Evaluating my election prediction from December 2011

In December 2011 I posted a prediction that Barack Obama would win reelection by 51/49 percent of the popular vote. Today CNN says that it was 50/48 in favor of Obama. That leaves open the question of what happened to the missing 2 percent (if they went to third-party candidates, CNN apparently did not think anyone would be interested in learning to which ones)! Depending on how one looks at it, then, my prediction was off by 1 point for each candidate or it was correct in predicting a 2-percent spread in the popular vote.

[In my own state of Massachusetts, a 32-year-old Kennedy family member has been deemed by voters to be the most qualified person (out of 6.6 million) to represent us in Congress. We will now be smoking medical marijuana. We will be forcing automakers to scrutinize our laws to figure out under what circumstances to share repair data with consumers and third-party repair shops. We will not be having doctors inject us with drugs to put us to sleep like dogs (i.e., we will be kept alive indefinitely as monuments to a vibrant economy’s ability to pay for unlimited ICU procedures via Medicare). Tom Tierney, an actuary and potential source of unwelcome news (e.g., that promising to pay for something until a person dies might be expensive), was defeated 76/24 by career Democrat Ed Markey. My own suburban ballot, aside from the headline presidential and senate races, consisted primarily of Democrats unopposed by any Republican. Romney won 11 percent of the vote in Cambridge. Scott Brown, who had styled himself an independent, was replaced by Democrat Elizabeth Warren.]

10 thoughts on “Evaluating my election prediction from December 2011

  1. Here in Texas we have a mirror image of what Phil describes in Massachusetts. My suburban ballot, aside from the presidential and senate races (neither of which was in any practical sense a “race”), consisted primarily of Republicans unopposed by any Democrats. What opposition there was to Republican nominees consisted of Libertarians who believe that Republicans are not sufficiently hard-core conservative.

    At least Massachusetts had a reasonably exciting and closely watched senate race. The senate race in Texas was a cake walk.

  2. Phil, what is it about candidates from Massachusetts? Sure, JFK. But then Dukakis, Kerry, Romney. So what should the rest of the country conclude from this?

  3. In California, ‘high earners’ i.e. married couples of 2 engineers in Silicon Valley making below average salaries (~150k/ea) will be paying a lot more in taxes thanks to Prop 30 in combination with AMT. Starting this year. Cheese and Crackers!

  4. Mark,
    As a former Texan now living in Massachusetts, I take issue with your description of Libertarians. I often vote Republican, but am a registered Libertarian. I favor legalized marijuana, gay marriage, and a balanced budget. I do not attend church regularly, but was a Conscientious Objector in my younger days. I toyed with voting for Gary Johnson, but in the moment I chose Romney, whom I respect as a person, but disagree with on some issues. My whole family is part Cherokee, so even though a majority of us vote Democrat, we all voted for Scott Brown.
    Tom

  5. Jay C,

    $250k is for individual. Extra tax kick in for household taxable income over $500k. So engineers are safe except for the sales tax increase, which is for everybody.

    Dong

  6. Congrats, Phil.
    You are still batting 1.000 when it comes to calling the presidential race and both times, but particularly the latest one, I did everything but pray that you’d be wrong.
    I had a Southern Baptist member tell me yesterday that God gave us the president that we deserved. I’ll let you draw your own conclusions as to what was meant by that statement.
    My PhD wielding wife says we are headed for a showdown with the Almighty.
    Personally, I’m searching for John Galt.

  7. Mark: I don’t know if Americans got the president they deserved, but certainly we got the president that we wanted. With government constituting close to 50 percent of the economy, I can’t fault people for voting in the hopes that some of this spending will be on them. Voters know that taxes aren’t coming down, so voting for a politician who promises to cut spending is not very appealing. The best that one can hope for is that some of the money previously confiscated will be handed back in one form or another.

  8. Of course I have no idea what goes on in the US.
    But when Romney pays 13% taxes, it appears to me that the problem is not too high taxes, but rather that the wrong people pay high taxes?

    And my wife being a medical doctor here in Germany, I wonder that the US has a much more expensive health business than Germany but fails to supply every citizen with basic care. I am referring to tent clinics pulling rotten teeths of people unable to pay medical insurance – a shame for any modern country.

    I am paying about 400 Euros per month, my employer the same and this takes care of my two kids too. And I have hit the maximum limit, so there are plenty of others paying much less. So a splendid health care does not have to be more expensive. In my view it is rather not enough state regulation in the US allowing insurance companies, clinics and pharamceutical companies to rip off their customer and ruining compaines through astronomical health benefit payments for their employees.

    Yet it seems that everyone arguing for better medical care is put into a socialist corner.

  9. Chris: Don’t get too excited about headline federal tax rates. The income that flows into Romney’s pockets starts by getting taxed at the world’s highest corporate tax rates (both federal and state). It then is subject to a relatively modest dividend and capital gains tax rate (federal) plus 5-10% additional dividend and/or capital gains taxes from a state. Any of the money that is spent will subject Romney to a variety of sales, import duties, and excise taxes. Finally it will be subject to a 45 percent tax upon Romney’s death. See http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/business/economy/10view.html for how one economist calculated that his marginal tax rate was about 90 percent. Don’t cry for the U.S. local, state, and federal government. They didn’t come to occupy nearly half of the economy without collecting some tax revenue along the way.

    As for the state of health care in the U.S., I wrote about this in http://philip.greenspun.com/politics/health-care-reform (nothing has changed since 2009 except that Obamacare throws more cash onto the bonfire)

  10. My own ballot, aside from the national races, consisted of mostly republicans with no democratic challenger. I live in Alabama. Even Roy Moore got re-elected to state Supreme Court justice, even with a democratic challenger. What a joke. I blame straight ticket voting.

Comments are closed.