Election 2008 Presidential Predictions

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

Date of Prediction: 2007-09-29 Version:9

Prediction Map

Confidence Map

Prediction States Won

		270 \|	538 \|
Dem	384
Rep	154
Ind	0

Confidence States Won

		270 \|	538 \|
Dem	292
Rep	131
Ind	0
Tos	115

State Pick-ups

	Gain			Loss			Hold			Net Gain
	ST	CD	EV	ST	CD	EV	ST	CD	EV
Dem	+12	0	+132	0	0	0	20	2	252	+132
Rep	0	0	0	-12	0	-132	19	3	154	-132
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
69	44	20	4	1

Analysis

I have to admit I'm sorry to lose the thread on fundraising, but hey it's the end of the 3rd quarter, so it's time to update things a bit.

Hillary/Giuliani as the nominees.

Strong undercurrents:

I think the growing revulsion against Reps is going to continue, the more Bush strong-arms them into obstructing popular Dem initiatives. On the Rep side, I think Giuliani will be able to make inroads in the fringe states around NYC, and could turn CT and NJ in particular into battlegrounds. However, I think Hillary will do the same in the border-south, and be able to do a better job of flipping states like AR, TN, KY and VA than Giuliani has with CT, NJ and PA. In the end, though, I think the Dems will be able to prevail, the most likely CT, AR, PA, VA, NJ, TN and KY if recent polling is to be believed. I haven't seen anything for WV, and can't imagine WV not continuing to vote Rep so moved that one back to the Rep column. All of the above is based on a spate of reputable polls.

Overall, I think it's important to realize that this election is not a repeat of 2004, 2000, 1996, or 1992. It's a new battleground out there!

OH, VA, and NM are all safely Dem for the moment.

In IA, not only are the major Rep candidates snubbing the state, but expect the national party to come down hard on ethanol, which could possibly effect things in SD too, but it's too early to say. I think the same things that elected McCaskill will help Hillary in MO.

FL is always a question mark. Giuliani will play well with the transplanted NY population, but Hillary is no slouch there either, and I think the Latino population here, always staunchly Rep may be having second thoughts.

So what about AZ, CO and NV? Immigration. I think the Reps are going to get suckerpunched in those states with Latino-American voters. Yeah there's a base that's pro-Rep on the issue, but my feeling is they were Reps to begin with. Remember, GWB got 40% of the Latino vote; without a major change in strategy, they'll be lucky to break 20. And if that happens, it's going to be as generational a marker as it currently is with Black Americans. Haven't seen much polling on this yet, but if my home state of CA is any indication, the current Rep congress is going to do nationally the same thing that Pete Wilson did to CA, hand over a huge demographic to the Dems. Viva La Raza!

Prediction History
Prediction Graph

Comments History - show

Version History

Member Comments

By: Chica_Of_Light (D-CA) 2007-09-29 @ 11:35:23
equern, I agree about Nevada and New Mexico going toward the Democrats this time around, due to the smaller populations of the states and tiny margins of success of President Bush during the 2004 elections, coupled with the states' large latino demographics. They will easily fall into Hillary's column in 2008--and this will be a talking point for commentators the morning after. (Nevada and New Mexico are as good as gone for the Republicans, considering all the factors working against them in these states, and the current polls all indicate this--yet I'm surprised by the amount of people that seem to be in denial!) However, it's a little harder for me to pin Colorado down this early because the margin of success for Bush during the 2004 elections there was slightly more than 100,000 votes. That means more than 50,000 people will have to change there mind in that state alone this time around. Now, I know Colorado has many latinos that are currently fed up with the Republican party, but I don't know if the immigration issue alone will be enough to make more than 50,000 of voting latinos tread with Clinton. Remember, the state's population is significantly larger than New Mexico's and Nevada's, but 50,000 is a large chunk of its electorate. I'm guessing at this point that Colorado will be toss-up and will fall Republican by the narrowest of margins (I'm talking 2000 vote margin this time around). For this reason I'm guessing Arizona's large Republican majority will evaporate too, and will only begin to lean Republican in 2008 and beyond. I have similar feelings about Florida, but Florida does have a large Jewish population slowly aligning itself with the Republicans, so it's possible the effect is being slightly neutralized. What are your thoughts? Last Edit: 2007-09-29 @ 12:54:07

By: darthpi (D-PA) 2007-09-29 @ 12:46:53
Not a bad map, though I don't think Hillary would pick up Tennessee, the Republican base is just too strong there right now. Also, I think Arkansas as strong Dem is a bit much.

By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2007-09-29 @ 12:49:59
I would be more inclined to make WV "blue" before making AZ "blue". or course, in the case of an absolute blowout, anything is possible.

By: CR (--MO) 2007-09-30 @ 12:18:48
I just don't think Hillary can carry Arizona. From what I hear she is not well recieved there. Now West Virginia should be very interesting to watch. For now and until other factors present themselves I am inclined to say it could go either way but I have a feeling it to may end up in the GOP column.

By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2007-09-30 @ 14:22:02
CR: Drink tea. Chai tea.

By: equern (D-CA) 2007-10-01 @ 17:37:04
I'm not very sangiune on the idea of WV going to the Dems anytime soon. The Dem Demographic just isn't there any more. If mining safety becomes an issue, I'll change my tune. CO has been trending to the Dems for the last several years. They just elected a Dem Governor, and have both state houses in Dem hands. I think they're ready to leap into the Dem column nationally. AZ has the right demographics to go Dem this time around. The only thing that could spoil AR for HRC is Huckabee. I'm as surprised as y'all about TN, but a recent poll showed both Obama and Edwards ahead of all the Reps and HRC within a point of Giuliani. I also think Ford would have been elected Senator if it weren't for the infamous ad in 2006. If any Rep has a chance of connecting with the expat NY vote, it'd be Giuliani, but like NY state voting itself, HRC outpolls him by almost 2-1. BC: Drink wheatgrass! It helps one develop good roots. Last Edit: 2007-10-01 @ 17:39:06

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2007-10-01 @ 22:47:27
Republicans losing Kentucky and Tenn? You can't be serious. The rest of it, I can see that as a literal meltdown scenario where Iraq goes to hell, the Republicans nominate Fred Dole, and the Dems get Clinton to cold clock him. Last Edit: 2007-10-01 @ 22:47:40

By: equern (D-CA) 2007-10-02 @ 13:38:51
OK, so maybe I'm having a bit of fun with KY, but not TN... TN-Pres Sep 25 Rasmussen Clinton (D) 46%, Giuliani (R) 44% TN-Pres Sep 25 Rasmussen Clinton (D) 46%, Romney (R) 40% Actually, I find this result a bit astonishing. And this is Rasmussen, who at least compared with other polls tends to overinflate the Rep count.

By: benconstine (D-VA) 2007-10-02 @ 22:17:37
This is a good prediction. I think if VA goes Democratic, then WV will as well.

By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2007-10-03 @ 15:20:54
The fact that the race is even close in TN is terrible news for the GOP.

By: CR (--MO) 2007-10-03 @ 16:10:34
Its close because the Democrats pretty much have a nomiee and the GOP is still in the primary. Not to mention that the campigns haven't begun and most folks aren't paying attention. I could say the close races in Washington, Oregon, and Connecticut don't look good for the Democrats. Enjoy some orange spice tea!

By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2007-10-03 @ 17:39:25
No, that is not the case. TN has been so reliably GOP through all wind and weather at all times of the year, it is illusory to say that it is only so while the DEMS have a clear frontrunner and the GOP does not. and folks are very much paying attention. Nice try, however... I agree, CT could be close, but just like AZ, will snap back into the fold on election day.

By: CR (--MO) 2007-10-03 @ 17:57:55
They said Tennessee was a tossup in 1992, 1996, and 2000. Same old same old. Its a safe state. But believe whatever you want, I don't care.

By: jamespol (I-MO) 2007-10-03 @ 18:01:45
well.. TN went dem in 92 and 96 because of gore.. went gop in 2000 because bush is a good fit for the state.. I am willing to bet that Brad Henry would carry the state over.. Lincoln Chafee (when he was a Republican).

By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2007-10-03 @ 18:17:28
TN was a tossup in 92, 96, and 00 because in 92, and 96 a moderate southern democrat was on the ticket and TN was competitive in 00 because it was Gores home. Don't forget KY, MO, WV also went to Clinton- because he was a moderate southern democrat who exemplified their values. I think they are all tossups again in 2008, though only MO was a tossup in 2004, becuase you have another moderate democrat (Sorry CR, Hillary is no Pelosi) with a popular Southern husband running against possibly two other moderate New Englanders! The South does tend to vote on the geography of the candidate and Hillary will put them in play because of her husband and her role in Arkansas. If and only if Rudy is the nominee will CT, NH and possibly NJ be a bit competitive but polls show Hillary maintains a small lead at the time and I don't think that will change unless Rudy changes his war position!!! Hello??? Do you all realize that this war is NOT popular in the Northeast... It may be popular in MO, but it isn't in New England or the MidAtlantic area!!!

By: deleteduser (I-WV) 2007-10-03 @ 21:59:52
a very logical map and analysis equern. I love and agree with almost all of your maps and analyses. I do think Montana is more Republican than you have on here but you could be right and I might be wrong now that I've thought about it. And I still think Tennessee is still Republican enough even in this instance. Really TN is 50/50 in this scenario. Last Edit: 2007-10-03 @ 22:01:08

By: CR (--MO) 2007-10-03 @ 22:07:51
"Hillary Clinton is no Pelosi" are you kidding me??? She is just as liberal. But don't take my word for it. Lets see what the right and the left have to say about. Every year the American Conservative Union ranks the various members of Congress based on how conservative they are. They look at voting records and issues for the year on various issues such as taxes, judicial confrimations (i.e. recently Alito and Roberts), spending/budget proposels, gay marriage, Iran sanctions, flag burning, social programs, defense legislation, etc. A member of congress with a high percentage is very conservative. Those with low percentages are very liberal. Let's look at how Hillary ranks since her arrival in the Senate: 2001: 12%, 2002: 10%, 2003: 15%, 2004: 10%, 2005: 8%, 2006: 4%. Overall lifetime rating: 6.2% conservative. Now how do some other members rank for their lifetime records, well Chuck Schumer got 9%, Harry Ried 19.9%, Obama 8%, Ted Kennedy 7.5%, John Kerry 5.6% and Nancy Pelosi 3.10%. Clearly conservatives find her liberal. But what about liberals or those on left. How do they rate her? Americans for Democratic Action is a liberal watchdog group that ranks members of congress based on how liberal they are. A high percentage indicates very liberal, a low percentage conservative. How did they rank Hillary for her time in the Senate: 2001: 95%, 2002: 95%, 2003: 95%, 2004: 95%, 2005: 100% (designated a progressive hero that year by the ADA), 2006: 95%. And who ranked with her? Reid, Obama, Schumer, Kennedy, and Kerry. For comparison Pelosi's marks for the same time were 100% 2001 to 2006. The Americans for Constitutional Action, another vote watcher, also give Hillary liberal marks with Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry. So at the end of the day Hillary is a liberal. Now that's fine. Let her run that way. Supposible the country and independents have shifted that way. But I would hardly call her a moderate.

By: jamespol (I-MO) 2007-10-03 @ 22:09:08
Back in the day the American Conservative Union praised pro-lynch legislation

By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2007-10-03 @ 22:10:54
Hillary 6.2% Pelosi 3.1% See she's twice as conservative as Pelosi :)

By: CR (--MO) 2007-10-03 @ 22:35:03
LOL good one doniki! Wow that was very funny, I can't stop laughing I'm serious!Phew nothing like a good laugh!

By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2007-10-04 @ 04:12:21
I kind of like you when you laugh :) Actually, I like you anyway. It's good to have nutty friends.

User's Predictions

Prediction Score	States	Percent	Total	Accuracy	Ver	#D	Rank		#Pred
2008 President	48/56	21/56	69/112	61.6%	9	402	1031	T	1,505
2008 Rep Primary	11/49	4/49	15/98	15.3%	2	-	182	T	235
Aggregate Predictions	59/105	25/105	84/210	40.0%

Links

Back to 2008 Presidential Prediction Home - Predictions Home