OK, we probably shouldn't do it but we all constantly make predictions. We, as a society are addicted to predictions and it's easy to make them because incorrect predictions are a dime a dozen and correct predictions, especially unlikely ones, can get you noticed. There is perhaps no place where this comes into play as regularly as politics where predictions are used so often that we start to assume they are reliable. They aren't. But political predictions based on good social science can carry a bit more weight. This past weekend Nate Silver (who now writes a blog for the NY Times and used to run an independent prediction site knows ans fivethrityeight that used extensive and relaible models) wrote a very interesting piece predicting the 2012 race based on three factors (or variables to use good social science speak): Obama's favorability a year before the election, the economic growth measured by GDP, and how extreme the poltiical views of his opponent are. Read (or thoroughly skim) the article
here, and play with the interactive feature predicting the popular vote winner
here.
- After reading this interesting article do you think that this prediction model should matter at all? What is useful? What is not?
- What factor(s) (or variables) not included in Nate Silver's model do you think will play a major role in determining who wins in Nov. 2012?
I think that this is a useful prediction model, as far as prediction models go. While Silver's analysis is obviously very thought out and backed up by extensive data, the fact remains that it only covers three factors, as crucial as those three factors are. To his credit, Silver is very clear on the fact that these predictions, while legitimate, are first and foremost conjecture, as relevant and accurate that conjecture may be.
ReplyDeleteI think that the extremist scale idea developed by Silver through Marty Cohen is particularly interesting, as Americans seem to be struggling with a desire to "fix" the economy in a more active way, whatever that translates into for the president (reasonable or not, but we are talking about voters and not what the president can actually do), yet not handing a significant part of their government over to extreme republican hands. Therefore I think that this element is particularly important in predicting who will win, and is especially relevant in the event that Romney gets in as the Republican nominee, which (once again, conjecture) looks likely given performance by the other candidates at Republican debates and in polls.
Silvers approach and analysis to the upcoming elections really hit on many key issues for the obama campaign. Unfortanetly the economy has not flourished during the past 3 years; thus people are ready for a change and not the "Obama Change". The article stated
ReplyDelete"Following the debt-ceiling debate, Obama’s strategists started comparing their boss with the original comeback kid, Harry Truman — an implicit concession that the president will most likely fight 2012 from behind."
This is very wishful thinking, while there is no clear outstanding GOP candidate, the likelihood of Obama being rated number one is rare.
When investing the approval ratings of Obama, Silver said : Polls find that his standing among Jews has deteriorated: only about 54 percent of them approved of his performance in the most recent Gallup survey. But this is to be expected when a president has a 40-something approval rating. He also has a Hispanic problem and a problem among the white working class. He has a problem in Ohio and a problem in Florida and a problem in New Hampshire. He even has, to a mild extent, an African-American problem: Obama’s approval ratings among black voters are still high, but down to about 80 percent from 90 percent.
Not only have Jews, Hispanics and whites lost faith in Obama, so have his strongest supporters! if Obama can not even unify his party of democrats how does he expect to go up against GOP congressmen and women?
The interactive predictions are usefull showing Huntsman and Romney as the forerunners for the Republican nomination. However there is still agood 9months of campaigning and during these upcoming months there is alot of time for flawed debates, scandalous secrets and misconduct
I think Silver does a good job in his prediction model, and the comprehensive data he put into it is pretty impressive. I think his three variables are pretty spot on, as Obama's approval rating, the percent growth of GDP, and ideological standpoint of the opponent are probably going to be the most important factors in the upcoming election.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there are a couple of things I was skeptical about while readings Silver's analysis. Firstly, when it comes to Obama's approval rating- clearly he's not going to hit 90% by the end of his third year, but approval ratings can prove to be kind of fickle. Obama's approval rating shot up right after the assassination of Osama bin Laden- there's no way to predict whether a similar kind of unexpected event will spur another spontaneous increase (or decrease for that matter) closer to the actual election.Secondly, when it comes to GDP growth, I think that Obama has a longer time than by the end of his third year to prove himself in that venue to the American people. If the GDP growth isn't great by January but somehow increases by later on in the election, he'll be able to still use that to his advantage and show the American people he's making successes with the economy.
Lastly, I think the biggest flaw in Silver's analysis is that he kind of puts Huntsman as a front runner. Just because he's the most moderate candidate doesn't mean that he'll be the most viable candidate- I think the last statistic I heard was that he's getting approximately 2% of coverage for his campaign. The ideological factor is probably going to be most useful in a prediction model once other candidates start dropping out of the race.
It’s interesting to see from Silvers article that the most recent presidential candidates had rather high approval rates after their first term in office. Meaning that going into the election they were granted to win over a second term, (which almost all of them did)! However, as Silver points out this is not the case for Obama. Due to the continuing economic problems as well as other issues, Obama seems to have lost approval from many different races and even from groups that at times were his greatest supporters. People have lost confidence in Obama’s capabilities to implement the changes they once thought he could. Though Silver’s prediction model has an interesting way of spelling out specific issues and how people react these predictions may only predict the outcome of the popular vote among citizens but may not determine the results of the actual election based on the Electoral College. The election is almost a year away and any rates are likely to change during these crucial campaigning months. This prediction model, which may not actually accurately predict an outcome, serves as a way to inform citizens of issues that are controversial. Whatever happens in our county over the next number of months will play a crucial part in the election and approval ratings for each of the candidates. We have seen approval rates improve after events such as 9-11 and we will just have to see what can happen. If the economy or other issues begin to show improvements, Obama’s rates are likely to rise up once again.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I would say that Silver's prediction model is accurate as far as these three factors being the largest determinants as to whether Obama will be re-elected. His model is effective because they are mostly based on trends from the past that are likely to repeat themselves. When you are dealing with such large numbers of American citizens over a large number of years, statistics are probably going to be relatively constant for the various trends.
ReplyDeleteAlthough there are certainly other factors that will affect Obama's standing outside of the ones that Silver lists, I think that the categories are broad enough that new and relevant issues that may arise will be pretty much encompassed by the three major categories -- the categories are broad enough that other factors that present themselves will leave some kind of footprint on "Obama's approval ratings" and the "ideology of the Republican candidate."
What isn't taken into account by Silver (because it is impossible to predict), is if the economy somehow pales in significance to some other factor that becomes more pressing or prominent over the course of the next number of months.
If, on the one hand, the economy were to become less of an issue because the economy improves, then Obama's chances will improve, as Silver stated. Because Obama's already in office, if he establishes some kind of economic stability and doesn't get people too upset, then there is a larger chance that he will stay in office just from the familiarity that people have with him and the existing 2-term status quo for presidents. The fact that the nation has a short term memory is significant, and if there is any way for Americans to be happy enough with the current standings to not want to risk change, then Obama is in luck.
But, the economy could also become less significant if it is caused by events beyond our control and beyond our predictability that become more pressing -- like a person who forgets about his stubbed toe because the dentist pulled out his tooth. This is not meant to be a prediction of doom, but in other difficult circumstances, people could end up looking for different strengths and weaknesses in a president than the ones that are most desirable right now. Silver can't take this into consideration because it is impossible to predict.
In my opinion, Silver's research and predictions can really help the public organize their thoughts and opinions on this upcoming election. He brings great points to our attention, maybe things that we could not come up with on our own. I think it is important not to rely on this too much but I don't see the harm in this prediction model helping the public make their decisions. We can't see into the future so it is hard to tell how to take in the information. I think that as long as the public uses this information wisely and in the correct manner, Silver has really given us something great to work with. Silver's work is definitely something that should be taken into consideration.
ReplyDeleteI thought the article was interesting but it seemed more interesting than useful to me. While it's nice that after all his calculations he concluded Obama has about a 50% chance of being reelected, Silver admitted himself that something like an "October surprise" or a sudden rise in Obama's approval rating could render all his predictions useless. In any case, I don't think anyone needed Silver to tell them that this will likely be a tough election for Obama to win, they could just take a look at the economy to tell them that. One thing I thought could be of practical use from this article was Silver's prediction that a more moderate candidate like Romney has a greater chance at winning than a more radical candidate like Perry or Cain. This could be of practical use for a Republican Primary voter who perhaps agrees ideologically with someone like Perry but might as a result of a study like this vote for Mitt Romney because he would have a greater chance at beating Obama in the general election.
ReplyDeleteOne factor (of many) that I think this study does not take into consideration is the likeability of a candidate. While Romney is pretty moderate, I think the fact that even Republicans aren't so excited about him might play a role in the 2012 election.
I think Silver’s model, while useful, isn’t groundbreaking. Its useful because it can roughly calculate the odds of each candidate using statistics past elections. But his idea isn’t new, he is merely quantifying factors that people consider when voting for president. Do you think the President is doing a good job? (Approval rating) Are you better off (financially) then you were four years ago? (GDP) How will the ideologies of the candidates affect their leadership? What I found interesting in the article, he mentioned the idea of referendum and median voter value model. I think it would be interesting, personally, to look at past election and figure out which model was used. See if the political scientists are right for leaning toward the referendum model.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I think there is a very significant element that Silver didn’t, and probably can’t, factor in; is how the candidates run their campaign. What I find effects voters most of all is how they perceive the candidate. Their perception is significantly affected by negative ads and stories of candidates past that may or may not effect their leadership ability at all. Any given issue can be spun a hundred different ways and candidates can rise above issues or it can be the nail in the coffin for them. Like in the 2008 election McCain couldn’t shake the label of old man, people perceived him as too old to be president, that was one of the things that did him in. In the election between Bush and Kerry, the stories that emerged about Kerry and the swift boats negatively effected his campaign. So I guess another variable would be what/ how many skeletons do they have in their closets and how well can they deflect attacks and convince people that some things are a non issue.
I feel that Silver’s prediction model is helpful, and clear. He has well thought out ideas, as well as the research to prove them, which is helpful. He is clear, and he speaks out about what is relevant and what is correct. It was interesting to read the results of President Obama amongst not just the Jewish population, but with the Hispanic population as well. He seems to have a lot more problems than he thought he would, which is going to be interesting to watch during the upcoming election- how he deals with it, or how he doesn’t. It was also interesting to see the comparisons between the previous Presidents and President Obama, however different circumstances do lead to different results. But when it came to the actual question of President Obama’s re-election, I feel Silver’s ideas were very concise and helpful, and I’m looking forward to see if his predictions stand true.
ReplyDeleteAs someone who isn't so up on politics, I found Silver's analysis to be very helpful. It outlined very understandable and relevant variables that put the candidacy in perspective for me. Perhaps it wasn't a groundbreaking model, but it was clear and concise in the way he broke it down. Although, as we established, predications aren't always so accurate, this seemed to me to be as accurate as can be in a prediction model. I agree, though, with Michelle that one of the most important factors is how the people perceive a candidate and as far as I know, that is not something that can be quantified in a way Silver might want it to be.
ReplyDeleteI found Silver's analysis to be helpful in certain aspects and very unhelpful in certain aspects. For instance I believe that one of the biggest components to a leader is the way he carries himself and his campaign, like other people have mentioned. I also believe that statistics are just statistics and we can't really know for sure where things will lie depending on just statistics. I also feel that different people carry their views on things and weight on those categories very differently each person and therefore until the final tally I don't think we can ever really know. It is however positive because it can help people understand a general idea of the candidates, but I do think it is more negative because it is trying to shape other people opinion on facts and ideas that are based on statistics that don't have everything in their statistics, the biggest one being their campaign and how they carry themselves. This is just my humble opinion.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I was very intrigued by Nate Silver's predictions. In particular, I felt that his point about how Obama's ideological standpoint differs from the Republican candidates to be a strong point.
ReplyDeleteI found it fascinating that Silver's model measures each Republican candidates' chance of winning the popular vote, taking into account possible changes in economic growth/stability and Obama's approval rating. Like we talk about constantly, the economy is THE issue that Americans have in mind. Therefore, the election's victor could change based on economic changes. The Times created a calculator so that Americans can play out the scenarios ourselves. Although I this tool is very cool, and with risk of being a total debbie downer, I wonder if American's really will be able to see any difference between the economic state we are in now, and the one we see in November a year from now.