Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 18, 2020, 04:24:23 am
News: 2020 Presidential Predictions (Primary) are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 User Predictions - Discussion
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 ... 99 Print
Author Topic: 2004 User Predictions - Discussion  (Read 823253 times)
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #425 on: January 03, 2004, 06:43:00 pm »

nfc champion panthers, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #426 on: January 03, 2004, 06:46:16 pm »

nfc champion panthers, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
they have the D, the running game, and a efficient quarterback.
Logged
Michael Z
Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,288
Political Matrix
E: -5.88, S: -4.72

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #427 on: January 03, 2004, 08:48:16 pm »
« Edited: January 03, 2004, 09:00:09 pm by Michael Zeigermann »

I just had a look at the compiled prediction map. A few days ago it was the same as 2000, now the average prediction dictates that New Mexico, Iowa and Wisconsin will go Republican. Any comments?
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #428 on: January 03, 2004, 09:03:07 pm »

I just had a look at the compiled prediction map. A few days ago it was the same as 2000, now the average prediction dictates that New Mexico, Iowa and Wisconsin will go Republican. Any comments?
I do think that those three states will go republican this year.  They were very close in 2000 and expect the small swing to bush in 2004 to makes those states go Republican.
Logged
Michael Z
Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,288
Political Matrix
E: -5.88, S: -4.72

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #429 on: January 03, 2004, 09:12:11 pm »

I just had a look at the compiled prediction map. A few days ago it was the same as 2000, now the average prediction dictates that New Mexico, Iowa and Wisconsin will go Republican. Any comments?
I do think that those three states will go republican this year.  They were very close in 2000 and expect the small swing to bush in 2004 to makes those states go Republican.

I'm tempted to agree. Still, I have a feeling Nevada, West Virginia and NH could go Dem, which may balance this out; even though that obviously isn't reflected by the average prediction.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #430 on: January 03, 2004, 09:28:59 pm »

I just had a look at the compiled prediction map. A few days ago it was the same as 2000, now the average prediction dictates that New Mexico, Iowa and Wisconsin will go Republican. Any comments?
I do think that those three states will go republican this year.  They were very close in 2000 and expect the small swing to bush in 2004 to makes those states go Republican.

I'm tempted to agree. Still, I have a feeling Nevada, West Virginia and NH could go Dem, which may balance this out; even though that obviously isn't reflected by the average prediction.
Nevada and WV might but I don't think NH will.  And that doesn't exactly balance it out, see the electoral vote totals:

NM: 5
Iowa: 7
Wisconsin: 10
----
NH: 4
WV: 5
Nevada: 5
Logged
2,868,691
Harry
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24,086
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #431 on: January 03, 2004, 09:42:08 pm »

dont forget AR--6 more votes, and a chance at OH--20
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #432 on: January 03, 2004, 09:45:38 pm »

dont forget AR--6 more votes, and a chance at OH--20
Arkansas is a distant chance, and Ohio will be tough, but it is winnable.
Logged
Michael Z
Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,288
Political Matrix
E: -5.88, S: -4.72

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #433 on: January 03, 2004, 09:51:37 pm »

Ohio may well prove to be a key state. However, assuming Dean is the candidate, would a socially conservative state like Ohio vote for someone like him? It's very doubtful if I'm honest.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #434 on: January 03, 2004, 10:01:06 pm »

Ohio may well prove to be a key state. However, assuming Dean is the candidate, would a socially conservative state like Ohio vote for someone like him? It's very doubtful if I'm honest.
It is doubtful, but KEEP HOPE ALIVE.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,601
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #435 on: January 03, 2004, 11:13:04 pm »

Don't forget about Minn.  It could very easily go Bush with a regular Democrat running, let alone Dean.
Logged
LibPa
Newbie
*
Posts: 1


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #436 on: January 03, 2004, 11:54:13 pm »

Has anyone paid attention to the 2003 elections?  Louisiana and Pa being more Dem. and Kentucky and Miss. going Rep?  What was the difference?  In Pa., more minority voters in the cities did come out, but that is only part of the story.  Lancaster, York, Adams, Dauphin - combined equals Philly - voted more Rep. than ever.  The other small cities and the rural industrial areas voted more Dem than ever.  These areas have not gained new voters, nor the Reps. lost votes.  Inactive Dems. came out this year to boost Dem. totals.  These blue collar voters came to vote for an unashamedly pro-choice, liberal Democrat in Baer.  They are not conservative, they will vote for a real Dem or not vote at all.  Southern Evangelicals have become more and more of a Rep. certainty (a danger to them in itself), but the rural blue collar Catholic areas of Ohio, Pa., and Michigan do not have new Rep. votes, only many Dems. who just don't vote.  They come out for the genuine article.  (Baer is not Catholic, so it wasn't that.)  If their turnout is decent, Ohio is Dem in 2004.  That is just enough, is it not?
Logged
agcatter
agcat
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,742


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #437 on: January 03, 2004, 11:56:34 pm »

Yep.  Sounds like Dean has the election all wrapped up.  Nominate him.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,601
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #438 on: January 03, 2004, 11:58:27 pm »

Has anyone paid attention to the 2003 elections?  Louisiana and Pa being more Dem. and Kentucky and Miss. going Rep?  What was the difference?  In Pa., more minority voters in the cities did come out, but that is only part of the story.  Lancaster, York, Adams, Dauphin - combined equals Philly - voted more Rep. than ever.  The other small cities and the rural industrial areas voted more Dem than ever.  These areas have not gained new voters, nor the Reps. lost votes.  Inactive Dems. came out this year to boost Dem. totals.  These blue collar voters came to vote for an unashamedly pro-choice, liberal Democrat in Baer.  They are not conservative, they will vote for a real Dem or not vote at all.  Southern Evangelicals have become more and more of a Rep. certainty (a danger to them in itself), but the rural blue collar Catholic areas of Ohio, Pa., and Michigan do not have new Rep. votes, only many Dems. who just don't vote.  They come out for the genuine article.  (Baer is not Catholic, so it wasn't that.)  If their turnout is decent, Ohio is Dem in 2004.  That is just enough, is it not?

Hi! Welcome to the forum.  Luisiana has a long tradition of going Dem. in state-wide races, so I don't see any big revelation there.  As for Ohio, I would arguee you there.  Ohio has a long Republican tradiotion and many former Dems now vote Rep.  As for PA, we are one of the weirdest states in the country when it comes to elections, so who knows?
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,584


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #439 on: January 04, 2004, 06:17:51 am »

I think the Dems should concentrate on a few big key states. Pennsylvania and Ohio would be there, and then throw in WV with them. Then, what about Florida? If the Dems went all out and won these three, they could afford losing all other "losable" states and still win.
Logged
2,868,691
Harry
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24,086
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #440 on: January 04, 2004, 11:43:54 am »

which states are "losable"?  NM?  WI?  I don't think any state is losable for the Dems.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #441 on: January 04, 2004, 11:53:30 am »

which states are "losable"?  NM?  WI?  I don't think any state is losable for the Dems.
Yes, those are losable states, as are the entire upper midwestern states.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,584


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #442 on: January 04, 2004, 12:39:30 pm »

which states are "losable"?  NM?  WI?  I don't think any state is losable for the Dems.

I was referring to tossups: NM, WI, MN, IA and OR. PA would be in there as well, but that's one of the target states.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #443 on: January 04, 2004, 12:49:32 pm »

which states are "losable"?  NM?  WI?  I don't think any state is losable for the Dems.

I was referring to tossups: NM, WI, MN, IA and OR. PA would be in there as well, but that's one of the target states.
I do think Dean would win Pennsylvania.
Logged
RhodeRage
Rookie
*
Posts: 31


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #444 on: January 04, 2004, 02:04:40 pm »

Dean has the north east in the bag (including PA).  All he needs to do is to concentrate in the Mid-West and some of the swing souths to win.  

The Dems will never again sweep the south.  I think we need to let that dream die and fight the good fight in the north.
Logged
mtwhitney
Rookie
*
Posts: 22


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #445 on: January 04, 2004, 02:23:31 pm »

The States that Bush won in 2000 have picked up 7 electoral votes, mainly due to an increase in population in the South and the Sunbelt. This trend does not seem to be turning around anytime soon.

If you guys abandon those areas, you will be consigning yourself to permanent minority status.

Not that I would care.

Clinton found a way to stay competitive in those areas. I would suggest that if the Dems have any hope of regaining the White House, they should look to the DLC and not to the turncoat Gore (who could not even win his own State!) and his new pal Dean.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,584


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #446 on: January 04, 2004, 02:28:53 pm »

The States that Bush won in 2000 have picked up 7 electoral votes, mainly due to an increase in population in the South and the Sunbelt. This trend does not seem to be turning around anytime soon.

If you guys abandon those areas, you will be consigning yourself to permanent minority status.

Not that I would care.

Clinton found a way to stay competitive in those areas. I would suggest that if the Dems have any hope of regaining the White House, they should look to the DLC and not to the turncoat Gore (who could not even win his own State!) and his new pal Dean.


You have a point, but let's remember that a Democrat win is still within reach. Much of Bush's pickup came in states that could easily go Dem, like Florida, Nevada and Arizona. So there is no need to get desperate just yet. As I said, for now, winning the steel states + Florida should be the main focus for the Dem campaign. If Florida is out of reach, as I suspect it might be, then they will have to rethink and go for the mid-west and south-west instead (NM, NV, WI, MN, etc).
Logged
John
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,088


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #447 on: January 04, 2004, 02:58:36 pm »

Bush Might win the Same States he won in 2000 & Pick Up Three or More States like Iowa, MINN, Wiscons, That's the best i could spelled
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,584


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #448 on: January 04, 2004, 03:10:27 pm »

Bush Might win the Same States he won in 2000 & Pick Up Three or More States like Iowa, MINN, Wiscons, That's the best i could spelled

You're longing to give it up aren't you? Come on, start to contribute instead of goofing around.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #449 on: January 04, 2004, 03:16:00 pm »

Is English his nineteenth language or is he just fooling around?  Because I really am starting to wonder.  He jumps tenses and can't spell for his life.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 ... 99 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC