scholarly journals Pollster problems in the 2016 US presidential election: vote intention, vote prediction

2020 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-28
Author(s):  
Natalie Jackson ◽  
Michael S. Lewis-Beck ◽  
Charles Tien
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
State Level ◽  
Horse Race ◽  
Present Evidence ◽  
Probability Sampling ◽  
Election Forecasting ◽  
Vote Intention ◽  
Us Presidential Election

In recent US presidential elections, there has been considerable focus on how well public opinion can forecast the outcome, and 2016 proved no exception. Pollsters and poll aggregators regularly offered numbers on the horse-race, usually pointing to a Clinton victory, which failed to occur. We argue that these polling assessments of support were misleading for at least two reasons. First, Trump voters were sorely underestimated, especially at the state level of polling. Second, and more broadly, we suggest that excessive reliance on non-probability sampling was at work. Here we present evidence to support our contention, ending with a plea for consideration of other methods of election forecasting that are not based on vote intention polls.

scholarly journals Fundamentals-Based State-Level Forecasts of the 2020 US Presidential Election

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clemens Nollenberger ◽  
Gina-Maria Unger
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
National Level ◽  
State Level ◽  
Electoral College ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Improve Accuracy ◽  
Short And Long Term ◽  
Us Presidential Election

Forecasts of US presidential elections have gained considerable attention in recent years. However, as became evident in 2016 with the victory of Donald Trump, most of them consider presidential elections only at the national level, neglecting that these are ultimately decided by the Electoral College. In order to improve accuracy, we believe that forecasts should instead address outcomes at the state-level to determine the eventual Electoral College winner. We develop a political economy model of the incumbent vote share across states based on different short- and long-term predictors, referring up to the end of the second quarter of election years. Testing it against election outcomes since 1980, our model correctly predicts the eventual election winner in 9 out of 10 cases – including 2016 –, with the 2000 election being the exception. For the 2020 election, it expects Trump to lose the Electoral College, as only 6.2 percent of simulated outcomes cross the required threshold of 270 Electoral Votes, with a mean prediction of 106 Electoral Votes.

Obama's Reelection Prospects under “Bread and Peace” Voting in the 2012 US Presidential Election

2012 ◽  
Vol 45 (04) ◽  
pp. 635-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas A. Hibbs
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
Weighted Average ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Average Growth ◽  
Us Military ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Objectively Measured ◽  
Foreign Wars

According to the Bread and Peace Model postwar, American presidential elections should be interpreted as a sequence of referendums on the incumbent party's record during its four-year mandate period. In fact postwar aggregate votes for president are well explained by just two objectively measured fundamental determinants: (1) weighted-average growth of per capita real disposable personal income over the term, and (2) cumulative US military fatalities due to unprovoked, hostile deployments of American armed forces in foreign wars. No other outside variable systematically affects postwar aggregate votes for president.

scholarly journals State-Level Forecasts for the 2020 US Presidential Election: Tough Victory Ahead for Biden — Corrigendum

2021 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 193-193
Author(s):  
Bruno Jérôme ◽  
Véronique Jérôme ◽  
Philippe Mongrain ◽  
Richard Nadeau
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
State Level ◽  
Us Presidential Election

The 2016 Election: Like 1888 but not 1876 or 2000

2018 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabrice Barthélémy ◽  
Mathieu Martin ◽  
Ashley Piggins
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
Anomalous Behavior ◽  
Electoral College ◽  
Popular Vote ◽  
The Us ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
House Size

ABSTRACTDonald J. Trump won the 2016 US presidential election with fewer popular votes than Hillary R. Clinton. This is the fourth time this has happened, the others being 1876, 1888, and 2000. In earlier work, we analyzed these elections (and others) and showed how the electoral winner can often depend on the size of the US House of Representatives. This work was inspired by Neubauer and Zeitlin (2003, 721–5) in their paper, “Outcomes of Presidential Elections and the House Size.” A sufficiently larger House would have given electoral victories to the popular vote winner in both 1876 and 2000. An exception is the election of 1888. We show that Trump’s victory in 2016 is like Harrison’s in 1888 and unlike Hayes’s in 1876 and Bush’s in 2000. This article updates our previous work to include the 2016 election. It also draws attention to some of the anomalous behavior that can arise under the Electoral College.

The Keys to the White House

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan J. Lichtman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
The United States ◽  
Prediction System ◽  
Popular Vote ◽  
President Obama ◽  
White House ◽  
Turn On ◽  
Us Presidential Election

The Keys to the White House are an index-based prediction system that retrospectively account for the popular-vote winners of every US presidential election from 1860 to 1980 and prospectively forecast the winners of every presidential election from 1984 through 2008. The Keys demonstrate that American presidential elections do not turn on events of the campaign, but rather on the performance of the party controlling the White House. The Keys hold important lessons for politics in the United States and worldwide. A preliminary forecast based on the Keys indicates that President Obama is a likely winner in 2012, but also reveals the specific problems at home at abroad that could thwart his re-election.

scholarly journals Measuring Public Opinion in U.S. Metro Areas, 2006-2016

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Micah Lindner
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Political Ideology ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
State Level ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Metropolitan Statistical Area ◽  
Strongly Correlated ◽  
Potential Applications ◽  
Level I ◽  
Statistical Area

While a great many state-level longitudinal measures of public opinion are now available, few measures exist at the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) level. I demonstrate a method for estimating public opinion annually in the fifty-three largest MSAs via disaggregation from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES). Using this method, I construct an MSA-level citizen political ideology measure from 2006 through 2016. This measure is strongly correlated with MSA-level results from the Presidential Elections in 2008, 2012, and 2016. While the MSA ideology scale itself has many potential applications for future research, so, too, does the underlying method of estimating MSA-level measures using CCES data.

Do campaigns matter outside the United States? Equilibrium and enlightenment in Korean presidential elections

2016 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-39
Author(s):  
Jeonghun Min ◽  
Paul-Henri Gurian
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
Party Identification ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vote Choice ◽  
Presidential Campaigns ◽  
The Us ◽  
Vote Intention

Do presidential campaigns matter outside the United States? We examine how public opinion responds to campaign events during Korean presidential campaigns. The fundamental variables of the election year influence vote intention before the campaign begins and substantially influence eventual vote choice. Campaign events assist voters to learn more about the fundamental variables – regionalism, party identification, and retrospective evaluations of the incumbent administration – and this leads to more informed intentions during the campaign. The results suggest that there is substantial congruence in the explanatory power of Holbrook’s ‘equilibrium’ theory and Gelman and King’s ‘enlightenment’ theory in presidential campaigns held in the US and in Korea.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document