Prediction time for 2012

ok folks let’s lay it on the line. The debates are done, October only has a few days left for surprises (though apparently Trump is saving one for tomorrow), and early voting has started. So take the poll and go on the record as to what happens on Nov 6th!

I personally think either it will be a blowout Obama victory (if the independents mobilize) or a narrow Romney win (if they dont). But I’m going with the consensus of Intrade and 538’s model that Obama is more likely to win than Romney. My mind was made up after the GOP primary, when Huntsman dropped out.

How about you? Take the embedded poll below and leave a comment about your reasoning.

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey, the world’s leading questionnaire tool.

Support independent journalism

  • Reasoning: It’s 1976 all over again, just not with such a good incumbent.

  • Elizabeth Reid

    I think it’s looking likely that Obama will win because the polls are consistently indicating that he will (also the Halloween mask test predicts his victory, and who can argue with that)? Still seems kinda crazy though, I would never have believed it was even possible back in 2011. I think it will be very close, a statistical dead heat. I just hope we get out of this one without any court action.

  • I personally think either it will be a blowout Obama victory (if the independents mobilize) or a narrow Romney win (if they dont). But I’m going with the consensus of Intrade and 538′s model that Obama is more likely to win than Romney.

    You have it backwards. If the Romney momentum stops it will be a narrow victory for Romney. If it continues, it will be a blowout for Romney.

    I’ve no idea what Intrade is, but obviously not consistent with other polls.

    I see no reason to vote because I already voted for real yesterday, selecting 5 republicans and 3 democrats on my ballot.

    My mind was made up after the GOP primary, when Huntsman dropped out.

    I am 99.9% sure your mind was made up before the campaign season began.

  • maggie – labrat

    I haven’t liked either party in years. I’ve voted 3rd party in the past 5 elections. While I really didn’t like Obama, I despised McCain, so I really didn’t care when he won. Now I wish I voted for the chipmunk. I despise everything about the Obama Administration. Everything. I didn’t like Romney when he was governor of Mass, but this year I am not only voting AGAINST Obama, I am voting FOR Romney. I pray he keeps his promise to repeal PPACA – it’s the most abominable monstrosity ever to be hoisted upon us. I only hope it’s not too late to undo all the damage it has already done. I pray that he rids public rhetoric of the politics of division and starts to rally us back together.

    I’m scared that Obama will squeak by with electoral votes but will lose the popular vote. That’s how it’s looking to me and that’s going to make for a very ugly 4 years – especially if the GOP picks up the Senate.

  • well Sandi that’s rather condescending of you, but as a mater of fact I was quite interested in Huntsman. And if you read my own posts arguing why I am voting for Obama you will see exactly why the idea of Huntsman was appealing.

  • Sorry Aziz, it wasn’t meant to be condescending, but with a bit of tongue in cheek. However I guess attitude rarely comes across in text.

    Although I more often than not disagree with you I think you are a good person to debate.

  • I’m sorry. I’ve been biting peoples heads off a lot today 😛

  • Scott

    I think it’s looking likely that Obama will win because the polls are consistently indicating that he will


    Did you mistype that? Because the two most accurate polls (judged by how well they called 2008 and 2010 in both the day of and how consistent they were in the lead up to), Rasmussen and Gallup, have been showing Romney consistently ahead for the last month. And now that I know the details of both models I’m having trouble deciding who is more accurate. Luckily today, both Gallup and Rasmussen are within a point of each other (Gallup: Romney +5; Rasmussen: Romney +4).

    Unless there is an October surprise (and both Trump for the GOP and Gloria Alred for the Dems are holding back a surprise) I think Mitt has created a “Momentum” by destroying the straw man that the Obama campaign tried to stick in his place. If you look in the polls people like Mitt more and have more faith in him as a leader on most things than Barack.

    It’s still close, but I’m thinking at least a 4% advantage in the NV to Mitt and more than 300 EV to Mitt also.

  • Scott

    On to Trump’s “surprise”. If it is what people are talking about, if it is about Barack and Michelle’s marriage (secret divorce) all I have to say to Trump is: crawl back in your hole, scumbag. We don’t need it and it might backfire on Mitt (whose people categorically refused the information from Trump).

    But I’m different. I never wanted to look at Barack’s Birth Certificate believing him to be a natural born American and only wanted to look at his college transcripts when Obama made Mitt’s tax returns the central issue of the campaign there for a while during the summer.

  • WHAT. you’re serious? thats what Trump has? where are you hearing this from? you mean he will allege they actually divorced at some poiint and remarried?

    god what a scumbag if true. Think about how this will hurt Obama’s kids.

  • jaymaster

    I think it will be Romney by an OK margin.

    But if it’s close, it will be Obama in a squeeker.

    Hey, those are the choices!

    The untold story is the Senate.

    If Romney wins, and the senate goes R, then we’ll really see where the R party is heading these days.

    If the direction the newly R state governments is going is any indication (PA, NJ, WI, MI,OH, etc, ), then I would probably be OK with that.

    Oh yeah, notice those are all swing states. Where something kinda radical happened in 2010.

  • roylofquist

    Most of the folks I have known for a long time, some for as long as 50 years, aren’t very political so I don’t talk politics with them. Many of them are now making comments about this election. Based on those comments and having lived through the blowouts of 52, 64, 72, 80, 08, and 10 I believe that Romney will get north of 55%.

  • Scott

    OK, well I owe Mr. Trump an apology. It has nothing to do with Barack and Michelle’s marriage and is instead a challenge to Mr. Obama to release his college transcripts in exchange for Trump donating $5 million to Mr. Obama’s charity of choice.

    Perfectly acceptable and highly commendable.

  • Voted for McCain. Will vote Obama. Predict Romney win by a squeaker. If Obama wins, it will be by a squeaker.

    I’m surprising myself by predicting Romney win, because while I always believed Romney was dangerous and my lefty pals were delusional to laugh at him, I still thought the President had the edge. I no longer do.

    With less than two weeks to go it’s anybody’s game but I’m calling it Romney in a squeaker. I would rather be wrong but I’m not going to commit seppuku or start stocking ammo and food supplies either way.

  • Scott

    If Obama wins, it will be by a squeaker.

    I sure hope you’re wrong, Dean. If Romney wins by a “squeaker” we’ll be treated to 4-8 years of “racism!”, “voter disenfranchisement!” or this decade’s version of Diebold “Hart-Intercivic!”. Seriously. I’m convinced the Professional Left is preparing the battleground for plans A, B and C.

    Plan A is win the election.

    Plan B is cite “raaaaacism” because of the Voter ID laws and Bain’s control of another investment company’s control of the company that makes a lot of the voting machines in some swing states to take the election to court to try and have it reversed (which works in a situation where one state’s electoral votes determine the whole election).

    Plan C is if Plan B loses and they spend the next 4-8 years calling Romney “illegitimate” because of the details of Plan B.

    They did it before, look at the years 2001-2009.

  • ArnoldHarris

    Meantime, Obama’s official court jester was visiting that great state of Ohiowa, uttering his usual and expected interpretations on significant policies of our republic.

    I think perhaps he was selected for that office in 2008 to make his keeper look all the more wise by comparison.

    Arnold Harris
    Mount Horeb WI

  • queenofallevil

    If Obama wins I look forward to the political theater of his probable impeachment for his abject FAILURE as Commander in Chief. This moron starts a war in Libya, kills their leader and brags about doing so without any boots on the ground.

    Well….maybe if there had been some boots on the ground our Embassy would not have been attacked and we would not have lost an Ambassador nor 3 other Americans due to the incompetence of this Administration. Is crappy and overpriced healthcare really more important than anything else? I cannot believe that anyone would vote for this dishonest and incompetent man to run a 7-eleven let alone a nation.

    I’m voting Romney, obviously.

  • ArnoldHarris

    Me too, QOAE. If I were to do otherwise, I would not be able to take for granted my own sanity.

    I hope life is treating you well these days.

    Arnold Harris
    Mount Horeb WI

  • queenofallevil

    Life is but alas the economy is not, Arnold…but with the strong will instilled in me, by my parents, my family and I will certainly persevere and God willing with a Romney victory…flourish. 🙂

  • Oddly enough, Intrade (which, for Sandy’s information, is a system that is a sort of stock market where people essentially place bets on who’s going to win–find it here) is showing an UPWARD trend for an Obama victory. The polls, meanwhile, are showing pretty much a dead heat with a slight Romney edge.

    Now what fascinates me about this is, historically, InTrade tends to have a shockingly good prediction rate. And it works on the theory that whatever people SAY they believe intellectually, when there’s money on the line they are closer to the truth. It also works under the theory that what people think subconsciously may be more important than what they think consciously, and that in large groups, the general consensus among people is right more often than not. (I said more often than not, sometimes the crowd is entirely wrong.)

    This should be an interesting test of InTrade’s methodology this year. Obama’s trading strongly and his price is going up even while the polls seem to say he’s in trouble. Do the betters know something (even unconsciously) that we don’t? Or will this be InTrade’s first major fail?

    (I say “major” because it does not and never has claimed 100% accuracy, just, to be surprisingly accurate. Indeed, there was a sad case some 8 or so years ago of an attempt to set up a trading market on where national security threats would next materialize, set up by intelligence analysts to try to make predictions. Which was really not a bad idea, but political partisans with Presidential Derangement Syndrome shot it down. Oh well.)

  • Elizabeth Reid

    The national polls are showing a Romney advantage and have been for a while, but that doesn’t mean a whole lot because of the electoral college and the winner-take-all system. What really matters (for the election anyway, not necessarily for how things will go after the election in terms of governance) is the state-by-state polls in the contested states, and for the same amount of time that Romney has been leading in the national polls, Obama has maintained a tiny, tiny edge in enough of the swing states to win. At least in some polls. The very uncertainty of it seems to indicate that it’s going to be a photo finish. I don’t understand people who think there could be a blowout in either direction, unless something really appalling comes out of one of the campaigns in the next few days.

  • Scott

    We’re in a strange election cycle this year from a predictor’s point of view. I’m a professional statistician and many of my peers are involved in political polling. They tell me several things, including:

    1) Polling this year is expected to be way off because, many believe, the old models are either breaking down or are irrelevant.

    2) Surprisingly, state-by-state polls are LESS reliable. You’d think they would be MORE reliable as a sample size of 1000 taken from a population of a state is a higher percentage of total population than 2700 taken from the whole nation. The funny thing is is if you take a sample from a swing state population you have to be MORE careful that you get a SRSWOR than you do on a national level. Regional differences that influence voting preference disappear the larger the population you sample from.

    3) Nate Silver, the Golden Boy from 2008, is expected to again lose his aura. He called 2008 with extreme accuracy (mostly because he had access to the Obama campaign’s highly-expensive internal polling which allowed him to highly-refine his models), he did barely OK in his 2010 predictions. THIS is going to be a major shake-up for the Left as he is their go-to guy on polls and they’ve been running to him to be consoled over the last month as Romney’s led in the national polls.

    But he’s not special. In fact, I know of at least a half-dozen graduate students right now who could do what he does with ease if given the insider polling he got.

  • roylofquist

    Statistical analysis assumes an underlying organizing principle or principles that, if discerned, is predictive of future results. If the system is chaotic or “non-computable” then the results are usually artifacts of the methodology. A recent notable example of this phenomenon is Mann’s “hockey stick”.

  • Elizabeth: My dream scenario is that Obama loses the popular vote but wins the Electoral College. I’m completely serious. I guess I’m sadistic.

    Scott: SRSWOR?

  • Scott

    Let me go on record that whoever wins the Electoral College and wins it soundly wins the Presidency. “Soundly” means, in the case of a close state vote, that there is an objective recount. Bush won the Electoral College “soundly” in 2000 no matter what the Lefties tell you about “HANGING CHADS”, “DIEBOLD” and “RACIST DISENFRANCHISEMENT!!!!!”

  • Scott

    Dean: SRSWOR: Simple Random Sample Without Replacement. It is the ideal of statistical sampling since each member of a population has equal probability of being selected.

  • Scott

    Oooh, I didn’t read this. Bob Krumm has a good analysis on why Nate Silver is FoS (Full of Shit)

    The final problem with Nate Silver’s model is its over-reliance on open-source state polling. Good polling is very expensive. That is why so few organizations do it well. Furthermore, even those who do polling well, don’t do it the same way for all clients. As an Army analyst, I have hired one of the major national polling companies to conduct recurring nationwide polling of a sufficiently large sample size to get statistically meaningful state level results. The cost: $11 million. Sure, that was in Iraq and not the United States, but labor costs there are much less than here. Nonetheless, I bring this up to point out that a good poll of the scope and scale necessary to derive national level results from state level input costs more money than even the largest media organizations can afford. Only the campaigns themselves have the kind of money to do polling right. All the publicly-released polls cut corners in order to do it on a budget. They use small sample sizes, and loose voter screens. Nor do they go back and check sample responses against the answers from a sample of non-responders. That’s why at the state level you get wide variability and large swings in most polls.

    I’ve already predicted a 50.8% (EC:301)- Romney, 47.5% (EC: 237)- Obama win and I’m pretty confident about that (if I’m not confident about the EC count). One thing I am confident about is Nate Silver will be proven wrong once again (he doesn’t have access to the highly-expensive internal polling from the Obama campaign and even if he did they don’t have the money to do really good statewide polling this time) I’m less certain that he will stop being regarded as a Wunderkind.

  • Elizabeth Reid

    My dream scenario is that Obama loses the popular vote but wins the Electoral College. I’m completely serious. I guess I’m sadistic.

    If you believe the polling right now, it seems possible. I don’t have a problem with it personally, because if the outcome of the EC can’t be different than the popular vote, why bother having an EC? But boy a lot of people are going to be upset if that happens.

  • Dishman


    If Obama loses, the Clintonistas will thoroughly demolish him.