With the release of her book and the accompanying media blitz surrounding it, we are again barraged with ‘Sarah Palin for 2012′ speculation. While Sarah herself is playing coy and is firmly sitting on top of the fence, both the right and the left are talking about what a run would mean and how effective it would be. The prognosis is, of course, mixed. While the race is several years off, some statisticians are already predicting the results of a possible 2012 showdown between Obama and Palin for the presidency of the United States.
A pair of researchers working out of the University of Pennsylvania, Professor J. Scott Armstrong and Dr. Andreas Graefe, spent time looking at statistical and biographical information about the candidates for President of the United Sates from 1900 until 2008. They developed a model called PollyBio, a list of 62 characteristics that they discovered were consistent among candidates and used them to develop a list of predictors. Candidates were then scored based on how they rated on the categories. There was a 94 percent success rate for predictions on the last 29 presidential races. The two exceptions were Clinton over Bush Sr. and Carter over Ford. It is interesting to note that both of these exceptions are examples of folksy, home spun Democratic rivals beating established, old guard Republicans.
The PollyBio model, when applied to an Obama versus Palin race, show Obama winning the vote in a 57% to 43% landslide victory. This is based on available bio data on both candidates, including Palin s new book, and reflects a score of 25 to 16 in favor of Obama. You can find the actual categories and tallies for this showdown at http://pollyvote.forecastingprinciples.com/. You can also view the research paper that will be presented about PollyBio and its methodology at an international conference in Lausanne at http://pollyvote.forecastingprinciples.com//images/papers/PollyBio.pdf.
For those who think that statistics don t matter, look at how polls are used to manipulate public perception by creating an illusion of popularity of an idea or person. Once a suitable question has been formed that will ‘prove’ the opinion that fits the behind-the-scenes agenda, the herding instinct does the rest. Count on party leaders to use models like PollyBio to predict the viability of candidates before they even come out of the gate and to become a part of the unofficial vetting process.
Sarah had better hope to become a Republican or third party version of the folksy Democratic spoiler or she may have to work on her balance, because she will be sitting on that fence for a long time.
The 2012 Presidential Election is fast approaching
The GOP race is now a field of 4 with only Romney, Gingrich, Paul, & Santorum still standing. Who will be the next candidate to exit the race & who will emerge as the eminent GOP nominee?
Follow us on Twitter & join our 2012 election FaceBook page for updates & new blog articles.
Contact us if you are passionate about politics & want to blog with us.
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
SilverWun,
Very interesting. I would say thats one of the best explanations I have heard in a long time.
Times they are a changin’ Laura. Carter got in in the wake of a tumultuous time caused by a President and party being cought doing n public what they all do best in private. Backlash..
Bill Clinton was helped by George II’s audacious remark ‘read my lips!’ Ol’ Bill termed out so his equally short-sighted remarks about ‘sexual relations’ didn’t matter much since he was termed out anyway.
We are in an era right now that can be compared to the Great Depression and arguably, soon might compare with pre-civil war polarization of the 19th. Century. Our electorate is woefully uninformed and under-educated. Alarm over the economy and nationalization of majhor industries with immanent nationalization of ‘healthcare’ has awakened the folks in the middle who have been napping. We don’t like what we see from Democrats or Republicans.
The biggest mistake most pundits are making is to assume that the former non-participants are still in slumber. To base anticipated outcomes on a past that has become increasingly less relevant over the last two generations. These changes have to skew the reliability of long standing statistics.
Creating illusions to manipulate public perception of the popularity of an idea or person. Sounds a lot like what we were sold on Obama during the campaign. Something about 2 years in the senate being enough experience.
I took statistics in college. And I always had just one little problem with it philosophically. Random chance. See the problem I noticed in statisticians a lot like people who predict the weather is they don’t allot for random chance. It’s hard to calculate. I’m not talking about a margin of error here. I’m talking about the inevitable lightning strike from nowhere. The one little missed thing that is the lynchpin for collapse. The deck with 5 aces. At one point all the statistics were in Hillary’s favor, but look who won. And another thing I don’t see in these calculations is voter mood. Which we all know is fickle.
If statisticians can’t beat Vegas then frankly what good are they? I live in Seattle so telling me it’s going to rain isn’t much of a spoiler. Predicting the future of politics is like predicting the weather. So I would suggest you carry an umbrella.
Interesting information though. Thanks for sharing.