Gemüt&Lou · Campaign Data · Reference

Win-Number Methods: Formulas & Sources

Every method we have available for turning prior election data into a target vote count, the formula each uses, and where the method comes from. The final section shows exactly how the live performance numbers for HD-62, HD-63, and the Commissioner race were computed — formula, variables, and source for each.

CORE

The core identity

Every method below is a way to estimate one of the two terms in a single equation. The win number is projected turnout times the share you need.

Win number = Projected turnout × Target share Projected turnout = Registered voters × Turnout rate Target share = 50% + 1 (raise to 52–55% for a safety margin)
Source: Standard campaign vote-goal formula as taught by NGP VAN (the Democratic Party's voter-file vendor) and re:power (formerly Wellstone Action). ngpvan.com/blog/how-to-determine-vote-goal · repower.org/resource/win-number-calculator
METHOD 1

Win number / vote goal

The headline number: how many votes it takes to win. Built from the turnout of comparable past elections rather than a guess.

Win number = floor(Projected turnout ÷ 2) + 1 (bare majority) = Target share × Projected turnout (with margin)
Source: NGP VAN, “How to Determine Vote Goal”; re:power Win Number Calculator; CallHub calculator writeup. callhub.io/tools/win-number-calculator
METHOD 2

Turnout projection — comparable-cycle method

Project turnout from elections of the same type and cycle. Do not average a presidential year with an off-year; the two behave nothing alike. For a 2026 midterm, the 2022 midterm is the anchor.

Projected turnout = average turnout of the last comparable elections × (current registration ÷ registration then)
Source: NGP VAN recommends the last three similar elections; the same-cycle discipline is stated in the CallHub method. callhub.io/tools/win-number-calculator
METHOD 3

Vote deficit & the three levers

The method that matters most in a Republican-leaning seat. The deficit is what you must add on top of the Democratic baseline; it closes only three ways, and the math sizes each.

Vote deficit = Win number − Base Democratic vote Persuasion universe = Vote deficit ÷ persuasion success rate ≈ 3 × deficit (at a 1-in-3 success rate)
Because a mobilized base Democrat yields ~1 vote and a persuasion contact yields ~⅓, every drop-off Democrat you turn out replaces about three persuasion targets. The lever mix matters more than the headline gap.
Source: The Campaign Workshop, vote-goal & vote-deficit method (persuasion universe ≈ 3× deficit). thecampaignworkshop.com/blog/pillar/campaign-strategy/vote-goal
METHOD 4

Performance index — the Democratic baseline

“Base Democratic vote” is not one race; it is the average partisan performance across several comparable contests, which cancels out individual candidate effects. Two forms: a granular index (NCEC's DPI) and a macro lean (Cook PVI).

Democratic Performance Index (DPI)

For each contested partisan race i: Dem two-way share sᵢ = Dᵢ ÷ (Rᵢ + Dᵢ) DPI = mean(sᵢ) across the basket of comparable races

Cook Partisan Voting Index (PVI) — macro lean

PVI = district presidential two-party share − national two-party share (last two presidential elections, weighted 75% recent / 25% prior)
Sources: NCEC originated the DPI — a granular moving average of actual prior results. ncec.org/analysis/20161214-its-not-the-data. Cook Political Report originated PVI. cookpolitical.com/cook-pvi. Sister District screens districts using both. sisterdistrict.com/strategy/candidate-selection-process
METHOD 5

Precinct targeting — support × turnout

Tells you where the votes are cheapest. The win number says how many; this sorts precincts by how to get them.

Score each voter/precinct on two axes: likelihood of support × likelihood to turn out → four quadrants: GOTV base · persuade · register/activate · skip
Source: Hal Malchow, The New Political Targeting (2008) — the canonical support×turnout quadrant framework, documented in the academic targeting literature. arxiv.org/pdf/1311.7326
ADJUSTMENT

Roll-off — the effective electorate is smaller

Not everyone who shows up finishes the ballot. Down-ballot races (state house, commissioner) lose votes to roll-off, so the real electorate for your race is smaller than total turnout.

Roll-off rate = 1 − (votes in your race ÷ total ballots cast) Effective electorate = Total ballots × (1 − roll-off rate)
Sources: Clark & Peterson, Too Far to the Bottom? — predicts state-legislative lower-chamber races suffer the most roll-off, rising when a race is uncontested or lopsided. Voter-Rolloff.pdf. MIT Election Lab on ballot-level undervotes. electionlab.mit.edu
ADJUSTMENT

Candidate overperformance — the persuadability signal

Compare a past Democrat's actual result to the baseline. Precincts where a Democrat beat the index show the ceiling isn't fixed — they point to where persuasion has already worked.

Overperformance = candidate's actual share − DPI baseline (per precinct)
Source: NCEC — comparing DPI to actual results identifies where Democratic support held or collapsed. ncec.org/analysis/20161214-its-not-the-data
OUR NUMBERS

How the live performance numbers were computed

The baselines in the calculator are not estimates. Here is each one's formula, the exact races used (the variables), and the source.

House seats — single contested race

HD-62 and HD-63 were contested D-vs-R every cycle, so the baseline is that race's own Democratic two-way share — no index needed.

Base share = Dem votes ÷ (Rep votes + Dem votes)
Source: Clermont County BOE official canvass (HD-62, entirely in Clermont); state-certified full-district total (HD-63, Clermont + Brown).
Seat / cycleRepDemBase share
HD-62 · 2022 (midterm)31,81017,75535.8%
HD-62 · 2024 (pres.)42,13424,25136.5%
HD-63 · 2022 (midterm)29,1959,10023.8%
HD-63 · 2024 (pres.)42,03413,68224.6%

Commissioner — performance index (the 2022 seat ran unopposed)

No Democrat ran for the seat in 2022, so there is no same-office midterm baseline. The baseline is a DPI of contested county-wide races. President, U.S. Senate, and Governor are excluded — strong candidate effects (Brown, Vance, DeWine) distort the partisan read.

sᵢ = Dᵢ ÷ (Rᵢ + Dᵢ) DPI = mean(sᵢ)
Midterm-turnout basket — Source: Clermont County BOE, 2022 General Election Official Results (Summary Group Detail, Nov 8 2022).
Contested race (2022)RepDemShare
Attorney General57,81522,43027.9%
Auditor56,78822,77828.6%
Secretary of State56,96322,22928.1%
Treasurer56,89722,62728.5%
Chief Justice55,48524,46530.6%
Supreme Court (Fischer)55,69024,10630.2%
Supreme Court (DeWine)55,13024,54130.8%
U.S. Congress (2nd)57,35322,84228.5%
Midterm DPI (mean of 8)29.1%
Presidential-turnout basket — Source: Clermont County BOE, 2024 General Election Official Results (Summary Group Detail, Nov 5 2024).
Contested race (2024)RepDemShare
Supreme Court (Shanahan)72,72833,39931.5%
Supreme Court (Deters)77,23133,37330.2%
Supreme Court (Hawkins)73,87334,89932.1%
U.S. Congress (2nd)76,32634,14930.9%
State Senate (14th)75,76133,32130.5%
Commissioner (Batchler/Combs)74,06234,61131.8%
Commissioner (Painter/Mazzuckelli)74,12034,06431.5%
Clerk of Courts74,01634,14631.6%
County Recorder74,60033,77731.2%
Presidential DPI (mean of 9)31.3%
The two 2024 commissioner races alone average 31.7% — the closest same-office anchor. So the Commissioner baseline band is 29.1% (midterm DPI) → 31.7% (same-office), central ~30%.

Turnout projection (Commissioner)

2022 midterm down-ballot turnout (mean of contested races) = 79,767 × registration growth (151,043 ÷ 145,532 = 1.038) = 82,788 projected 2026 votes cast
Source for registration & turnout: Clermont County BOE official canvasses — 2024: 151,043 registered, 76.42% turnout; 2022: 145,532 registered, 55.78% turnout. House registration: GL_HD62_HD63_Precinct_Roster (HD-62 88,567 · HD-63 78,371).
REFERENCES

All sources