Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Politics

Journal turg's Journal: [Poll] US Election Predictions 59

Journal by turg

Three parts to the question:
1) Who will win?
2) By what margin?
3) What is your rationale?

Here's mine:
1) George Bush
2) With 55% of the vote.
3a) "Anybody but [name]" campaigns never work (see the recent Canadian election for an example)
3b) In an apparent draw, the incumbent has the advantage.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

[Poll] US Election Predictions More

[Poll] US Election Predictions

Comments Filter:
  • The whole "Anyone but x" thing doesn't work because its the vocal minority vs the silent majority in most cases.
    • And when it comes right down to it, people want a reason to vote for someone, no matter how much they dislike the other guy.
      • I've got a reason to vote FOR Kerry- his goals. I don't believe in his current plans to achieve those goals, but here are the ones that are important to me:

        1. Economic self-sufficiency for the United States, especially in the energy industry.
        2. Reduction of the need for abortion.
        3. Universal Health Care
        4. Limiting the war on terror to something we can win
        5. Capturing/executing Bin Laden
        6. Getting Americans back to work, even if it means fewer profits for the Stock Market.
        7. Ending the giveaw
  • Cthulu with all the votes. He is the lord and master of chaos. All praise Cthulu!

    My predicton is that Jon Stewart will get a non-trivial amount of write-in votes.

    • I'd agree with your prediction and raise one- as a third party candidate in 2008 I'll be writing to Jon Stewart in November to ask him to be my VP candidate (since I've now, in just the last week, found a major flaw in the Technocrat Platform as written so far- and may yet even change the name of the party to break with the other one of that name).
  • http://www.electoral-vote.com/ [electoral-vote.com]- Current poll results

    http://www.electoral-vote.com/fin/oct19p.html [electoral-vote.com] Where we're headed if the straight-line regression for all states holds true- don't bookmark this, the URL changes every day and is based on the 30 day window of past polling data.

    Having said this, it would not surprise me at all if Bush got the POPULAR vote this time around, by about the same percentage you quote- but the few swing states that are left are not breaking towards him, and the massive get out t
    • The data are very noisy, so this map should not be taken too seriously. The current map is probably a better predictor.

      The data on the linear regression link is Bush 193, Kerry 309. The data on the current map is Bush 247, Kerry 284.

      But your guess still looks likely, assuming a continued sheep like response to media stimuli. Since I haven't heard much positively spun news out of either camp, only negatively spun FUD, I find it hard to draw a conclusion.

      jason
      • Kerry's been basically ahead on this link since the third debate. He's been ahead immediately after every debate, and for a short period just before the RNC, but other than that has been behind.

        This map WILL predict how I vote when I finally decide to do so- if on that day the linear regression and the daily map both show Kerry winning by more than 10% in Oregon then Peroutka will get my vote. Otherwise Kerry will.
        • I would hope that a vote is not informed by the current popular votes. But I do understand your idea to assure your primary choise a win, and if that is assured, then vote for a secondary choice.

          jason
          • I would hope that a vote is not informed by the current popular votes. But I do understand your idea to assure your primary choise a win, and if that is assured, then vote for a secondary choice.

            It's also due to a well-informed and particularily nagging Catholic conscience. Well informed to the point that I don't fall for the lie that Bush is pro-life by any means. But I'm not comfortable with Kerry's separation of Church and State theories either, nor his apparent moral relativism. Peroutka is the bes
            • I am currious about what laws / comments by Bush led you to believe that he is not a pro-life candidate...

              jason
              • See my journal entry on the subject. Basically, it comes down to 6 basic ACTIONS and COMMENTS:

                1. The third debate when he promised to not appoint pro-life judges.
                2. The fakery of the Partial Birth Ammendment being passed without protections for life of the mother (even the Catholic Church has the Principle of Double Effect)
                3. As Governor of Texas, he "upheld the law" by setting the record for most executions in United States History for any governor.
                4. In 2003, Jenna Bush had an abortion her father pa
                • Thanks for the info. Regarding some of the items...

                  #1 isn't a pro-choice decision either. If you read into it, you should look both ways. Appointing strick constitution interpreting judges would be preferable to appointing some judge based solely on their personal beliefs regarding abortion. I think his comment was designed to sway some of the un-decided or slightly left-of-center single women voters but is not in any way abandoning the pro-life crowd.

                  #3 Executions, and upholding the law regarding the
                  • #6 doesn't have to do with abortion, but it does have to do with life (pro-life is not just anti-abortion)

                    Anyway, just in case you haven't seen this [chron.com] yet:

                    Why abortion rate is up in Bush years
                    By GLEN HAROLD STASSEN and GARY KRANE

                    I, Glen, am a Christian ethicist, and trained in statistical analysis. I am consistently pro-life. My son David is one witness. For my family, "pro-life" is personal. My wife caught rubella in the eighth week of her pregnancy. We decided not to terminate, to love and raise our ba

                    • Thanks for a good article.

                      I do have to question any report that attributes so much effect to the president. How long does monitary policy regardin federal support for abortionstake to come into effect?

                      I personally don't link many events with a presidency. The economy for example, has a slow turn around time, and an administration can effect it, but not as much as congress, and not fast in any case.

                      jason
                    • How long does monitary policy regardin federal support for abortions take to come into effect?

                      Just about six months- about as long as it took for Bush to reverse Clinton's job growth numbers and throw the country into recession. But this doesn't help much- because with the Partial Birth Abortion Ban came new limits on WIC and Medicare paying for pregnancies and births- throwing a lot of women into the IMMEDIATE choice between a $400 abortion and a $6000 birth.

                      I personally don't link many events with a
                    • Umm, the stock market started correcting itself in March 2000, before Bush was even the Republican Nominee.
                    • The stock market, contrary to popular opinion, is NOT the real economy, it's just a fake to keep the masses ammused. The real economy is the JOBS market- that's the one that touches the majority of the nation. That's the one that slipped into recession in March 2001. That's the one that has yet to recover when you take population increase data into account (and is pretty bad still even when you don't- Bush is down 500,000 jobs STILL from top employment pre-crash, or even still down 100,000 limited to his
                    • So you're telling me the stock market is a a complete fiction and isn't a barometer of where the US economy is? Come on dude, don't be silly. As for Unemployment, we have the same UR as 1996, 5.4%, good enough to get Clinton Re-elected and should be enough to push Bush into a second term.
                    • So you're telling me the stock market is a a complete fiction and isn't a barometer of where the US economy is?

                      When you have idiots investing in companies that have P/E ratios greater than 1, I think it's pretty obvious that the entire bloody system is completely divorced from anything resembling reality. Nobody in their right mind would EVER invest in something that risky unless they didn't give a shit about reality. Nope- the Stock Market is just another opiate of the masses- the Church of the Worship
                  • #1 is in there because a strict reading of the constitution does not extend rights to the unborn (thanks to BIRTH being one of the two ways to become a citizen).

                    #3 and #6 are in there because I'm Catholic and believe in a seamless garment of life viewpoint- you can't claim to be pro-life for only the unborn, you've got to include all human life from conception to natural death if you're going to have any integrity at all.

                    #5- he was born Christian, wasn't he? Baptised by his parents? I'm Catholic and don
  • 1) Bush
    2) 52% popular vote, 290-300EV
    3) Economy numbers look better, Kerry isn't drawing enough of the Black/Jewish/Women to swing the Election from the WASP contingent out there
    • http://www.electoral-vote.com/ [electoral-vote.com] disagrees with you on Bush's EVs. And on the economy, thanks to oil prices we're headed for a new recession just as the holiday shopping season starts, which is going to cut into retail sales something fierce (you can't do anything about how much gas you use to drive to work, you can do something about how expensive of presents you buy for friends and family). And if you haven't noticed, WASPs are now a minority in the United States- there are far more Catholics out there, m
      • Florida and Nevada (and Ohio and Misouri) are jumping all over the place, Pennsylvania and New Jersey are not as strong Kerry as his map is suggesting either. Any of those states (besides NV) have the ability to throw this election either way.

        As for Bush not holding up to his pro-life rhetoric, on what grounds, Kerry is the one who said Abortion is be government subsidized for those who can't afford it.
        • Florida and Nevada (and Ohio and Misouri) are jumping all over the place, Pennsylvania and New Jersey are not as strong Kerry as his map is suggesting either. Any of those states (besides NV) have the ability to throw this election either way.

          True- but the latest polls show even in those swing states, Kerry's high point margins have been greater with every poll (thus the straight line regression showing Kerry with 364 EVs).

          As for Bush not holding up to his pro-life rhetoric, on what grounds, Kerry is t
          • If Bush has paid for an abortion, Kerry was excommunicated [tldm.org] for his pro-abortion stance. Don't believe everything you read on the intarweb, there is a lot of half-truths and lies out there, just like the evening news.

            Between Gay marriage and abortion-on-demand (Kerry wouldn't even vote for the "Laci and Connor" double homicide bill), the Christian Conservatives ain't voting for Kerry, Badnarik, Nader, or Cobb, they're pulling the lever for Bush.
            • If Bush has paid for an abortion, Kerry was excommunicated [tldm.org] for his pro-abortion stance.

              Uh, Kerry may not be excommunicated yet, but according to Zenit there is a case before the Papal Nuncio about it. It's currently held up in the office of the Archbishop of Boston, and probably will stay there until after the election. Kerry's got a pretty good case from past statements though that despite the fact that he doesn't support making abortion illegal, he DOES support such things as paying women
          • something Kerry never has and never would do, due to his faith

            A faith that has (apparently) recently kicked him out for not matching his actions in public with his words in public with their beliefs. That's fine with me. If an orginization has rules for membership and you violate those rules, then out you go if that is what they decide.

            jason
            • A faith that has (apparently) recently kicked him out for not matching his actions in public with his words in public with their beliefs. That's fine with me. If an orginization has rules for membership and you violate those rules, then out you go if that is what they decide.

              True enough- though personally considering ALL of his public statements on the supposed actions/words mismatch, I think he can and should take it clear up to a tribunal in Rome. Also note that it hasn't entirely happened yet- for som
  • Roosevelt beat Hoover in an anybody but campaign- had Huey Long survived he would have been a major spoiler at the very least though.
  • Historically, as in during the past four re-election campaigns, the "undecided" vote breaks heavily for the challenger, and the supporters of the challenger turn out slightly more often.

    "Not him" campaigns don't work? While I agree that this is good strategic advice for the Dems - it simply doesn't stand up to the available data. It also doesn't reflect the latest poll numbers, which show Kerry to be essentially as well liked as Bush. While it is true that extremist Democrats don't care much for Kerry, swi
    • Sorry, didn't answer poll.

      1) John Kerry.
      2) by 3 points (50 to 47).
      3) In an apparent draw, the *challenger* has the advantage. Also, take a look at the map.
    • Well in the recent Canadian election, the Conservative party ran an "anyone but" campaign after the Liberal government got itself into a terrible scandal. Really, the Liberals should have been toast. But the Conservatives chose to campaign almost entirely on how bad the Liberals were -- with little reference to what they would do if elected. The polls showed them neck and neck right to the end. But on election day, the Liberals ended up with 125 seats and the Conservatives with 99 (out of 300).
  • By a weak electoral vote margin.
    rationale: He has a "better" political machine behind him, and some of the mud will stick to Kerry.

    Im voting third party. Maybe Nader, maybe Libertarian, but definitely not for Kerry or Bush.
  • 1) Kerry
    2) 55% Kerry, 42% Bush, 3% "other"
    3) The US is still nearly evenly split in political views but not nearly as much as the media would have you believe. Besides, telephone polls are leaving out a huge demographic: age 18-35 educated males and females without landlines.

  • I also disagree with your statement here. I'd say in an apparent draw, the rest of the candidates don't matter AT ALL- the race turns into an Anybody But race, with the entire election being a referendum of confidence in the incumbent.

    In Bush's case that's VERY bad news- his solid base of the well off and the rich has been eroding since March 2001, and very few Americans can say they are as well off as they were four years ago.
    • In Bush's case that's VERY bad news- his solid base of the well off and the rich has been eroding since March 2001, and very few Americans can say they are as well off as they were four years ago.

      No, you're wrong. John Kerry's still well off. But since Kerry no longer supports President Bush, I guess you could argue that President Bush's base among those richer than he is, is indeed eroding.

      -Brent
      • Actually- Kerry's poorer than Bush is. Theresa is richer- but I think her first husband's will would have stipulated a prenup for future husbands. Sure seems that way- they don't file jointly, and his income was about $1.2 million less than hers.
      • Kerry's not as well off as he appears- compared with Bush and Cheney, his IRS tax refund is short at least $200,000 of income from last year. Likewise, he and his wife file separately- and SHE earned $1.2 million more than he did (that's where the comment "We all married up- myself more than the others" came from in the third debate).

  • I think President Bush will be re-elected, winning by two percentage points in the popular vote, and by ten votes in the electoral college.

    Because:

    • He's an incumbent during wartime;
    • The economy isn't bad;
    • Carl Rove hasn't even sprung the October surprise yet.

    That said, it's really too close to call with even 60 percent confidence. Here are some prediction links:

  • Rationale:

    This is probably not the most accurate of methodologies, but I find very few people who actually want to vote for Bush. I do know a couple, but the ratio is easily 10:1. If you want to argue that my sample is unrepresentative of the country as a whole, well, you'd be making a pretty strong one;-)

    What I see is a relatively silent dissatisfaction with Bush. For most people their lives have not gotten better since he came to power. The war in Iraq was justified through what we now know to be

  • 1) Who will win? Bush

    2) By what margin? None - pretty much a dead-even in pure democratic numbers, but Bush scrapes together enough electoral college votes.

    3) What is your rationale? Neither candidate is convincing enough to change anyone's mind and at the current levels Bush is more likely to pull of the electoral college votes.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Bush (Score:2)

    by red5 ( 51324 )
    1) Bush
    2) Probably on a technicality again. Or by an extremely narrow margin.
    3) He who raises the most money wins.
  • Al Gore wins re-election with 50.1% of the vote (again).

    Yup. That outta get the Bushites fired up. ;)

  • picks (Score:2)

    by n0wak ( 631202 )
    1) Kerry
    2) by less than 2%
    3) because advance polls aren't very accurate (see recent Canadian elections)
  • It will be close - especially in Minnesota

    I'd say Bush will win if you are looking at it things from a republic / electorate standpoint.

    Kerry may win the popular vote, which if we were a democracy rather than republic, would be in his favor.

    I've already voted. I'd also wager that we will see record numbers of absentee voting this year.
  • 1) Approval rating. Incumbants rarely top theirs by more than 1-2% points. Dubya's is hovering well below 50%

    2) History shows that voters don't vote so much for a Candidate as against something else. Notice how Dubya's campaign has turned to "George W. Bush is a fine President" to "Vote against that Liberal from Massachusets?" Unfortunately, it's going to be too little to late.

    Kerry will win electoral margin by 10-15 points over the required 270 and the popular vote by 51.5%
  • I also predict that Kerry will get 330 electorial votes in January because of elector defections away from Bush, for the same reasons: abject shame about Bush on the part of the GOP.
  • 1. Bush
    2. 58.73% popular vote. 312 electoral.
    3. Because I said so. OK, because I think conservative sentiment is understated in polls, over-represented in the *actual* elections [esp if the weather is bad]. Remember, Reagan-Mondale was supposed to be close... And there still hasn't been an October Surprise(tm))

    THOR HAS SPOKEN!

    1. Bush
    2. A small but significant margin
    3. Firstly the republicans only need to remind their supporters (i.e. the rich) that a Democratic (or indeed democratic) president would hurt them in their pocketbooks to get them out to vote where as the Democrats have to motivate many different groups with different needs (many of whom, especially the Black and Latino communities, feel disenfranchised and sidelined by the majority white middle/upper class politicians). Secondly, those electronic vote tally machines. Too
  • An attack will occur before elections.

    Elections get postponed.

    Riots erupt because of the sentiments towards the previous "stolen election"* and some people's unrelenting hatred of Bush.

    Martial Law declared.

    Americans revolt.

    Society crumbles.

    Mass starvation and violence until population diminishes to the point that they're able to produce enough food.

    Perhaps a foreign invasion.

    *Put in quotes because that's how some people refer to it. I'm no fan of Bush, but I do believe he was fairly elected, and the
  • 1)Bush
    2)55% or something I think
    3)If you see the margin he still has with halfway loosing a couple of debates, all the shit he pulled with respects to iraq etc., hundreds of soldiers having been shipped back in coffins etc. and some pols _still_ put him in the lead. Well then I think things can only get better for him.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Bond reflected that good Americans were fine people and that most of them seemed to come from Texas." - Ian Fleming, "Casino Royale"

Close