# Perrin’s Predictive Election Algorithm — the First Published Results

For about the past ten years, every election cycle I would create an algorithm to predict the outcome of the gains and losses of the Dems and GOP in the House and Senate elections. It was a back-of-the-envelope experience.

I never did record the algorithm or keep any notes. Every cycle I created, de novo, a new algorithm. (This year I had in my head a highly simplified and abridged version I could compute — more or less.)

So last cycle, I decided to keep a record of the algorithm. Last night, I remembered the password I put on the document — which I had been attempting to do for months — opened the file and dusted off the algorithm.

One big problem became apparent — I kept the algorithm, but did not note which data I used to input into the algorithm or the adjustments I know I made to the data I settled on using.

(Some years, the algorithm was one seat off in either the House or Senate results. In 2008, my algorithm was 94% accurate for predicting the Dem-GOP seat distribution in the U.S. Senate, and 89% accurate for predicting the same in the U.S. House.)

Since opening the document, I have spent hours running various data sets and adjustments to the data through the algorithm, trying to remember which data set and the adjustments I used last cycle.

I woke this morning with further choices and final adjustments to the data in mind.

(These choices about which data to use and the adjustments to the data — algorithm inputs — are where math and science ends, and the art begins.)

Bottom line, I can not remember which data set or adjustments I used last cycle — so please do not use prior, unpublished results to imbue accuracy to this algorithm or to the adjusted data set I am using.

Further, because I was torn between two different adjustments to one key data point of the most powerful variable in the algorithm, I decided to use one data set for the House predictions and a wildly different data set for the Senate prediction — to see which was more accurate.

In fact, most analysts will find these results unbelievable, and the more charitable would likely say the algorithm’s predictive outcome may be possible, but not probable or likely.

Having said that, here are the results of Perrin’s Predictive Election Algorithm:

Dems lose 73 seats in the U.S. House and lose 10 seats in the U.S. Senate.

On Monday, November 1st, the day before the election, I will survey all available new data, and publish the algorithm’s final predictive results.

Sometime, when all the election results are finally settled, I will review the accuracy of my algorithm and whether I made the right choices in the data set used, and my adjustments to it.

• Scope

and if you are correct with the Senate, we won’t have to wake Bite Me up to break a tie vote, correct?

Also, if your House numbers are any where near correct, we can afford to lose some votes, even from the RINO leaders, and still get good things passed, and, bad things blocked. That is if we can get the good bills to the floor.

• Dan Perrin

shoulder the blame from the MSM for stopping The One.

And yes, you are correct, but the key thing will be a filibuster-proof majority and a strong message to any GOP Senator that may want to bolt and vote with the Dems, and inversely, a strong message to any Dem thinking of not voting with the GOP.

• wonkish1

I know it seems weird but I either want 53 senate seats or 50 senate seats, I think 51 is worse. 51 and the obama administration has a bigger target to run against. Its the poor old obama administration against the mean GOP congress.

If the dems hold the senate by their fingernails then we can portray the obama’s and the democrat senate as the same old political establishment trying to bully the gop house that is fighting for you America! It will work like a charm and round 2 in 2012 will be more likely to play into our hands giving us big margins in the senate.

It really rests on 1 question. If we really can’t legislate any easier with 51 seats then 50 seats why would we even want it so that we take all the blame for the chambers short comings?

• Dan Perrin

incapable of compromise.

He is and will be the Newt Gingrich — and in the public eye — already is.

So the title and image you think will be put on a GOP Senate is, in my view, already taken by The One.

• 6eorge Jetson

All things being equal, 2010 should have been a “home” game for the Dems. Republicans are “defending” the +4 Senate seat pickup from 2004. But then the Dems secretly hired Matt Millen, former Detroit Lions General Manager, and have subsequently seen their 2010 “home court advantage” become irrelevant because they absolutely suck. We can beat them not only in purple states, but in many solid blue states. Washington? Illinois? Wisconsin? Delaware? California?

In the next two cycles, Dems will be defending in 2012 a +6 pickup from 2006 and in 2014 a +8 pickup from 2008.

If Republicans stick to the mandate* that is being given them to stop Obama and get control of spending, a supermajority is possible in 2014.

If the Republicans get to DC and turn into RINOs that cater to special interests, then as we’ve seen, the home court advantage may become irrelevant.

*Only the statist MSM could make the statement that their is no mandate in a 50-80 House/ 7-11 Senate seat pickup.

• Dan Perrin

is writing that a +55 Dem House seat loss is to be expected.

The guy is, like many of his colleagues, delusional.

• bcourt17

I know Rasmussen has Manchin up by 3 (breaks my heart). Does anyone have any insights as to what is actually happening on the ground?

• Dan Perrin

Manchin

• barleycorn

Your numbers are very close to where my thinking has been the last 10 days or so.

• Dan Perrin

thanks for posting that.

• wonkish1

My numbers are in that area, too. I handicapped every single race in the house and I’m about 74-75 in the house and 9 in the senate.

• Dan Perrin

Thanks for letting me know.

• Finrod

If the 32 races RCP has listed as tossup in the House split 16-16, that would make for +63 for Republicans. The range for the extremes for the tossups all going one way or the other are +47 to +79. I’ve been watching their page recently and their numbers are definitely drifting towards the GOP– just look at their historical graph at the bottom.

For the Senate, with no tossups they have Republicans +8. The range with tossups going all one way or the other are +4 to +10. Again the historical graph has shown movement towards the GOP but not nearly as clearly.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/house/2010_elections_house_map.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/2010_elections_senate_map_no_toss_ups.html

• Dan Perrin

trends, as this algorithm does and determine macro results, has been answered by other algorithms that do the same thing as this one.

• mikerazar
• wonkish1

They just don’t have much polling data on them so they aren’t moving them. But the dirty little secret is in the internals. Look at an internal poll and move the spread about 4 – 8 points(depending on how much of the crosstabs are released/reputable name) away from the party that conducted the poll.

You then will see a lot more races in the likely dem and lean dem categories that should be moved closer. Also, RCP doesn’t publish campaign internals.

• wonkish1

Any democrat incumbent that isn’t up at least 10 points in their own internal is like dead meat.

• The_Rebel

is cooked, since it was reported this morning that he is ahead by only one point in his campaign’s internal poll.

• wonkish1

Wow, massachusetts 3??? That would be another big one. Where did you find that 1 I can’t find it?

• The_Rebel

n/t

• wonkish1

So I hope its true, but we can’t be positive until it can actually pointed to.