Atlas Forum

Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion => Election Predictions => Topic started by: Dave Leip on May 17, 2007, 08:47:53 pm



Title: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Dave Leip on May 17, 2007, 08:47:53 pm
With the early nature of the 2008 Presidential Contest, I've gone ahead and created the 2008 Presidential Predictions (https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/PRESIDENT/2008/pred.php) section early as well.  Try it out and write some words about your early prognostications - who do you expect to be the candidates of the major parties? - how will the states vote? - will there be a strong independent?  Please let me know if you find any issues with the scripts.
Thanks and enjoy,
Dave


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Alcon on May 17, 2007, 09:20:15 pm
Thanks Dave.  Awesome as always!

Is someone going to start compiling a list of poll results, both Generic D vs. R and, say, Clinton v. Giuliani?


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Dave Leip on May 17, 2007, 09:24:30 pm
Glad you like it.  My next atlas feature will be to add the 2008 polling script - I'll attempt to build a Primary version for D & R first followed by the general version.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Josh/Devilman88 on May 17, 2007, 09:43:10 pm
Good work Dave, like Alcon, I too will start off with Clinton vs Giuliani.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Josh/Devilman88 on May 17, 2007, 09:47:20 pm
Dave I have a question. Why is Ohio on the Republican's side when over half of the people put it on the Democrat's. How is it calculated to determine which party it goes to?


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Alcon on May 17, 2007, 09:50:54 pm
Dave I have a question. Why is Ohio on the Republican's side when over half of the people put it on the Democrat's. How is it calculated to determine which party it goes to?

Looks Dem to me.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Scott Inman (D) OK Gov 2018 on May 17, 2007, 09:51:44 pm
Dave I have a question. Why is Ohio on the Republican's side when over half of the people put it on the Democrat's. How is it calculated to determine which party it goes to?

I think its based on 2004 results.  I could be wrong, though.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Josh/Devilman88 on May 17, 2007, 09:53:27 pm
Dave I have a question. Why is Ohio on the Republican's side when over half of the people put it on the Democrat's. How is it calculated to determine which party it goes to?

Looks Dem to me.

It is showing me Rep for Ohio.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Alcon on May 17, 2007, 09:56:05 pm
Dave I have a question. Why is Ohio on the Republican's side when over half of the people put it on the Democrat's. How is it calculated to determine which party it goes to?

Looks Dem to me.

It is showing me Rep for Ohio.

Here?

https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/PRESIDENT/2008/pred.php

Try refresh (F5)?  Clear your cache?


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Josh/Devilman88 on May 17, 2007, 09:59:56 pm
Dave I have a question. Why is Ohio on the Republican's side when over half of the people put it on the Democrat's. How is it calculated to determine which party it goes to?

Looks Dem to me.

It is showing me Rep for Ohio.

Here?

https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/PRESIDENT/2008/pred.php

Try refresh (F5)?  Clear your cache?

Thanks thats better...


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Padfoot on May 18, 2007, 02:44:57 am
Glad you like it.  My next atlas feature will be to add the 2008 polling script - I'll attempt to build a Primary version for D & R first followed by the general version.
Does that mean there will be a map of the current poll leaders for both D & R like the one on the wikipedia pages?


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Hash on May 18, 2007, 09:27:14 am
Love it. Any way to include a clip of the predictions below our names?


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Dave Leip on May 18, 2007, 12:07:44 pm
Prediction icon is now below your name - furthest map to the left.

BTW, with the version control nature of the scripts, you can create different versions for different scenarios of candidates if you like (note: only one different version is saved per day to reduce spamming). 

I'm also a bit surprised that the so many predictions to date show the Northeast (esp. CT, NH, ME, and NJ) to not be in play.  Note though, I don't know whom most of the D&R candidates are predicted to be - I suggest that in the analysis section, at least add the names of the candidates for your prediction maps.

Enjoy,
Dave


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Tender Branson on May 18, 2007, 02:02:40 pm
Question to Dave regarding the 2004 prediction page:

There were 1998 predictions made for OHIO, 1000 predicted a Bush victory and 998 a Kerry victory, yet OH is colored red.

Or did I just get something wrong here ?

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/GENERAL/CAMPAIGN/2004/pred04.php


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Dave Leip on May 18, 2007, 02:27:26 pm
Hi,
The maps are compiled from the "most recent entries" - from those predictions made in the last several weeks prior to the election.  I'll have to check to find out how many that was - maybe I'll update the script so that the statistics show the most recent figures as well.
Thanks,
Dave


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Gustaf on May 19, 2007, 10:26:31 am
Well, well...what can one say? Excellent job as usual, I agree that the prediction maps were needed now to keep up with the level of debate! Thank you very much Dave. :)


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Beck 2020 on May 22, 2007, 02:54:44 pm
Of course, this could all be relatively unimportant if the electoral college is made obsolete before then, by the interstate contract movement.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Mr. Morden on May 22, 2007, 03:02:45 pm
Of course, this could all be relatively unimportant if the electoral college is made obsolete before then, by the interstate contract movement.

Fat chance of it happening in time for the 2008 election.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: opebo on May 24, 2007, 05:44:18 am
Is the the appropriate place to comment on the compiled 'median' prediction map?  I just noticed Colorado flipped Democrat!  Nevada can't be far behind.  I also noticed Missouri went from Lean on the confidence factor to 'tossup'.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: True Federalist on June 05, 2007, 04:59:23 pm
I've done the cache reload thing so that can't be the problem.  Nevada has 59 Dem predictions, 58 Rep predictions and 1 Ind prediction, yet it's showing up as an R-40 Tossup, when I would expect it to be either a D-30 Tossup or a No result based on the raw numbers.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Dave Leip on June 08, 2007, 01:08:19 pm
I've found a slight error in the median calculation algorithm (has to do with independents being added to the script).  I believe I've fixed issue that sets the map winner incorrectly when the states are close and an independent candidate has more than 0 wins.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Harry Hayfield on June 19, 2007, 09:02:26 am
I would like to start making forecasts as well (but can't access it), could you link my forum account to the atlas please?


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Dave Leip on June 19, 2007, 11:48:22 am
I would like to start making forecasts as well (but can't access it), could you link my forum account to the atlas please?

You are already linked (see the predictions for Senate below your avatar).  What error do you receive when you try to create your prediction?


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Harry Hayfield on June 19, 2007, 05:17:26 pm
I'd not put a space in my username!!!


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: bonncaruso on September 06, 2007, 03:28:12 pm
Great forum, great idea.

It is, however, sad that certain posters decide to use the projections area to spread vile hate of the other side instead of using analysis and debate. I am certain this is not what the founding fathers intended nor is it of help to any kind of debate between human beings with brains in their heads. I was just confronted with a posting comparing Hillary Clinton to the NAZI era between 1933-1945 and find it incredibly stupid and hateful and vile, especially for jewish americans who contribute to this website.

Before a huge flame war over Hillary Clinton erupts, perhaps her detractors should really start looking at polls coming out of many places and more all the time, with her positives far HIGHER than her negatives.  And a woman senator does not get this far without possessing great intelligence, perserverance and iron will, qualities befitting a president.

And for those who want to dis the GOPers, I submit to you that this crew of 9 candidates is the brightest and most talented that the GOP that I have ever seen throw their hats in the ring at the same time. The DEMS should not automatically assume that, just because a mighty wind is blowing against the GOP right now, that that mighty wind will still be there in November of 2008, especially if a GOP nominee arises who can capture the imagination of the american people.

And finally, in a year before an election year that has most obviously become an election year in and of itself, with the populace already being bombarded with ads and mail and the like, if we start to see consistent polls all the time, then the race may already be decided in March or April 2008.  If not, then be prepared for everything, from a huge DEM or GOP landslide (a real blowout election) or once again, a nail-biter, but I doubt that the so-called "in-between solid win" will happen.

In the predictions area, we are asked to forget the standard accepted mode of blue-vs-red states, which is a good idea, as Clinton is already making inroads in the south where she was not expected to. But with Thompson suddenly in the GOP ring, this could all change once again.

So please, I ask of fellow posters to keep it clean and respectful.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Dave Leip on October 24, 2007, 10:51:42 am
Hi,
I've made a few small maintenance edits to the prediction scripts.  Please let me know if you find anything out-of-the-ordinary.
Thanks,
Dave


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Kaine for Senate '18 on October 26, 2007, 02:39:58 pm
Great forum, great idea.

It is sad that certain posters decide to use the projections area to spread vile hate of the other side instead of using analysis and debate. I am certain this is not what the founding fathers intended nor is it of help to any kind of debate between human beings with brains in their heads. I was just confronted with a posting comparing Hillary Clinton to the NAZI era between 1933-1945 and find it incredibly stupid and hateful and vile, especially for jewish americans who contribute to this website.



Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: paraquat99 on December 24, 2007, 12:00:01 pm
New Year Presidential Election Analysis...

2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ELECTORAL VOTE GOP/DEMOCRAT WINNER PREDICTION:

MAJOR SWING STATE SYNOPSIS PREDICTION: As of this writing (12/23/07), the 2008 Presidential Election electoral vote is going to hinge primarily on four (4) "swing-states": Florida, Iowa and New Hampshire and Pennslyvania. The most important of these, once again, will prove to be FLORIDA and PENNSLYVANIA.

Iowa, coming off its 2000 and 2004 election results, is a toss-up but leaning Republican. New Hampshire, which is steadily turning into a "blue state", is a toss-up leaning in favor of the Democrats. Florida, meantime, will go Democrat ONLY if Hillary Clinton is the party's nominee. If not, the state will go razor-thin Republican especially with the likes of a nominee like Rudy Guiliani.

While the "swing-state" of Pennsylvania still proves somewhat troublesome, it will in all likelihood go GOP as will Ohio. Michigan and Wisconsin, meanwhile, will repeat their past two presidential outcomes and go Democrat. Smaller swinger states like New Mexico and Colorado will go GOP, while Oregon will go Democratic. Nevada will, again, go Republican.

BLUE STATE SYNOPSIS: As for solid "blue" (Democratic) states, they will continue to be the Northeast states (save maybe NH) like Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York. Then, of course, there's also Democrat strongholds such as D.C., Minnesota, California, Washington state, and Illinois and Maryland.

RED STATE SYNOPSIS: As for solid "red" (GOP) states, they will continue to be the mid- and deep-South states (save maybe FL) like Virginia, Mississippi and Texas. Then we cannot forget the Rocky Mountain and Western state GOP strongholds like Utah, Idaho, Wyoming and Montana.

CONCLUSION: As stated above, New Hampshire's four (4) electoral votes will go to the Democratic Party nominee regardless of who they are just as Iowa's seven (7) will go for the Republican Party nominee regardless. Florida's very important twenty-seven (27) electoral votes, however, will give the Democratic Party the presidency but only if Hillary Clinton is the nominee. Otherwise, Guiliani, Mitt Romney or John McCain (and perhaps even recent pull-ahead Mike Huckabee or even Ron Paul!) each have a fairly excellent chance of victory.

OTHER NOTES NOT RELEVANT TO THE ABOVE ANALYSIS: This election will be slightly less close, both popular and electoral vote wise, then the 2004 race between Bush and Kerry. Therefore, the already slim chance of it being thrown into the House of Representatives because no candidate will obtain the necessary 270 electoral votes needed to become president, is less likely then it even was four years ago.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Tender Branson on December 24, 2007, 12:06:13 pm
While the "swing-state" of Pennsylvania still proves somewhat troublesome, it will in all likelihood go GOP as will Ohio.

Nope, in all likelyhood it will stay Democratic.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: HappyWarrior on December 24, 2007, 01:59:11 pm
What?  Who is making these predictions?  Karl Rove?  Iowa and Ohio are both very likely to go Democrat, and Pennsylvania will NOT go Republican under almost any condition.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on December 24, 2007, 06:27:51 pm
While the "swing-state" of Pennsylvania still proves somewhat troublesome, it will in all likelihood go GOP as will Ohio.

Nope, in all likelyhood it will stay Democratic.

WTF? PA isn't even a swing state.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: War on Want on December 28, 2007, 04:35:09 pm
New Year Presidential Election Analysis...

2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ELECTORAL VOTE GOP/DEMOCRAT WINNER PREDICTION:

MAJOR SWING STATE SYNOPSIS PREDICTION: As of this writing (12/23/07), the 2008 Presidential Election electoral vote is going to hinge primarily on four (4) "swing-states": Florida, Iowa and New Hampshire and Pennslyvania. The most important of these, once again, will prove to be FLORIDA and PENNSLYVANIA.

Iowa, coming off its 2000 and 2004 election results, is a toss-up but leaning Republican. New Hampshire, which is steadily turning into a "blue state", is a toss-up leaning in favor of the Democrats. Florida, meantime, will go Democrat ONLY if Hillary Clinton is the party's nominee. If not, the state will go razor-thin Republican especially with the likes of a nominee like Rudy Guiliani.

While the "swing-state" of Pennsylvania still proves somewhat troublesome, it will in all likelihood go GOP as will Ohio. Michigan and Wisconsin, meanwhile, will repeat their past two presidential outcomes and go Democrat. Smaller swinger states like New Mexico and Colorado will go GOP, while Oregon will go Democratic. Nevada will, again, go Republican.

BLUE STATE SYNOPSIS: As for solid "blue" (Democratic) states, they will continue to be the Northeast states (save maybe NH) like Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York. Then, of course, there's also Democrat strongholds such as D.C., Minnesota, California, Washington state, and Illinois and Maryland.

RED STATE SYNOPSIS: As for solid "red" (GOP) states, they will continue to be the mid- and deep-South states (save maybe FL) like Virginia, Mississippi and Texas. Then we cannot forget the Rocky Mountain and Western state GOP strongholds like Utah, Idaho, Wyoming and Montana.

CONCLUSION: As stated above, New Hampshire's four (4) electoral votes will go to the Democratic Party nominee regardless of who they are just as Iowa's seven (7) will go for the Republican Party nominee regardless. Florida's very important twenty-seven (27) electoral votes, however, will give the Democratic Party the presidency but only if Hillary Clinton is the nominee. Otherwise, Guiliani, Mitt Romney or John McCain (and perhaps even recent pull-ahead Mike Huckabee or even Ron Paul!) each have a fairly excellent chance of victory.

OTHER NOTES NOT RELEVANT TO THE ABOVE ANALYSIS: This election will be slightly less close, both popular and electoral vote wise, then the 2004 race between Bush and Kerry. Therefore, the already slim chance of it being thrown into the House of Representatives because no candidate will obtain the necessary 270 electoral votes needed to become president, is less likely then it even was four years ago.
That was crap. The Republicans have a very slim chance of victory even with their best candidate(McCain) running, they have a 40% chance of winning. Considering that McCain has a very slim chance of winning the nomination there is almost no way that the Republicans will win. Ohio is consistently Democrat, Pennsylvania is, Iowa is, Arkansas is, New Mexico is. The Republicans are screwed in 2008.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Platypus on January 03, 2008, 06:04:40 am
New Year Presidential Election Analysis...

2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ELECTORAL VOTE GOP/DEMOCRAT WINNER PREDICTION:

MAJOR SWING STATE SYNOPSIS PREDICTION: As of this writing (12/23/07), the 2008 Presidential Election electoral vote is going to hinge primarily on four (4) "swing-states": Florida, Iowa and New Hampshire and Pennslyvania. The most important of these, once again, will prove to be FLORIDA and PENNSLYVANIA.

Iowa, coming off its 2000 and 2004 election results, is a toss-up but leaning Republican. New Hampshire, which is steadily turning into a "blue state", is a toss-up leaning in favor of the Democrats. Florida, meantime, will go Democrat ONLY if Hillary Clinton is the party's nominee. If not, the state will go razor-thin Republican especially with the likes of a nominee like Rudy Guiliani.

While the "swing-state" of Pennsylvania still proves somewhat troublesome, it will in all likelihood go GOP as will Ohio. Michigan and Wisconsin, meanwhile, will repeat their past two presidential outcomes and go Democrat. Smaller swinger states like New Mexico and Colorado will go GOP, while Oregon will go Democratic. Nevada will, again, go Republican.

BLUE STATE SYNOPSIS: As for solid "blue" (Democratic) states, they will continue to be the Northeast states (save maybe NH) like Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York. Then, of course, there's also Democrat strongholds such as D.C., Minnesota, California, Washington state, and Illinois and Maryland.

RED STATE SYNOPSIS: As for solid "red" (GOP) states, they will continue to be the mid- and deep-South states (save maybe FL) like Virginia, Mississippi and Texas. Then we cannot forget the Rocky Mountain and Western state GOP strongholds like Utah, Idaho, Wyoming and Montana.

CONCLUSION: As stated above, New Hampshire's four (4) electoral votes will go to the Democratic Party nominee regardless of who they are just as Iowa's seven (7) will go for the Republican Party nominee regardless. Florida's very important twenty-seven (27) electoral votes, however, will give the Democratic Party the presidency but only if Hillary Clinton is the nominee. Otherwise, Guiliani, Mitt Romney or John McCain (and perhaps even recent pull-ahead Mike Huckabee or even Ron Paul!) each have a fairly excellent chance of victory.

OTHER NOTES NOT RELEVANT TO THE ABOVE ANALYSIS: This election will be slightly less close, both popular and electoral vote wise, then the 2004 race between Bush and Kerry. Therefore, the already slim chance of it being thrown into the House of Representatives because no candidate will obtain the necessary 270 electoral votes needed to become president, is less likely then it even was four years ago.

Welcome to the forum :)

The 'accepted truth' on ths forum is a little different, but why accept what is acceped by the majority.?

The three areas of strong disagreement I have are these: Minnesota is not a Democratic stronghold, although it does favour the DFL nor is Virginia gauranteed GOP; Florida is in contention with any of the major democrats, and Iowa is very, very much up for grabs.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Dave Leip on January 08, 2008, 12:16:44 pm
Note,
I have corrected an issue showing up with the Republican Primary prediction script that did not default the predicted winner of each state to your previous choice (colors were right, but wrong button was selected - always U).  I've corrected this malfunction.
Dave


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Left-Wing Blogger on January 13, 2008, 11:45:25 am
Note,
I have corrected an issue showing up with the Republican Primary prediction script that did not default the predicted winner of each state to your previous choice (colors were right, but wrong button was selected - always U).  I've corrected this malfunction.
Dave

Great. Thanks, Dave!


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Harry Hayfield on February 08, 2008, 05:52:25 am
Republicans: My current score is 33 points (21 correct state projections and 12 % vote projections)
Democrats: My current score is 16 points (13 correct state projections and 3 % vote projections)

NBC projects Huckabee wins KS.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: The Hack Hater on February 09, 2008, 04:45:38 pm
New Year Presidential Election Analysis...

2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ELECTORAL VOTE GOP/DEMOCRAT WINNER PREDICTION:

MAJOR SWING STATE SYNOPSIS PREDICTION: As of this writing (12/23/07), the 2008 Presidential Election electoral vote is going to hinge primarily on four (4) "swing-states": Florida, Iowa and New Hampshire and Pennslyvania. The most important of these, once again, will prove to be FLORIDA and PENNSLYVANIA.

Iowa, coming off its 2000 and 2004 election results, is a toss-up but leaning Republican. New Hampshire, which is steadily turning into a "blue state", is a toss-up leaning in favor of the Democrats. Florida, meantime, will go Democrat ONLY if Hillary Clinton is the party's nominee. If not, the state will go razor-thin Republican especially with the likes of a nominee like Rudy Guiliani.

While the "swing-state" of Pennsylvania still proves somewhat troublesome, it will in all likelihood go GOP as will Ohio. Michigan and Wisconsin, meanwhile, will repeat their past two presidential outcomes and go Democrat. Smaller swinger states like New Mexico and Colorado will go GOP, while Oregon will go Democratic. Nevada will, again, go Republican.

BLUE STATE SYNOPSIS: As for solid "blue" (Democratic) states, they will continue to be the Northeast states (save maybe NH) like Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York. Then, of course, there's also Democrat strongholds such as D.C., Minnesota, California, Washington state, and Illinois and Maryland.

RED STATE SYNOPSIS: As for solid "red" (GOP) states, they will continue to be the mid- and deep-South states (save maybe FL) like Virginia, Mississippi and Texas. Then we cannot forget the Rocky Mountain and Western state GOP strongholds like Utah, Idaho, Wyoming and Montana.

CONCLUSION: As stated above, New Hampshire's four (4) electoral votes will go to the Democratic Party nominee regardless of who they are just as Iowa's seven (7) will go for the Republican Party nominee regardless. Florida's very important twenty-seven (27) electoral votes, however, will give the Democratic Party the presidency but only if Hillary Clinton is the nominee. Otherwise, Guiliani, Mitt Romney or John McCain (and perhaps even recent pull-ahead Mike Huckabee or even Ron Paul!) each have a fairly excellent chance of victory.

OTHER NOTES NOT RELEVANT TO THE ABOVE ANALYSIS: This election will be slightly less close, both popular and electoral vote wise, then the 2004 race between Bush and Kerry. Therefore, the already slim chance of it being thrown into the House of Representatives because no candidate will obtain the necessary 270 electoral votes needed to become president, is less likely then it even was four years ago.
That was crap. The Republicans have a very slim chance of victory even with their best candidate(McCain) running, they have a 40% chance of winning. Considering that McCain has a very slim chance of winning the nomination there is almost no way that the Republicans will win. Ohio is consistently Democrat, Pennsylvania is, Iowa is, Arkansas is, New Mexico is. The Republicans are screwed in 2008.

While I agree that Iowas will likely go to the Democrats, it is trending more red these days.  I agree about the other states too, but it's not like a Republican will never be able to pick them up in the future(though I question their ablity to adapt, that's a topc I'll discuss elsewhere)


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: auburntiger on April 22, 2008, 10:42:10 pm
Why is Florida not "lean Republican" on the map while Arkansas is, yet more people have Florida going Republican than they do Arkansas. It's pretty obvious that Clinton won't get the nomination, and in no polls out of Florida have shown Obama leading


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on May 15, 2008, 01:47:25 am
Why is Florida not "lean Republican" on the map while Arkansas is, yet more people have Florida going Republican than they do Arkansas. It's pretty obvious that Clinton won't get the nomination, and in no polls out of Florida have shown Obama leading

Many people haven't updated their predictions for a long time.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Harry Hayfield on June 02, 2008, 11:01:23 am
You know, I'm going to miss these primary elections when they finish on Tuesday. This is the first full primary calendar I have seen from start to finish and kept a video record of  (Thanks Sky + and a DVD recorder) and I wonder what I am going to do for the next 24 Tuesdays until polling day!

By the way, when all the results are in, can we get a list of the positions of everyone who entered the prediction contest. I have a feeling I did better on the GOP nomination than the Dem.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Hash on June 05, 2008, 09:15:22 am
I flunked both, not surprisingly. Failed the Republican one badly, and about 61% on the Dem one, IIRC.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: palinode on October 19, 2008, 05:32:26 am
I was thinking. Wouldn't it make more sense for the "Compiled 2008 Prediction Map" to be the statistical mean, not the median numbers?


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Platypus on November 07, 2008, 07:08:12 am
So who won?


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: minionofmidas - supplemental forum account on November 07, 2008, 05:15:31 pm
So who won?
No idea. I know I (unless a state's shade changes - some are pretty close to lines) I got two winners (FL and IN) and 8 shades wrong (De, MD, NC, AL, MT, WY, CA, AK).
Not seen topline figures for the ME and NH districts anywhere so far.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Harry Hayfield on November 08, 2008, 08:35:14 am
In terms of state wins at least 48 (I'd be suprised if anyone thought Indiana would flip). I can't remember whether I said Missouri or North Carolina would flip or not. If I did then at least 49 if not then still 49.

As to the percentage element, not a clue! I actually think the percentage element is more difficult and should be scrapped in favour of the strong, lean, tossup buttons. Strong would be a lead of more than 10%, lean between 5% and 10% and tossup less than 5% lead, with 1 point awarded for strong, 3 points for lean and 5 points for tossup.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Josh/Devilman88 on November 08, 2008, 12:22:41 pm
I missed FL, IN, OH and NV.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: minionofmidas - supplemental forum account on November 08, 2008, 03:23:29 pm
In terms of state wins at least 48 (I'd be suprised if anyone thought Indiana would flip).
Quite a few people (browsing predictions right now). Problem is, they all thought Missouri would flip too. So far I've found one guy who has these right - rock_nj he's called, and his only wrong call is NE-02. Lots of off state percentages, but that's secondary. Let's see if someone can best that - off by one EV.

EDIT: And there's a guy called zx3bri who gave Obama the wrong NE CD but has everything else right.

And another with only NE-2 missing, and looking pretty good on percentages too: whoblitzell.

Of our forum people, Hughento called IN and MO right. Missed NC and NE-2. Mr Moderate has the same prediction. Kalimantan missed FL too, but is otherwise the same. Oh, and our special friend from way back when John Engle has only NE-02 and MT wrong.

Just found the first ever prediction to catch IN, MO, and NE-2, only to flounder in Ohio: tulsa11.

Another with only NE-2 wrong: MatthewZD. Seems to have refused to predict party percentages - all states in the 50 shade.

And the second prediction with IN, MO and NE-2 right: pacewicz. A, cough, rather special prediction, that one: Wrong on NH, NJ, PA, OH, SC, GA, FL, LA, KS and SD. ;D There's a saying in Germany that goes, translated literally, "even a blind hen finds a seed sometimes". It seems to apply here. Another even more devolved one by lloydbowers.

And a fourth: This one has Florida and Montana wrong. Jlemere.

Someone called klkraft with two errors: Ne-02 and... Virginia.

I didn't list every prediction with MO and IN right - only those that were very close otherwise and/or caught NE-02.

And that's that. Nobody called everything right.





Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: War on Want on November 08, 2008, 05:11:26 pm
Damn I forgot to update my prediction so Indiana is still going for McCain in mine.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Frodo on November 08, 2008, 05:17:59 pm
With the exception of one of Nebraska's congressional districts and possibly Missouri, I am amazed at how closely my map seems to hew to general election results.  I got a number of election margins wrong of course, but generally speaking my predictions are not far off from what has actually transpired. 


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: GMantis on November 11, 2008, 09:59:39 am
I missed (https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/PRESIDENT/2008/pred.php?action=indpred&id=9649) Indiana and NE-2. But I did rather well on the percentages.


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Harry Hayfield on November 11, 2008, 01:30:28 pm
Having now found my projection, I can score mine:

(
Img
)

State Wins: 47 out of 51 (wrong: IN, NC. MO, WV but got NE-2 right. Thanks NBC News)
% Wins:34 out of 51 (wrong: CA, ID, AZ, MT, NM, ND, NE, KS, MO, AR, IL, MI, DC, CT, RI, MA, VT)

Total Score: 81 out of 102 (5 congressional districts not counted)
% Score: 79.4%
% Score 2004: 79.5%
Change: -0.1%

(Any chance of a prize for least change since 2004???)


Title: Re: 2008 Presidential Predictions
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on November 14, 2008, 01:31:55 am
New Year Presidential Election Analysis...

2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ELECTORAL VOTE GOP/DEMOCRAT WINNER PREDICTION:

MAJOR SWING STATE SYNOPSIS PREDICTION: As of this writing (12/23/07), the 2008 Presidential Election electoral vote is going to hinge primarily on four (4) "swing-states": Florida, Iowa and New Hampshire and Pennslyvania. The most important of these, once again, will prove to be FLORIDA and PENNSLYVANIA.

Iowa, coming off its 2000 and 2004 election results, is a toss-up but leaning Republican. New Hampshire, which is steadily turning into a "blue state", is a toss-up leaning in favor of the Democrats. Florida, meantime, will go Democrat ONLY if Hillary Clinton is the party's nominee. If not, the state will go razor-thin Republican especially with the likes of a nominee like Rudy Guiliani.

While the "swing-state" of Pennsylvania still proves somewhat troublesome, it will in all likelihood go GOP as will Ohio. Michigan and Wisconsin, meanwhile, will repeat their past two presidential outcomes and go Democrat. Smaller swinger states like New Mexico and Colorado will go GOP, while Oregon will go Democratic. Nevada will, again, go Republican.

BLUE STATE SYNOPSIS: As for solid "blue" (Democratic) states, they will continue to be the Northeast states (save maybe NH) like Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York. Then, of course, there's also Democrat strongholds such as D.C., Minnesota, California, Washington state, and Illinois and Maryland.

RED STATE SYNOPSIS: As for solid "red" (GOP) states, they will continue to be the mid- and deep-South states (save maybe FL) like Virginia, Mississippi and Texas. Then we cannot forget the Rocky Mountain and Western state GOP strongholds like Utah, Idaho, Wyoming and Montana.

CONCLUSION: As stated above, New Hampshire's four (4) electoral votes will go to the Democratic Party nominee regardless of who they are just as Iowa's seven (7) will go for the Republican Party nominee regardless. Florida's very important twenty-seven (27) electoral votes, however, will give the Democratic Party the presidency but only if Hillary Clinton is the nominee. Otherwise, Guiliani, Mitt Romney or John McCain (and perhaps even recent pull-ahead Mike Huckabee or even Ron Paul!) each have a fairly excellent chance of victory.

OTHER NOTES NOT RELEVANT TO THE ABOVE ANALYSIS: This election will be slightly less close, both popular and electoral vote wise, then the 2004 race between Bush and Kerry. Therefore, the already slim chance of it being thrown into the House of Representatives because no candidate will obtain the necessary 270 electoral votes needed to become president, is less likely then it even was four years ago.

This was BS then, and funny now.