Election 2008 Presidential Predictions

Note: The Google advertisement links below may advocate political positions that this site does not endorse.

Date of Prediction: 2008-02-09 Version:28

Prediction Map

Confidence Map

Prediction States Won

		270 \|	538 \|
Dem	283
Rep	255
Ind	0

Confidence States Won

		270 \|	538 \|
Dem	243
Rep	142
Ind	0
Tos	153

State Pick-ups

	Gain			Loss			Hold			Net Gain
	ST	CD	EV	ST	CD	EV	ST	CD	EV
Dem	+22	+3	+161	-5	0	-130	15	2	122	+31
Rep	+5	0	+130	-22	-3	-161	9	0	125	-31
Ind	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Prediction Score (max Score = 112)

Score	State Wins	State Percentages	CD Wins	CD Percentages
43	27	12	3	1

Analysis

McCain vs. Obama

Prediction History
Prediction Graph

Comments History - show

Version History

Member Comments

By: Chica_Of_Light (D-CA) 2008-02-09 @ 23:44:23
Anything, think about all these red states Obama would have to capture on your map in this scenario against John McCain. He would have to win virtually all of them! One or two could go toward McCain and that's it! Good luck!!! :)) By the way, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, Indiana, Kentucky and New Mexico will definetely be going to John McCain against Obama. Haven't you seen the Survey USA polls? Obama does even worse when you incorporate the "Bradley Effect". Reason or Lunacy? Democrats still have a choice. Last Edit: 2008-02-10 @ 00:47:03

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-02-10 @ 00:43:20
This will not be the outcome of the 2008 election that I am confident of!

By: CR (--MO) 2008-02-10 @ 01:21:42
But it would be wild if it were. And I think we all know Obama is not endanger of losing New York, California, New Jersey or Massachusetts. Still I like how orginial it is.

By: AnythingGoes41 (I-IL) 2008-02-10 @ 01:28:57
Oh yes Obama could lose those states. The hatred against Obama is very strong yet he does very well in traditional Republican states. Just look at Kansas and Nebraska as examples. Obama swept those states while Republican turnout was fairly low. I was amazed to find in Nebraska that Obama won largely by 200+ Republicans in caucuses switching to Obama. Obama has considerable strength in the heartland and not so much on the coasts.

By: Chica_Of_Light (D-CA) 2008-02-10 @ 01:35:14
Caucuses, caucuses, caucuses. Cockuses, cockuses, cockuses. Obama wins Caucuses but loses Primaries! Winning public votes is one thing, winning private votes are quite another. Washington, Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa were caucuses! New Hampshire, New York, California, Arizona, Massachussets were primaries! In private, voters chose Hillary; in public, in the face of critical left-wing hacks, they vote Obama. Obama wont be performing anywhere near this good in the all-private General Election! Last Edit: 2008-02-10 @ 01:36:51

By: AnythingGoes41 (I-IL) 2008-02-10 @ 01:43:46
Ummm what was Louisiana then? Or was that just all racial? Along with Delaware and Missouri, Utah, Alabama, South Carolina, Georgia, and Connecticut? Give me a break! Because we all know Utah is 56% African-American

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-02-10 @ 01:51:34
Obama is doing extremely well with the african american vote and extreme left vote in the primary states he has won. A caucus like Chica said is a different game one he has mastered its another thing when one votes in private, not a public arena. So Obama will do well in Maryland and Virginia where african americans dominate the democratic primary electorate. Hillary appears to do a lot better with the working class blue collar vote and latino's which will help her in Ohio and Texas that offer a larger amount of delegates then the states voting in february. Wisconsin will be a tight race it appears as both candidates have elements to benefit there and the state is diverse as California was...

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-02-10 @ 01:52:47
As we have seen there are exceptions to every rule but there are patterns to follow

By: AnythingGoes41 (I-IL) 2008-02-10 @ 01:59:39
There are so many exceptions here. Idaho, Nebraska, and Kansas hardly represent the far left.

By: CR (--MO) 2008-02-10 @ 02:13:23
I agree. I mean Utah, Connecticut, Idaho those states hardly have large black populations. I really did not see that there was this much discontent between Obama and Hillary supporters. It kindof suprises me. You guys have to unite so you can stop John McCain, lol, for both our party's sakes. In all seriousness though, with McCain on the ticket I think conservative turn out will be low unless Hillary is the nominee. Anything can happen then. I think Obama could crush him with the Democratic base, independents, and a few liberal Republicans. Conservatives stay out and McCain goes nowhere but hack to Arizona. But hey, its way too early for all of this. I want to see how Barak does in Texas, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Pennslyvania. Two of the four and he's in because I could see him sweeping Oregon, Kentucky, Indiana, Montana, Mississippi, etc. Hillary is not out yet but she got a bad defeat tonight. Doesn't mean much but we are starting to run out of states. I mean we are over half way through. I think that both the DNC and RNC need major overhauls for their primaries. But that is a discussion for another day. Democrats still seem more motivated to win than the GOP now that we have McCain. But be careful, Hillary can draw those that may stay home otherwise. Obama is the better choice especailly with independents.

By: AnythingGoes41 (I-IL) 2008-02-10 @ 02:18:18
CR- Damn good analysis. It is way too early but these wins debunk Obama as the "racial" candidate which the Clintons have tried to portray him as. BTW - have you ever seen Blazing Saddles? Clinton reminds me of the schoolmarm from that movie - in style only, not substance.

By: jamespol (I-MO) 2008-02-10 @ 02:22:30
This map looks nothing like 2004.. so I have to find another way to insult the whole world..

By: AnythingGoes41 (I-IL) 2008-02-10 @ 02:27:43
I'm coming around to your camp James - We'll have to see what happens.

By: CR (--MO) 2008-02-10 @ 02:27:51
First thank you for the nice comment, and second, lol, my dad said the same thing a few days ago. The fact of the matter is I think Obama could well be on his way to winning the presidency. His wins tonight were impressive. To be honest I was not expecting her to be beat so badly. Now there are a lot of states to go. But at this point I think that Obama has put himself in a really good place. A brokered convention could be an issue but after the last big states come along I think we'll have a good idea of what is going to happen. We'll know more in the coming weeks and months. But McCain-Obama will destroy the red-blue divide for sure. Last Edit: 2008-02-10 @ 02:28:30

By: jamespol (I-MO) 2008-02-10 @ 02:30:12
ConservRep texaslefty is concerned that Oklahoma is still blue on your map.

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-02-10 @ 02:30:54
CR as you can see there is as much discontent in our party as there is in yours. There is a segment of the party that would be extremely bitter if Clinton loses as there would be if Obama did. We will not just unite with the snap of a finger, So dont underestimate John Mc Cains chances like him or not.

By: CR (--MO) 2008-02-10 @ 02:31:36
And so it shall stay for a long long long time. Hey I thought that joke was over with?

By: AnythingGoes41 (I-IL) 2008-02-10 @ 02:32:03
That's exactly why I have New York and California going for McCain!

By: jamespol (I-MO) 2008-02-10 @ 02:32:33
Remember this.. CR, OK will be closish in 2008!

By: CR (--MO) 2008-02-10 @ 02:33:43
That's wired Liberal because that means that portions of both our bases could sit out. For example in an Obama-McCain race, neither doniki nor myself will vote for president. No one seems happy with the candidates. This is turning into a terrible election year. I think that the fact that the campigns will have gone on for two years when its all over does not help at all. At this point I wish it were all over so that we could get a break and move on.

By: CR (--MO) 2008-02-10 @ 02:35:01
Well if that is the case maybe I'll have some fun with my next map.

By: AnythingGoes41 (I-IL) 2008-02-10 @ 02:35:08
Anything can still happen at this point.

By: AnythingGoes41 (I-IL) 2008-02-10 @ 02:36:57
Hell Look at well Romney has done in Louisiana and Washington tonight. That's totatlly messed up.

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-02-10 @ 02:41:47
CR my friend, you can add me to your list if Obama is the nominee Im going to write in Hillary Clinton which if you think about it is a vote for John Mc Cain or equal to sitting it out

By: AnythingGoes41 (I-IL) 2008-02-10 @ 02:51:58
Keep up the effort - Those of us in Middle America will keep our fight up for this country. "We are the ones we have been waiting for"

By: Chica_Of_Light (D-CA) 2008-02-10 @ 04:37:25
I will vote for Obama. If I'm furious enough, I might write in Hillary's name, but I might have calmed down a bit by November. However, if Obama loses, I wont let the Democratic left-wing forget it! Ever! In the end, the Democratic Party will be forced to listen to its moderates if Obama loses! Last Edit: 2008-02-10 @ 04:38:23

By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-02-10 @ 06:35:00
How can anyone who consider themselves Democrats even THINK of not voting for the Democratic candidate ? After eight years of Bush, two stolen elections, a war that is costing the country human lives and much needed money, an economy going down the drain, trade deficit and public deficit shooting up, you're still wondering whether you'll write-in the also-ran ? What kind of thinking is that ? I can't stand Clinton, but if she's nominated (and she still has a 50% chance) I'll support her like I supported Obama in primary, it's so obvious. The United States and the entire WORLD won't get through a third Republican term. McCain is a conservative warmonger even more than Bush is, he'll take you to the edge of hell, and you're still asking yourself, hum, what if I don't like my party's candidate? Get real, people! This is not just your parochial instinct that's at stake here.

By: Chica_Of_Light (D-CA) 2008-02-10 @ 06:43:05
Hey, I'm still surprised there are Republicans after what Bush has done to the standing of the party, but people have their reasons. Personally, I'm getting to the point where I can't stand Obama and his fallacious attempt to cast himself as the anti-establishment candidate. With the backing of the Kennedy Klan and a bunch of Washington insiders, he certainly isn't an Anti-establishment candidate. Nor has he ever voted against the Iraq War. He wasn't a US senator when power was first granted to Bush to attack Iraq nor has he ever voted against the war there after. He simply doesn't bother to vote. How convenient! I was orginally hopeful that he was who he indicated himself to be but after closer scrutiny I've realized he's just as much a fake as the rest of them! Sorry, but I'm throwing my weight completely behind Hillary Clinton because she has the experience and knowledge to get what we want and that's fundementally important after 8 long years of Bush hell! The Novice or the Expert? I choose the Expert! And no, I don't want unity with the nuts of the Republican party, which is what Obama consistently touts. Anybody with a foundation in political history knows that, to get your way, your going to have to piss off the other party. That's what Bill Clinton realized and that's why he is so hated by the Republican party! That's what Hillary will do! She will not pull punches to get what she wants! She will fight tooth and nail to get what Democrats want! Obama will hold up a white flag at an attempt for "unity"! NO THANKS! But "Republicans hate Hillary". Well, they're going to hate her even more once she's President! After 8 long years of the tragic Bush Presidency, they deserve it! Last Edit: 2008-02-10 @ 07:05:01

By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-02-10 @ 06:58:05
Clinton is an expert, sure, an expert for politics as usual. Her term will be like Bill's. A second Republican revolution in 2010 and maybe even a loss in the GE in 2012. And excuse me, but apart from the Kennedy clan (I wish you'd spell that without a K, it's a bit insulting), it is the Clinton side who are consistently bragging about their lead in the superdelegate count, who have the big fund donors, who are supported by a whole bunch of Clinton people like Madeleine Albright (whom I intensely admire, her Clinton endorsement notwithstanding). And Obama isn't that lone novice you try to portray. He'll have advisers, an administration, he will be the leader and he will have as many tech crew people by his side as you like. What we need is leadership, not knowledgeability. Bill Clinton was only ever a governor in a poor southern state before he became President. He got the right advisers, and he became a very able leader in foreign matters.

By: Chica_Of_Light (D-CA) 2008-02-10 @ 07:08:21
I don't want Obama. He's a farce! A politician with experience is far better than a politician exclusively! That's true of EVERY CAREER and TRADE. Experience always matters! I don't know what universe Obama comes from to believe it doesn't! Last Edit: 2008-02-10 @ 07:12:19

By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-02-10 @ 07:42:34
Well, I won't bother trying to convince you anyway, because I can't (and you can't, so don't give it a try). Calling Obama a farce is too much for me, no farce has ever gone past super tuesday. And if you think Obama's chances are smaller than Clinton's, despite the polls, despite her image, despite his charisma and his appeal to independents, well then I don't know which universe YOU're in, but it sure isn't mine or Obama's or pretty much everybody's.

By: Chica_Of_Light (D-CA) 2008-02-10 @ 07:49:18
Obama's chances are nil! Good luck if you plan on him being your savior! He wont be doing any saving in November! By the way, John Kerry was tons more charismatic than Bush yet the Illiterate-in-Chief still won the Presidency! If you think charisma and pretty words will sway the American people, you're fooling yourself! What matters are the issues! Except for anything other than Iraq, Obama is a virtual unknown on the issues! Hillary Clinton has it all out in the open! She knows what's important in the Fall! Last Edit: 2008-02-10 @ 07:54:46

By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-02-10 @ 14:56:02
I simply do not understand where all of the liberals, african-americans, and "youth" voters have been up until 2008. In 2004 we were told the youth would come out in droves and support Kerry, which didn't happen. But now all of a sudden they are showing up in droves at the polls for someone who sounds more like he's leading a church revival than the free world. I agree he gives one hell of a speach, but where is the substance behind the words? Where is the action, when he can't even show up to vote in the Senate on Iran? If I want to sit this election out like others did in 2000 and 2004, thus allowing Bush to be elected and reelected, I have every right to. Liberals, blacks, college students, NEVER showed up to vote for Gore and Kerry but I went out to vote for 2 candidate who were completely uninspiring and either didn't campaign or didn't fight hard enough. But now all of a sudden when the left-wing of the Dem party finds a candidate they like, I'm being branded "unpatriotic" for not supporting that candidate, when I've been the one all along who has supported the Democratic party! No, now it is time for the liberals, the blacks, the college kids, to get off their lazy asses and go out and vote for their party and their candidate the way I did in 2000 and 2004. I'm not going to do it this time. I'm done supporting candidates I don't personally care for just for the sake of the Democartic party. I have supported every freakin' loser the Dems have put up just to keep Bush out of office, but now its your turn! I'm not supporting a man that is quite clearly all talk and NO action. Amazing though that on this forum we have heard ringing endorsements of Bill Clinton and even Madeline Albright, while Hillary Clinton has been driven in the ground. This is so incredibly reminiscent of the entire "Hillary stayed with Bill, so she isn't fit to lead" arguement. You continously applaud the perpetrator, but punish the woman who has had to make difficult choices in her life for herself and her family... Truly amazing! Last Edit: 2008-02-10 @ 14:59:18

By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2008-02-10 @ 16:58:15
Hillary will pull on on March 4th at the latest. Now that she lost all four yesterday, will lose Maine tonight and will lose the potomac primaries on Tuesday, Ohioans will have three weeks to consider their vote. And if she doesn't stop Obama in Ohio, then it's checkmate and her keen intellect and her pocketbook will tell her to give up.

By: CR (--MO) 2008-02-10 @ 17:55:32
Well having seen Obama's strength to date and if he wins Maine, Virginia, DC, Maryland, and Ohio I'd say Hillary is done whether she wants to be or not. I don't know how Texas will go nor do I know just what Wisconsin will do. But I do know that Obama could pull off wins in Ohio, Texas, and Pennslyvania. If he does, she's out. But likewise if she courts all the big states like Texas, Wisconsin, Ohio, and such then she can keep going. At the end though given the way other states are voting that means a brokered convention if one of them doesn't drop out for the sake of party unity. About a month from now or by early March will know a lot more. We need to see especially what Texas and Ohio do.

By: dnul222 (D-MN) 2008-02-10 @ 19:17:03
Well, As Maine goes so goes Virginia, Maryland and DC! But COnservRep is correct - On to Wisconsin which should be a close vote. Then next month Ohio, Tx (and tiny Vt and RI)....Obama has a chance in Ohio because of the economy. TX should be a win for Hilary BUT the younger hispanic vote will be different here according to insiders. I feel that this may go beyond PENN...maybe until Puerto Rico in June. ANd on to the convention, but if Obama keeps winning it will be hard to deny him the nomination. I too voted for Kerry, Gore, CLinton twice, Carter twice, Dukakis, even Mondale, alas also McGovern, Humphrey, Johnson...oh am I giving away my age! The youth vote has come and gone many times (Humphrey instead of mCCarthey) But I only blame the candidates for poor choices in the campaign and take care of my own vote and as many as I can convince. I will be happy to vote for Obama OR CLinton...but I am not happy with either for many of the same reasons COnservrep is not happy with McCain....

By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-02-10 @ 21:59:53
How does Ohio's economy benefit Obama? On the contrary- those states with weak economies benefit Clinton. Clinton has broad support here in Ohio including the very popular governor. Her husband has an approval rating of 68% in Ohio, according to a poll in the C. Dispatch this summer. The Demographics strongly favor Clinton here. 1.) 8% african american population, 2.) heavy blue collar population 3.) heavy unionization, 4.) democratic voters that are poor and white, and 5.) entrenched racism in Southern Ohio. Obama does well among wealthy Democrats- you may have them in MN, we don't have them in Ohio. One week ago I would have predicted a 15-20% win for Clinton here. I'm not sure what it is now, but Obama fever hasn't caught on yet and he has suspended his ads in the Cleveland market. I would now predict a Clinton win around 10% here including her looming losses in VA, MD, and DC. I do think that this is Obama's to lose now... He better keep his wife quiet- may Hillary be a lesson to her!

By: CR (--MO) 2008-02-10 @ 23:44:11
Well I personally think if Obama wins Washington, Louisiana, Nebraska, Maine, Virginia, Maryland, DC, Wisconsin, and Hawaii all in a row his momentum will be hard to stop and could sway many in Ohio. But that is just a guess. Even more confusing is Texas. It has both a black and latino population. Men and women could split as well as the youth and elderly. Its a real tossup. Again a string of wins like that, especially since the GOP has its wrecked nominee may motivate Democrats to choice the winning candidate. I feel confident that Obama could carry Pennslyvania. We'll see how the next few weeks will go but Barak appears to be holding his own.

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-02-11 @ 00:05:31
Lol if only conservatives really knew the real Michelle Obama she makes hillary look like a republican in comparison, they really have no idea who she is LOL......

By: CR (--MO) 2008-02-11 @ 00:09:35
Oh I know all about Mrs. Obama. But she won't be the president. Barak will and as long as McCain is kept from gaining control of the party we can survive for two or four years. With the long term survival of the party at stake we have little choice. I hate to do this but its one of those unfortunate things that has to be done.

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-02-11 @ 00:19:29
Oh I know all about Mrs. Obama. But she won't be the president. I suppose the same was said of Hillary Clinton in 1992 by conservatives. Barack would not have been any where with out Michelle hmm (sounds familiar to me). All Im saying is I think conservatives will have a second look when she starts spewing her views!! They will turn out regardless of the democratic candidate just my opinion our base is just as fractured if not more. Last Edit: 2008-02-11 @ 00:20:26

By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-02-11 @ 09:41:00
Liberal- I know nothing about Michelle Obama? What is the story.. @AG- I never said I wouldn't support a N*gger! I'm no different than you! You don't feel Clinton to be inspiring so you aren't going to vote for her. I don't feel Obama inspiring so I'm not going to vote for him. It has more to do with his lack of substance than his race. I will happily cast a vote for an African American, Latino, Woman.... etc.... The problem I have right now is that where was the black community when Gore and Kerry were trying to stop Bush? Now that they have a black candidate they are voting, but only after 8 disasterous years for them in terms of a president that is not friendly to any of their causes. Of course they have also turned their backs on the Clinton's who have been the only people that have propelled black causes and progressive causes to the forefront of the political stage.

By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2008-02-11 @ 09:43:45
wild map. I am throwing my support to Obama.

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-02-11 @ 14:27:05
Doniki, So true the black vote was 90 percent for Kerry but the turnout was not high. Now suddenly they have found there inspiration lol well where were they when it mattered same with the youth that is now complaining about Bush where were they? Will they be there for the general election once the republicans get threw with there smear campaign I suspect not! As for Michelle Obama doni do some investigative reporting you'll see what I mean. Many things for the republicans to feast on there. Last Edit: 2008-02-11 @ 14:29:24

User's Predictions

Prediction Score	States	Percent	Total	Accuracy	Ver	#D	Rank		#Pred
2008 President	30/56	13/56	43/112	38.4%	28	269	1484	T	1,505
2008 Senate	28/33	11/33	39/66	59.1%	1	348	358	T	407
2008 Governor	11/11	5/11	16/22	72.7%	1	348	152	T	264
2008 Dem Primary	30/52	9/52	39/104	37.5%	11	-	110	T	271
2008 Rep Primary	20/49	5/49	25/98	25.5%	7	-	141	T	235
2007 Governor	3/3	2/3	5/6	83.3%	3	61	58	T	167
Aggregate Predictions	122/204	45/204	167/408	40.9%

Links

Back to 2008 Presidential Prediction Home - Predictions Home