polls i've seen and this is only for discussion....a play with maths

[Tarazis]

I've been looking at a lot of polls for the 2006 election and polls comparing possible contenders for 2008. of the polls that I've seen and drawing a mean deviation from the difference between reps and Dem's, which is by my calculations is a Dem's lead over the Rep's of 9.2% (please remember these are drawn from polls!). this is the election map at the moment and i was wondering what everyone else thought of this? do you think that it is an accurate picture?

I'm using the results of the 2004 presidential election as a base and I haven't done a straight reduction accross the board and tried to guess local outcomes and factors.

[Yates]

That seems like a fairly reasonable map.  I, however, would place Louisiana in the Republican column due to the events during and following the Hurricane Katrina disaster.

[Speed of Sound]

This map is a dream come true.

[TheresNoMoney]

I seriously hope for the sake of humanity that any election in the near future looks nothing like that...no offense.

For the sake of humanity? Could you be any more of a hack?

No congress/presidency has done a worse job in my lifetime than the current Republican congress/presidency. Why do you think their poll numbers are so damn low?

[Jake]

I think that post was a good example of why you shouldn't use the internet while stoned.

[TheresNoMoney]

I think that post was a good example of why you shouldn't use the internet while stoned.

Are you trying to say that the Republicans in Washington have done a good job and that they are popular?

[Erc]

If you had read the first sentence of his post, you'd fine that he appears to think the exact opposite.

[tarheel-leftist85]

Even w/ Bush being unpopular, we must realize that he won't be on the ticket in 2006 or 2008.  Certainly the Iraq fiasco and other debacles will have some effect on the elections to come, but they could do so in two ways:
(1)  The Dems. fail to offer an agenda on tax REFORM (not "reform"), national security, health care, and energy independence.  Not just "America can do better" and "Anybody but Bush."  People don't need to be told their president has failed miserably and continued not to deliver the goods to social conservatives.  If the Dems. choose the no agenda scenario, then the electorate will only change in such a way that turnout is depressed, but of similar composition to previous elections (< 50% D).
(2)  Dems. offer a substantive (doesn't necessarily have to be detailed) platform (more progressive taxes, investing in alternative energy research, Soldier's Bill of Rights) while Republicans try in vain to debate the decision to go to Iraq (let's face it, Republicans love to have this fight, one of the ways they feign indignation).  In this case, it's a blowout (and perhaps a realignment.  This will require candidates like Tim Kaine was this year (not necessarily talking about religion, but comfortable in his own shoes). 
For 2008 examples:
Dems. persue Opt. (1):  HRC or Clark (46) v. Allen (53)

Dems. pursue opt. (2):  Warner/Lincoln (52) v. Allen/Sanford (46)
Intermediate situation:  Feingold (49.25) v. Allen (49.75)
I believe Feingold would be an issues-oriented (opt. (2)) candidate, but *SOME* of the base would pursue opt. (1), thereby, hurting his candidacy

[Tarazis]

wow.....i didn't think that this was so contentious......

let me explain, just in case anyone was wondering. taking the polls that I've looked at (about 50 over the last year from, what i would consider, Dem leaning Rep leaning and Neutral pollsters. using the general questions of the "which party would you support?" type, i came up with the figure of 9.2% lead of the Dems over the Reps. (I'm from Ireland and trying to do this in a muilty party system is a lot more difficult)....

I then looked at the results of the presidential elections (the last large test of public opinion) i reduced the Reps lead over the Dems (and also where Dems lead in a State increased there lead) as a guide of general disacification with a piticular party.

The intention was to try and get a guide for what may happen in 2006 and what could happen in 2008. and regardless Bush is going to be a factor in that election, just a Clinton was in the 2000 election. that answers you point kurstytheklown [q]Even w/ Bush being unpopular, we must realize that he won't be on the ticket in 2006 or 2008. [/q]

I think that post was a good example of why you shouldn't use the internet while stoned.

I was not stoned when doing this and it was a purly theoretical exercises

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't understand what you are saying here. this would be a win for the Dems....in here the Dems are in Red, I think that California it would be a dead giveaway.
As for being a hack...i take it that you mean that i am an armature and unknowing of politics and political procedures.....I've been involved with politics for over 20years, but local, national and European. I have just finished mt diploma in Politics and Government and am about to start an Honers degree in International Studies. I have a Degree in Physics and Maths (so i understand about modeling) and at present I work for a bank as a risk assessor. am i really a hack?

It is my feeling from watching US news, reading papers from all over the country and by reading formes like, this that there could be a shift like in 1994 in the upcoming midterms. I think that regardless of how the polls look now, that a Dem should easily win the WH in 2008, unless we have someone tainted by the war and the Reps make it stick and the Reps would only win by getting there support out in several swing states like Ohio, Florida, New Mexico, Iowa, Missouri and Arizona. where the next election will be fought. This is of course dependant on who the nominees are, i.e. if john McCain is the Rep nomination then Arizona wouldn't be in that list.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think that in the argument FezzyFestoon of the Dems not offering an alternative, when you are not in power it is very hard to get the microphone on the national stage unless it is like a hot-button topic like the war. but i would agree with the trust of you argument.

That seems like a fairly reasonable map.  I, however, would place Louisiana in the Republican column due to the events during and following the Hurricane Katrina disaster.

Hurricane Katrina is the reason that I placed Louisiana in the Dems column, I think that this issue and the resulting national disgrace of Americans being refugees in there own country should be a factor in explaining to the American People why Government is for and why taxes are needed, and that a strong government with programs to help those who have fallen through the cracks in society is a national security issue, because it is done for the security of the nations that is at stake. At least that is how it looks from this side of the Atlantic.

Blegh, it's time for Bush to get lost so we don't lose half our members.  I seriously hope for the sake of humanity that any election in the near future looks nothing like that...no offense.

No offense was taken.....if this was a map for my party then i would feel the exact same way.


o.k....i'm ready for your "backlash"......:>

[Brandon H]

Too early to tell and a lot can change by 2008, but I think La. will go Republican in 2008. The state went Republican in 2000 and 2004 and most of the people not coming back to La. seem to be people inside New Orleans which went Democrat while most everywhere else, except for St. Bernard, a lot of other people are going back (or are already back) which usually vote Republican.

Also, many Democrats are just blaming Bush while many Republicans are blaming Blanco. So people's opinions aren't changing, just the people that live there are.

[skybridge]

That seems like a fairly reasonable map.  I, however, would place Louisiana in the Republican column due to the events during and following the Hurricane Katrina disaster.

With all the anger at the Bushes? No way. LA will be solid Democratic next time around!

[Tarazis]

That seems like a fairly reasonable map.  I, however, would place Louisiana in the Republican column due to the events during and following the Hurricane Katrina disaster.

With all the anger at the Bushes? No way. LA will be solid Democratic next time around!

from some news reports, there is a fear in the state that congress and the WH is losing interest (do these guys have the attention spans of goldfish???) I think if that takes hold then the state will go Dem in 2008, if the Dems can make a policy platform on disaster relief then it could tip the balance.