..."

Jewells45: "[i]Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 12, 2019 09:5 ..."

Rodrigo Borgia: "> If the American people took a notion to do it ..."

Guy Mohawk: "If it hurts when you move its most likely muscle, ..."

Tom Servo: "I thought it deduced that it was circulated weeks ..."

TheQuietMan: "And here's the question: places like Chicago may n ..."

Jewells45: "Jewels, you were supposed to remove the MoMe namet ..."

Trump poisoned my cat: ""289 236 I haven't made plans to flee California, ..."

Recent Entries
Search


Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64