**An Electoral Vote Forecast Formula: Simulation or
Meta-analysis Not Required**

Oct.31, 2011

It’s very surprising that election forecasting blogs and academics who use the latest state polls as input to their models don’t apply basic probability, statistics and simulation concepts in forecasting the electoral vote and corresponding win probabilities.

** A meta-analysis or simulation is not
required to calculate the expected electoral vote.** Of course the
individual state projections will depend on the forecasting method used. But
the projection method is not the main issue here; it’s how the associated win
probabilities are used to calculate the expected EV, win probability and
frequency distribution.

Calculating the expected electoral vote is a three-step process:

*1. Project the 2-party vote share
V(i) for each state(i) as the sum of the poll share PS(i)
and the undecided voter allocation UVA(i): *

*V (i) =
PS(i) + UVA(i), i-1,51*

*2. Calculate the probability P(i) of winning state (i) given the margin
of error (95% confidence):*

*P (i) =
NORMDIST (V(i), 0.5,
MoE/1.96, true) , i=1,51*

*3. Calculate the total expected
electoral vote EV as the sum: *

* EV = ∑ P(i) * EV(i), i = 1,51*

The ** 2004
Election Model** allocated
75% of the undecided vote to Kerry and projected that he would have 337
electoral votes (99% win probability) with a 51.8% two-party vote share.

The challenger is expected to win the
majority (60-90% UVA) of the undecided vote,
depending on incumbent job performance.

After calculating the individual
state probabilities, we can calculate the EV win probability. The best, most
straightforward method is

The average electoral vote is
calculated for the 5000 election trials. Of course, the average will only be an
approximation to the theoretical value based on the summation formula. *But
the Law of Large Numbers (LLN) applies: the EV average and median are usually within one or two electoral votes of the
theoretical mean**. The close match between the *

*Princeton**
Professor Wang’s EV estimator is an unnecessarily complex
method and overkill for calculating the expected Electoral Vote. His Meta-analysis
projected that Kerry would win 311 electoral votes and had a 98% win
probability. But he was wrong to suggest that Bush won the undecided vote as an
explanation for why his forecast was “wrong”. Just like AAPOR,
the media pundits and political scientists, he never considered that Election
Fraud was the cause. But overwhelming statistical and other documented evidence
indicates that the election was stolen, just like it was in 2000. *

*The**2008 Election Model includes a sensitivity (risk) analysis of five
Obama undecided voter (UVA) scenario assumptions ranging from 40-80%, with 60%
as the base case. This enables one to view the effects of the UVA factor
variable on the expected electoral vote and win probability. Electoral vote forecasting models which do
not provide a risk factor sensitivity analysis are incomplete. *