Bob Owens

The saddest truth in politics is that people get the leaders they deserve

368: the case for a cascade (or, not quite as bad as Carter)

Written By: Bob - Oct• 20•12

Preference cascades are powerful, and unpredictable.

Mitt Romney experienced a powerful surge after the first debate, picked up 1-2 points after the second debate (so far). The third debate mirrors the style of the first debate in which Romney destroyed Obama, and it isn’t unreasonable to expect Romney can pick up and additional 1-2 points on debates along.

But while I referred to the “erosion effect” in my previous, and I feel conservative model that indicates a steady and constant shift towards Romney, that steady shifting simply does not take into account what is know as a preference cascade, where a surging candidate demoralizes the other’s supporters like an athletic team having their spirits broken.  Instead of a shift, there is a surge, and that sort of surge is what saw the previous recession President, Jimmy Carter, ousted in 1980 in 489-49 Electoral College victory won by Ronald Reagan.

Taking the preference cascade into account, I had a little fun last night, looking at the latest polling averages for the swing states in the Real Clear Politics electoral college maps, and gave the swing states where Obama had a 5.1-point advantage Obama, and those states where the lead was smaller to Romney, as the cascade suggest they will overcome Obama.

For ease of use, I used the interactive map at 270 to Win to keep track of the score.

Our starting point is BO 201 EV | MR 191 EV

Romney is ahead in Florida (29 EV) with a +2.6 advantage. BO 201 | MR 220
Romney is ahead in North Carolina (15 EV) with +5.6 advantage. BO 201 | MR 235
The race in Virginia (13 EV) is tied, but trending solidly toward Romney. BO 201 | MR 248
Romney is ahead in New Hampshire (4 EV) with a +1.0 advantage. BO 201 | MR 252
Obama has a +5.0 in Pennsylvania (20 EV). Romney overcomes. BO 201 | MR 272 and the Presidency

The remaining states are just margin of victory.

Obama is currently at +2.4 in Ohio (18 EV), which he cannot sustain. BO 201 | MR 290
Obama has a +5.0 in Michigan (16 EV) that Romney overcomes. BO 201 | MR 306
Obama has a +2.8 in Wisconsin (10 EV) that will likely collapse. BO 201 | MR 316
Obama has a +3.3 in Iowa (6 EV) that will likely collapse. BO 201 | MR 322
Romney is already up +0.2 in Colorado (9 EV) and can pull away. BO 201 | MR 331
Obama has a +3.0 in Nevada (6 EV) that he cannot sustain. BO 201 | MR 337

If the cascade is even more pronounced, Obama could even conceivable lose his “leaners,” leaving us with an even more brutal result.

Obama has a lead in Oregon (7 EV) that if he cannot sustain, yields. BO 194 | MR 334
Obama has a lead in Minnesota (10 EV) that if he cannot sustain, yields. BO 184 | MR 347
Obama has a lean in New Jersey (14 EV) that if he cannot sustain, yields. BO 170 | MR 368

Make of this intellectual exercise what you will.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

3 Comments

  1. Melensdad says:

    I think you may be using ‘new’ math, but I sure hope you are correct. An absolute landslide would certainly rebuke the progressive ideals and set this nation back on track to some fiscal and reglulatory sanity. While you dream of this landslide, I’ll be happy with 271. I’d be happier with 368, but I’d be all smiles with 271.

  2. captainfish says:

    Obama losing Oregon is like the moon suddenly becoming made of cheese.

    Obama losing Oregon will happen when the hippies in Oregon learn the existence of baths.

  3. Lazarus Long says:

    If the nationwide popular vote goes to Mr. Romney then Vermont should turn Red. I believe that the legislature voted, and the Gov. signed, a bill stating that the Vermont electoral votes would go to the winner of the popular vote. More hippie fallout from the 2000 election.