This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/01/election-interactive-vote-make-a-difference
The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 5 | Version 6 |
|---|---|
| Will your vote make a difference? Understanding our election interactive | Will your vote make a difference? Understanding our election interactive |
| (4 months later) | |
| The title of our new election interactive – "Will your vote make the difference?" – could mean a few different things, so let me explain exactly what we're trying to accomplish. | The title of our new election interactive – "Will your vote make the difference?" – could mean a few different things, so let me explain exactly what we're trying to accomplish. |
| The first thing you must know is that we're trying to determine the likelihood of a voter with certain characteristics having the chance of casting the tie-breaking vote this election. I believe that every vote matters, so we're not in any way seeking to imply that it's not worthwhile voting. But the outcome of the election almost certainly does not hinge on whether you vote or not. | The first thing you must know is that we're trying to determine the likelihood of a voter with certain characteristics having the chance of casting the tie-breaking vote this election. I believe that every vote matters, so we're not in any way seeking to imply that it's not worthwhile voting. But the outcome of the election almost certainly does not hinge on whether you vote or not. |
| The second point rests on the premise that there isn't one presidential election on election day, but 51. Each state and the District of Columbia holds its own election for president. These votes matter because of something known as the electoral college. Because all 49 of the 51 contests are winner-takes-all (Maine and Nebraska being the exceptions), most electoral votes are pre-determined. We already know that President Obama will carry California and its 55 electoral votes, while Mitt Romney will take Texas and its 38 electoral votes. | The second point rests on the premise that there isn't one presidential election on election day, but 51. Each state and the District of Columbia holds its own election for president. These votes matter because of something known as the electoral college. Because all 49 of the 51 contests are winner-takes-all (Maine and Nebraska being the exceptions), most electoral votes are pre-determined. We already know that President Obama will carry California and its 55 electoral votes, while Mitt Romney will take Texas and its 38 electoral votes. |
| Thus, a 35-year-old college-educated black voter in the uncompetitive state of New York is far less important to the election than a voter with the same characteristics who resides in the swing state of Florida. | Thus, a 35-year-old college-educated black voter in the uncompetitive state of New York is far less important to the election than a voter with the same characteristics who resides in the swing state of Florida. |
| Likewise, a state may be close at this moment, but that doesn't mean it's going to be the determinative one in the election. Right now, Obama holds a lead in the national and swing state polls. The closest state if the election were held today would likely be North Carolina. But that actually indicates North Carolina isn't likely going to be the difference maker. | Likewise, a state may be close at this moment, but that doesn't mean it's going to be the determinative one in the election. Right now, Obama holds a lead in the national and swing state polls. The closest state if the election were held today would likely be North Carolina. But that actually indicates North Carolina isn't likely going to be the difference maker. |
| The most important state is the one that, if the electoral college race was extremely close, would be the likeliest of affecting the outcome of the presidential election if that state were to flip to the other candidate. We believe that state to be Ohio – even if Obama leads there at the moment. | The most important state is the one that, if the electoral college race was extremely close, would be the likeliest of affecting the outcome of the presidential election if that state were to flip to the other candidate. We believe that state to be Ohio – even if Obama leads there at the moment. |
| The reason that we believe Ohio to be the ultimate swing state is that we're guided by the computations completed by Emory University professor and Votamatic founder Drew Linzer. Linzer was kind enough to compute, from his presidential state winner projections, the percentage chance that a state will flip the electoral college. | The reason that we believe Ohio to be the ultimate swing state is that we're guided by the computations completed by Emory University professor and Votamatic founder Drew Linzer. Linzer was kind enough to compute, from his presidential state winner projections, the percentage chance that a state will flip the electoral college. |
| After examining current state polling and historical trends, Linzer concluded that Ohio, with its relatively large share of 18 electoral college votes, is the state most likely to alter the election outcome if its winner changed. | After examining current state polling and historical trends, Linzer concluded that Ohio, with its relatively large share of 18 electoral college votes, is the state most likely to alter the election outcome if its winner changed. |
| The third and final important point is that we're talking about a person with certain characteristics. Each individual's vote has the same chance of allowing one candidate to win than any other vote. But because there are more white than black voters in the swing states, there's a better chance that a white person's vote will determine the election than a black person's. We'd also expect that an older voter (one age 30 and older) has a better chance of casting the decisive vote – because there are more older voters in America. | The third and final important point is that we're talking about a person with certain characteristics. Each individual's vote has the same chance of allowing one candidate to win than any other vote. But because there are more white than black voters in the swing states, there's a better chance that a white person's vote will determine the election than a black person's. We'd also expect that an older voter (one age 30 and older) has a better chance of casting the decisive vote – because there are more older voters in America. |
| As you get more specific in your demographic selection, the percentage chance of a person with given characteristics deciding the election decreases significantly. We aren't just multiplying the percentage of Latino voters x male x college educated x 18-29-year-olds to figure out the percentage of Latino college males who are 18-29. We dug deep into the raw exit poll data to know the percentage of voters in a given state who met all these characteristics. | As you get more specific in your demographic selection, the percentage chance of a person with given characteristics deciding the election decreases significantly. We aren't just multiplying the percentage of Latino voters x male x college educated x 18-29-year-olds to figure out the percentage of Latino college males who are 18-29. We dug deep into the raw exit poll data to know the percentage of voters in a given state who met all these characteristics. |
| Also, we're not trying to calculate the chance that one group's votes are up for grabs. White non-college graduates may have a better chance of changing their minds before the election than white college graduates. We aren't taking that into account. | Also, we're not trying to calculate the chance that one group's votes are up for grabs. White non-college graduates may have a better chance of changing their minds before the election than white college graduates. We aren't taking that into account. |
| Our interactive is calculating a number derived from the following equation: the state's competitiveness factor – the chance that it will influence the winner – multiplied by each group's demographic percentage from 2008. | Our interactive is calculating a number derived from the following equation: the state's competitiveness factor – the chance that it will influence the winner – multiplied by each group's demographic percentage from 2008. |
| [Note: some might argue the electorate will be different in 2008, but we're not sure. Rather than make an estimate we're not happy with, we're going to choose the neutral position of no change.] | [Note: some might argue the electorate will be different in 2008, but we're not sure. Rather than make an estimate we're not happy with, we're going to choose the neutral position of no change.] |
| You can also choose not to pick a state. In that case, we are merely telling you the chance that a person with the given characteristics will determine the winner of the electoral college. The state competitiveness factor is still being taken into account, but it is the sum of voters who meet a given characteristic in all the states. | You can also choose not to pick a state. In that case, we are merely telling you the chance that a person with the given characteristics will determine the winner of the electoral college. The state competitiveness factor is still being taken into account, but it is the sum of voters who meet a given characteristic in all the states. |
| The state competitive factor means that there is a 79% chance that a white voter will be the decisive voter in this election, which is 4 percentage points higher than the proportion of whites in US electorate at large. Latinos are only at 7%, versus the 8% of voters they were nationally in 2008, and blacks are only 11%, not the 12% of nationwide voters they were in 2008. The reason is that swing states tend to be whiter than the US as a whole. | The state competitive factor means that there is a 79% chance that a white voter will be the decisive voter in this election, which is 4 percentage points higher than the proportion of whites in US electorate at large. Latinos are only at 7%, versus the 8% of voters they were nationally in 2008, and blacks are only 11%, not the 12% of nationwide voters they were in 2008. The reason is that swing states tend to be whiter than the US as a whole. |
| We hope that you'll let us know about your own interesting findings from our interactive, so do share your results with us on Facebook and Twitter. | We hope that you'll let us know about your own interesting findings from our interactive, so do share your results with us on Facebook and Twitter. |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. | Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |