|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 30, 2020, 02:20:06 PM

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 User Predictions - Discussion (search mode)
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17
Author Topic: 2004 User Predictions - Discussion  (Read 831411 times)
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #375 on: July 18, 2004, 09:05:42 PM »

nfc champion panthers, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I don't think he's laughing now!
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #376 on: July 21, 2004, 07:39:44 PM »

Harry, what is thar map supposed to signify?
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #377 on: July 21, 2004, 08:13:45 PM »

It is a map of state legislatures. Some are Dem controlled, some are Rep controlled and some have divided control. NE is unicameral.

Okay, thanks.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #378 on: July 24, 2004, 03:24:45 PM »

Please note that the last Democrat nominee to win more than half the vote was Carter in 1976 (with just 50.08% of the vote).  

Clinton would have done it twice had Perot not ran.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #379 on: July 24, 2004, 08:19:24 PM »


Unlikely.  Without Perot Bush would have likely won 50-51% of the vote.  The majority of Perot's support came from Bush.

LOL...so with a recession loomingm Bush does nearly as well as he did in 1988?  I don't think so.

That also means 13-14% of Perot's 19% comes goes to Bush, which leaves...2% for Clinton and 3% stay home?

I would say Bush gets 1-2% closer in the PV without Perot but is still beaten soundly.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #380 on: July 24, 2004, 08:20:14 PM »

Also, it is a downright fact that Clinton would have got 50% in 1996 without Perot.  It's a fact.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #381 on: July 25, 2004, 03:19:37 PM »


Kerry does better in Iowa than Vermont?
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #382 on: July 26, 2004, 11:50:43 AM »
« Edited: July 26, 2004, 11:53:03 AM by Boss Tweed »

1992:



Clinton's lead INCREASES by 2% after Perot drops out the first time.



Clinton's lead remains at 16% after Perot re-enters.

Also, as Perot climbs, Clinton's lead decreases, and as Perot tapers off at the end, Clinton's lead climbs.

I just don't see any evidence Perot hurt Bush in the polls.  The only argument you can make is if that you say Perot's ads hurt Bush, but there really is no evidence to support that claim.

I think we can safely say Perot had little effect.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #383 on: July 26, 2004, 12:25:29 PM »

Also, we have to remember that even though a lot of Perot's voters were conservatives they supported him over Bush BECAUSE they were unhappy with Bush and his broken tax pledge. They might well have refused to vote for him anyway, even if Perot wouldn't have been around.

I think Dazzleman said it best:  The very presence of a Perot-type candidate illustrated Bush's weaknesses.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #384 on: July 26, 2004, 01:04:59 PM »

Carl,

First, I'd like to knwo where you got your numbers from, then I will point some things out.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #385 on: July 26, 2004, 08:16:03 PM »

Lets assume carl's numbers are right.

Clinton/Gore: 48,858,570 (49.6%)
Bush/Quayle: 47,002,078 (47.7%)
Other: 2,639,382 (2.7%)
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #386 on: July 26, 2004, 08:23:14 PM »

Here's the map:


Clinton/Gore: 48,858,570 (49.6%); 346 EV's
Bush/Quayle: 47,002,078 (47.7%); 192 EV's
Other: 2,639,382 (2.7%); 0 EV's

So with Carl's numbers, Clinton wins convincingly.  Which is what I have been saying all along.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #387 on: July 26, 2004, 08:37:36 PM »

Bush will run much tougher in California and New york than he did in 2000.  He won't win those two states but will force Dems to spend resources there they didn't have to spend in 2000.  

Bush ain't winning no NY or CA as it stands now.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #388 on: July 27, 2004, 12:36:17 PM »


As I said, they come from a number of studies done by a couple of Political Science professors assisted by graduate students.

Carl,

Do you have the numbers for 1996?
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #389 on: July 27, 2004, 01:58:39 PM »

Using those numbers:


Clinton/Gore: 48,208,665 (50.9%); 348 EV's
Dole/Kemp: 44,454,266 (47.0); 190 EV's
Other: 1,995,389 (2.1); 0 EV's

Florida would have been extremely close, I have it as Clinton by .09%.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #390 on: July 29, 2004, 07:25:23 PM »

Here is my 'pre-bounce' projection:


Kerry 274
Bush 264
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #391 on: August 15, 2004, 12:21:31 PM »

Current Snapshot:


Kerry/Edwards 312
Bush/Cheney 226

Kerry has been up since he picked Edwards (mid-July) on my map.  I'm trying my best not to get excited, because I learned my lesson in 1992 when Perot dropped out.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #392 on: September 17, 2004, 05:54:20 PM »


I wish Spain had kept Florida.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #393 on: September 25, 2004, 07:33:39 AM »

New Prediction


332-206...or 336-202, can't remember.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #394 on: October 14, 2004, 02:10:43 PM »


That was from 3 weeks ago, Kerry has signnificantly closed tha gap since then.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #395 on: October 22, 2004, 05:50:49 PM »


New Jersey is my election night suprise. Wink Allow me to stay disillusioned, ok? Smiley

I suppose Bush can win NJ, but he won't lose NH and PA simultaneously.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #396 on: October 23, 2004, 06:29:28 PM »



Bush 286
Kerry 252

Minnesota and NH are basically ties.

If Kerry gains Wisconsin and NM, and puts it at 271-267, a Colorado legal struggle likely decides the election.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #397 on: November 01, 2004, 07:39:05 PM »

Still waiting for the example of a President seeking reelection who was defeated when the unemployment rate was less than six per cent.

Still waiting for the example of an incumbent president who won when the Redskins lost their final home game before the election.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #398 on: January 16, 2006, 08:45:45 PM »

nfc champion panthers, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Told you so
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,596
United States


« Reply #399 on: January 16, 2006, 08:49:25 PM »


Way to sock it to someone who is in Iraq and hasn't posted in months.

Thank you.

But that's when I was good at picking postseason football games.  Now all these road teams are winning and I'm like a hick on 5th avenue.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17  
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 0.032 seconds with 13 queries.