2010 Midterm House and Senate Forecast Models: RV/LV Polls, Undecided Voters and Election Fraud
Richard Charnin (TruthIsAll)
http://richardcharnin.com/2010ElectionForecastModels.htm
Oct. 8, 2010
The House and Senate forecast models provide a comprehensive analysis of Registered Voter (RV) and Likely Voter (LV) polls. The assumption is that the election is held today. Pre-election polls interview registered voters; likely voter polls are a sub-sample based on a likely voter cutoff model (LVCM). They are not separate polls.
The Senate model employs simulation analysis of the latest RV and LV polls to forecast average GOP net gains, associated win probabilities and trends. The built-in sensitivity analysis displays the effects of various undecided voter allocation and vote-switching scenarios.
The House model provides a summary comparison of the latest RV and LV Generic polls, win probabilities and a moving average projection. As in the Senate model, the sensitivity analyses displays the effect of various undecided voter and vote-switching assumptions on forecast vote shares, House seats and win probabilities. The 2010 summary table illustrates the wide difference between Rasmussen and other pollsters. The 2006-2010 Generic Poll table provides a historical context.
Democrats always do better in the full RV sample than in the LV sub-sample. LV polls exclude millions of registered voters who actually vote – and most of them are Democrats. In addition, millions of votes are cast but never counted in every election – and most of them are Democratic as well. The good news is that proliferation of electronic voting has reduced the uncounted vote rate. The bad news is that votes can be switched, stuffed or dropped at the voting machine and/or the central tabulator where they are counted.
Polling websites generally display only Senate LV polls. CNN/Time has provided both RV and LV samples, but only the LVs are listed at realclearpolitics.com. The Senate RV model forecast model is therefore a mix of RV and LV polls. Without a corresponding RV poll for every LV sub-sample, a comparable analysis is difficult.
Unlike the Senate, House Generic polls have been primarily RV samples (except for Rasmussen which only provides LV sub-samples). But the ratio will shift to virtually all LVs as Election Day approaches.
Latest Polling Analysis
Gallup
The GOP leads the full 3000 RV sample by 46-43%
The GOP leads the 1883 LV sub-sample by 53-40%.
Therefore, 1118 RV respondents did not pass the Gallup LVCM. The Democrats lead this group by 48-35%.
Rasmussen
The GOP leads the LV sub-sample by 45-42%. They led in the prior poll by 46-40%.
Rasmussen does not provide RV poll results.
Senate Models
RV & LV (15 RV and 22 LV polls) (Table 1)
The RV polls are from CNN/Time.
The Democrats have a 52.7-45.3 simulated seat margin (100% win probability).
The Democrats lead the 37-poll weighted average by 45.3-44.3%.
LV (37 polls)
Most polls are from Rasmussen.
The Democrats have a 49.6-48.4 simulated seat margin (88% win probability).
The GOP leads the LV poll weighted average by 47.2-43.4%.
Each 1% incremental vote-switch to the GOP gives them 2 additional seats (Table 5).
RV (15) vs. LV (15) sub-sample (Table 1a)
The Democrats lead the RV poll unweighted average by 48.7-40.8% and the LV sub-sample by 46.5-45.3%.
The Democrats win 10-12 of the 15 races (2 are tied) in the full RV sample and 7 in the LV sub-sample.
The Democrats win 8 seats if 50% of the registered voters excluded in the LV sub-sample are included.
House Models
Latest 13 RV polls (Table 6)
The GOP leads the average RV poll by 45.7-43.8%.
The GOP has a 224-211 seat margin (74% win probability).
Latest 15 LV polls
The GOP leads the average LV poll by 47.4-40.3%
The GOP has a 235-200 projected seat margin (99% win probability).
Each 1% incremental vote-switch to the GOP gives them 4 additional seats.
2010 Generic polls (Table 9)
The GOP leads the 116 non-Rasmussen poll average by 45.0-43.2% with a projected 223-212 majority and 69% win probability.
The GOP leads the 38 Rasmussen poll average by 45.2-37.1% with a projected 237-198 majority and 99.6% win probability.
Gallup Poll
GOP leads the 3000 RV sample by 46-43% and the 1883 LV sub-sample by 53-40.
There were 1118 RV respondents rejected by the LVCM. The Democrats led this group by 48-35%,
Therefore, 1118 RV respondents did not pass the Gallup LVCM. The Democrats lead this group by 48-35%.
Rasmussen
The GOP leads the LV sub-sample by 45-42%. They led in the prior poll by 46-40%.
Rasmussen does not provide RV poll results.
Pollsters Are Paid To Predict the Recorded Vote – Not the True Vote
The media/pollster drumbeat of a “horse race” is largely based on the LV polls. The focus on LV polls conditions the public to expect a recorded vote which in fact will surely understate the True Democratic share. The pollsters discount the RV sample, fully expecting that their LV projections will be a close match to a fraudulent recorded vote – but they never mention the F-word. They know that votes are miscounted in every election. And so their final LV-based poll predictions are usually quite accurate. Pollsters are paid to predict the recorded vote – not the True Vote.
As Election Day approaches, the MSM gradually phases out RV polls for LV polls which lowball the projected Democratic vote share. And so the general public is prepared for the fraudulent recorded vote-counts that the MSM knows are coming.
Since 2000, LV poll projections have closely matched recorded vote shares while RV poll projections closely matched unadjusted and preliminary state and national exit polls. In each election, the final exit polls were forced to match the recorded vote. In 2004 and 2008, the Final National Exit Poll required impossible returning Bush voter turnout in order to match the recorded vote. Since pre-election LV poll predictions also matched the recorded vote, what can we conclude?
The media cites low Democratic enthusiasm in the 2010 midterms, but turnout will exceed the LV sub-sample. Unfortunately, most pollsters won’t provide RV samples in the two weeks prior to the election. The media will gush on how close the final LV predictions came to the vote but ignore the real reason: systemic election fraud.
The Fraud Component
In 2004, 2006 and 2008, projections based on final pre-election LV polls underestimated voter turnout and yet closely matched impossible final exit polls and fraudulent recorded vote counts. Projections based on final pre-election RV polls (adjusted for undecided voters) were a close match to the unadjusted exit polls and the True Vote.
Pre-election Model:
Recorded vote share = LV poll projection = RV poll projection + Fraud component
Post-election Model:
Recorded vote share = Final Exit Poll = Unadjusted exit poll + Fraud component
Senate:
Projected GOP LV (Recorded) Share:
LV poll projection = 49.4 = 46.0 + Fraud component
Fraud component = 3.4%
Assuming the RV projection represents the True Vote (zero fraud):
Each additional 1% vote-switch results in a GOP gain of 2 seats (Table 5).
Projected GOP House Vote Share:
Share = 53.53 = 50.96 + Fraud component
Fraud component = 2.57%
Assuming the RV projection represents the True Vote (zero fraud):
Each additional 1% vote-switch results in a GOP gain of 4 seats (Table 7).
The Likely Voter Cutoff Model (LVCM)
In 2004, there were 22 million voters who did not vote in 2000. Nearly 60% of newly registered voters were Democrats for Kerry. In the 2006 midterms, a Democratic tsunami gave them control of both houses. In 2008, there were approximately 15 million new voters of whom 70% voted for Obama. All pre-election polls interview registered voters. Likely Voter (LV) polls are a subset of the full Registered Voter (RV) sample. LV polls exclude most “new” registered voters – first-timers and others who did not vote in the prior election.
Most pollsters use the Likely Voter Cutoff Model (LVCM), a series of questions regarding past voting history, residential transience, intent to vote, etc. Since students, transients, low-income voters, immigrant new voters, etc. are much more likely to give “No” answers than established, wealthier, non-transient voters, Republicans are more likely to exceed the cutoff than Democrats. A respondent who indicates “yes” to four out of seven questions might be down-weighted to 50% compared to one who answers “yes” to all seven.
The LVCM assigns a weight of zero to all respondents falling below the cutoff, eliminating them from the sample. But these potential voters have more than a zero probability of voting. The number of “Yes” answers required to qualify as a likely voter is set based on how the pollster wants the sample to turn out. The more Republicans the pollster wants in the sample, the more “Yes” answers are required. This serves to eliminate many Democrats and skews the sample to the GOP.
Undecided Voters, Turnout and Final Exit Polls
In 1988, 11 million votes were uncounted; in 2000, 6 million; in 2004, 4 million; in 2006, 3 million.
In 2004, 2006 and 2008, projections based on final pre-election LV polls closely matched fraudulent recorded vote shares. Projections based on the final pre-election RV polls closely matched the unadjusted exit polls. Undecided voters typically break heavily for the challenger. In each of the last three elections, the Democrats were the challengers, but many pollsters did not allocate accordingly. Democratic voter turnout was underestimated by the pre-election LV polls (see 2004 Final Pre-election polls).
Final exit polls are always forced to match the recorded vote count (i.e. the final pre-election LV polls). The underlying assumption is that the recorded vote is correct (i.e. zero fraud). In 2004 and 2008, the Final National Exit Polls required an impossible turnout of returning Bush voters (110% and 103%, respectivrely). In the 2004 Final (13660 respondents), the Bush vote shares were increased dramatically over the 12:22am Preliminary NEP (13047 respondents). The NEP media consortium of news outlets FOX, CNN, AP, ABC, CBS and NBC has suppressed the release of 2008 unadjusted state exit polls and unforced preliminary national exit polls.
Once again, as in every election cycle, the media avoids the real issues. Martha Coakley won the hand-counts in Massachusetts for Ted Kennedy’s seat but lost to Scott Brown; Vic Rawl won the absentee vote but lost to unknown Alvin Greene in the South Carolina Democratic Senate primary; Mike Castle won the absentee ballots but lost to Christine O’Donnell in the Delaware GOP Senate primary. But there has not been a peep about any of this in the mainstream media. Apparently, we must just accept the conventional wisdom that even though the votes have vanished in cyberspace and can never be verified, they were not tampered with. The media lockdown is not limited to past stolen elections. The MSM prepares us for election fraud by listing final pre-election LV polls and ignoring RV polls.
Richard Charnin's Blog 