Predicting the Outcome of Tomorrow's Midterm Election

The first academic paper I ever published was an empirical analysis of the “midterm gap” in American politics.? (I couldn’t find an ungated version, but it’s not really worth reading anyway!)

In almost every midterm election in the 20th century, the party of the president has lost seats in the House of Representatives.? I wrote the paper as an undergraduate for a class taught by one of my favorite professors, Alberto Alesina.? He liked the paper and suggested I try to publish it.? I waited a few years to try while I dabbled in management consulting, but when I decided to go back to get a Ph.D., I dug out the paper, revised it and sent it off to an academic journal.

The paper ended up having a very typical life for an academic paper.? It got rejected from the first journal I sent it to.? Then it got rejected from a second journal.? Finally, I got a letter back from the editor at a third journal that was so cryptic I wasn’t sure whether the paper had been accepted or rejected.? I showed the letter to my MIT advisor Jim Poterba, and he gave me some sound advice: when in doubt, act like the paper has been accepted.? So I revised it and sent it back, and indeed it was accepted at long last.? That was in 1994.? In the last 16 years, it has managed to collect a whopping four citations according to Google Scholar. ?That’s probably about the median number of cites for an economics paper.

With all the buzz about this year’s midterm election, I pulled that paper out to have a look at what it predicts this year.? I found that a handful of (obvious) factors were important predictors of how many seats the party of the sitting president would lose.? The decline tends to be worse when the presidency switched parties two years earlier (i.e., it looks like the incumbent president’s party gets punished in both presidential election years and at the midterm, so the congressional vote was abnormally high in 2008 for the Democrats).? It helps the president’s party if GDP is growing quickly, if the president has a high approval rating, and if the president’s party has a lot of incumbent congress members.

When I crunch through the numbers, the prediction of the model is that the Democrats will end up with 199 seats, or a loss of 56 seats.? I would put essentially zero faith in this estimate on its own, but I find it interesting that the prediction it yields matches almost perfectly with the market prediction at Intrade.com.? As I write this, the market thinks there is a 47 percent chance that the Democrats will lose 60 seats or more.? Interestingly, back in August the market only put a 15 percent chance on a loss that big.? If you had believed my model (which would have made the same prediction in August), you could have made some money betting against the Democrats at that time.

The model did come through with flying colors the only other time I asked it to make a prediction.? That was back in 1994.? My paper was published in March 1994.? In the original conclusion to the paper, I estimated that in November of that year the GOP would take control of the House for the first time in decades.? My advisor Jim Poterba, when he read that prediction, told me I had to take it out of the paper. The first rule of paper writing, he told me, is to never make predictions about the future.? Also, he said, that prediction is just plain dumb.? Everyone knows that will never happen.? So he made me take the prediction out of the paper, and he told me he would buy me a pizza if I was right.

Even up to the day of the election, my prediction looked crazy.? I was at a political economy seminar at Harvard on election day, and when Poterba announced to the assembled crowd that I predicted the Democrats would lose the House, they guffawed uproariously.? Shockingly, the Democrats were routed, just as the model predicted.

Oh how I wished I had left that prediction in there.

If I had, I might have gotten five cites.? Or maybe even six.

Leave A Comment

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

 

COMMENTS: 18

  1. Eric M. Jones says:

    I predict Americans will vote against their own best interests once again. Let’s not forget that half the voters have a two-digit I.Q.


    “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”
    H. L. Mencken

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. frankenduf says:

    yo DrillBaby- not sure if ur aware, but the evidence for election fraud is much more robust for the 04 pres election- i keep tryna market it here, cuz the evidence is right up freakonomics’ alley- exit polls had historically been quite accurate, but there were sharp anomalies in 04- this of course was coupled with the receiptless computer voting machines which are quite easy to rig- the evidence is all out there- frontline did an excellent expose on it- the media to this day never picked up on it- in my opinion, it’s one of the biggest civil society crimes, right up there with the banks stealing of public $

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. GLK says:

    Flummoxed over the tide turning that’s happening to the Democratic initiative? Don’t resort to sarcasm and insults, purify your mind by reading this: http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2010/10/31/20-reasons-democrats-are-the-walking-dead/

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. brent says:

    “I predict Americans will vote against their own best interests once again. Let’s not forget that half the voters have a two-digit I.Q.”

    Tendentious, unoriginal and uninteresting. Reminds me of another famous quote, that perfectly defines our current leadership:

    “Stupid is as stupid does”
    – Forrest Gump

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. JimBob says:

    @9 That is why we are having to vote out the incumbents, because so many of the below average voted in 2008.

    Mr. Levitt, I believe you have thus proved the theory that 99% of everything that is written by economists is not useful. Thanks.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. EL says:

    You guys recently mentioned in a radio segment that spending on US Senate and House elections doesn’t sway the result. I’m left scratching my head on this one. If this were the case, why on earth do candidates in California and Wisconsin, and elsewhere, spend multiple millions of their own dollars to run for political office. It was a foolish comment on your part!

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. Sean Cooper says:

    @clydemcphat Thank you for that. Nice to see someone else who gets it.

    @bankemployee What defines middle class? To me, that means you’re somewhere between the very top and the very bottom. If you’ve got a couple grand in your account, are paying your rent and putting your food on the table without direct government assistance, I think that pretty well qualifies.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. Aaron says:

    After your impressive success, will you let us know what your paper predicts every year?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0