Hostname: page-component-669899f699-8p65j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T00:24:09.971Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

State-Level Forecasts of the 2012 Federal and GubernatorialElections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2012

Carl E. Klarner
Carl E. Klarner*
Affiliation:
Indiana State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The election forecasts presented in this article indicate that control of the WhiteHouse after the 2012 election is a tossup, that control of the US House will likelyremain in Republican hands, and that although closely fought, the Republicans havethe edge for control of the US Senate. These forecasts were made on July 15, 2012.Obama was predicted to receive 51.3% of the two-party popular vote, 301 electoralvotes, and to have a 57.1% chance of winning the Electoral College. The year 2012was forecast to be one of stasis for the US House, with almost no change in thenumber of seats controlled by the Republicans: they were forecast to pick up twoseats, and to have a 75.6% chance of maintaining their majority. Lastly, theRepublicans were predicted to pick up five seats in the US Senate and have about a61.6% chance of attaining majority control.

Type
Symposium: Forecasting the 2012 American National Elections
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 45 , Issue 4 , October 2012 , pp. 655 - 662
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abramowitz, Alan. 2008. “Forecasting the 2008 Presidential Election with the Time-for-Change Model.” PS: Political Science and Politics 41 (4): 691–95.Google Scholar
Bartels, Larry M., and Zaller, John. 2001. “Presidential Vote Models: A Recount.” PS: Political Science and Politics 34 (1): 9–20.Google Scholar
Beck, Nathaniel. 2000. “Evaluating Forecasts and Forecasting Models of the 1996 Presidential Election.” In Before the Vote: Forecasting American National Elections, eds. Campbell, James E. and Garand, James C.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Campbell, James E., Ali, Syed, and Jalalzai, Farida. 2006. “Forecasting the Presidential Vote in the States, 1948–2004: An Update, Revision, and Extension of a State-Level Presidential Forecasting Model.” The Journal of Political Marketing 5 (April): 33–57.Google Scholar
Cuzán, Alfred G., and Burdick, Charles M.. 2009. “Predicting Presidential Elections with Equally Weighted Regressors in Fair's Equation and the Fiscal Model.” Political Analysis 17: 333–40.Google Scholar
De Boef, Suzanna, and Keele, Luke. 2008. “Taking Time Seriously.” American Journal of Political Science 52 (January): 184–200.Google Scholar
Friedman, John N., and Holden, Richard T.. 2009. “The Rising Incumbent Reelection Rate: What's Gerrymandering Got to Do With It?” Journal of Politics 71 (2): 593–611.Google Scholar
Klarner, Carl E. 2008. “Forecasting the 2008 U.S. House, Senate, and Presidential Elections at the District and State Level.” PS: Political Science and Politics 41 (4): 723–28.Google Scholar