Very good news.
Printable View
Historicaly speaking, the incumbent has the advantage too of capturing votes not counted in pre-election polls. People will vote for the name they know when they are undecided. If Kerry expects to unseat President Bush he would have needed a very strong lead in the polls this late, and he doesn't. [img]biggrin.gif[/img]
Or then again----it might be a month before we know. Like last time. "THEY" may even rig the election.
[img]graemlins/shhh.gif[/img]
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I thought you were a Bush supporter.Quote:
The map shows Kerry leading. More importantly, many of the close Kerry states were close Bush states a couple weeks ago, including PA, OH, NV, and WI.
So the map shows the trend going toward Kerry.
This looks to be good news for Kerry.
<font color="#000002" size="1">[ October 12, 2004 02:59 PM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>
Electoral Vote Predictor 2004:
Kerry 260 Bush 274
Did math get changed on me again? 274 is more than 260.
I should also point out that Lake's map shows Nader with 1% in Ohio. Nader is not on the ballot.
A miniscule amount, but general consensus says those votes mostly go to Kerry.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Not in a liberal's mind.Quote:
Originally posted by gae:
Electoral Vote Predictor 2004:
Kerry 260 Bush 274
Did math get changed on me again? 274 is more than 260.
There are enough "very weak Kerry" and "very weak Bush" electoral votes up for grabs that I wouldn't be going around claiming good news just yet Lake. [img]graemlins/whatever.gif[/img]
There are about 104 electoral votes still up for grabs Source so it's still anybody's race.
Even if I weren't a Bush supporter, if I were a betting man (and I am) my bet goes for a Bush victory. The Democrats simply made the choice too easy for a lot of people. I think most votes for Kerry are simply a vote against Bush and a lot of Bush votes are simply "well he's better than the other one.." We aren't very spoiled for choice this election. And I say that even as a Bush supporter. Aren't there any FDRs or Ronald Reagans left out there? [img]graemlins/wonder.gif[/img]
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Pretty much can't argue with this....Quote:
Even if I weren't a Bush supporter, if I were a betting man (and I am) my bet goes for a Bush victory. The Democrats simply made the choice too easy for a lot of people. I think most votes for Kerry are simply a vote against Bush and a lot of Bush votes are simply "well he's better than the other one.." We aren't very spoiled for choice this election. And I say that even as a Bush supporter. Aren't there any FDRs or Ronald Reagans left out there?
Although for ever poll Lake can find citing a Bush victory, I can find a poll claiming Kerry wins.
We'll know who wins on Nov 3rd and not a minute before....polls be damned.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It looks to change daily. Bush has regained momentum.Quote:
Originally posted by gae:
Electoral Vote Predictor 2004:
Kerry 260 Bush 274
Did math get changed on me again? 274 is more than 260.
Today's numbers:
Electoral Vote Predictor 2004:
Kerry 228 Bush 291
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Just one of the many reasons as to why I hate polls.Quote:
Originally posted by reason:
It looks to change daily. Bush has regained momentum.
Latest Polls Added:
NJ: Kerry +6% (Strategic Vision 10/09 - 10/11)
NJ: Kerry +5% (Strategic Vision 10/09 - 10/11)
WI: Bush +4% (Strategic Vision 10/09 - 10/11)
WI: Bush +5% (Strategic Vision 10/09 - 10/11)
PA: Bush +1% (Strategic Vision 10/09 - 10/11)
PA: Bush +3% (Strategic Vision 10/09 - 10/11)
OH: Bush +6% (Strategic Vision 10/09 - 10/11)
OH: Bush +8% (Strategic Vision 10/09 - 10/11)
IA: Bush +2% (Strategic Vision 10/09 - 10/11)
IA: Bush +3% (Strategic Vision 10/09 - 10/11)
[img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img] Source.
<font color="#000002" size="1">[ October 13, 2004 11:43 AM: Message edited by: LAKE ]</font>
I think the polls this year are less meaningful than in the past.
First of all, you have a lot of newly registered voters who will be unpredictable.
Secondly, you've got concentrated segments of the population who will come out in droves to vote one way or another. When you have ultra strong pockets of support on either side, I think it's difficult even for a scientific poll to pick that up.
For example, my street has maybe 60 homes, at least 15 of them have Kerry signs. No Bush signs. I don't think a poll is going to accurately pick up the extreme "lumpiness" of the voting blocks that are hellbent on making their candidate win.
It wasn't like this 4 years ago. Not at all.
<font color="#000002" size="1">[ October 13, 2004 11:54 AM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>
My goodness, Lake is correct, this IS very good news! As of today the electoral count is:
Kerry 291
Bush 247
http://www.electoral-vote.com/
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe because the Bush signs are stolen faster than you can replace them. [img]tongue.gif[/img]Quote:
For example, my street has maybe 60 homes, at least 15 of them have Kerry signs. No Bush signs. I don't think a poll is going to accurately pick up the extreme "lumpiness" of the voting blocks that are hellbent on making their candidate win.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe because the Bush signs are stolen faster than you can replace them. [img]tongue.gif[/img] </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I dunno. I lost my Kerry sign. Poof! Gone.Quote:
Originally posted by Oldie Blonde Kenobi:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">For example, my street has maybe 60 homes, at least 15 of them have Kerry signs. No Bush signs. I don't think a poll is going to accurately pick up the extreme "lumpiness" of the voting blocks that are hellbent on making their candidate win.
Here's another one for you to follow.
Kerry 290
Bush 231
Undecided 17
LINK
I like this one because it specifically details what polls were used and when.
Polls are always accurate. President Dewey was a case in point. [img]wink.gif[/img]
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe because the Bush signs are stolen faster than you can replace them. [img]tongue.gif[/img] </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I dunno. I lost my Kerry sign. Poof! Gone.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">A Kerry campaign worker probably saw it and was embarassed to see it in a yard like yours and took it back.Quote:
Originally posted by reason:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Oldie Blonde Kenobi:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">For example, my street has maybe 60 homes, at least 15 of them have Kerry signs. No Bush signs. I don't think a poll is going to accurately pick up the extreme "lumpiness" of the voting blocks that are hellbent on making their candidate win.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe because the Bush signs are stolen faster than you can replace them. [img]tongue.gif[/img] </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I dunno. I lost my Kerry sign. Poof! Gone.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">A Kerry campaign worker probably saw it and was embarassed to see it in a yard like yours and took it back.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That sounds like something a gay person would say.Quote:
Originally posted by G L:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by reason:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Oldie Blonde Kenobi:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">For example, my street has maybe 60 homes, at least 15 of them have Kerry signs. No Bush signs. I don't think a poll is going to accurately pick up the extreme "lumpiness" of the voting blocks that are hellbent on making their candidate win.
Actually, I see
http://www.electoral-vote.com/
Kerry 271
Bush 247
Still bad news. [img]graemlins/cry_smile.gif[/img]
Today's tally - THEY'RE TIED!
I just checked and found
Bush 271
Kerry 257
However the link that Reason provided shows
Kerry 290
Bush 231
Looks like another wild election... [img]graemlins/party.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/martini.gif[/img]
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I did a quick check of battleground states in both links, at it appears that Lake's link is more up to date.Quote:
Originally posted by LanDroid:
I just checked and found
Bush 271
Kerry 257
However the link that Reason provided shows
Kerry 290
Bush 231
Looks like another wild election... [img]graemlins/party.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/martini.gif[/img]
Here's another one from the NY Times. I suspect this one is more accurate because it recognizes more states are up for grabs.
Kerry 225
Bush 213
Open 100
NYT Electoral Calculator
This morning's numbers:
Electoral Vote Predictor 2004:
Kerry 257 Bush 271
The constant changes in this poll begs the question -- Anyone here EVER been polled?
Yes, I think my wife and I were called on separate occasions during the 2000 election. Heh, prolly 'splains the spike in support for Mick Jaggar. [img]graemlins/wonder.gif[/img]
<font color="#000002" size="1">[ October 23, 2004 10:39 AM: Message edited by: LanDroid ]</font>
Oh mercy sakes, as of today:
Bush 254
Kerry 253
The numbers haven't changed since Lan posted yesterday, but I have a question.
At one point, the total number of electoral votes totaled 528. Right now, it's at 507. Is somebody somewhere deciding which states won't count?
Electoral Vote Predictor 2004: 10/25/04
Kerry 247
Bush 285
-------
532
Tuesday, 10/26:
Bush 227
Kerry 225
Up For Grabs: 86
As of today, I'd say it doesn't look good for Bush because the states up for grab are New Mexico, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Florida, with Pennsylvania and Minnesota moving into Kerry territory.
I'm sorry, but I just can't see Michigan and New Mexico going for Bush. On the link I provided, Ohio is moving into Kerry territory (Scripps/Ohio University poll). I also see Wisconsin going for Kerry.
That leaves Florida and Iowa potentially going for Bush, which won't matter when all the electoral votes are counted.
Bush 281
Kerry 236
Bush 280
Kerry 243
Kerry 283
Bush 246
And here we are, the day before the election:
drum roll please.....
Kerry 298
Bush 231
Hold on to your hats, folks. It's going to be a bumpy ride.