Electoral Vote Projections

[Kepler]

Interesting summary on Survey USA today about the state/local breakdown of polls on who won the first debate: http://www.surveyusa.com/Scorecards/PrezDebate093004WinnerLoserByRegion.pdf

Highlights:

OR favored Kerry 50-31%
PA Kerry 47-25%
FL Kerry 45-31%
CO even 39-39%
TX Bush 41-39%

If these margins stand up to the post-debate spin, I would expect them to start pushing Kerry's numbers up among undecideds in the state polls of the following week; so we may start to see Kerry pulling closer in the swing states by around 10/8.

[Kepler]

The first post-debate poll, the Newsweek Poll, has Kerry ahead 47-45%: http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm

Interesting results:
+ Kerry leads independents, 42-37%.
+ A majority does not think Bush deserves another term, 48-46%.

Of course it's early, and the Kerry campaign is playing it down, but hey, good news is... good news.

[Kepler]

An interesting spinoff effect of the Newsweek Poll is how much the VP favorability ratings are dragged along with the head of the ticket.

Nothing has happened with either Edwards or Cheney the last week, yet their ratings follow exactly the same post-debate curve as the presidential candidates.

Bush: pre-debate: 52 favor 44 unfavor
Bush: post-debate: 49-46
Net effect: Bush loses 5 points (+8 to +3)

Cheney: pre-debate: 47-42
Cheney: post-debate: 44-47
Net effect: Cheney loses 8 points (+5 to -3)

Kerry: pre-debate: 48-44
Kerry: post-debate: 52-40
Net effect: Kerry gains 8 points (+4 to +12)

Edwards: pre-debate: 45-37
Edwards: post-debate: 50-31
Net effect: Edwards gains 11 points +8 to +19)

[Terrierbyassociation]

Even my stauch Republican friends hate Cheney.

My uncle has made the fact known that if Cheney runs for president in the event of Bush winning the election and Cheney not keeling over due to stress before 2008, that he will do everything in his power to make sure the Spawn of Satan himself is not elected president.

Interestingly enough, I said the same thing pre-2000 about Lieberman.

[unofan]

I would never vote for Cheney. I don't even see him trying to run in 2008, it'd be pointless. Even if he got the nomination he'd lose the election in a landslide, there's enough republicans that hate him.

Course if it's Cheney v. Clinton, I quit.

[bronconick]

I would never vote for Cheney. I don't even see him trying to run in 2008, it'd be pointless. Even if he got the nomination he'd lose the election in a landslide, there's enough republicans that hate him.

Course if it's Cheney v. Clinton, I quit.

In that case, I'm running a blow-up doll as a 3rd party. I'll win going away.

[fundoodman]

Anybody who would vote for Bush/Cheney would be insane, they have already made our country hated all over the world, do we really want that for 4 more years? I don't. If they stay in office it makes us a target for more terror and more Americans dead - that does not make me feel very safe, and our country is not looked up to anymore around the world. O and while I'm at it - O - and while I'm at it here - Let's tax our middle class people more than our wealthy - that makes a lot of *** sense.

I'm all for Pro - Choice, Screw Bush :eek:

[unofan]

Anybody who would vote for Bush/Cheney would be insane, they have already made our country hated all over the world, do we really want that for 4 more years? I don't. If they stay in office it makes us a target for more terror and more Americans dead - that does not make me feel very safe, and our country is not looked up to anymore around the world. O and while I'm at it - O - and while I'm at it here - Let's tax our middle class people more than our wealthy - that makes a lot of *** sense.

I'm all for Pro - Choice, Screw Bush :eek:
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Way to make philralphnate seem like a rocket scientist. Try making a coherent point rather than calling 49% of the country insane.

[Kepler]

Course if it's Cheney v. Clinton, I quit.
Me too, but Cheney will never run. It is far more likely to be Jeb or some other neocon icon (if Dubya wins) or a socially-moderate, fiscally-conservative Republican (if Dubya loses).

[unofan]

Me too, but Cheney will never run. It is far more likely to be Jeb or some other neocon icon (if Dubya wins) or a socially-moderate, fiscally-conservative Republican (if Dubya loses).
****it Kepler, actually making me think. If you're right with that, is 4 years of the waffler Kerry worth a chance at say Giuliani/Hagel/McCain getting the nod in 2008? Short term pain for long term gain....hmmmm....

Course having Bush this year and a socially moderate/fiscally conservative in 2008 would be best of both worlds. :D

[Kepler]

Moving to the Senate, for a moment, the 10/4 Electoral Vote.com http://www.electoral-vote.com/ has a table of current polling on Senate seats. The makeup of the Senate, extrapolating from these results, would be a 52 (51+1) to 48 Dem majority. They also speculate Chafee may change to Dem, since he is a RINO.

So, we *might*move from a GOP sweep of the Presidency and both houses of Congress four years ago to a Dem-controlled White House and Senate.

BTW, Obama now leads Keyes 68-17%, but I'm sure that the amazing push from Keyes predicted by many on this forum is just around the corner.

Something else I was thinking about was the possiblity of the Dems winning their fourth consecutive plurality of the Presidential vote. This has only happened once before in the modern era: the five straight Dem pluralities under FDR and Truman. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html

Plurality streaks:

5 Dem: 1932, 36, 40, 44, 48
4 GOP: 1860, 64, 68, 72
4 GOP: 1896, 1900, 04, 08

[Red Cloud]

BTW, Obama now leads Keyes 68-17%, but I'm sure that the amazing push from Keyes predicted by many on this forum is just around the corner.
*** are you talking about? Are you lumping the crazies in with the sane again?

I dunno Kep. You seem to be moving from the latter to the former lately.

[Kepler]

*** are you talking about? Are you lumping the crazies in with the sane again?
While you were away, a number of the intellectual leading lights of the USCHO right assured us that Keyes would overtake Obama.

So, natch, I assume it's going to happen.

[Kepler]

Now returning to our regularly-scheduled program, the national polls through 10/5 continue to reflect a steady movement back to 50/50. http://www.pollingreport.com/wh2004.htm

Here is the trending of all the polls since the debate.

Likely voters:

Zobgy: Kerry +2 since previous poll
CNN: Kerry +8
LA Times: Kerry +7 (not confirmed on website)


Registered voters:

Newsweek: Kerry +8
CNN: Kerry +12
LA Times: Kerry +6 (not confirmed on website)

None of this trending has hit the state polls yet -- according to the primary two e.v. sites (election projection and electoral vote.com), that polling will start rolling into their e.v. totals later this week through early next week.

To give an idea of how a slight twitch can result in an huge transfer of e.v.s., at the height of the pre-debate Bush advantage, Election Projection http://www.electionprojection.com/elections2004.html has him leading 295-243. If the states within a 5% margin shift back to Kerry:

Nevada (5) - 4.82%
Wisconsin (10) - 4.18%
Florida (27) - 4.09%
Ohio (20) - 3.57%
Iowa (7) - 2.51%
New Hampshire (4) - 0.92%

that transfer of 73 electoral votes would give Kerry the lead, 316-222.

[ttnorm]

While you were away, a number of the intellectual leading lights of the USCHO right assured us that Keyes would overtake Obama.

So, natch, I assume it's going to happen.Who on USCHO ever said Keyes would overtake Obama? Or is it OK to make up stuff when talking about "wingnuts"? [/huff]

Still it will be some great debates of two eloquent guys of differing perspectives. Too bad Obama didn't keep his word to have 6 debates which he offered to whoever replaced Ryan one week before Keyes entered.

[Milmo]

ABC/Washington Post Oct 3 Poll: Bush 51, Kerry 46

Pre debate Poll: Bush 51, Kerry 45

Confirms Boston Globe focus group results of debate: approx 70% thought Kerry won debate, no votes changed as a result.

In any case, since it's not a national election but a bunch of state elections held on same day only the state polls for a few battle ground states matter, e.g., OH, PA, NJ, FL.

According to electoral-vote.com state by state polls, on the day before the debate the projected totals were Bush 280, Kerry 254. Today they are Bush 321, Kerry 200.

It simply doesn't matter that another few million people in CA, NY, and the Peoples Republic of MA are declaring for Kerry. What does matter is that OH and PA have flipped from Kerry to Bush pre to post debate.

I guess the Bush folks are thinking, "if that's what happens when we lose a debate, hell, let's lose a bunch more".

[Jason A]

The Ohio and Pennsylvania numbers cited at www.electoral-vote.com are from Rasmussen's tracking polls. Both e-v.com and the Rasmussen Web site point out that those results are from interviews with approximately 600 likely voters, taken from September 26 to Oct 2. That means most of the interviews were conducted before Thursday's debate.

[Rimbaud]

Who on USCHO ever said Keyes would overtake Obama? Or is it OK to make up stuff when talking about "wingnuts"? [/huff]

I think all of them are now suspended. :D

[Jason A]

Here's some data from up north: Bush has taken the lead in New Hampshire, according to a poll released by my alma mater, UNH.

Bush leads 50-45. Each candidate recevies 89% of his base (registered Repubs and Dems), and Kerry leads 50-34 among independents. But the 40,000-voter advantage for the Republicans gives Bush the lead in the poll.

Note that about half of the 600 surveys were conducted before the first debate.

Source: http://www.unh.edu/survey-center/elect100404.pdf (PDF WARNING)

[Kepler]

I think all of them are now suspended. :D
It has been a lot smarter around here, lately. :D (Although the Ignore List is a fine way to accomplish that, too.)

If none of the nutjobs (my preferred term) actually went as crazy as to pick Keyes to win, then I withdraw the remark and have an ounce more respect for them. Bringing the total to one ounce.