The 2000 Florida recount, which has generated renewed interest in light of the HBO dramatization to debut tonight, seemed at the time like a once-in-a-lifetime fluke of probability, the electoral equivalent of being struck by lightning. But then just four years later, had John Kerry pulled a few thousand votes closer to George W. Bush, we might well have had an automatic recount in Ohio and a replay of the whole scenario, with Ken Blackwell playing the role of Katherine Harris.
So just how (un)likely are these recount things anyway? To evaluate the problem, I looked for all occurrences in my simulation when the following happened: there was some state, or some combination of states, that the candidate who lost the electoral college had lost by no more than 0.5 points. But if the candidate had won some or all of these states, he would have won the elecotral college.
For example, in simulation run #132 of 10,000, Barack Obama initially picked up 250 electoral votes. But that doesn't count Pennsylvania, which he lost by just 0.04 points. That's a very obvious recount scenario.
Or, in simulation run #336, Barack Obama won the election with 290 electoral votes -- but had carried Indiana and Missouri by just 0.4 points and 0.5 points, respectively, close enough to trigger recounts. If McCain had won both recounts, he would have gained 22 electoral votes, enough to give him a 270-268 electoral win.
Overall, the recount scenario was triggered 703 times out of 10,000 simulations -- slightly more than 7 percent of the time.
By one definition, that does qualify as a "once-in-a-lifetime" occurrence: 7 percent means once out of about every 14 elections, and the average American adult will have the opportunity to vote in roughly 14 presidential elections before they die. But that's still quite a bit more likely than I would have thought.
5.25.2008
The odds of a recount
by Nate Silver @ 1:54 PM...see also history, scenario testing
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

12 comments
Well, you also have to consider that not every election is as closely contested as the last couple were, and as this one seems likely to be. If you factor in mismatches like Reagan-Mondale or even Clinton-Dole every so often (or more) the relative frequency of recount scenarios is bound to go down significantly.
I think that your model may underestimate the odds of a recount. I say this primarily because there are two factors in modern elections that both seem to encourage close election: modern voter targeting, and the mass media. First, the ratings driven media tends to encourage close races. This doesn't even have to be by design, increased "interest" in the frontrunner means increased ratings for covering him/her, increased coverage means increased likelihood of covering a gaffe, scandal, or other negative event, which encourages the race to tighten. Second, modern voter targeting also encourages tight races. The reason for this is because of the "median voter theory" you support. Quite simply, these tools allow the party to strike that median voter theory balance much more accurately in the days before polling, focus groups, and micro-targeting.
Naturally, there are more factors than those in a race, so it won't always be close, but it's more likely now than in the past and I can't think of anything on the horizon that I would be comfortable in predicting changing that.
How frequently were the simulated contests close enough in the popular vote to trigger a likely recount, were that the way we elected the President? This is actually a more than "academic" question, as one of the (specious, I think) arguments made against a national popular vote is the "danger" of a national recount. Your simulations would seem to shed light on this debate.
(I, too was surprised that these electoral college recount scenarios would happen as often as the simulations suggest, I would just add that it is even more than "once in a lifetime" given that 1 in 14 means one might remember one from one's pre-eligibility years as well as have a plausible chance of seeing another during one's voting lifetime.)
In my lifetime there have been 2 recount possible
elections(1960, 2000) and 2 that could have been in that state of affairs (1968, 2004). That makes the recount scenario more frequent than 1 in 14. It could be more like climate and that certain typologies recur more often and then less often.
I'll never forget staying all night on election night 2000 - I remember I was still watching the news 9 AM before I finally turned it off... That was incredible.
I don't think my blood pressure could withstand such a scenario this year.
This diary says there will be a poll from a Puerto Rican newspaper out on Thursday.
Oh Poblano, not you too! I know I'm nitpicking, but 7% does not mean once out of about every 14 elections. In fact, it means that in 1 election there is a 93% chance that it won't happen and in 14 elections, there is still a 36% chance that it will NOT happen and therefore only a 64% chance that it will happen in one's lifetime (assuming it's 14 elections).
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,
^^ nice blog!! ^@^
徵信, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 感情挽回, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 女子徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 外遇沖開, 抓姦, 女子徵信, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 女人徵信, 外遇
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信網, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 女人徵信, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,
^^ nice blog!! thanks a lot! ^^
徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 離婚, 外遇,離婚,
徵信, 外遇, 離婚, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 征信, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,
艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差、打工,兼差,或者八大行業,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的,還是想去制服店當上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作、兼差打工、假日兼職、兼職工作、酒店兼差、兼差、打工兼差、日領工作、晚上兼差工作、酒店工作、酒店上班、酒店打工、兼職、兼差、兼差工作、酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作和特種行業內容,想兼職工作日領、假日兼職、兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!
艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚,無業績壓力,無脫秀無喝酒壓力,高層次會員制客源,工作輕鬆,可日領、現領。
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已,對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有!艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪,不需擔心!只提供最優質的酒店上班,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。心動嗎!? 趕快來填寫你的酒店上班履歷表
水水們妳有缺現領、有兼職、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學缺錢嗎?妳是傳播妹??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,假日兼職賺錢的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??
艾葳酒店台北酒店經紀招兵買馬!!徵專業的酒店打工,想要去酒店的水水,想要短期日領,酒店日領,禮服酒店,制服店,酒店經紀,ktv酒店,便服店,酒店工作,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀人,
等相關服務 幫您快速的實現您的夢想~!!
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment