Chance of a 269-269 tie?

[zorkpolitics]

My first prediction map from last Nov had a 269 to 269 tie, with WV and NH going from Bush to the Democrat.

I don't think a probablity analysis based on 10 states randomly going for Bush or Kerry is correct, becuase I don't think the probablity of the close states going for either Bush or Kerry is random.  Looking over the current polls we see an outline of how the swing states might trend if the election is within close:
(State poll data from Hedgehog)
http://www.davidwissing.com/bushkerrystate2004.html

Currently Kerry leads in the following swing states:
IA by 10
MI by 10
MN by 12
OR by 5
WA by 6
I don't think Bush has much of a chance of taking any of these in a close race.

Bush leads in:
AZ by 9
CO by 9
FL by 8
MO by 7
NV by 11
NH by 3
PA by 6
TN by 11
WI by 6
I  think Kerry still has a shot at NH, WI and PA in a close race


Both are Tied (or ahead by only 1)
NM
OH
WV
If just 6 states are in play then there are 2/64 or about 3% chance of a tie.
 

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

My first prediction map from last Nov had a 269 to 269 tie, with WV and NH going from Bush to the Democrat.

I don't think a probablity analysis based on 10 states randomly going for Bush or Kerry is correct, becuase I don't think the probablity of the close states going for either Bush or Kerry is random.  Looking over the current polls we see an outline of how the swing states might trend if the election is within close:
(State poll data from Hedgehog)
http://www.davidwissing.com/bushkerrystate2004.html

Currently Kerry leads in the following swing states:
IA by 10
MI by 10
MN by 12
OR by 5
WA by 6
I don't think Bush has much of a chance of taking any of these in a close race.

Bush leads in:
AZ by 9
CO by 9
FL by 8
MO by 7
NV by 11
NH by 3
PA by 6
TN by 11
WI by 6
I  think Kerry still has a shot at NH, WI and PA in a close race


Both are Tied (or ahead by only 1)
NM
OH
WV
If just 6 states are in play then there are 2/64 or about 3% chance of a tie.
 

Sure, I just chose to base it on 10 states somewhat arbitrarily.  But I don't think it much matters.  With your six states, the chance is 3%; with my ten, the chance is 2%.  And I still think the chance is >50% that the election won't be as close as 2000 anyway, so the swing states won't even matter.

[PBrunsel]

It is not that likely. The last time that happened was 1800, a four man election.

[12th Doctor]

My first prediction map from last Nov had a 269 to 269 tie, with WV and NH going from Bush to the Democrat.

I don't think a probablity analysis based on 10 states randomly going for Bush or Kerry is correct, becuase I don't think the probablity of the close states going for either Bush or Kerry is random.  Looking over the current polls we see an outline of how the swing states might trend if the election is within close:
(State poll data from Hedgehog)
http://www.davidwissing.com/bushkerrystate2004.html

Currently Kerry leads in the following swing states:
IA by 10
MI by 10
MN by 12
OR by 5
WA by 6
I don't think Bush has much of a chance of taking any of these in a close race.

Bush leads in:
AZ by 9
CO by 9
FL by 8
MO by 7
NV by 11
NH by 3
PA by 6
TN by 11
WI by 6
I  think Kerry still has a shot at NH, WI and PA in a close race


Both are Tied (or ahead by only 1)
NM
OH
WV
If just 6 states are in play then there are 2/64 or about 3% chance of a tie.
 

I really don't trust the Minnesota or Iowa polls.  Minnesota and Iowa are way closer than that.  Those polls are FUBAR.  The other ones are probably true.

[Lunar]

I can't see Ohio being more pro-Kerry than its neighbor to the East.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Public Service Broadcast: There were too many Republicans and people who vote for Bush in 2000 in the ARG poll for WV.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

4. Bush scores poorly on the economy, but has a strong showing among Libertarians.

you put quite a bit of work into those maps, and explain the situations well, by the way.  

Thanks!  It wasn't that hard with the calculator.

Number 4 seems particularly unlikely though, since economics are the basis of the (lower case L) libertarian swing voter.

Bush keeps taxes low, and most of the job losses are in the manufacturing and tech sectors.  This doesn't affect Frontier New England and the (non-coastal) West the way it does, say, the Industrial Midwest.  If Sagebrush libertarians aren't too bad off economically, it comes down to taxes.  In which case, Bush dominates.

In such a scenario, Bush wins Maine and New Hampshire, as well as Oregon, but loses Ohio and West Virginia.

[angus]

4. Bush scores poorly on the economy, but has a strong showing among Libertarians.

you put quite a bit of work into those maps, and explain the situations well, by the way.  

Thanks!  It wasn't that hard with the calculator.

Number 4 seems particularly unlikely though, since economics are the basis of the (lower case L) libertarian swing voter.

Bush keeps taxes low, and most of the job losses are in the manufacturing and tech sectors.  This doesn't affect Frontier New England and the (non-coastal) West the way it does, say, the Industrial Midwest.  If Sagebrush libertarians aren't too bad off economically, it comes down to taxes.  In which case, Bush dominates.

In such a scenario, Bush wins Maine and New Hampshire, as well as Oregon, but loses Ohio and West Virginia.

okay, that's a plausible scenario.  I sometimes forget rustbelt blue-collar workers.   I once read that Pittsburghers vote economically left and socially right, pretty much the opposite of voters in this part of the sunbelt.  But I can see a situation where Bush wins all the West except HI and CA, but Kerry wins OH, PA, and the rest of the great lakes region, resulting in a tie.  That's the old East/West division that we discussed about a month ago on another thread.  The more I think about it, the more it seems like a long-term trend, pitting Eastern/snowbelt economic interest against Western/sunbelt economic interests.  This assumes that US manufacturing jobs don't go the way of the dodo bird, which may or may not be a valid assumption.

[ShapeShifter]

If it was a 269-269 , is it safe to assume Bush would win? which in my opinion would be yet another horrible way to lose the election like 2000