What will Voter Intensity and Turn Out be in the 2014 Mid-Terms?

[WelfareQueen]

So what will voter intensity and turn out be in the 2014 mid-terms? I ask this question because I have no idea.

Obama had roughly a +7 turnout advantage in 2012. Most polls reflected this advantage (those were obviously the most accurate) some did not. Some information I have seen says Republicans could have a +12 advantage in this election cycle (see link).


Republican voter intensity could sway 2014 mid-term elections


Again....I have no idea. Do any of you have any thoughts on voter turn out or maybe some actual data?


Thanks.

 

[AquaAthena]

So what will voter intensity and turn out be in the 2014 mid-terms? I ask this question because I have no idea.

Obama had roughly a +7 turnout advantage in 2012. Most polls reflected this advantage (those were obviously the most accurate) some did not. Some information I have seen says Republicans could have a +12 advantage in this election cycle (see link).


Republican voter intensity could sway 2014 mid-term elections


Again....I have no idea. Do any of you have any thoughts on voter turn out or maybe some actual data?


Thanks.

Nope, and I avoid predictions unless there is evidence to trust them and even then...

 

[Moonglow]

I predict gun play and beer...and large breast...

 

[Hossfly]

The only intensity I know about is my own. I can't leave Cowtown until Monday the 3d and have to drive 1200 miles in order to vote on Tuesday evening in Charlotte.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I predict 38%-39% voter turnout, pretty much on par with most Mid-Terms,maybe a point or two lower.

 

[WelfareQueen]

I predict 38%-39% voter turnout, pretty much on par with most Mid-Terms,maybe a point or two lower.

But the key question who which side will turn out the most? Any thoughts?

 

[Nyvin]

I predict 38%-39% voter turnout, pretty much on par with most Mid-Terms,maybe a point or two lower.

But the key question who which side will turn out the most? Any thoughts?

It's looking like 2014 is more of a local (state level) focused election than a national one like every general election for the past 10 years.

It will vary from state to state. Particularly with things like Abortion, Marijuana, and Minimum wage on ballot measures.

 

[WelfareQueen]

I predict 38%-39% voter turnout, pretty much on par with most Mid-Terms,maybe a point or two lower.

But the key question who which side will turn out the most? Any thoughts?

It's looking like 2014 is more of a local (state level) focused election than a national one like every general election for the past 10 years.

It will vary from state to state. Particularly with things like Abortion, Marijuana, and Minimum wage on ballot measures.

Could be.....but the key to any election is voter turn out. The question for the 2014 mid-terms is which side will turn out the most.

Obama won is 2008 and 2012 because Dems turned out (and particularly minorities) is record numbers. Again...Obama had a +7 turn out advantage in 2012.

If the Dems still have a +7 turn out advantage in 2014 and the polling data does not reflect that advantage...the polls don't mean shit.

So I am asking does anyone have any idea which said will turn out the most in the upcoming mid-terms?


Here is a key quote from the link I provided above.


"The vote intensity of Republican voters is strong – a net twelve-points more than their Democratic counterparts. Overall, sixty-two percent (62%) of voters say they are extremely likely to vote in the November elections. However, Republicans (69% extremely likely) outpace Democrats (57% extremely likely). In fact, this intensity advantage exceeds where Republicans were in the September 2010 Battleground Poll."

 

[WelfareQueen]

Just found this from Pew Research Center. The key quote is bolded at the bottom. But remember folks....the only thing that matters is who actually shows up to vote.


Fact Tank - Our Lives in Numbers
October 29, 2014
Registered voters, likely voters, turnout rates: What does it all mean to 2014 election forecasts?
By Andrew KohutLeave a comment

(FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images)
One of the most important factors in the results of 2014 pre-election polls being released almost daily at this stage in the cycle is determining the answers to two questions: How many Americans are likely to vote, and which voters in the survey are the likely voters? Important as this is, there is almost no consensus among the pollsters as to how to identify each of these groups.

The least sophisticated polls derive their likely voters by asking respondents if they are registered, and if so, do they plan to vote. The more rigorous surveys ask their registered voters a series of questions: Will you vote, are you certain, have you voted in the past, are you interested in the campaign, where do you go to vote, or do you vote by mail, and so on. Respondents are scored based on these questions to derive a likely voter group based upon cumulative answers to the “turnout” questions.

The relative importance assigned to the turnout questions are sometimes based on guesstimates of which questions the pollster thinks are most important. In other cases, actual voting data are used to construct a model for likely turnout. Over the years, both the Gallup Organization and Pew Research Center have gone back to the actual voting records of their respondents to validate which questions are the best predictors of voting. On this basis, respondents are scored from the highest to the lowest probabilities of voting.

But even with this level of sophistication, the pollster’s judgment is still a factor in the turnout puzzle. The validation studies only tell us how to accurately rank respondents from the most likely to the least likely to vote; they do not provide guidance as to where to draw the line between likely voters and respondents who are not likely to vote.

The rate of turnout is another issue itself. Here’s where the judgment comes in. Will the rate be similar to previous “high” turnout elections, “low” turnout elections or somewhere in between? That’s the pollster’s call, and he or she makes that call without hard data that can peg how low or how high turnout will be.

Based on modest levels of voter interest found in most recent surveys, 2014 may be a low turnout year — at least, that is the way it looks. But there is not a statistical model using the results of surveys taken days before the election to predict exactly what the level of turnout will be.

And there are often surprises. For example, the turnout rate was a little higher in 2012 than expected, as young people and Latinos came out to vote in greater numbers than anticipated. In this year’s midterm, the surprise will be if Democrats more generally become re-energized to vote.

Pew Research Center’s mid-October survey reported, “As has been the case all year, Republican voters are substantially more engaged in the election than are Democratic voters. And on several measures, the GOP’s advantage is about as great as it was four years ago.”

So the possibility remains that the absolute level of turnout will increase, if the Democratic interest in the races increases in the final days of the campaign. This is particularly hard to predict in a midterm election compared with a presidential election, since congressional, gubernatorial and Senate races can vary widely from district to district and state to state when it comes to how interested voters are in those contests.

 

[Nyvin]

Well looking at African American turnout in Georgia's early voting there's certainly at least "some" momentum on the Democrat side.

I don't know about the rest of the country. I think the red state/blue state divide might be a factor, states that didn't vote for Obama might feel more "cheated" in some way and have more resentment toward democrats. That could be a contributing reason why Democrats usually outperform polls in blue states and the GOP usually outperforms polls in red states.

I suppose that's bad news for Nunn, Pryor and Landrieu, but might work out to Braley's and Udall's favor.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Well looking at African American turnout in Georgia's early voting there's certainly at least "some" momentum on the Democrat side.

I don't know about the rest of the country. I think the red state/blue state divide might be a factor, states that didn't vote for Obama might feel more "cheated" in some way and have more resentment toward democrats. That could be a contributing reason why Democrats usually outperform polls in blue states and the GOP usually outperforms polls in red states.

I suppose that's bad news for Nunn, Pryor and Landrieu, but might work out to Braley's and Udall's favor.

Stat is saying the polling organizations are giving the GOP a +2 to +2.3% turnout advantage.

In 2012 most of them were very accurate in predicting a +7 turnout advantage for Obama.

I truly have no idea if they are correct this time. I heard about the heavy early AA turnout in the Atlanta suburbs....but I have also heard about heavy GOP turnout in Iowa, Wisconsin, and Colorado.

Again, I have no idea....but the general consensus among Pew Research and others is GOP turnout will at least equal or exceed the GOP turnout in the 2010 mid terms.

We'll all see on Tuesday I guess.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

It's really hard to accurately measure "voter intensity" with a telephone poll, due to social desirability bias.

It remains to be seen how it all works out.

 

[WelfareQueen]

It's really hard to accurately measure "voter intensity" with a telephone poll, due to social desirability bias.

It remains to be seen how it all works out.

I agree....but I've come to realize the only thing that ultimately matters in elections is turnout. The consensus opinion from polling organizations does favor a stronger GOP turnout this cycle. The question is how accurate are they.....

 

[theDoctorisIn]

It's really hard to accurately measure "voter intensity" with a telephone poll, due to social desirability bias.

It remains to be seen how it all works out.

I agree....but I've come to realize the only thing that ultimately matters in elections is turnout. The consensus opinion from polling organizations does favor a stronger GOP turnout this cycle. The question is how accurate are they.....

I absolutely agree - turnout is what matters - and I'm not just saying that because voter turnout and GOTV is a big part of what I get paid the big bucks for (I'm a field director consultant to political campaigns, turnout is what I do for a living)

And I agree that how accurate the polls are is "the question", as well - but that's also not the whole story, either. It depends a lot on what happens on the ground in each race, as well. Since it's not a Presidential election year, it's a lot harder have a nation-wide picture in terms of polling since there's no connecting candidates that every voter in the country will be placing a vote for, in addition to all the lower ballot candidates.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

For example, there will be low Democrat turnout in NY. Cuomo is going to win by double digits, and no one really even likes him that much, so all of NY Dems are going to stay home.

But that has no impact or relevance to what the Dem turnout in Kansas will be.

 

[Judicial review]

By the intensity of this board I predict a raping. Figuritively speaking..

 

[JakeStarkey]

A "raping" would be veto proof majorities.

Far short of that.

Our GOP will win comfortably in the House, pick up a few seats, and the Senate should go Red with 51 to 53 seats.

 

[Judicial review]

A "raping" would be veto proof majorities.

Far short of that.

Our GOP will win comfortably in the House, pick up a few seats, and the Senate should go Red with 51 to 53 seats.

54 seats

 

[JakeStarkey]

Possibly but not likely.

 

[WelfareQueen]

It's really hard to accurately measure "voter intensity" with a telephone poll, due to social desirability bias.

It remains to be seen how it all works out.

I agree....but I've come to realize the only thing that ultimately matters in elections is turnout. The consensus opinion from polling organizations does favor a stronger GOP turnout this cycle. The question is how accurate are they.....

I absolutely agree - turnout is what matters - and I'm not just saying that because voter turnout and GOTV is a big part of what I get paid the big bucks for (I'm a field director consultant to political campaigns, turnout is what I do for a living)

And I agree that how accurate the polls are is "the question", as well - but that's also not the whole story, either. It depends a lot on what happens on the ground in each race, as well. Since it's not a Presidential election year, it's a lot harder have a nation-wide picture in terms of polling since there's no connecting candidates that every voter in the country will be placing a vote for, in addition to all the lower ballot candidates.

This is what I was looking for. Someone with some actual expertise. It sounds like you feel turnout will vary fairly significantly from State to State or locality to locality. That there will not be a fairly uniform national turnout like Presidential Elections.

You could be right....which makes the polling data all the more critical.
I think we all remember the whole "unskewed polls," fiasco in 2012.

The reality is the pollsters by and large got it right. The Dems had a much better ground game in 2008 and 2012. They met or exceeded most turnout projections.

I am really interested in what the ultimate turnout will be in this cycle and how good each sides ground game will be.