Logo Words
Home arrow Insightology arrow tagsarrow Politics

Main Menu

Home
About us
Offerings
Practices
Knowledge
Conferences
Newsletter
Contact Us
Login


Insight Links 

 

Risk management

Publish and be wrong

Sleeping at work

Fingerprint test tells what a person has touched

A touch of generosity

You are checked in but your brain is tuned out

The nature of glass remains anything but clear

The future of sports TV

Eyes on you

Trying to save by increasing doctors' fees

 


 

 

 

 

 

About this Blog 

My name is Rajan Sambandam and my day job is Chief Research Officer at TRC. Insightful ideas interest me. Insightology is a place where ideas of interest to me are brought together. Regular sections include posts on interesting topics & research I have seen, book recommendations, people with insightful ideas and links to articles that are interesting. Subject areas include business, economics, psychology, science, technology and sports. If you have thoughts to share, feel free to send them to me at This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it .

 

Insightology

Tag >> Politics

You can read my previous two election posts here and here. In this post I will take a look at who got the election right and what factors to look for in making that evaluation. Those factors include single polls versus (simple and complex) poll aggregations, use of combination forecasting, the use of cell phone only households in surveys and the astonishing performance of quantitative models that accurately predicted the final results almost a year back. Keep in mind that as of this writing, the final results are still not in both in terms of vote share and in terms of states (Missouri). That said, the results are close enough that we can get a good idea of what went right.


The Bradley Effect is quite often mentioned in the media as we approach the Presidential election. It refers to the under-performance of a black candidate as compared to poll numbers. A good summary of various issues can be found here. A lot of the information about this effect is speculative or based on sparse polling numbers from other races which have led to questions of whether the effect really existed, whether it was seen in other races and whether in 2008 it is still likely to be seen. Perhaps the best study on this issue was conducted by Anthony Greenwald and Bethany Albertson the University of Washington. They used data from the Clinton-Obama primary, the most comprehensive source available and studied it using regression analysis to explore the existence of the Bradley effect.


Obama or McCain? Part II

Posted by: Rajan Sambandam in PollsPoliticsMarkets on

To read the first part of this post click here. In that we discussed how to use the available information to predict a winner in the current presidential race. While the polls (including the poll average) gave a small edge to McCain at that time, the other measures gave a mixed picture with the combined measure giving Obama a slight edge. Since that post a month ago the race has changed quite a bit. In this post I will revisit those numbers to see where they stand, how they have changed and what that means when you track such numbers. In the next one we will look at the impact of race on the race, or the so called Bradley Effect.


A question that is of great interest now and the common response tends to be "who's leading in the polls?". You often hear people say that the latest poll from some reputable organization shows one candidate with a 3 point lead. Is that the best measure we have of predicting who will win the Presidential election? I submit that it is not and will walk you through the different measures available and what is most likely the best one. I say most likely because nothing predicts the future with complete certainty. Further, the aim here is not to examine the political strategies used by the candidates or speculate on who has a better ground game. We just want to see what is the best way to predict the winner, using all publicly available information.