PredictionsMock2008 Presidential Predictions - FiveSenses99 (--MO) ResultsPolls
Note: The Google advertisement links below may advocate political positions that this site does not endorse.
Date of Prediction: 2008-10-19 Version:49

Prediction Map
FiveSenses99 MapPrediction Key

Confidence Map
FiveSenses99 MapConfidence Key

Prediction States Won
270 |
538 |
pie
Dem349
 
Rep189
 
Ind0
 
 

Confidence States Won
270 |
538 |
pie
Dem286
 
Rep158
 
Ind0
 
Tos94
 

State Pick-ups

Gain Loss Hold Net Gain
ST CD EV ST CD EV ST CD EV
Dem+80+97000202252+97
Rep000-80-97233189-97
Ind0000000000


Prediction Score (max Score = 112)

ScoreState WinsState PercentagesCD WinsCD Percentages
84483141
piepiepiepiepie

Analysis

This might be my final map, unless something major changes. I just want to get a guess down and go with it, but some states are so hard to call at this point such as North Carolina, Missouri, and even Ohio. They will all be close.


Prediction History
Prediction Graph


Comments History - show

Version History


Member Comments
 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-10-21 @ 22:22:26
Geceres:FiveSenses...what did I tell you about talking to me when the adults are talking...take your Kool-Aide and go back to the sandbox. <--- funny this all you can say and all you *ever* can say.

Well I say *you* are the one who drinks "Kool-Aide" and who plays in a sand box.

And I have a challenge for you. Whoever has the map which reflects reality more on election day is the one who isn't drinking the "Kool-Aide". So come election day, if McCain wins Maine and New Hampshire, then you get to say I am drinking "Kool-Aide". But come election day when Obama wins, you have to admit that you are a brain-washed loser who is drinking Bill O'Reilly's "Kool-Aide"
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-10-22 @ 21:14:40
By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-10-22 @ 17:34:58
Predictions for surprises for Election Night as of today (I reserve the right to revise and extend these predictions LOL):

1. Virginia is 53 to 47 and not close.

2. New Mexico is super tight and goes McCain.

3. Colorado, 52 to 48 McCain.

4. Pennsylvania...no landslide here...really close...edge Obama...not called until late.

5. Indiana & Kentucky...first two states...both called immediately.

6. Florida...not decided on Election Night.

7. North Carolina...closer than Virginia.

8. Sleeper race...Washington State is closer than expected and not immediately called...Obama wins by a couple of points.
prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-10-24 @ 00:19:03
Oooh, this challenge is good. I like this a lot.prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-10-24 @ 00:27:48
Virginia will be carried by Obama.

New Mexico will be carried by Obama. Hell several McCain people have admitted this one is over.

Ditto Colorado.

Indiana won't be called immediately. Kentucky might, or might not.

One of my predictions is the McCain will underperform Bush in every state, which means he won't win any state Bush did not win.

Pennsylvania, here I agree withe Gceres, an Obama win. Not as close as he predicts though.

Florida. Decide on election night. For Obama.

Now on NC I agree with Gceres, NC will be close than Virginia. This is a real toss-up state for '08. One Bush won by 13 points.

Washington, Obama wins by more than five points at least.

prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-10-24 @ 18:56:34
Yes, that is why I posted this on my map. I will late it on the fool after the election.

It bugs me that people are so ignorant, stubborn and brainwashed that they convince themselves that people only think like they do, and they are so out of touch with reality, they will convince themselves of anything.

I too want to see the excuses he comes up with after his predictions are proved so wrong. Will he say ACORN stole the election for Obama? Will he say that the votes were counted wrong? Will he drop off this site and never come back because he was so stupid?
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-10-28 @ 16:51:22
Joe "The Plumber" = the perfect metaphor and icon for the Republicans, which is why its so ironic McCain keeps on bringing him up.

This "Joe The Plumber" is a perfect comparison because he is nothing but a lie, just like most Republican voters. The guys name isn't Joe, he isn't a plumber, he is lying about how much money he makes (he has the typical red-neck, wanna-be Republican delusion that he makes much more money than he actually does and that somehow he is in a much higher tax bracket that he actually is, therefore he is voting *against* his self interest to satisfy his masculine ego) and he owes money in taxes. The list go on. The man is an all-out psycho, and many many many Republicans I know act exactly the same way. It is a delusional way of thinking, a pathology that effects so many fools in this country. It should be studied by psychologists. (And I am sure it is)
prediction Map

 By: satyrday (I-MI) 2008-10-28 @ 22:36:05
Perfect Joe the Dumbass Plumber analysis. A+ for that one.prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-10-29 @ 22:51:44
It's almost impossible for McCain to win. There has not been a single poll recently to have McCain up in PA. In fact there has not been a single poll from PA to have McCain within even 5 points of Obama in PA.

Add on top of that OH is now taken out of the toss up category and into lean Obama, along with VA and CO.
prediction Map

 By: pace (D-IL) 2008-10-30 @ 01:17:49
Re Joe the plumber: Plus, he considers progressive taxes "socialist" and is running for congress as a Republican in 2010. Yup. Real regular guy allright!

In other news: I've got a real feeling on NC going Obama...

Last Edit: 2008-10-30 @ 01:18:24
prediction Map

 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-10-30 @ 01:53:29
pace...(I do not respond to anything FiveSenses says):

You don't fully understand then the difference between progressive taxation and Obama's "tax" socialist scheme.

Progressive taxation is a liberal system of taxation whereby you pay a higher percentage of income taxation as your income grows (ie. 1st 10,000 is exempt...next 10,000 taxed at 10%...next 10,000 taxed at 11%...etc.)

This is a system that most Democrats and liberals believe in and a few moderate/liberal Republicans. There are also some Democrats and a lot of Republicans that instead favor a flat tax system.

The ideological backdrop is simply that as your income rises, you ought to pay a higher percentage of the "additional" income in taxes.

There can be plenty to debate about whether this is a good idea or not and I would argue it is a horrible tax system.

However, it isn't socialism because it's primary reason for existence is not income redistribution but so-called tax fairness.

Obama's tax plan is a radical departure from even progressive taxation models. Obama would instead increase taxes on those making over $150,000 (it will wind up being MUCH lower btw) and confiscating this extra taxation and sending it in the form of a check to other income earners in the country including 40% who pay no taxes. In other words, his plan exists not for tax fairness but for income redistribution.

The Obama tax plan is a socialistic plan and not progressive taxation.

Last Edit: 2008-10-31 @ 08:49:58
prediction Map

 By: pace (D-IL) 2008-10-30 @ 09:16:49
Okay...how is that different from the earned income tax credit? I supported that back when it was a "Republican" plan BTW - now it is "Socialist?".

As for the flat tax...that just seems like a lot of ideological dreaming to me and is frankly not workable. This is just simple math:

The U.S. has some mega rich people and they pay a lion's share of the nation's taxes - almost 90% (because they make the lion's share of the money). So... if you are going to balance the books the "flat tax" rate would need to be nearly equivalent to the highest marginal tax rate now. Since the highest marginal tax rate is 35% the flat tax would need to be over 30%.

Most Americans could not afford to pay that much in taxes - could you?

And before you say "yes, but we could cut down on needless tax bureaucracy to make up the difference", note that:

1) Even with a flat tax we would still need some kind of tax bureaucracy

2) The annual operating budget of the IRS is about 11 billion dollars - about half the size of Harvard's endowment, the operating expenses for a month of the Iraq war, less than 5% of the bailout, about what it costs to build 4 stealth bombers etc etc.

In other words, cutting tax bureaucracy is a small drop in the bucket and will not save us that much proportionately.
prediction Map

 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-10-30 @ 10:42:28
No, most flat tax advocates readily acknowledge that the rate would need to be around 20%...some go as low as 17%. The reason is that you would eliminate all tax loopholes. It would be very simple. If you earned %50,000 a year, you would get a generous personal exemption of $35,000 leaving $15,000.

You would then very simply take 20% of $15,000...$3,000....that's your tax burden...it will actually cut taxes at a significantly higher percent for lower and middle income earners than upper income earners because upper income earners currently have far more tax breaks, credits, etc.

But the simplification of the tax code would unleash a bonanza of economic growth which would potentially expand the economy greatly. The result would be an increase in government revenue due to a significant increase in economic activity due to the lower taxation requirements (meaning more willingness to risk investment) more consumer dollars in the economic markets, and billions of taxpayer hours saved by individuals and businesses preparing taxes under the current system.
prediction Map

 By: hotpprs (R-NY) 2008-10-30 @ 21:32:59
One of Obama's standard punch lines at his stump speeches, defending the Socialist accusation, goes something like this.
"The next thing you know, John McCain will say I'm a Communist because I shared my peanut butter and jelly sandwiches when I was in kindergarten".
But that's a poor analogy.
The fair analogy would be, that he took half of a peanut butter and jelly sandwich from one kid, and gave it to some other kid.
Maybe McCain should incorporate that into his stump speeches, to show that Obama can't even get the facts straight on his jokes.
prediction Map

 By: pace (D-IL) 2008-10-30 @ 22:56:33
Hum... well, adding a 35,000 exemption would be a different story, obviously. I could get behind that...tough on tax attorneys though. prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-10-31 @ 11:07:16
Pasted from fivethirtyeight.com


In the wee hours of this morning, Public Policy Polling released data from Colorado and New Mexico. The toplines are strong for Obama, giving him leads of 10 and 17 points, respectively in those states. What's worse for McCain, however, is that PPP estimates that nearly two-thirds of Coloradans have already cast their ballots, as have 55-60 percent of New Mexicans, with large majorities of those votes going to Barack Obama. This is backed up to some extent by Michael McDonald's turnout statistics. In Colorado, the state had already processed approximately 1.3 million ballots as of Thursday, around 60 percent of the total 2004 turnout. In Bernalillo County (Albuquerque), New Mexico (statewide figures are not available), 145,000 ballots had been cast as of Wednesday, equaling 55 percent of 2004's total.
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-10-31 @ 11:11:44
The income level above which the Obama tax plan would raise taxes is $250,000, not $150,000. "Independent analyses of the presidential candidates’ tax proposals show that those who make less than $250,000 a year would not see their taxes raised under Senator Barack Obama’s plans."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/31/us/politics/31taxes.html?ref=politics

GC is talking about Obama's plan to expand the Earned Income Tax Credit. The EITC was first implemented in 1975 under President Ford, expanded by Reagan in 1986, and again expanded by Bush on 2001. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_Income_Tax_Credit#Impact
McCain does not propose doing away with the EITC, and proposes an additional "refundable" tax credit (one that a taxpayer gets regardless of whether or not he/she owes taxes) for those who buy health insurance.

If this makes Obama a socialist, then Ford, Reagan, Bush, and McCain were/are socialists, too.

Last Edit: 2008-10-31 @ 11:22:51
prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-10-31 @ 11:12:29
Yeah, look Five Senses...at this point, so close to the election, arguing about it is moot. The truth will be revealed soon enough. I myself am confident that I will have at least the same level of accuracy that I had in predicting the 2004 election. I think overall Gceres has been more reasonable than a lot of other people, and a lot of his analysis I think has been very good. Obviously, he's a Republican and he has a more optimistic view of his team. I obviously think McCain's campaign is not good and will lose. But time is running short, we're going to know who's right and wrong soon enough!prediction Map

 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-10-31 @ 12:03:02
"The income level above which the Obama tax plan would raise taxes is $250,000, not $150,000. "Independent analyses of the presidential candidates’ tax proposals show that those who make less than $250,000 a year would not see their taxes raised under Senator Barack Obama’s plans.""

Ummm...his own infomercial states the number at $200,000. And his own VP candidate says it's $150,000.
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-10-31 @ 13:45:41
$200,000 for single persons, $250,000 for families. Biden's statement in Canton: “Now look -- these are patriotic Americans, they’re not bad guys... But ladies and gentlemen, we want to take that $130 billion and give it to people making under $150,000 as families, people who are making 40 and 50 and 60 and 80 and 100 thousand dollars who are struggling just to keep their kid in college, struggling just to stay in their home, struggling just to pay the bills.”

This is not inconsistent with the plan's provision for no increases for families earning under $250K and single people earning under $200K. All apples are fruit, but not all fruit is apples.
prediction Map

 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-10-31 @ 14:28:53
No I have a video of Biden on my blog during a television interview saying that those individuals making less than $150,0000 a year will not have tax increases...they continue to lower the bar.prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-10-31 @ 15:34:31
Ummm, if no one earning under $250K will have their taxes increase, it stands to reason that no one earning under $150K will have their taxes increase, either. If a campaign official weere to say that under the plan, someone making $100K a year would not see an increase, would you take that to mean the plan had changed?? Think a little, man.



Last Edit: 2008-10-31 @ 15:35:55
prediction Map

 By: hotpprs (R-NY) 2008-10-31 @ 16:20:38
The Clintons are masters of campaigning, and the pundits said her campaign was bad.
Bush won 2 elections which he had no business even being close to winning. The GOP knows how to win elections, but they are saying McCain's campaign was bad too.
I say both their campaign's were just fine.
There is no way anyone could ever win with the media brainwashing people at the rate they have since the Primary season.
I don't think it would have made a difference if the money situation was reversed. I think the media is much more important then the money.
You guys can say what you want about the McCain campaign, but don't be too happy if Obama wins because of the media. Because that can strike both ways. It's a very dangerous precedent to have the President selected by the media. I don't think Obama will be that bad, as his personal history is somewhat like Clinton's. He came from a broken home, and like Clinton, that will make him the type of President that LOVES to be liked. By everyone, not just the left.
Watch for Obama to surprise the liberals and be very moderate if he wins.
But my main point, is that we really need to put some controls in place so this can't happen again. If someone is able to pay off the media through big business, we could really have a dangerous person in office some day. (I know...you can fill in the Bush jokes here....)
prediction Map

 By: pace (D-IL) 2008-10-31 @ 16:27:22
Ahhh... Republican Excuse for impending landslide #541: Media Bias.

No, joking aside, I actually agree with you. I'd be willing to give up a little Obama bias in return for a guarantee that the free media pass GW got between 2001-2004 could never happen again. The question is what can be done about it.

I also agree that Obama will probably turn out to be a moderate, but then again Obama has never really claimed otherwise. Charges of "socialism" - for apparently returning taxes to pre-GW levels - have probably done as much to make democrats salivate as republicans fume!
prediction Map

 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-10-31 @ 16:57:28
"Ummm, if no one earning under $250K will have their taxes increase, it stands to reason that no one earning under $150K will have their taxes increase, either. If a campaign official weere to say that under the plan, someone making $100K a year would not see an increase, would you take that to mean the plan had changed?? Think a little, man"

I would be willing to bet substantial amounts of money that IF Obama wins, and right now I just don't see how he could, that the limit will drop to around $30,000.
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-10-31 @ 18:09:20
Bush Country, I respect your opinion of Gceres, but to me he has been nothing but a stubborn, far right fool, and he has made many racist remarks and quite frankly I find his inaccurate analysis, and his attitude condescending and immature.

But you are right, there is no reason to argue about this anymore, because come election day, Gceres and the rest of these fools will be proven the fools in which they are.
prediction Map

 By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-10-31 @ 19:41:21
"The Clintons are masters of campaigning, and the pundits said her campaign was bad.
Bush won 2 elections which he had no business even being close to winning. The GOP knows how to win elections, but they are saying McCain's campaign was bad too.
I say both their campaign's were just fine."

Er... No. Yes, the Clintons are master at campaigning -but the advice they got was god-awful, the big primaries state strategy was not good given the proportional system, and they were a but slow in understanding what a challenge Obama really was. They were overconfident -and rightly so because the MEDIA had proclaimed Hillary the winner before the first caucus! The very same awful liberal evil Media you're now accusing of taking her into the ground. Yes, they were startled and laudative with Obama's primary performance -he was just great, successful, telegenic, charismatic, a dark horse (no pun there).
As for McCain, his campaign is a failure, his advisers are turning against each other and against the VP candidate to whom McCain hardly speaks these days, the message changes every day or they just drive two or three messages at the same time for a week. This week was more Joe Worthless-backward/Obama is an evil Brezhnevlike socialist/Obama is a secret PLO terrorist (OK that's caricature but you get the idea).
McCain's campaign is desintegrating in midair.
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-10-31 @ 23:54:21
I don't want to make a new map, because I would like to keep this one up, to preserve all the insane comments Gceres has made so I can laugh at him after the election is over.

But today I would change my prediction, and it would to be to change MO with NC. McCain wins MO and Obama wins NC.
prediction Map

 By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-11-01 @ 06:25:55
I think that's right.prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-11-01 @ 14:47:43
I agree with that Five Senses, we need to see which of these predictions come true. prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-11-01 @ 14:58:55
Looking over it, the only prediction I see coming true is N.C. closer than Virginia.prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-01 @ 19:09:06
My point is not to mock Gceres just because he is a Republican. The truth is no one knows for sure what is going to happen on election day. But my point is that he thinks that he magically knows because he has this ignorant, insulting, rude assumption that he is a "real" american and he magically knows what the other "real" americans are thinking , and that no matter what the evidence is, he will stubbornly hold onto this idea this idea that the only people who matter in this country are the people who vote for Republicans. Its ironic because this is all very *elitist* of him, and the many many many condescending jerks like him on the right.

So therefore on election day he deserves to be called out for this, and he should answer for it. Though I predict he will chicken out, and come up with more excuses. Maybe he will say the election is stolen by "blacks", "community organizers" or "communists".
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-02 @ 14:34:28
Some more important points about Gceres "analysis"

Gceres is either arguing A) No polls are correct (even non-partisan polls and republican leaning polls), and therefore there is no way to accurately asses this race other than to assume as he is doing that this country is just conservative, and for some mysterious reason the polls don't pick this up (perhaps he thinks there is a conspiracy and somehow, every single pollster out there has a liberal bias, who knew that those who want to grow up to be pollsters were all liberal? Fox News, Strategic Vision and Rasmussen?) But Gceres himself knows this, and can state with confidence that McCain will win because *he* knows voters.

B) That there is a huge bradley effect out there, which would contradict his statements that Obama's race somehow *helps* him. So therefore if there *is* a Bradley effect out there, then in fact Obama's race *hurt* him, and this country is more racist than we can admit.




Last Edit: 2008-11-02 @ 14:35:00
prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-11-02 @ 14:56:03
The hilarious thing in all this is that when they aren't talking about the Bradley Effect, they're talking whites voting for Obama out of "white guilt." As a white person I must say, please give us more credit than that!prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-11-02 @ 15:35:42
No it is white guilt! Also whites wanting to get on the bandwagon of equality all while not truly looking at qualifications and preparedness. Particuliarly in the "democratic" primary. I also speak as a white male.

Last Edit: 2008-11-02 @ 15:44:19
prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-11-02 @ 15:55:24
Liberalrocks, welcome home!prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-02 @ 19:20:11
Hello Liberalrocks, the gay Republican. No too off from a Jewish Nazi, eh?prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-02 @ 19:22:24
Is there "white guilt"? Sure there is. Are there white people who want to deny the fact that black people were ever treated the way they were in this country and ignore the history of it? Sure.

Are there intelligent white people who can get beyond that mess? Sure, definitely.
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-02 @ 21:31:39
Uh oh... "Jewish Nazi!" that's not going to go over well with the forum police... You should be more tolerant for an Obama supporter. Obama wouldn't appreciate those angry, partisan, divisive words in his Holy name. He's the uniter not the divider and his followers should take note that attacking the other party is NOT what Mr. Obama stands for. As Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden have said, you are going to have to put your partisanship aside because he plans on working with the very same Republicans you are attacking. You aren't off to a good start, Five!


P.S. Black!
prediction Map

 By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-11-03 @ 00:51:06
White guilt... That's utterly stupid. First it is the Bradley effect that's somehow going to save you, and now even that's beyond reach you've decided to diminish Obama's probable victory with the "white guilt". Haven't you even envisaged that people might vote for him because they agree eight is enough and they want new policies in the White House? Do you really think given the economic mess your Freudian theories hold?
And how come there was no "male guilt" for Hillary? Oh yeah, sexism...
Playing the victims doesn't suit you well, guys...
prediction Map

 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-11-03 @ 03:05:45
It's absolutely white liberal guilt...there is no substance to the man...many of my friends will readily admit that they are voting for him solely because they want to vote for a black man for President. So it 100% White Guilt. It may be more difficult to understand by French standards because France does not have the despicable history of slavery. There are many white liberals in this country (particularly upper middle class btw) that are conditioned to feel bad that they are where they are at and many African-Americans are not. Their vote for this man is based on assuaging part of that guilt.

It is 100% a factor and the only factor for a good many.
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-03 @ 09:45:49
And there are many Conservatives who are programed to be ethocentric and and look at the world in terms of black and white terms, such as Gceres. Some are out right racists, others like to pretend they aren't, but harbor much resentment, such as Gceres. prediction Map

 By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-11-04 @ 00:23:19
Did you get out of the playpen again!prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-11-04 @ 00:26:22
Have Joe the Plummer stick something in his mouth!

--Im just sayin.
prediction Map

 By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-11-04 @ 05:16:23
"It may be more difficult to understand by French standards because France does not have the despicable history of slavery."

Slavery dates back to a long time, but we did have some strong debates over it, especially in the French overseas territories. But we don't have enough blacks on the motherland to make it an issue.
What we have, however, is a long tradition of anti-Semitism (think Vichy France), and I can assure you nobody feels "goy guilt" over here.
Actually, on another issue, Arab Muslims, only 57% of the French say they could vote for a Muslim. Just yesterday! So you see we do have our issues and some progress to be made (although not as much as the US -I can't even imagine a Muslim getting more than 20% of the vote for President even with a major party endorsement -people would think they vote for a terrorist. Americans are SO closed to Islam).

Btw, the figures would be 80% for a black man (we don't have the same complex as in the USA, and therefore no need to get 95+ results in that kind of survey) and 72% for an Asian president. The 80% figure is undoubtedly a pro-Obama effect.

And what if these people actually want Obama for President, not just a black man?
And why "white LIBERAL guilt"? Because conservatives don't care about the history of slavery? Or is that just the ideological equivalent of racism?
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-06 @ 17:58:17
By: Gceres (R-CA) 2008-10-22 @ 17:34:58
Predictions for surprises for Election Night as of today (I reserve the right to revise and extend these predictions LOL):

1. Virginia is 53 to 47 and not close.

2. New Mexico is super tight and goes McCain.

3. Colorado, 52 to 48 McCain.

4. Pennsylvania...no landslide here...really close...edge Obama...not called until late.

5. Indiana & Kentucky...first two states...both called immediately.

6. Florida...not decided on Election Night.

7. North Carolina...closer than Virginia.

8. Sleeper race...Washington State is closer than expected and not immediately called...Obama wins by a couple of points.



As we can see, Gceres is a loser, and was wrong on every single prediction.

The biggest losers on this website?

Chica of Light, Gceres and Conservative Republican. All of whom let their bitterness and distortion cloud their judgment.

Chica was so bitter Hillary lost, she convinced herself Obama was going to be blown out of the water with a "Bradley Effect" which did not exist.

Gceres and Conservative Republican ignored any bit of information they didn't want to hear, and convinced themselves that they were the real Americans, and that there was a conspiracy by the pollsters and the media to paint the world more liberal than it actually is. Their attitude and philosophy, and their refusal to adapt and reason is the reason why the Republicans lost, and they will continue to lose until they wise up.
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-11-06 @ 18:03:42
Well Gceres appears to have been right about Virginia. I was a bit surprised that Virginia ended up as close as it was.

edit:

53-47 Obama in VA win is assuming the CNN count rather than Dave's

Last Edit: 2008-11-06 @ 18:15:53
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-06 @ 18:10:40
No, he was dead wrong about Virginia.

He said Obama would never win Virginia and it would go for McCain. He swore up and down all friggin year about how Virginia had no chance of ever going blue. Virginia went to Obama by 4 points. A bit tighter than the 6 or 7 points that the averages of the polls said, and the most off of all the newly blue states, but none-the-less, still an Obama win *within the margin of error* of most of the polls.
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-06 @ 18:23:15
Biggest losers of 08

#8 Joe Lieberman - Mr. Lieberman let his hatred of muslims and his religious partisan ship destroy his dignity and cost him memebership in the democratic party.

#7 Elizabeth Dole - Her holier than thou art attitude cost her the election

#6 John McCain - Sold his soul and ran a negative campaign full of lies. His choice to run to the right in the worst year to do so might have cost him the election.

#5 PUMA and the bitter Hillary vote - So bitter that they lost the primary, they sold their souls to get revenge and it got them nowhere. These people showed their true colors and put their bitterness above their values.

#4 Sarah Palin - The worst possible pick for VP. She made such a fool of herself with her ignorance and extremism she will forever be seen as a laughing stock.

#3 The Bradley Effect - Absolutely no evidence of it existing

#2 Out of Touch Republicans - Their refusal to listen to anything that contradicts their world view, they convinced themselves they would win the election and that they were the "real americans". They try to mask their extremism as "mainstream values" and it once again cost them the election. They will continue this trend for quite some time until the party changes idenity.

#1 Baseless, fear based character attacks against liberals - These attacks finally lost out for the American public finally voted on the issues. Fool us once, shame on you, fool us twice shame on us and to sort of quote G W. Bush, Fool us the second time, we can't get fooled again.
prediction Map

 By: CR (--MO) 2008-11-06 @ 19:10:14
No Five, the biggest loser on here is you. Even in victory you are still a hateful and bitter person. Because I was optmistic, did my part and voted like a good citizen, and now resolve to pick myself up and move on makes me the real winner.

But despite all our difference and harsh words back and forth, I still wish you good luck, good tiddings, and all the best. May your life be blessed as richly as anyone else's.

Last Edit: 2008-11-06 @ 19:11:22
prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-11-06 @ 19:22:32
Five Senses, you were right as I knew you would be. The Republicans and PUMA people were wrong as I knew they would be.

I also, your losers, I again entirely agree. There is no question.

We ended up having the same map. Again, I overestimated the Republicans, even this time! I should've known Obama was going to carry Indiana, his organization was impressive here.
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-06 @ 19:33:34
Conserivative, I am sticking it to you people because of your condescending, out-of-touch attitude that you Conservatives are the "real americans" and that you know it all. You maintain this attitude that "real" people couldn't possibly vote for some "liberal" and that you guys alone know the out come of the election, that there is some "liberal media" conspiracy in the polls, and thus you guys ignore all facts and information that contradicts your world view.


You can't just sit here, make outrageously false predictions and not have someone point it out to you. Learn next time to live in reality, accept facts, and stop ignoring information that contradicts your world view, and maybe you won't look like such a fool.

As far as the liberals go, and myself included! We must be careful to learn the lessons from the Republicans. Don't ignore facts that contradict your outlook and world view, and never lose touch with reality.

Now what we *don't * know is how well Obama governs. Based upon his attitude, education, intelligence and willingness to listen and make good decisions, I think he will do a great job, but we will never know. Especially since he is handed this mess from the Republicans. But I can tell you this much, if 4 years from now the facts and stats say Obama is going to lose by 10 points, you better believe I won't be on some website claiming Obama will pull it off, and that I alone know how the electoral thinks because "real americans" like me know the answers.
prediction Map

 By: CR (--MO) 2008-11-06 @ 19:46:15
I'll hold you to that four years from now Five. And I don't think I looked like a fool because I choose to be optmistic about our chances. You are right that I did not factor in things that I should have. You where also right on the polling data. I admit my failures there. But go look at my senate and govenor maps. You'll see they are not that bad in there predictions nor was my Democratic primary map. All things in politics are possible and I always said that Obama could easily win. I was hoping for an upset and portade that as best I could. In all fairness things at the very end looked like they might be tightening up so I thought an upset was possible. Didn't work out. Now I know better. We learn by making mistakes. Its part of being human. I never claimed to be the sole keeper of how the electorate would vote. You can look that up if you like.

Again I'm at peace with what has occured. High time this party had a house cleaning and got back to its roots and conservative values. And I again wish you all the best Five because to any less would not be right. Enjoy your victory.

Last Edit: 2008-11-06 @ 19:48:36
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-06 @ 21:17:49
:-)prediction Map

 By: satyrday (I-MI) 2008-11-07 @ 12:42:02
FiveSenses is dead on. There are times for trying to get everyone together, to argue your point, and accept the results. But we're far past that point now. It's time to leave the 'kool-aid' drinkers behind, because the mess that THEY created is far too serious. We don't have time to get them all up to speed.prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-07 @ 13:08:21
Well, satyrday, Obama is going to try to make a bi-partisan cabinet and work with moderate conservatives and I say good for him. I say we do make a reach out for the moderate conservatives, but you are right, the "kool-aide" drinkers will be left out, and rightly so. First of all you can't trust them, and second of all they are the same type of people who made Obama seem like a monster and they only want harm for this country and those they disagree with. Those who I am talking about are the Rush Limbaughs, the Tom DeLays and the Sean Hannity's. prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-11-07 @ 16:25:03
Hey Rove ended having a good map himself! I don't know why ConservaRep and Gceres wouldn't listen to one of their own when he had Obama winning easily.prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-11-07 @ 16:26:23
Gceres was right about one thing, North Carolina was closer than Virginia, something I knew he would be right about.

Also he was right about Palin's clothes not belonging to her... a GOP lawyer is headed up to Alaska to reclaim them.
prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-07 @ 17:18:00
North Carolina was not closer than Virginia man. Obama barely won NC, by less than a percentage point and he won Virginia by 4 points.

Turns out Gceres was the one drinking the kool-aide all along (big suprise)

Last Edit: 2008-11-07 @ 17:18:54
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-11-07 @ 17:41:10
Omaha called for Obama:

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=2835&u_sid=10481441
prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-11-07 @ 18:53:42
The polls were vindicated as well, something I'd like to point out. Obama won by 6% nationally. Most of the states were accurate, with Alaska the one exception... I told you guys Alaska worried me.prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-11-07 @ 18:56:43
Alaska - the Senate race - we'll see.

prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-07 @ 21:07:27
I never ever ever would have guess Stevens would have held on to his seat.

I also never thought IN would go for Obama while MO stayed for McCain (though both were super close)

Those were the two biggest surprises of the night.

Though the polls are almost always right, there always seems to be a surprise or two somewhere.
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-11-07 @ 21:18:54
Alaska was pretty stunning, the polls seemed to be turning against Stevens.prediction Map

 By: FiveSenses99 (--MO) 2008-11-08 @ 20:34:02
There seems to be a lot of people saying that there was some dirty business going on in Alaska. Who knows, but they will be checking into it. It certainly wouldn't surprise me if it turns out to be true. prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-11-08 @ 22:49:06
A lot of it probably came down to the notion that Palin could appoint a Republican to the Senate after Stevens is gone.

Even if he does win re-election, which he probably will, I'm guessing he will resign in pretty short order.
prediction Map

 By: BushCountry (I-IN) 2008-11-09 @ 15:21:57
That's what I thought too. Haha, what if Palin appoints herself to the seat? Hahaha, that would be hilarious. But as the guys a fivethirtyeight.com said there may have been a "Bradley Effect" for convicted felons...people just didn't want to admit to pollster they were going to vote a guy like Stevens. prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-11-09 @ 16:26:24
@Bushcountry- Isn't that incredible in Alaska. What a sad commentary on Alaskans. They reelected a felon! lol... Alaskans definitely lied to pollsters about Stevens vs. Begich. I don't know whether to credit that win for Stevens to "loyalty" from Alaskans or Palins coattails? That has to be the most disturbing senate race out there.

Im very curious as to what is happening in Minnesota right now with the Coleman lead down to about 200 before the recount. Are the absentees and provisionals counted in MN? I think Coleman is legitametly nervous if he's willing to sue to stop the counting of 32 ballots in Minneapolis. Apparently there are thousands of undervote ballots that have not been counted that will be hand counted to check for "intention." It helps to have a Dem SOS in MN! lol... I'm not a Franken fan, but if Coleman is so intent on not allowing all votes to be counted, then GO FRANKEN!!! That would be 58 seats. If dnul is out there I wish he would chime in.

Last Edit: 2008-11-09 @ 16:27:22
prediction Map

 By: FrenchEd (D-NJ) 2008-11-09 @ 17:07:55
Alaska: Don't forget Young. He was supposed to lose big time to Berkowitz and still won assuming early results are correct. Young and Stevens were reelected against all odds thanks to a Bradley effect for felons and McCain's coattails (McCain was also underestimated in AK).

Minnesota: ouch. I had predicted this would be the closest race but I hadn't anticipated it would be that close -it seems that prediction was ominous.
When a race is so close, there is about 1 chance out of 2 that the winner is not the right guy. Think Gore and Bush.
prediction Map


User's Predictions

Prediction Score States Percent Total Accuracy Ver #D Rank#Pred
P 2008 President 52/56 32/56 84/112 75.0% pie 49 16 382T1,505
Aggregate Predictions 52/56 32/56 84/112 75.0% pie


Back to 2008 Presidential Prediction Home - Predictions Home


Terms of Use - DCMA Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC 2019 All Rights Reserved