Bush carries Iowa, wins election 286-252 (pending Richie Robb’s decision and any other Electoral College shenanigans next month).
Congratulations to Mike Wiser for his perfect Electoral College map!!! Wow!!!
If you accept the pre-election CW that there were ten true “swing” states — Nevada, New Mexico, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and Florida — and you assume for the sake of simplicity that each candidate had exactly a 50-50 chance in each of those states (and that there was a 100% chance that the favored candidate would win in the other 40 states), the odds of a perfect map are 1 in 1,024 — about 0.098%. Again, wow — way to go, Mike!!!
Congrats to the Top 3: Fellow USC alum and Stanford grad student Mike Wiser; U. of Dayton alum and fellow Notre Dame 1L Kevin Moot; and Trojan blogger extraordinaire Boi from Troy:
I know there has been a certain amount of controversy about the way in which the standings break down under the official contest rules (although there is obviously no controversy about the winner, since Mike would finish first under any possible set of rules). So I will give some alternate standings for other possible rule regimes, and y’all can decide for yourselves what you think is fairest. But first, the official final standings for the 2004 BrendanLoy.com Electoral College Contest:
1. Mike Wiser (Bush 286-252): 538 — 0 EVs wrong, 0 differential (States wrong: none)
2. Kevin Moot (Bush 288-250): 508 — 26 EVs wrong, 4 differential (States wrong: IA, NH, NM, WI)
3. Boi From Troy (Bush 285-253): 497 — 39 EVs wrong, 2 differential (States wrong: HI, ME2, NH, OH, WI)
4. Darrell Owenby (Bush 302-236): 490 — 16 EVs wrong, 32 differential (States wrong: MA, NH)
5. Jennifer Pease (Bush 270-268): 482 — 24 EVs wrong, 32 differential (States wrong: NH, OH)
6. Brendan Loy (Bush 302-236): 480 — 26 EVs wrong, 32 differential (States wrong: ME2, MN, NM, WI)
7. Brooke Bennett (Kerry 272-266): 478 — 20 EVs wrong, 40 differential (States wrong: OH)
8. Andrew Long (Bush 307-231): 475 — 21 EVs wrong, 42 differential (States wrong: ME2, MN, WI)
9. Leanna Loomer (Kerry 274-264): 462 — 32 EVs wrong, 44 differential (States wrong: IA, ME2, NH, OH)
10. Miss Jeeves (Bush 272-266): 460 — 50 EVs wrong, 28 differential (States wrong: HI, IA, NH, NM, OH, WI)
11. Alex Ho (Kerry 279-259): 457 — 27 EVs wrong, 54 differential (States wrong: IA, OH)
12. Joe Loy (Kerry 274-264): 452 — 42 EVs wrong, 44 differential (States wrong: IA, NV, OH, WI)
13. Chris Aemisegger (Bush 270-268): 428 — 78 EVs wrong, 32 differential (States wrong: FL, HI, MI, OH, WI)
14. Brian Kiolbasa (Kerry 286-252): 428 — 42 EVs wrong, 68 differential (States wrong: AR, FL, NH, NM)
15. Brian Foster (Bush 273-265): 421 — 91 EVs wrong, 26 differential (States wrong: FL, HI, NH, NM, OH, PA, WI)
16. Becky Zak (Bush 300-238): 418 — 92 EVs wrong, 28 differential (States wrong: FL, IA, IL, NJ, NV, OR, WI)
17. Nick Surmacz (Kerry 293-245): 415 — 41 EVs wrong, 82 differential (States wrong: CO, IA, OH, WV)
18. David Kreutz (Kerry 295-243): 401 — 51 EVs wrong, 86 differential (States wrong: FL, NH, OH)
19. Lisa Velte (Kerry 288-250): 394 — 72 EVs wrong, 72 differential (States wrong: FL, HI, IA, NH, OH, WI)
20. Greg Rauen (Kerry 304-234): 382 — 52 EVs wrong, 104 differential (States wrong: FL, NM, OH)
21. Josh Rubin (Kerry 307-231): 365 — 63 EVs wrong, 110 differential (States wrong: FL, IA, NH, NM, OH)
22. Kenneth Stern (Kerry 311-227): 361 — 59 EVs wrong, 118 differential (States wrong: FL, IA, NM, OH)
23. Dmytro Aponte (Kerry 310-228): 332 — 90 EVs wrong, 116 differential (States wrong: FL, IA, KS, ME, ME2, NE, NE1, NE2, NM, OH, VT, WI, WV)
24. Antonia Byers (Bush 388-150): 218 — 116 EVs wrong, 204 differential (States wrong: CT, HI, IA, IL, MI, MN, NH, NJ, PA, WI)
25. Charles Chambers (Bush 488-50): -78 — 212 EVs wrong, 404 differential (States wrong: CA, CT, DE, HI, IL, MA, MD, ME, ME1, ME2, MI, MN, NH, NJ, NM, OR, PA, RI, VT, WI)
Now for some alternate versions of the standings…
First, let’s see what happens if we judge the contestants purely by the total electoral-vote values of the states they got wrong, ignoring the “differential” between their predicted Bush margin over Kerry and the actual Bush margin over Kerry (except to use it as a tiebreaker if the EVs wrong is tied):
1. Mike Wiser (Bush 286-252): 0 (States wrong: none)
2. Darrell Owenby (Bush 302-236): 16 (States wrong: MA, NH)
3. Brooke Bennett (Kerry 272-266): 20 (States wrong: OH)
4. Andrew Long (Bush 307-231): 21 (States wrong: ME2, MN, WI)
5. Jennifer Pease (Bush 270-268): 24 (States wrong: NH, OH)
6. Kevin Moot (Bush 288-250): 26 (States wrong: IA, NH, NM, WI)
7. Brendan Loy (Bush 302-236): 26 (States wrong: ME2, MN, NM, WI)
8. Alex Ho (Kerry 279-259): 27 (States wrong: IA, OH)
9. Leanna Loomer (Kerry 274-264): 32 (States wrong: IA, ME2, NH, OH)
10. Boi From Troy (Bush 285-253): 39 (States wrong: HI, ME2, NH, OH, WI)
11. Nick Surmacz (Kerry 293-245): 41 (States wrong: CO, IA, OH, WV)
12. Joe Loy (Kerry 274-264): 42 (States wrong: IA, NV, OH, WI)
13. Brian Kiolbasa (Kerry 286-252): 42 (States wrong: AR, FL, NH, NM)
14. Miss Jeeves (Bush 272-266): 50 (States wrong: HI, IA, NH, NM, OH, WI)
15. David Kreutz (Kerry 295-243): 51 (States wrong: FL, NH, OH)
16. Greg Rauen (Kerry 304-234): 52 (States wrong: FL, NM, OH)
17. Kenneth Stern (Kerry 311-227): 59 (States wrong: FL, IA, NM, OH)
18. Josh Rubin (Kerry 307-231): 63 (States wrong: FL, IA, NH, NM, OH)
19. Lisa Velte (Kerry 288-250): 72 (States wrong: FL, HI, IA, NH, OH, WI)
20. Chris Aemisegger (Bush 270-268): 78 (States wrong: FL, HI, MI, OH, WI)
21. Dmytro Aponte (Kerry 310-228): 90 (States wrong: FL, IA, KS, ME, ME2, NE, NE1, NE2, NM, OH, VT, WI, WV)
22. Brian Foster (Bush 273-265): 91 (States wrong: FL, HI, NH, NM, OH, PA, WI)
23. Becky Zak (Bush 300-238): 92 (States wrong: FL, IA, IL, NJ, NV, OR, WI)
24. Antonia Byers (Bush 388-150): 116 (States wrong: CT, HI, IA, IL, MI, MN, NH, NJ, PA, WI)
25. Charles Chambers (Bush 488-50): 212 (States wrong: CA, CT, DE, HI, IL, MA, MD, ME, ME1, ME2, MI, MN, NH, NJ, NM, OR, PA, RI, VT, WI)
As you can see, this reduces the disadvantage of those who picked the wrong winner or otherwise made all or most of their errors in the “same direction” (i.e., in Kerry’s favor or in Bush’s favor). Except for tiebreaking purposes, it totally ignores the final numerical totals and looks only at the state-by-state results.
Now let’s try the opposite — using the original contest rules, as conceived before I modified them, which look only at the final numerical totals and ignore the state-by-state results (except, again, as a tiebreaker). The closer each contestant’s Bush-Kerry “differential” is to the accurate result (Bush 286-252), the better they do:
1. Mike Wiser (Bush 286-252): 0 (States wrong: none)
2. Boi From Troy (Bush 285-253): 2 (States wrong: HI, ME2, NH, OH, WI)
3. Kevin Moot (Bush 288-250): 4 (States wrong: IA, NH, NM, WI)
4. Brian Foster (Bush 273-265): 26 (States wrong: FL, HI, NH, NM, OH, PA, WI)
5. Miss Jeeves (Bush 272-266): 28 (States wrong: HI, IA, NH, NM, OH, WI)
6. Becky Zak (Bush 300-238): 28 (States wrong: FL, IA, IL, NJ, NV, OR, WI)
7. Darrell Owenby (Bush 302-236): 32 (States wrong: MA, NH)
8. Jennifer Pease (Bush 270-268): 32 (States wrong: NH, OH)
9. Brendan Loy (Bush 302-236): 32 (States wrong: ME2, MN, NM, WI)
10. Chris Aemisegger (Bush 270-268): 32 (States wrong: FL, HI, MI, OH, WI)
11. Brooke Bennett (Kerry 272-266): 40 (States wrong: OH)
12. Andrew Long (Bush 307-231): 42 (States wrong: ME2, MN, WI)
13. Leanna Loomer (Kerry 274-264): 44 (States wrong: IA, ME2, NH, OH)
14. Joe Loy (Kerry 274-264): 44 (States wrong: IA, NV, OH, WI)
15. Alex Ho (Kerry 279-259): 54 (States wrong: IA, OH)
16. Brian Kiolbasa (Kerry 286-252): 68 (States wrong: AR, FL, NH, NM)
17. Lisa Velte (Kerry 288-250): 72 (States wrong: FL, HI, IA, NH, OH, WI)
18. Nick Surmacz (Kerry 293-245): 82 (States wrong: CO, IA, OH, WV)
19. David Kreutz (Kerry 295-243): 86 (States wrong: FL, NH, OH)
20. Greg Rauen (Kerry 304-234): 104 (States wrong: FL, NM, OH)
21. Josh Rubin (Kerry 307-231): 110 (States wrong: FL, IA, NH, NM, OH)
22. Dmytro Aponte (Kerry 310-228): 116 (States wrong: FL, IA, KS, ME, ME2, NE, NE1, NE2, NM, OH, VT, WI, WV)
23. Kenneth Stern (Kerry 311-227): 118 (States wrong: FL, IA, NM, OH)
24. Antonia Byers (Bush 388-150): 204 (States wrong: CT, HI, IA, IL, MI, MN, NH, NJ, PA, WI)
25. Charles Chambers (Bush 488-50): 404 (States wrong: CA, CT, DE, HI, IL, MA, MD, ME, ME1, ME2, MI, MN, NH, NJ, NM, OR, PA, RI, VT, WI)
Now let’s examine a version of the rules, suggested by Brooke the other day, that looks simply at the number of states wrong, and uses the Electoral College value of those states only as a tiebreaker. (If the person got only one Maine congressional district wrong, but the rest of the state right, we’ll consider that a “half-state.”)
1. Mike Wiser (Bush 286-252): 0 (States wrong: none)
2. Brooke Bennett (Kerry 272-266): 1 (States wrong: OH)
3. Darrell Owenby (Bush 302-236): 2 (States wrong: MA, NH)
4. Jennifer Pease (Bush 270-268): 2 (States wrong: NH, OH)
5. Alex Ho (Kerry 279-259): 2 (States wrong: IA, OH)
6. Andrew Long (Bush 307-231): 2.5 (States wrong: ME2, MN, WI)
7. David Kreutz (Kerry 295-243): 3 (States wrong: FL, NH, OH)
8. Greg Rauen (Kerry 304-234): 3 (States wrong: FL, NM, OH)
9. Brendan Loy (Bush 302-236): 3.5 (States wrong: ME2, MN, NM, WI)
10. Leanna Loomer (Kerry 274-264): 3.5 (States wrong: IA, ME2, NH, OH)
11. Kevin Moot (Bush 288-250): 4 (States wrong: IA, NH, NM, WI)
12. Joe Loy (Kerry 274-264): 4 (States wrong: IA, NV, OH, WI)
13. Brian Kiolbasa (Kerry 286-252): 4 (States wrong: AR, FL, NH, NM)
14. Nick Surmacz (Kerry 293-245): 4 (States wrong: CO, IA, OH, WV)
15. Kenneth Stern (Kerry 311-227): 4 (States wrong: FL, IA, NM, OH)
16. Boi From Troy (Bush 285-253): 4.5 (States wrong: HI, ME2, NH, OH, WI)
17. Chris Aemisegger (Bush 270-268): 5 (States wrong: FL, HI, MI, OH, WI)
18. Josh Rubin (Kerry 307-231): 5 (States wrong: FL, IA, NH, NM, OH)
19. Miss Jeeves (Bush 272-266): 6 (States wrong: HI, IA, NH, NM, OH, WI)
20. Lisa Velte (Kerry 288-250): 6 (States wrong: FL, HI, IA, NH, OH, WI)
21. Brian Foster (Bush 273-265): 7 (States wrong: FL, HI, NH, NM, OH, PA, WI)
22. Becky Zak (Bush 300-238): 7 (States wrong: FL, IA, IL, NJ, NV, OR, WI)
23. Dmytro Aponte (Kerry 310-228): 10 (States wrong: FL, IA, KS, ME, ME2, NE, NE1, NE2, NM, OH, VT, WI, WV)
24. Antonia Byers (Bush 388-150): 10 (States wrong: CT, HI, IA, IL, MI, MN, NH, NJ, PA, WI)
25. Charles Chambers (Bush 488-50): 18 (States wrong: CA, CT, DE, HI, IL, MA, MD, ME, ME1, ME2, MI, MN, NH, NJ, NM, OR, PA, RI, VT, WI)
Finally, here’s an interesting idea that Mike proposed: ranking the contestants based on the “number of either additional votes for your candidate or fewer votes for the opponent needed to flip each state/district to the actual result of the election.”
1. Mike Wiser (Bush 286-252): 0 (States wrong: none)
2. Kevin Moot (Bush 288-250): 42,570 (States wrong: IA, NH, NM, WI)
3. Andrew Long (Bush 307-231): 127,266 (States wrong: ME2, MN, WI)
4. Brendan Loy (Bush 302-236): 135,633 (States wrong: ME2, MN, NM, WI)
5. Brooke Bennett (Kerry 272-266): 136,484 (States wrong: OH)
6. Jennifer Pease (Bush 270-268): 145,656 (States wrong: NH, OH)
7. Alex Ho (Kerry 279-259): 149,701 (States wrong: IA, OH)
8. Joe Loy (Kerry 274-264): 161,515 (States wrong: IA, NV, OH, WI)
9. Leanna Loomer (Kerry 274-264): 175,928 (States wrong: IA, ME2, NH, OH)
10. Boi From Troy (Bush 285-253): 211,735 (States wrong: HI, ME2, NH, OH, WI)
11. Miss Jeeves (Bush 272-266): 216,264 (States wrong: HI, IA, NH, NM, OH, WI)
12. Nick Surmacz (Kerry 293-245): 386,787 (States wrong: CO, IA, OH, WV)
13. Brian Kiolbasa (Kerry 286-252): 394,756 (States wrong: AR, FL, NH, NM)
14. Greg Rauen (Kerry 304-234): 522,068 (States wrong: FL, NM, OH)
15. David Kreutz (Kerry 295-243): 522,873 (States wrong: FL, NH, OH)
16. Kenneth Stern (Kerry 311-227): 535,285 (States wrong: FL, IA, NM, OH)
17. Josh Rubin (Kerry 307-231): 544,457 (States wrong: FL, IA, NH, NM, OH)
18. Chris Aemisegger (Bush 270-268): 562,725 (States wrong: FL, HI, MI, OH, WI)
19. Lisa Velte (Kerry 288-250): 585,114 (States wrong: FL, HI, IA, NH, OH, WI)
20. Brian Foster (Bush 273-265): 707,737 (States wrong: FL, HI, NH, NM, OH, PA, WI)
21. Darrell Owenby (Bush 302-236): 735,926 (States wrong: MA, NH)
22. Becky Zak (Bush 300-238): 1,216,475 (States wrong: FL, IA, IL, NJ, NV, OR, WI)
23. Dmytro Aponte (Kerry 310-228): 1,310,138 (States wrong: FL, IA, KS, ME, ME2, NE, NE1, NE2, NM, OH, VT, WI, WV)
24. Antonia Byers (Bush 388-150): 1,348,811 (States wrong: CT, HI, IA, IL, MI, MN, NH, NJ, PA, WI)
25. Charles Chambers (Bush 488-50): 3,505,389 (States wrong: CA, CT, DE, HI, IL, MA, MD, ME, ME1, ME2, MI, MN, NH, NJ, NM, OR, PA, RI, VT, WI)
This method penalizes people who made particularly “bad” mistakes — for example, Darrell Owenby, fourth in the official standings, who got only two states wrong, but one of those states was John Kerry’s home state of Massachusetts! The main disadvantage of this method is that, because it’s based on state-by-state popular-vote totals rather than winner-take-all results, it would take much longer to come up with a final result, as the official popular-vote tallies aren’t certified for several weeks after the election. (For example, the battle for fourth place between me and Brooke is definitely too close to call, and indeed the entire #3 and #9 spots on the leaderboard could easily change all around between now and the end of the month.)
One could propose all sorts of additional possibilities: counting the total number of Electoral Votes wrong, but “penalizing” wrong states where the margin is more than, say, 5%; using a formula similar to the official one, but weighting the “differential” to be somewhat less important; and various other possible combinations. But these are the obvious options. Comments are welcome about the fairness of each, for future contests.
Now then… about those national popular-vote predictions… officially this is just a tiebreaker, but I figured it would be interesting to see how people did, especially since this is the one and only category that Mike Wiser didn’t win! :)
If we rank the contestants based on who came closest to predicting Bush’s margin of victory — 3.1%, according to U.S. Election Atlas — the winner is, believe it or not, the man who finished dead last in the Electoral College Contest: Charles Chambers! :) Here are the standings… ties are broken by who was closest to predicting Bush’s percentage total:
1. Charles Chambers – Bush +4.0% (0.9% off)
2. Boi From Troy – Bush +2.0% (1.1% off)
3. Andrew Long – Bush +4.3% (1.2% off)
4. Lisa Velte – Bush +1.6% (1.5% off)
5. Brendan Loy – Bush +1.6% (1.5% off)
6. Chris Aemisegger – Bush +1.3% (1.8% off)
7. Miss Jeeves – Bush +1.2% (1.9% off)
8. Darrell Owenby – Bush +0.8% (2.3% off)
9. Mike Wiser – Bush +0.8% (2.3% off)
10. Joe Loy – Bush +0.7% (2.4% off)
11. Kevin Moot – Bush +0.5% (2.6% off)
12. Brian Foster – Bush +0.2% (2.9% off)
13. Jennifer Pease – Tied (3.1% off)
14. Nick Surmacz – Kerry +0.4% (3.5% off)
15. Josh Rubin - Kerry +0.5% (3.6% off)
16. Brooke Bennett – Kerry +0.5% (3.6% off)
17. Alex Ho – Kerry +0.7% (3.8% off)
18. David Kreutz – Kerry +0.8% (3.9% off)
19. Greg Rauen – Kerry +1.1% (4.2% off)
20. Kenneth Stern – Kerry +1.1% (4.2% off)
21. Leanna Loomer – Kerry +1.3% (4.5% off)
22. Brian Kiolbasa – Kerry +3.2% (6.3% off)
23. Becky Zak – Bush +13.0% (9.9% off)
24. Dmytro Aponte – Kerry +8.0% (11.1% off)
25. Antonia Byers – Bush +17.0% (13.9% off)
Conversely, here are the standings for who came the closest to predicting Bush’s total, with the Bush-Kerry margin as a tiebreaker. (Bush’s actual total stands at 51.1%.)
1. Andrew Long – 50.4% (0.7% off)
2. Charles Chambers – 52.0% (0.9% off)
3. Kevin Moot – 52.0% (0.9% off)
4. Boi From Troy – 50.1% (1.0% off)
5. Miss Jeeves – 49.5% (1.6% off)
6. Lisa Velte – 49.4% (1.7% off)
7. Darrell Owenby – 49.4% (1.7% off)
8. Brendan Loy – 49.3% (1.8% off)
9. Chris Aemisegger – 49.2% (1.9% off)
10. Nick Surmacz – 49.1% (2.0% off)
11. Brian Foster – 48.9% (2.2% off)
12. Greg Rauen – 48.7% (2.4% off)
13. Mike Wiser – 48.5% (2.6% off)
14. Joe Loy – 48.2% (2.9% off)
15. Kenneth Stern – 48.2% (2.9% off)
16. Leanna Loomer – 48.2% (2.9% off)
17. Jennifer Pease – 48.0% (3.1% off)
18. Josh Rubin – 48.0% (3.1% off)
19. Alex Ho – 47.9% (3.2% off)
20. Brooke Bennett – 47.8% (3.3% off)
21. David Kreutz – 47.7% (3.4% off)
22. Brian Kiolbasa – 47.6% (3.5% off)
23. Becky Zak – 55.0% (3.9% off)
24. Dmytro Aponte – 45.0% (6.1% off)
25. Antonia Byers – 58.0% (6.9% off)
Last but not least, here are the standings of who came the closest to predicting the combined total percentage for all third-party candidates. As you can see, virtually everyone overestimated this number. The actual total was just over 0.9%.
1(t). Kevin Moot – 1.0% (0.1% off)
1(t). Antonia Byers – 1.0% (0.1% off)
3. Nick Surmacz – 1.4% (0.5% off)
4. Greg Rauen – 1.5% (0.6% off)
5. Brian Kiolbasa – 1.6% (0.7% off)
6. Boi From Troy – 1.8% (0.9% off)
7. Charles Chambers – 0.0% (0.9% off)
8(t). Darrell Owenby – 2.0% (1.1% off)
8(t). Dmytro Aponte – 2.0% (1.1% off)
10. Miss Jeeves – 2.2% (1.3% off)
11. Leanna Loomer – 2.3% (1.4% off)
12. Brian Foster – 2.4% (1.5% off)
13. Kenneth Stern – 2.5% (1.6% off)
14. Lisa Velte – 2.8% (1.9% off)
15. Chris Aemisegger – 2.9% (2.0% off)
16(t). Becky Zak – 3.0% (2.1% off)
16(t). Brendan Loy – 3.0% (2.1% off)
18(t). Andrew Long – 3.5% (2.6% off)
18(t). Josh Rubin – 3.5% (2.6% off)
18(t). Alex Ho – 3.5% (2.6% off)
21(t). Mike Wiser – 3.8% (2.9% off)
21(t). David Kreutz – 3.8% (2.9% off)
23. Brooke Bennett – 3.9% (3.0% off)
24. Jennifer Pease – 4.0% (3.1% off)
25. Joe Loy – 4.3% (3.4% off)
I did most of the popular-vote math in my head, not on the spreadsheet, so please let me know if you spot any errors.
Anyway, there you have it! Thanks for playing, everyone, and congratulations again to BLECC champion Mike Wiser!!!
|
Categories: Election 2004
|
November 5th, 2004 at 3:36:01 pm
Cheater.
November 5th, 2004 at 4:15:20 pm
GO, PERFECT MIKE!!!! All RIIIIIGHT!!! :)
November 5th, 2004 at 4:19:25 pm
Who came in second?!!?
And I thought the contest was for the winner’s %, too!
November 5th, 2004 at 5:04:13 pm
“In Iowa, absentee ballots had to be postmarked by Nov. 1, and those received by county auditors up until noon Monday can be counted.”
Sucks. Be like CT: no Postmark deadline; & all AB’s received by the close of the polls election day are counted. / Screw this Late stuff. / Rmmph. :)
“Special precinct boards also have been reviewing provisional ballots that were cast.”
Federal Delay. Not Tom. HAVA. (Tom might be Detained soon himself, I hear. :)
“The state will not certify its results until Nov. 29.”
About, if not exactly, the same as CT. And many/most states. There’s a Reason.
“Iowa Secretary of State Chet Culver had asked the public for patience while the state pursued its vote-counting process, which has been in place for 30 years.“
Love the implicit wisecrack, there. Bull. Iowa’s vote-counting process has hardly been in place 30 years. Note that all but One county use either Optical Scan or Direct
Recording Electronic (DRE), aka “Touchscreen”. These systems, which ARE the basis — the electronic Root, if you will (OR if you Won’t :) — of the Vote Counting Process, did not exist as viable voting-&-tallying technologies 30 years ago.
What they mean is, the late-November DEADLINE for the Canvass — the Completion — dates back 30 years. / But come to think of it, that probably IS obsolete. Needs to be replaced with a Later date. To accomodate all these modernized Late AB receipts & Late Provisional counts & other Late Great mechanisms to enfranchise the Patient People of Iowa, who I’m sure will agree that it’s Great to Wait for Late. :>
*******************************************
Here’s the deal. You guys keep up the whiny griping about Brendan’s contest rules. I’ll keep up the paranoid Bitching about the News Media harassing the heroic Election Officials. :) That way all of our work get Done on Time. :)
November 5th, 2004 at 5:08:06 pm
“Who came in second?!!?”
I’m working on it, I’m working on it. :) I said “More to come,” didn’t I?
“And I thought the contest was for the winner’s %, too!”
That was a tiebreaker only… but as a matter of fact, I do plan to make a list for that, too. Patience, young Padawan. :)
November 5th, 2004 at 5:34:09 pm
Uh Oh I think I am gonna come in last :(
I hate that!
November 5th, 2004 at 6:36:01 pm
Toni, I think you can rest assured that Charles will finish behind you. :)
I’m working on it, will post the final results shortly.
November 5th, 2004 at 7:46:07 pm
Darrell, Darrell, Darrell. If only you had picked Kerry in Massachusetts, you would be a strong second, just 12 points behind Mike… :)
November 5th, 2004 at 8:05:32 pm
Who came the closest to predicting Kerry’s percentage of the vote?
November 5th, 2004 at 8:06:55 pm
Brooke, looking at the final standings… I would argue that it’s right and proper for Boi From Troy to be ahead of you… granted, he got Ohio plus four other states wrong, whereas you only got Ohio wrong. But he also is just one electoral vote away from predicting the exact final result, whereas you are 20 away. I think that oughta count for something.
However, I can understand why you would think it’s unfair that Jennifer Pease is ahead of you, simply on the basis of getting New Hampshire wrong and therefore having predicted a bare majority for Bush whereas you predicted a bare majority for Kerry. But on the other hand, if you and Jennifer were the only contestants in the race, I think I might argue that Jennifer finishing first is right and proper, since she at least picked the right winner!
A half-solution to this problem would be to cut in half the mathematical importance of the “differential.” That would result in you, Boi and Jennifer all being tied:
1. Mike Wiser (Bush 286-252): 538 — 0 EVs wrong, 0 differential (States wrong: none)
2. Kevin Moot (Bush 288-250): 510 — 26 EVs wrong, 2 differential (States wrong: IA, NH, NM, WI)
4. Darrell Owenby (Bush 302-236): 506 — 16 EVs wrong, 16 differential (States wrong: MA, NH)
5(t). Brooke Bennett (Kerry 272-266): 498 — 20 EVs wrong, 20 differential (States wrong: OH)
5(t). Boi From Troy (Bush 285-253): 498 — 39 EVs wrong, 1 differential (States wrong: HI, ME2, NH, OH, WI)
5(t). Jennifer Pease (Bush 270-268): 498 — 24 EVs wrong, 16 differential (States wrong: NH, OH)
8. Brendan Loy (Bush 302-236): 496 — 26 EVs wrong, 16 differential (States wrong: ME2, MN, NM, WI)
Under the current tiebreaker scheme, the order would be the same — Boi, Jennifer, you — because the first tiebreaker is who has the lower differential (i.e., difference between your predicted EV totals and the actual EV totals). However, if we made the tiebreaker “who has the fewest electoral votes wrong,” it would reverse, and the order would be you, Jennifer, Boi. But I’m not sure how I feel about that… I think the final result matters, and I’m not entirely comfortable with the idea of someone who got 20 EVs wrong and predicted a 272-266 Kerry win finishing ahead of someone who got 39 EVs wrong predicted a 285-253 Bush win when, in fact, Bush won 286-252. Boi is just so close to being correct, I think he deserves some credit. (Mind you, if someone got 50 or 60 EVs wrong and predicted a 285-253 finish, they wouldn’t finish ahead of you. That’s the beauty of the formula. They have to at least be close. They can’t engage in an endless series of lucky flips.)
But I understand where you’re coming from… it all comes down to what is the most important criteria.
November 5th, 2004 at 8:07:14 pm
Also, how were you able to get the vote margin for Maine’s 2nd Congressional District?
November 5th, 2004 at 8:07:31 pm
Ugh Andrew… are you really going to make me figure that out? Those popular-vote predictions are tedious, because they’re not in my spreadsheet…
November 5th, 2004 at 8:08:54 pm
Maybe I’ll do it later, when I need a study break.
About Maine 2nd CD, you’ll have to ask Mike, he sent me those numbers via email.
November 5th, 2004 at 8:14:55 pm
I used this URL, which isn’t complete but is better than nothing. I rely heavily on the power of google.
November 5th, 2004 at 8:16:48 pm
Okay.
I see Brooke’s point, but it hinges on the purpose of the contest. Was the goal to predict the correct number of Electoral Votes for each candidate, or was the purpose to come closest to the correct EV map (with the EV value of each state determining the importance of one state over another–i.e., better to miss on New Hampshire than Ohio because it’s fewer EVs wrong)? If the latter, Brooke’s point is quite valid, and it’s a little closer to what I was thinking was the point, too.
However, your original rules state, “The winner of the contest will be the person who a) picks the right winner, and b) comes closest to accurately predicting his winning electoral-vote total.” That would seem to rule out Brooke, even though she was so close.
I think Mike’s proposed rule for measurement is the best of all of those above, but yes, you’d have to wait for certified results in another week or so. You could also express Mike’s formula as a percentage difference instead of a vote difference, thus for instance if Bush lost Wisconsin by 1% and New Hampshire by 1%, they are treated equally, even though 1% of Wisconsin’s votes is a much higher figure than 1% of New Hampshire’s votes.
November 5th, 2004 at 8:19:03 pm
Well, Maine’s Secretary of State’s site is certainly unhelpful.
November 5th, 2004 at 8:36:02 pm
The goal was a little bit of Column A, a little bit of Column B. Both are considered important, but neither is so important that it acts to the exclusion of the other. Hence my compromise formula, which is somewhere in between my original rules (under which Brooke finishes 11th) and the pure state-by-state method (under which Brooke finishes 3rd). Under the compromise formula, Brooke finishes 7th… so as you can see, it really is a compromise. :)
November 5th, 2004 at 8:38:29 pm
P.S. I tend to agree that a modification of Mike’s rule, totalling the percentage differences in all the states where the contestant was wrong, might be the best system of all.
November 5th, 2004 at 8:46:36 pm
“Maybe I’ll do it later, when I need a study break”
Is this the way you should be spending you study break?! You crazy :)
November 5th, 2004 at 8:52:58 pm
6. Brendan Loy (Bush 302-236): 480 — 26 EVs wrong, 32 differential (States wrong: ME2, MN, NM, WI)
Dammit… if I had changed my map to reflect my actual late-October expectations instead of stubbornly sticking with my mid-September prediction, I would have gotten ME2, MN and probably NM right. (I still would have gotten WI wrong.)
Then again, I probably would have gotten Ohio wrong, because in the final week I started to believe that would swing toward Kerry. So I would have ended up:
4. Brendan Loy (Bush 276-262): 490 — 30 EVs wrong, 18 differential (States wrong: OH, WI)
Oh, well.
November 5th, 2004 at 8:58:42 pm
P.S. We were Ohio, Iowa and Wisconsin away from a 269-269 finish, BTW. That’s 158,341 votes away… maybe less, once they count the provisional ballots and such.
Granted, that’s not as close as 2000, when we were 5,381 votes (in Florida, New Mexico, Iowa and Wisconsin) away from such a result. But still.
November 5th, 2004 at 9:19:54 pm
Wait, that can’t be right…
November 5th, 2004 at 9:22:36 pm
So I would have ended up:
4. Brendan Loy (Bush 276-262): 490 — 30 EVs wrong, 18 differential (States wrong: OH, WI)
Correction… that should have read:
5. Brendan Loy (Bush 276-262): 488 — 30 EVs wrong, 20 differential (States wrong: OH, WI)
November 5th, 2004 at 9:24:42 pm
Final thought… I suppose it should say “56 for 56,” not “51 for 51,” since he had to get each congressional district in Maine and Nebraska right, too, in addition to the 50 states and D.C. But let’s be honest, if I said “56 for 56,” no one would know what the hell I was talking about. :)
November 5th, 2004 at 11:50:43 pm
“…if I said “56 for 56,” no one would know what the hell I was talking about. :)”
I’ve said it Before & I’ll say it Again (hi Josh :) - no one does anyway. :)
What’s with the Corrections? Wuttsa madduh witchyoo News mediums, can’tchyez Count da Votes right da Foist time? Always Foisting dis crap on us, no Wonder we just voted youse all Out, praise da Lord. :)
All hail Mike! There is None Wiser. :)
November 5th, 2004 at 11:58:19 pm
“…maybe less, once they count the provisional ballots and such.”
I’ve volunteered to help count the Such. I’ll Telecommute. This way Here, see, my home computer can receive secret encrypted radio signals from the AP via a Transmitter hidden inside the back of Sandy Berger’s pants and we can get Kerry elected, thus Saving our democracy.
November 6th, 2004 at 1:05:11 am
Somebody, Andrew I think, asked about Maine’s results by CD. I’ll be damned if I can find them, having searched considerably. ME SOS doesn’t have them Up but that’s Very Commendable, ay-up, they should wait til they are Perfect. :) CNN, NBC, various ME papers, No. Closest I’ve come is Dave Leip’s Atlas etc. which has good statewide data plus Results Maps of Counties & CDs. (Caution: on maps & elesewhere, Red = KERRY & Blue = BUSH. As it Should be, right Andrew? :) Go to General by Year, 2004, click Maine outline on national map, scroll down to ME maps - CD Map shows Both in Kerry Red; county maps shows only Two in Bush Blue. Those 2 ARE both in CD 2 (the vast North Forty hinterlands :) - cross-check the two Maps, you’ll see - but evidently they couldn’t Swing it.
I DID find on Dave Leip the following Down East result which is much more significant:
QUESTION 2 CITIZENS INITIATIVE: DO YOU WANT TO MAKE IT A CRIME TO HUNT BEARS WITH BAIT, TRAPS, OR DOGS, EXCEPT TO PROTECT PROPERTY, PUBLIC PROPERTY, PUBLIC SAFETY OR FOR RESEARCH?
BEAR BAITING - NO 381,612 53%
BEAR BAITING - YES 335,912 47%
Gee, no wonder Kerry did so well. The Bear Huggers made a good Showing, there, kept it pretty Close. Like to see the CD breakdown on THAT one. WAW haw haw Talk about yer Great Divide, if the North Country 2nd didn’t whup the Birkenstocks 1st on that Plan I’ll eat my Moose-poop souvenir paperweight. :)
Here also from Leip is a Statisticnerd’s Dream. (Sorry Brendan. I just wrecked yer Study schedule. Again. :)
November 6th, 2004 at 1:37:26 am
Mike mentioned this, sort of bemusedly & (as always) modestly, somewhere; & I love it. I’ll Brag for him. Here, amongst all the Yammering political theorists & journalists & historians & congressional hacks nowait I mean, staffers :) & grumpy old elections bureaucrats & Washington insiders & other Assorted and Sordid Per-fessers, LiberalArtists, lawyers & liars — Who is it that Wins the PolitcoPrediction Perfection Prize? Why, THE SCIENTIST of course! HAR HAR HAR HAR! Yaaaaaay!
See? Biology IS Destiny. :) Congrats again, Mike. The Perfect Game.