Sam Spade's 2008 Senate/House Election Prediction Thread (FINALIZED - SEE P.18) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 06, 2024, 12:35:45 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Sam Spade's 2008 Senate/House Election Prediction Thread (FINALIZED - SEE P.18) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Sam Spade's 2008 Senate/House Election Prediction Thread (FINALIZED - SEE P.18)  (Read 48651 times)
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

« on: June 08, 2008, 11:06:27 AM »

Considering the GOP got the best possible match-up in terms of winning the election, I think NJ should be moved to Likely D rather than Safe D.  I'd say Zimmer winds up losing by less than 5%
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2008, 11:38:50 AM »

Considering the GOP got the best possible match-up in terms of winning the election, I think NJ should be moved to Likely D rather than Safe D.  I'd say Zimmer winds up losing by less than 5%

So, in other words, Zimmer will lose by double-digits.  Thanks.
NJ Repubs never lose by double digits, right around 10 pts is really the max.  I think Zimmer could definitely pull this one off, but it would take a good campaign.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2008, 11:42:08 AM »

Considering the GOP got the best possible match-up in terms of winning the election, I think NJ should be moved to Likely D rather than Safe D.  I'd say Zimmer winds up losing by less than 5%

So, in other words, Zimmer will lose by double-digits.  Thanks.
NJ Repubs never lose by double digits, right around 10 pts is really the max.  I think Zimmer could definitely pull this one off, but it would take a good campaign.
Well actually, what helps Zimmer is negative ads work well in NJ.  You see, elections in NJ have to do with selecting which one is more awful, the nastier you get the better chance you have.  You also must prove that you can carry on at least a sizable level of corruption.

It's a joke, considering your penchant for overestimating Republican chances.

I suspect Zimmer will probably run closer the worse his campaign is, so...
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

« Reply #3 on: June 09, 2008, 12:36:42 PM »

Considering the GOP got the best possible match-up in terms of winning the election, I think NJ should be moved to Likely D rather than Safe D.  I'd say Zimmer winds up losing by less than 5%
You must know something I don't. Like, Camden County finding a million absentee votes for Andrews yesterday.
I don't agree with you there, I think Andrews would have been much, much harder to defeat.  The main argument for NJ GOP is to say, "hey Democrats are old and trite and let's give us some new breath."  If Andrews had been in there, I doubt the GOP would have spent a lot of time on the election.  Lautenberg is old, incompentent, and not as good at winning the independents.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

« Reply #4 on: July 01, 2008, 07:01:32 PM »

Bob Torricelli went out with an unblemished record, too, right?
Yes, he simply was too ill to hold office or something like that...
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 13 queries.