2004 User Predictions - Discussion

[classical liberal]

The election goes to the House of Representatives

[classical liberal]

cskendrick

where do you get your data?

[classical liberal]

The only problem was that the economy got better too quickly for the stock market.  When the growth abated a bit, the overvalued stocks plummeted taking consumer confidence with it.  Companies couldn't afford to remain here so an accelerated wave of outsourcing screwed the job numbers.  Companies who could afford to stay had to give pay cuts and reduce their workforce.  A reduced workforce doing the samer activity translates into higher productivity.  Productivity = Profits.  However, with mandatory overhead at 3%-7% in Mexico and 22% in the US, corporations are performing their profit induced hiring in Mexico.  This translates into depressed job markets in the US.

Note that none of this has much of anything to do with profligate spending or iresponsible tax cuts; both parties are irrelevant in their claims.

The point is that the cycles of the economy, good and bad have nothing to do with governemtn programs.  If the government just leaves well enough alone things will work out.  The only thing is that until the mandatory overhead is tripled, or at least doubled in Mexico, the job market will be less attractive here; the US public would never stand for a reduction of more than 2% here.  In this suite, the Dems' cry for fair trade is not as far off as many would pose.  But, the overhead will naturally rise in 20 years to match the US; we don't need to renegotiate or cancel the treaties.  This is why we Reps are saying to continue to leave well enough alone; the unemployment is low enough as it is.  It's also a good way to break the vicious cycle of a consumer culture and credit card debt.  With a pay cut a family is likely to rethink their spending habits.

[classical liberal]

States Rights-

You're sorely mistaken if you think that our Federal Deficit is good debt.  Good debt is debt incurred in the attainment of a positive cashflow statement.  Last time I checked our cash flow amounts to  -$527,000,000,000.00.  Negative cashflow ==> BAD debt.

The only way to responsibly reduce taxes is to cut services as well.  I think that we should, as Chairman Greenspan suggested, eliminate Social Security and Medicare and make the tax cuts permanent, eliminate the FICA while we're at it.  Then revenues are reduced to $1.3t and outlays are reduced to $1.4t plus the cost of war.  We could easily make up the other $100b in loophole closings and cross-purpose program elimination.

[classical liberal]

I'm going to write-in Sen. Sununu/fmr. Rep. Watts.

[classical liberal]

I know this is off topic (and is probably posted somewhere), but can somebody please explain to me how to post a 50 state electoral map here?

In the prediction section, create a prediction, right click on the maps, select properties, copy the http://www.us... (it should take up many lines in the property window click before the "h" and drag the cursor down), paste it inside of an [img ] [/ img] without the spaces in the tags, and post.

[classical liberal]

Gov. Richardson might give the Dems AZ and CO.  But that's a slim chance of happening.  Sen. Edwards might help the Dems in OH, IN, IA, TN, and MO.  Maybe VA and WV too.

[classical liberal]

Kerry will win VA before he wins MO, AR, or TN.  The political climate is shifting drastically.  I expect to see massive Democratic gains in the DC, Hampton, and Richmond suburbs, which have been getting increasingly liberal as time passes.  Farifax, Henrico, Virginia Beach, Chesapeake, and Prince William Counties will all go for the Dems this time, maybe Isle of Wight, Clarke, Warren, Albemarle, Nelson, Dinwiddie, and Loudon Counties too but probably not till '08.  That will probably shift the state.

[classical liberal]

Unemployment actually won't. But ppl will make more money and things will cost less.  Most of the numbers will look good: markets, currency, inflation, interest rates, GDP, productivity, etc.  However, the job numbers won't bounce back until 2020 or 2024 when the Indians and Chinese Unionize and the environmental lobbies are established in those countries.  And even so, by then the next wave of mechanization will be ready to hit.

Just by nature of the changing face of the economy, jobs as we know them will become a thing of the past.  Sure Jobs that require though on a case-by-case basis will still be around, but the regular, non-degree requiring jobs will fade away.

[classical liberal]

That's my point Kerry won... because he won... you can understand my massive sense of confusion. :S

Siege40

Well, he came from nowhere for no obvious reason. The key is why he won Iowa. From then on it was pure momentum and perfectly explainable, even though it doesn't make sense, of course.

He won Iowa because his campaingn organization was able to accomodate the unforseen magnitude of the turn-out at the Caucuses.  Plus, Dean and Gephart toppled each-other.

[classical liberal]

Unemployment actually won't. But ppl will make more money and things will cost less.  Most of the numbers will look good: markets, currency, inflation, interest rates, GDP, productivity, etc.  However, the job numbers won't bounce back until 2020 or 2024 when the Indians and Chinese Unionize and the environmental lobbies are established in those countries.  And even so, by then the next wave of mechanization will be ready to hit.

Just by nature of the changing face of the economy, jobs as we know them will become a thing of the past.  Sure Jobs that require though on a case-by-case basis will still be around, but the regular, non-degree requiring jobs will fade away.

I think you're getting ahead of yourself with this space-age analysis.  Sure productivity will be growing faster for a long while - as it has been since the late nineties - but the business cycle will reduce the unemployment rate a lot in '05-'07.

Not in the US.  It will reduce unemployment in Mexico, South Korea, India, and China.

[classical liberal]

I think that DC is the only place that will break 60%. So, I am using the colors to represent the range within the 60% max range. The colors from lightest to darkest represent: <50%, 50%-53.3%, 53.4%-56.6%, and 56.7%-59.9%.

Here's my election night prediction:

[classical liberal]

Yep, the NE-02

[classical liberal]

It would be funny if my scenario actually happened.

[classical liberal]

texasgurl-

If that electoral scenario comes about, this is a more likely percentage breakdown:
Map Percentage Code:     4          5               6                7            8
Percentage Range:        <50, 50.1-53.3, 53.3-56.6, 56.6-59.9, 60-100.

[classical liberal]

Here's my prediction though:

Map Percentage Code:     4          5               6                7            8
Percentage Range:        <50, 50.1-53.3, 53.3-56.6, 56.6-59.9, 60-100.

[classical liberal]

I think that he can.

Bush won NE-02 with 54% in 2000.  Considering that he's lost 10 points in neighboring states (SD, ID, 10 in OK) and that his administration just today announced new regulation on diesel feul for farm vehicles that will raise the price of diesel much more than the current raises in the price of gasoline from which I would say that he stands to loose more I contend that Bush has a good chance of loosing in the farming areas surrounding Omaha.  Plus with an 2% per year average liberalization of the suburbs I think that there's a very good chance that Bush will loose NE-02.

[classical liberal]

Ask Soros.

[classical liberal]

That "liberal weenie" happens to have a sh**tload of money to spare.

[classical liberal]

Switch NH.

[classical liberal]

I guess if you're looking at today's situation.  However when the fed funds rate returns to a normal level, the interest payment on the debt eclipses defense as our largest expenditure, and people comprehend the GOP's newfound disregard for maintaining positive or zero cashflow there will be a big shift away from Bush.  Even if Iraq works and the people have work, if fiscal discipline is entirely missing from DC people will be pissed.  I expect to see the GOP loose every close race this year as a result.

[classical liberal]

Here is my prediction (I can't figure out how to post it): http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/GENERAL/CAMPAIGN/2004/pred04.php?action=indpred&id=1196

put img tags around the url.

[classical liberal]

Someone claimed here that NJ is a tossup state. The fact is that NJ is super-safe for Kerry. Bush+Buchannan got there only 40.3% in 2000.
VA, on the other hand might become tied, since Bush got there 52.5% in 2000 and the Reps are in a slow, but constant decline in that state.

Yes, Bush will lose New Jersey but he will get more than the 40.3% mentioned above.  I'd guess around 46-47% or so.

44% max, most likely 42.5-43.5

[classical liberal]

"Yes, Bush will lose New Jersey but he will get more than the 40.3% mentioned above.  I'd guess around 46-47% or so"

The matter of the fact is that Dem states become more Dem and Rep states become more Rep.

You can see this in western states like UT, ID, WY, ND, SD, NE as well as TX. On the other hand RI, MA, NY, CT, NJ become more and more Dem. The Deep South: GA, AL, MS, NC, SC are more or less stable with around 55%-56% to the Reps.

There are some movements: IA, WI, and MN are Dem states which are slowly moving toward the Reps. At this point MN still looks very safe for Kerry (depends on Nader)

FL, AZ, NH and VA are Rep states which are moving toward the Dems.

There is a reasonable chance that Kerry would win in NH and FL and lose IA and WI.

OH is stable around the 50:50 and totally unpredictable

My assessment/prediction is that not more then 4 or 5 states will vote differently than in 2000

IA is a GOP state moving towards the Dems.  MN has moved to the center but I don't think that it will go much farther right.  WI has been centrist and will continue to be so.

[classical liberal]

They just recently elected a Dem Gov, and their House delegation and state legislature are GOP held.

States w/0-1 Dems in their House Delegation except those w/Dem majority delegations:



States w/0-2 Dems in their House Delegation except those w/Dem majority delegations: