IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/122490.html

Forecasting US Presidential Election 2024 using multiple machine learning algorithms

Author

Listed:
  • Sinha, Pankaj
  • Kumar, Amit
  • Biswas, Sumana
  • Gupta, Chirag

Abstract

The outcome of the US presidential election is one of the most significant events that impacts trade, investment, and geopolitical policies on the global stage. It also sets the direction of the world economy and global politics for the next few years. Hence, it is of prime importance not just for the American population but also to shape the future well-being of the masses worldwide. Therefore, this study aims to forecast the popular vote share of the incumbent party candidate in the Presidential election of 2024. The study applies the regularization-based machine learning algorithm of Lasso to select the most important economic and non-economic indicators influencing the electorate. The variables identified by lasso were further used with lasso (regularization), random forest (bagging) and gradient boosting (boosting) techniques of machine learning to forecast the popular vote share of the incumbent party candidate in the 2024 US Presidential election. The findings suggest that June Gallup ratings, average Gallup ratings, scandal ratings, oil price indicator, unemployment indicator and crime rate impact the popular vote share of the incumbent party candidate. The prediction made by Lasso emerges as the most consistent estimate of the popular vote share forecast. The lasso-based prediction model forecasts that Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party candidate, will receive a popular vote share of 47.04% in the 2024 US Presidential Election.

Suggested Citation

  • Sinha, Pankaj & Kumar, Amit & Biswas, Sumana & Gupta, Chirag, 2024. "Forecasting US Presidential Election 2024 using multiple machine learning algorithms," MPRA Paper 122490, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 22 Oct 2024.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:122490
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/122490/1/MPRA_paper_122490.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Walker, 2006. "Predicting presidential election results," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(5), pages 483-490.
    2. Rodrigo Praino & Daniel Stockemer & Vincent G. Moscardelli, 2013. "The Lingering Effect of Scandals in Congressional Elections: Incumbents, Challengers, and Voters," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1045-1061, December.
    3. Nyhan, Brendan, 2015. "Scandal Potential: How Political Context and News Congestion Affect the President's Vulnerability to Media Scandal," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(2), pages 435-466, April.
    4. Douglas Hibbs, 2000. "Bread and Peace Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 104(1), pages 149-180, July.
    5. Richard R. Lau & David J. Andersen & David P. Redlawsk, 2008. "An Exploration of Correct Voting in Recent U.S. Presidential Elections," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(2), pages 395-411, April.
    6. Gelman, Andrew & King, Gary, 1993. "Why Are American Presidential Election Campaign Polls So Variable When Votes Are So Predictable?," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 409-451, October.
    7. Nagler, Jonathan & Leighley, Jan, 1992. "Presidential Campaign Expenditures: Evidence on Allocations and Effects," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 319-333, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrew Gelman & Jessica Hullman & Christopher Wlezien & George Elliott Morris, 2020. "Information, incentives, and goals in election forecasts," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(5), pages 863-880, September.
    2. Kang, Seungwoo & Oh, Hee-Seok, 2024. "Forecasting South Korea’s presidential election via multiparty dynamic Bayesian modeling," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 124-141.
    3. Strömberg, David, 2002. "Optimal Campaigning in Presidential Elections: The Probability of Being Florida," CEPR Discussion Papers 3372, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Sergiu Gherghina & Elena Rusu, 2021. "Begin Again: Election Campaign and Own Opinions Among First‐Time Voters in Romania," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1311-1329, July.
    5. David A. M. Peterson, 2009. "Campaign Learning and Vote Determinants," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(2), pages 445-460, April.
    6. Kirill Chmel & Aigul Klimova & Nikita Savin, 2023. "Saving lives or saving the economy? Support for the incumbent during the COVID-19 pandemic in Russia," Post-Soviet Affairs, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(4), pages 291-307, July.
    7. Sharma, Priyanka & Wagman, Liad, 2020. "Advertising and Voter Data in Asymmetric Political Contests," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    8. Epstein, Gil S., 2000. "Personal productivity and the likelihood of electoral success of political candidates," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 95-111, March.
    9. Sinha, Pankaj & Verma, Aniket & Shah, Purav & Singh, Jahnavi & Panwar, Utkarsh, 2020. "Prediction for the 2020 United States Presidential Election using Machine Learning Algorithm: Lasso Regression," MPRA Paper 103889, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 31 Oct 2020.
    10. Wang, Wei & Rothschild, David & Goel, Sharad & Gelman, Andrew, 2015. "Forecasting elections with non-representative polls," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 980-991.
    11. Sinha, Pankaj & Srinivas, Sandeep & Paul, Anik & Chaudhari, Gunjan, 2016. "Forecasting 2016 US Presidential Elections Using Factor Analysis and Regression Model," MPRA Paper 74618, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Oct 2016.
    12. Jerome, Bruno & Jerome, Veronique & Lewis-Beck, Michael S., 1999. "Polls fail in France: forecasts of the 1997 legislative election1," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 163-174, April.
    13. Hibbs, Douglas A., 2010. "The 2010 Midterm Election for the US House of Representatives," MPRA Paper 25918, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Stephan J. Goetz & Meri Davlasheridze & Yicheol Han & David A. Fleming-Muñoz, 2019. "Explaining the 2016 Vote for President Trump across U.S. Counties," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(4), pages 703-722, December.
    15. Khan, Urmee & Lieli, Robert P., 2018. "Information flow between prediction markets, polls and media: Evidence from the 2008 presidential primaries," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 696-710.
    16. Gabriele Gratton & Richard Holden & Anton Kolotilin, 2018. "When to Drop a Bombshell," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 85(4), pages 2139-2172.
    17. Temporão, Mickael & Dufresne, Yannick & Savoie, Justin & Linden, Clifton van der, 2019. "Crowdsourcing the vote: New horizons in citizen forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-10.
    18. Yarrow Dunham & Antonio A. Arechar & David G. Rand, 2019. "From foe to friend and back again: The temporal dynamics of intra-party bias in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(3), pages 373-380, May.
    19. A. Kamakura, Wagner & Afonso Mazzon, Jose & De Bruyn, Arnaud, 2006. "Modeling voter choice to predict the final outcome of two-stage elections," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 689-706.
    20. Caroline Le Pennec & Vincent Pons, 2023. "How do Campaigns Shape Vote Choice? Multicountry Evidence from 62 Elections and 56 TV Debates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(2), pages 703-767.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General
    • C10 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - General
    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General
    • C6 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling
    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques
    • G0 - Financial Economics - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:122490. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.