Revised Predictions...?

[The Vorlon]

Has anybody changed any of their state predictions, and if so... why?

[WalterMitty]

vorlon:  im quite curious as to why you have nm, wisc, and iowa in the gop category?

you seem to know a lot about polling.  where/how did you gain your knowledge?

[GOPhound]

I have moved Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Iowa to Bush.  I think Kerry's glow is starting to fade as the primaries have ended and Bush is now starting to hit back and run campaign ads.  I think Bush has the following in his favor:

-The Iraq situation has stabilized and democracy is setting in.  It will be difficult for Kerry to attack him here.

-Terrorist attacks will continue to happen.  The Bush team will hammer the point home that we need a president who understands this is a war, not a law enforcement issue.

-The economy is fundamentally in good shape and job growth is slowly but steadily taking place.  We are in the beginning stages of long, sustained expansion.

-I believe people are already becoming disenchanted with Kerry.  Even hard core Liberals that I know don't like the guy.  He's not a good stump speaker, always has a scowl on his face, offers no optimism.  This will hurt him down the stretch as people compare him to Bush.  Edwards is a far superior campaigner.  

-Cash.  Bush cannot be matched here.  After Labor Day he is going to literally carpet bomb the airwaves.  

I am becoming increasingly optimistic that Bush has taken their best shot and is still standing.  Kerry will get a bump when he picks his VP but it will fade I think.

In the next few weeks if we see polls in PA, OH, IA, WI,NM,FL,WV placing Bush within the margin of error, I think Kerry will lose in November barring unforseen circumstances.  The polls showing Bush basically tied in PA at this point should scare Kerry big time.

     

[zachman]

I agree Iowa and NM are fairly likely to switching to Bush, but Wisconsin will come after Pennsylvania, Minnesota, and perhaps Oregon depending on how Nader does. Wisconsin had a high turnout primary, and they hate Bush more than they did in 2000. I disagree with the changes. But NM, is about the most likely to change.

[Beet]

I predicted in November 2003 that Bush would win Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, and Iowa, and nothing has changed since then to change my mind. The dynamics of the race have essentially stayed the same since the 2002 elections.

I don't expect anything to change until November. The world has become so predictable.

[StevenNick]

I was just watching CNN Headline News.  On the crawl at the bottom of the screen I saw that John Kerry, according to the AP, has official gotten enough delegates to be the nominee.  Beyond that, this story hasn't gotten any press coverage whatsoever that I've seen.  Now that Kerry won't be getting any more free, positive press coverage, he'll start fading in the polls.

Everybody's been saying that this is going to be a close race.  I still don't see it that way.  I think Bush could win by 8-10 points.

[angus]

I predicted in November 2003 that Bush would win Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, and Iowa, and nothing has changed since then to change my mind. The dynamics of the race have essentially stayed the same since the 2002 elections.

I don't expect anything to change until November. The world has become so predictable.

Don't change 'em.  That's my game.  Vorlon's game is more serious, though.  Following the polls and such.  I respect that.  Glad to see that the march13th update finally materialized.  But it's chickensheet, because you left three of them blank.  I this material won't merit an A.

"I'm just being honest."
        --Outkast

[Ben.]

vorlon:  im quite curious as to why you have nm, wisc, and iowa in the gop category?

you seem to know a lot about polling.  where/how did you gain your knowledge?

New Mexico, Wisconsin, and Iowa were amazingly close in 2000, so flipping them to Bush requires only a very modest change.

Iowa won by Gore by 4,144 votes
Wisconsin   won by Gore by 5,708 votes
New Mexico won by Gore by 366 votes.

We are, after all, only talking about 10,000 total votes...

Oregon was also razor thin - Gore won by 6,765 votes

Right now, the polls are quite distorted.

Back in 1993 when the Motor Voter act got passed, doing a poll really changed a great deal.  It used to be that if somebody took the effort to go down to the courthouse to register, they usually ended up voting...

With "motor voter" a very high % of people are "registered" but only about 50ish % actually do vote.

To make your polling accurate you thus have to ask a whole bunch of "screening" questions to weed out those who will vote from those who don't.

The questions vary a great deal from polling firm to polling firm, but typically ask things like "How closely how have been paying attention to the race", "how excited are you are about your candidate", etc...

Right now, Democrats are on a "high" they have just selected a candidate, had tons of media coverage, etc...  

because of this there are more "excited" democrats than Republicans, hence more "likely" democrat voters (according to polllsters), hence better poll numbers for Kerry..

A month from now when things settle down, Bush should be up 3-5 points from what I see in the current polls..

Bush at +3 has 3 or 4 states he VERY narrowly lost in 2000 shift to his column..

Vorlon I’m going to have to quibble with your  calling of these states for while these states you mention where close that does not mean they will be so this time around, not least because Bush in 2004 is not the same candidate as Bush in 2000, Kerry is not Gore and Nader is not so much a factor….but I digress here’s my assessment of the states you mention plus NM…

Iowa
Gore: 48.54%
Bush: 48.22%
Nader: 2.23%

IMHO, Iowa is the most likely Bush pickup after New Mexico the closeness of the result last time and a number of other factors give Bush an edge but not a commanding advantage…however the state certainly leans to the GOP this time around.  

Minnesota  
Gore: 47.91%
Bush: 45.50%
Nader: 5.20%

The events of 2002 would suggest that the state was trending dramatically to the GOP, I am not so sure the senate election was closer than it seemed and the Democrats committed a number of blunders not least the “Wellstone Memorial” that alienated voters (I really feel sorry that Mondale lost, would have been great to have him back in the senate) and added to this in the Gubernational race the Republicans only really won thanks in large part to the independent liberal candidacy of Timothy Penny who gained 16% which threw the election to the GOP. Taking into account these factors the 2002 results no longer seem to denote a radical shift in MN leanings and combined with the massive Nader vote (really a Le Duke vote IMHO) last time which will largely vote for Kerry this time around should make MN a definite Dem leaning state and I would expect the Dem majority to be much stronger than last time. And finally as with Oregon environmental issues are very important in MN and Bush just cant run on his handling of the environment and there is a definite risk that liberal republicans in the state who voted for Bush in 2000 and see the environment as a big issue might well stay home or even vote for the Libertarians.  
         
Wisconsin:
Gore: 47.83%
Bush: 47.61%
Nader: 3.62%

Not a Massive Nader vote but sufficient to suggest that Nader’s supporters would have made Gore much safer in the state, having said that Buchanan’s rather pitiful showing if transferred to Bush would have won the state for Bush (had Nader still run). Looking at the 2002 results the Dems took the Governorship and still dominate the congressional delegation as was shown in their primary the local party appears highly energised and while the state could go either way I would argue that it strongly leans to the Dems.  

Oregon:
Gore: 46.96%
Bush: 46.52%
Nader: 5.04%

Looking at the closeness between Gore’s and Bush’s voter totals it may seem absurd when I say I have no worries that the Dems will carry the state, however it is important to remember that Oregon is a state where environmental issues have a high priority and as in MN Bush cannot compete when it comes to environmental issues and combine this with the likelihood that Nader’s vote this time will be much smaller than in 2000 and further more that Oregon’s elected officals are overwhelmingly democratic (only one Republican senator and representative) and that a high voter turnout in the urban conurbations such as Portland, Salem and Newport all of which tend democratic is very likely I would be very surprised where Bush to win the state.

New Mexico:

Gore: 47.91%
Bush: 47.85%
Nader: 3.55%        

Bush’s policy on immigrations (and a use the word policy lightly here) together with his assiduous courting of the Hispanic vote should help gain this state however I would imagine that it will be once again close if not very close as the 3.5% who voted Nader may very well vote for Kerry this time around. However it must be said that at this point NM is leaning GOP as much as WI or MN are leaning to the Dems but probably more than IA is leaning to Bush (but I still expect both IA and NM in the end to go over to the GOP).  

[Gustaf]

I change my predictions all the time...

[The Vorlon]

I predicted in November 2003 that Bush would win Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, and Iowa, and nothing has changed since then to change my mind. The dynamics of the race have essentially stayed the same since the 2002 elections.

I don't expect anything to change until November. The world has become so predictable.

Don't change 'em.  That's my game.  Vorlon's game is more serious, though.  Following the polls and such.  I respect that.  Glad to see that the march13th update finally materialized.  But it's chickensheet, because you left three of them blank.  I this material won't merit an A.

"I'm just being honest."
        --Outkast

Ok... I've called em' all.. happy now..?

[Gustaf]

Though all Nader voters won't go to Kerry, etc most will. Look at the match-up polls that are done where people are asked how they would vote in a Kerry-Bush race and then in a Kerry-Bush-Nader race.

[© Tweed the Younger]

I just revised mine.



Bush 282
Kerry 256

OH switches to Kerry, and PA and NV switch to Bush.

[Gustaf]

I predicted in November 2003 that Bush would win Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, and Iowa, and nothing has changed since then to change my mind. The dynamics of the race have essentially stayed the same since the 2002 elections.

I don't expect anything to change until November. The world has become so predictable.

Don't change 'em.  That's my game.  Vorlon's game is more serious, though.  Following the polls and such.  I respect that.  Glad to see that the march13th update finally materialized.  But it's chickensheet, because you left three of them blank.  I this material won't merit an A.

"I'm just being honest."
        --Outkast

Ok... I've called em' all.. happy now..?

You keep changing it all the time...

[ilikeverin]

Minnesota  
Gore: 47.91%
Bush: 45.50%
Nader: 5.20%

The events of 2002 would suggest that the state was trending dramatically to the GOP, I am not so sure the senate election was closer than it seemed and the Democrats committed a number of blunders not least the “Wellstone Memorial” that alienated voters (I really feel sorry that Mondale lost, would have been great to have him back in the senate) and added to this in the Gubernational race the Republicans only really won thanks in large part to the independent liberal candidacy of Timothy Penny who gained 16% which threw the election to the GOP. Taking into account these factors the 2002 results no longer seem to denote a radical shift in MN leanings and combined with the massive Nader vote (really a Le Duke vote IMHO) last time which will largely vote for Kerry this time around should make MN a definite Dem leaning state and I would expect the Dem majority to be much stronger than last time. And finally as with Oregon environmental issues are very important in MN and Bush just cant run on his handling of the environment and there is a definite risk that liberal republicans in the state who voted for Bush in 2000 and see the environment as a big issue might well stay home or even vote for the Libertarians.  

I don't think Minnesota is trending GOP.  I think it's trending centrist.

The difference in votes between Mondale & Coleman was 1%.  Don't remind me about the Wellstone Memorial gaffe.  The memorial was going along fine... there was no politics at all... then disaster struck.  One of Wellstone's sons took the stage.  Let's just say his speech caused The Body to walk out of the Metrodome in disgust...

Tim Penny->Independence Party
Independence Party->Reform Party of Minnesota (formerly)

I'm not sure about his views, though.

And WHY DOES EVERYONE INSIST THAT IT WAS THE LADUKE FACTOR?  I had never heard of her.  She never served in any public office (IIRC).  I think it's the Ventura Factor.  People 'got used' to voting for a 3rd party.  They also agreed with the Green Party positions, most notably the environment (it's big here).  

Another big issue is education, as Minnesota has one of the best public school systems in the country.  Thus, you don't hear much of anything about cutting education funding.  Last year, we had a 4.56 billion dollar budget deficit.

All in all, I would give Minnesota to Kerry.  But that's just me

[angus]

I predicted in November 2003 that Bush would win Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, and Iowa, and nothing has changed since then to change my mind. The dynamics of the race have essentially stayed the same since the 2002 elections.

I don't expect anything to change until November. The world has become so predictable.

Don't change 'em.  That's my game.  Vorlon's game is more serious, though.  Following the polls and such.  I respect that.  Glad to see that the march13th update finally materialized.  But it's chickensheet, because you left three of them blank.  I this material won't merit an A.

"I'm just being honest."
        --Outkast

Ok... I've called em' all.. happy now..?

You keep changing it all the time...

Sorry Gustaf I think you misinterpreted.  Vorlon did not.  Change is no problem.  Some are changers some aren't.

[Gustaf]

I predicted in November 2003 that Bush would win Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, and Iowa, and nothing has changed since then to change my mind. The dynamics of the race have essentially stayed the same since the 2002 elections.

I don't expect anything to change until November. The world has become so predictable.

Don't change 'em.  That's my game.  Vorlon's game is more serious, though.  Following the polls and such.  I respect that.  Glad to see that the march13th update finally materialized.  But it's chickensheet, because you left three of them blank.  I this material won't merit an A.

"I'm just being honest."
        --Outkast

Ok... I've called em' all.. happy now..?

You keep changing it all the time...

Sorry Gustaf I think you misinterpreted.  Vorlon did not.  Change is no problem.  Some are changers some aren't.

I just pointed out that he's flipped his calls around some. H ehad Kerry winning a few days ago, and now he hasn't.

[Sibboleth]

And WHY DOES EVERYONE INSIST THAT IT WAS THE LADUKE FACTOR?  I had never heard of her.  She never served in any public office (IIRC).  I think it's the Ventura Factor.  People 'got used' to voting for a 3rd party.  They also agreed with the Green Party positions, most notably the environment (it's big here).  

Nader polled stronger in Northern Minnesota than the rest of the state.

[angus]

Little town of just a few miles north of the Superior lakeshore, in huge Saint Louis county, is where I spend almost every Christmas from as far as I can remember till around 17.  It's a bastion of the religious left.  No doubt Nader polls strong there.  Also no doubt anti-Nader brownshirts will be out in full intimidating force.  MoveOn dot org has no shortage of contributors in that little part of the world.

[© Tweed the Younger]

I don't see hwo you can say MN isn't trending GOP, it went from being one of the most liberal states in the union (the only state to go dem in 1984), to being a near tossup this year.  If bush does win Minnesota, it will be the first time that has happened since Nixon won it in 1972.

[Gustaf]

I don't see hwo you can say MN isn't trending GOP, it went from being one of the most liberal states in the union (the only state to go dem in 1984), to being a near tossup this year.  If bush does win Minnesota, it will be the first time that has happened since Nixon won it in 1972.

Well, to be fair it was Mondale's home state in 1984, but still, you have a point. It voted for Humphrey in 1968 as well.

[dunn]

I don't see hwo you can say MN isn't trending GOP, it went from being one of the most liberal states in the union (the only state to go dem in 1984), to being a near tossup this year.  If bush does win Minnesota, it will be the first time that has happened since Nixon won it in 1972.

It eas Mondale home state

[Gustaf]

I don't see hwo you can say MN isn't trending GOP, it went from being one of the most liberal states in the union (the only state to go dem in 1984), to being a near tossup this year.  If bush does win Minnesota, it will be the first time that has happened since Nixon won it in 1972.

It eas Mondale home state

I just said that.

[dunn]

I don't see hwo you can say MN isn't trending GOP, it went from being one of the most liberal states in the union (the only state to go dem in 1984), to being a near tossup this year.  If bush does win Minnesota, it will be the first time that has happened since Nixon won it in 1972.

It eas Mondale home state

I just said that.

when I post it wasn't there. but you beat me

[zachman]

Its still has a bias to the left. 53-46.5 with Nader and Buccanan included.

[© Tweed the Younger]

I don't see hwo you can say MN isn't trending GOP, it went from being one of the most liberal states in the union (the only state to go dem in 1984), to being a near tossup this year.  If bush does win Minnesota, it will be the first time that has happened since Nixon won it in 1972.

Well, to be fair it was Mondale's home state in 1984, but still, you have a point. It voted for Humphrey in 1968 as well.

Still, it's the only state that went for him.

I was rooting for the 50-state sweep.