|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 07, 2020, 05:21:57 am
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 User Predictions - Discussion (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 2004 User Predictions - Discussion  (Read 828221 times)
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« on: November 13, 2003, 03:49:30 am »

Dave, it may be a little too late to suggest changes in color-coding for your map repeating 2000 results, but I found the shades to red associated with >50  and >60 to be too similar.
Also since the difference between getting 50.16% (Washington) and getting 54.60% (Illinois)  in the last election makes all the difference with regard to predicting competitiveness in the next election, Might I suggest having more than one category for 50-60%?

As to the predictive maps, I myself plan to have four completely different colors
Solid Republican – Dark Blue
Lean Republican – Light Blue
Tossup  - White or gray
Lean Democrat – Light Red
Solid Democrat– Dark Red
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #1 on: November 13, 2003, 03:52:00 am »

Well I seem to be obsessed with colors today. :)Darthkosh you seem to have mixed up Red and Blue states by assigning Red to the GOp and vice versa.

I was much shocked to see your map before I realised this Cheesy
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #2 on: November 15, 2003, 03:26:24 pm »

Well people, I have some good news and bad news as regards my map. The bad news (perhaps good for some Smiley ) is that I feel unable to make my map with useful predictions as of right now.

The main reason is that the Democratic challenger is not yet known. My picks would vary considerably depending upon that factor. I feel uncomfortable deciding upon how states would turn based on a generic democratic candidate when I know full well that I would have to revise them next year. For Instance if Clark wins then Arkansas goes from Lean Rep to Lean Dem. The same applies to West Virginia if Gephardt is the candidate. If Dean wins a whole bunch of tossups become Lean Rep.  

Thus I am not going to put up a map with solid predictions yet. However since the others have taken so much effort on theirs; I feel compelled to make a contribution. I have put up a map detailing the margins of victory in 2000 for the most competitive states (in my opinion).  All other states I expect to remain in the same column as they were in 2000. I trust this will be of use to the others in their analysis. (Please refer to the color key on the right)

I am still in the process of completing my analysis. If I find that there are comparatively few states where it ALL depends on the Dem. nominee I will definitely put up my map in a week or so. Till then, have fun evryone :-)
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #3 on: November 17, 2003, 11:29:27 am »

Sorry I forgot to post this earlier. Its a really good electoral college calculator. I've found it very useful in my calculations and hope you will too Cheesy

http://www.grayraven.com/ec/
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #4 on: November 17, 2003, 11:54:02 am »

Well I've just posted my first prediction map. I can't say I put a lot of faith in it. :-) I haven't assumed a democratic nominee but have tried to consider a "generic" democrat.
Obviously a number of changes will occur in my map depending upon the candidate. For Instance if Clark wins then Arkansas goes from Lean Rep to Lean Dem. The same applies to West Virginia if Gephardt is the candidate. If Dean wins a whole bunch of states like Nevada become Lean Rep.

I'm not going to go too much into detail as to why I have assigned states the way I have but will be happy to field any specific queries.

Remember that the Confidence map is not my picks but is info put up for the benefit of everybody else. I have put up a map detailing the margins of victory in 2000 for the most competitive states. Except for one or two I consider them all to be competitive and not till a Dem nominee is selected can I definitely assign any to the D or R Column. All other states (in yellow) I expect to remain in the same column as they were in 2000. I trust this will be of use to the others in their analysis.

(Please remember to refer to the color key on the right)
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #5 on: November 19, 2003, 02:05:38 pm »

Yeah, I noticed that too. Well done Edwards, give the man the Presidency. Grin

LOL yeah he's leading in at least one respect. Btw as to EC calculators I genuinely find Dave's the simplest and easiest to use. I'd recommend it for your calculations. Smiley
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #6 on: November 24, 2003, 02:55:25 am »

I submitted my predictions today for the 2004 presidential election.  I am looking forward to electing a Democratic candidate into office.  It is my prediction that whomever is nominated will be the next President.

LOL I gotta say that I'm impressed that you submitted a reasonably non-partisan and neutral analysis inspite of your obviously strong views.
I had expected a copy of the 1964 map or something Tongue Grin
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #7 on: November 27, 2003, 03:05:11 pm »

There's a better EV calculator on John Edward's website(!)
What is the web-address for Jonathan Edwards?

U can get the EV calculator itself on

http://www.johnedwards2004.com/map/

Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #8 on: November 28, 2003, 03:54:27 am »

Mikey welcome aboard, I too am much impressed with your analysis. Smiley
Got kinda Deja Vu feeling when I read ur state by state analysis Cheesy

A couple of questions:

- Why is Hawaii not in the definite Strong Dem column??

- For that matter how about Connecticut, Delaware?? I realise they COULD go GOP but only in a landslide and in that case, a couple more from the Strong Dem column would join them.

- In my opinion Kentucky works the other way around for the GOP. Its safe except for a landslide.

- Why is La. and not Tenn. a GOP lean??

that's enough for starters Smiley
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #9 on: November 28, 2003, 04:00:46 am »

Okay, I'm having a heapload of problems in uploading the gif files and I've spent enough time on it and in addition, how do you change colors, etc.?  Paint?  If so, just a TAD bit too much time.

Lol we've all had our share. There is another forum thread for technical issues with predictions. Post a run-down of ur probs there and the big guy (Dave) will help ya out.
As for the coloring in paint taking time; what feature are you using? Mine took five minutes using the "fill with color" feature. I'd recommend that. Smiley
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #10 on: November 29, 2003, 03:36:55 pm »

Well I cant be certain about this and mikey will no doubt clarify it but I think the percentages are CHANCES OF A PARTY WINNING the states altogether not their actual percentages there.

If you look at it from that angle most of them make sense. You guys shoulda thought of that :-) Why would somebody who had preceded it by such a reasonable analysis predict such wacky percentages?Huh
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #11 on: November 30, 2003, 12:29:24 pm »

Nice analysis. A question. Why is Washington state in solid Democrat??

I'll graph my predictions when I get a chance, but here are my detailed predictions. This assumes no earth-shattering events between now and Nov. '04 and the Dems nominating either Dean or Gephardt and a competitive race.

Solid Dem: VT, NY, CT, RI, MA, MD, DC, DE, NJ, CA, WA, HI, IL

Solid GOP: ND, SD, NE, KS, OK, TX, ID, MT, WY, UT, AK, MS, AL, GA, SC, NC, VA, KY, LA, IN

Lean Dem:

Maine
New Mexico (Gore won barely in '00 and a Hispanic Dem was solidly elected Governor--should be able to turn out Hispanics on election day)
Pennsylvania (more competitive if Dean is the nominee)
Michigan (ditto for MI)

Lean GOP:

Colorado
Tennessee
Florida (it'll be very close, but I must sadly say it leans GOP due to increased GOP registration and a solid win for Jeb Bush in 2002)
Nevada (a bit more competitive due to Yucca Mountain and an increasing Hispanic population)
Arizona (though more Democratic than in '00)

Tossup:

NH: Lean Dem for Dean; Lean GOP for Gep
MO: Lean GOP for Dean; Lean Dem for Gep
IA: Lean GOP for Dean; Lean Dem for Gep
WV: Lean GOP for Dean; Lean Dem for Gep
AR: Lean GOP, though highly competitive if Clark gets VP
OH: Lean GOP for Dean; Lean Dem for Gep
MN: Lean Dem for Dean; Lean GOP for Gep
WI: Lean Dem for Dean; Lean GOP for Gep
OR: Lean Dem for Dean; Lean GOP for Gep

I figured Dean would overperform in states Nader did well in in 2000 (MN, WI, OR) and Gephardt would do well in his home state and in states with a high union population (MI, OH, PA, WV).
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #12 on: November 30, 2003, 12:34:59 pm »

Nevada, Washington, Oregon, California:  lean Dem
Hawai'i:  lean Dem

All good except for California and Hawaii.............lean Dem?Huh?
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #13 on: December 01, 2003, 02:55:37 pm »

Well Yeah but the most I could say about either state is that the Democratic margin will be smaller than in 2000 (unless, as I have repeatedly mentioned, its a landslide year either way)

The recent gubernatorial elections signify a better organized state party which can turn out their base and that means a larger republican vote but not near a majority in either case.

Arnold and Lingle run as LOCAL republicans and actually almost as Independents. A LOT of their voters would never consider voting for Bush- Just like I keep assuring people that the recent Dem victory in La. does not mean even a marginal change at the national level. The antipathy towards the national democratic party is as strong as ever. Same for these states. If we are looking at a reasonably close election, they should be solid democrat.

And if at all I agree to change that I might change California because of a huge uncommitted if left-tending independent electorate who could TECHNICALLY vote GOP. Hawaii has a much stronger democratic base.

I wouldn't put too much stock in Hawaii's record as a bell-weather. I would caution against using bellwethers that didn’t work in 2000. For example Delaware has voted for the winning candidate for the TEN elections from 1960 through 1996. In 2000 it voted for the loser and by a huge margin. Proponents of its bell-weather status failed to note it had become increasingly democratic and only retained bellwether status in the 90's because the democrats happened to win both the elections held later that decade.  



Ryan:  both California and Hawai'i (only my predictions) are gonna be lean Democrat unlike strong because of Arnold Schwarzenegger and recent Republican gubernatorial grabs in Hawai'i.  Just "hunches."  In addition, Hawai'i has a history of voting for the "right guy" (i.e. the winner of elections), but they've been Democrat for quite a few years now.  Again, a hunch...I can't see a DEVASTATING Democrat victory in either state.
Logged
Ryan
ryanmasc
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 332


« Reply #14 on: December 02, 2003, 02:29:10 am »

There is a modify option which you can use. Comes in handy Cheesy
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 0.201 seconds with 15 queries.