Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
Forecasting presidential elections has become a growth industry in political science. Econometric models used to predict the presidential election that were once viewed as part of “recreational political science” are now being taken seriously. The widespread belief that these models have been highly successful at predicting election outcomes has enticed a score of political scientists to propose new models hoping to share in the triumph of political science over the pundits and polls. Unfortunately, there has been very little critical examination of the models used to forecast presidential elections. A close review reveals that existing quantitative models are not useful predictors of presidential races. In addition, most of the new proposed models have adopted an approach that is unlikely to lead to better forecasts.
I would like to thank Alan Abramowitz, James Campbell, Ray Fair, Michael Lewis-Beck, and Tom Rice for providing me with their data. I would also like to thank Mo Fiorina, Gary King, Aleza Spalter Greene, and Paul Peterson for their helpful comments and advice on this paper. The staff and regular patrons of the Harvard Data Center also provided valuable comments on an earlier draft.