The 2012 Presidential True Vote Model: How Obama Could Lose
Oct. 4, 2011
Updated: Aug. 11, 2012
The 2012 Presidential True Vote Model was created to take a first look at the election before the state and national pre-election polls became widely available. The model indicates that Obama needs a 55% True Vote to overcome the 5% fraud factor to win the majority of the popular vote.
On April 27, 2012, the Presidential True Vote Simulation Election Model (TVM) was created. The model utilized pre-election state and national polls in a Monte Carlo simulation to forecast the electoral vote and win probability. The combination of a True Vote Model and pre-election polling simulation is a unique forecasting tool to determine the likelihood of Obama overcoming the fraud factor and winning re-election.
In 2008, Obama had a 52.9% recorded vote share. Using the recorded share as a basis, Obama loses by 2.6 million votes, a 9 million vote switch in margin from the True Vote scenario. Bottom line: Obama needs at least a 55% True Vote share to win in 2012 if, as in 2008, he loses 5% due to fraud.
The National Exit Poll (NEP) is ALWAYS forced to match the recorded vote. It indicated that returning Bush 2004 voters comprised 46% of the 2008 electorate compared to just 37% for returning Kerry voters. This astounding anomaly is never discussed by academics, political scientists and media pundits.
In the TVM, the impossible 46/37 return voter mix was replaced with a feasible mix based on Kerry’s true 53.6% share, 5% voter mortality and an estimated 97% “habitual voter” turnout rate. Obama had a 58% True Vote share. The assumed TVM shares of new and returning voters were identical to the 2008 Final NEP shares.
Obama had 58.1% of 81,388 state exit poll respondents (weighted by state votes cast). The NEP is a subset (17,836 respondents) of the state exit polls. Obama had a remarkable 61.0% in the unadjusted NEP.
Of the 17,836 NEP respondents, 4,178 were asked how they voted in 2004: 43.4% said they voted for Kerry, 36.6% for Bush, 4.5% for Other and 13.4% did not vote. The percentages implied that Kerry won by 50.2-44.6%.
Using the implied 2004 shares, Obama’s share increases from 52.9% to 58.0% – exactly matching the True Vote Model and the unadjusted/weighted state exit poll aggregate!
An impossible returning/new voter mix was required in the 2008 NEP to force it to match the 52.9% recorded share.
2008 Unadjusted State and National exit polls vs. recorded and True Vote:
For 2012, consider the following base case scenario:
– Obama’s 58% True Vote share is the basis for calculating returning voters.
– 90% of living 2008 Obama voters and 97% of McCain voters turn out in 2012.
– Obama wins 85% of his 2008 voters and 10% of returning McCain voters.
– Obama splits returning third-party (Other) and New (DNV) voters with the Republican candidate.
Based on these assumptions, Obama wins the election by 6.4 million votes with a 52.4% True Vote share.
Table 1: Nine vote share scenarios
In each scenario, 90% of living Obama voters and 97% of living McCain voters turn out.
In the worst case scenario, Obama wins 80% of returning Obama voters and 5% of returning McCain voters. Obama loses by 5 million votes with a 48.1% share.
In the most likely base case scenario, Obama has 85% of Obama and 10% of McCain voters. Obama wins by 6.4 million with a 52.4% share.
In the best case scenario, Obama wins 90% of returning Obama voters and 15% of returning McCain voters. Obama wins by 17.7 million with a 56.6% share.
Table 2: Nine voter turnout scenarios
In each scenario, Obama wins 85% of returning Obama and 10% of McCain voters.
In the worst case scenario, 85% of Obama and 100% of McCain voters turn out. Obama wins by 2.6 million with a 51.0% share.
In the most likely base case scenario, 90% of Obama and 97% of McCain voters turn out. Obama wins by 6.4 million with a 52.4% share.
In the best case scenario 95% of Obama and 92% of McCain voters turn out, Obama wins by 10.9 million with a 54.0% share.
Note that these scenarios are based on the 2008 True Vote. Unfortunately, pollsters, academics and media pundits do not consider or mention the True vote or Election Fraud for that matter. It’s not in their vocabulary. They can’t mention one without the other (the Recorded vote is equal to the True Vote plus an Election Fraud factor). To these forecasters, the recorded vote is sacrosanct. They base all of their pre-election and post-election analysis on the recorded vote. That is what they do.