Electoral Vote Projections

[Kepler]

I've seen the following. Anybody know of others?

Race 2004: http://www.race2004.net/
Electoral Vote.com: http://www.electoral-vote.com/
Rasmussen: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Elec...Projection.htm
Poll Watcher: http://www.mydd.com/popup.html
Blogging Caesar: http://www.electionprojection.com/elections2004.html

[ihw30]

Originally Posted by Kepler

I've seen the following. Anybody know of others?

Race 2004: http://www.race2004.net/
Electoral Vote.com: http://www.electoral-vote.com/
Rasmussen: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Elec...Projection.htm
Poll Watcher: http://www.mydd.com/popup.html
Blogging Caesar: http://www.electionprojection.com/elections2004.html

All of them look close, but the one that has Kerry with 305 is a little crazy imo.

[Kepler]

Originally Posted by ihw30

All of them look close, but the one that has Kerry with 305 is a little crazy imo.

They all use slightly different methodologies for combining state poll results, national polling, demographics, and registered vs likely definitions.

I much prefer to watch the electoral map projections rather than the national numbers because, well, the latter doesn't mean squat.

[goBU18]

Remember there used to be a website caled Voter.com?

[Kepler]

Yep. They have the following message:


Dear visitors,

Thank you for your loyal readership during the past year and throughout Election 2000. Unfortunately,
we are closing down. Quite simply, we were not able to secure sufficient funding to maintain the
quality site that you have come to expect and that earned us our reputation as the top political site online.

We're proud of what we've done: delivering a new kind of political report and commentary that combined
the best of traditional journalistic values with the technology of this wonderful new medium that is
the Web. This enabled us to give you a more comprehensive political report than is available anywhere
else - either in print, broadcast or online. We trust that what we have started will be the basis of
a second generation of politics on the Web. It's been our pleasure to serve you in this space.

-- Voter.com

[AMC]

The last site on the list is the only site that treats Maine correctly.

There are 3 different contests: District 1, District 2 and overall.

The overall state winner gets 2 points, and one point for each district. So it could be 4-0 if someone sweeps both districts, or 3-1 if they don't. Perot almost won the 2nd district (Lewiston north) back in the day.

[Red Cloud]

Originally Posted by Kepler

I much prefer to watch the electoral map projections rather than the national numbers because, well, the latter doesn't mean squat.

In general, yes, but the national numbers do indicate likely trends in the swing states. If Bush does have a 6-10 point lead nationwide, it's likely that he will have the advantage in most of the swing states as compared to when the race was pretty much tied.

[Rover]

While I follow the elections closely, I too can't tell what the holy hell is going on anymore. While I agree that Bush has the momentum, I can't figure out how Time has him up 11 while Fox and Zogby have him up 2%.

Same thing with some state polls. IMO, I'd discredit anything from Survey USA, because they're all over the place. Likewise polls made by one party or another - Strategic Vision is the GOP, I can't remember the Dems right now.

As I see it, Kerry's most threatened "Gore" state is Wisconsin, although polls are so all over the place I couldn't tell you who's in the lead. Bush's are obviously Florida which to the best of my knowledge is tied, and New Hampshire. I've seen Ohio anywhere between tied and an 8 point Bush lead.

Bottom line, who knows?

[Todd]

Originally Posted by Kepler

I've seen the following. Anybody know of others?

Race 2004: http://www.race2004.net/
Electoral Vote.com: http://www.electoral-vote.com/
Rasmussen: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Elec...Projection.htm
Poll Watcher: http://www.mydd.com/popup.html
Blogging Caesar: http://www.electionprojection.com/elections2004.html

Thanks for the links. I've been wondering where I could find this info, but - to be honest - I haven't taken the time to surf to find them. Now I don't have to.

As for the Kerry 305 poll (Poll Watcher), the basic difference there is that they give FL to Kerry, where the currently expected vote margin is razor thin for Bush (although the latest polls show razor thin for Kerry). Not that that state is definitely Bush (I think voter turnout will decide that state - as in it depends who shows up that day), but take that 27 away and it's Kerry 278, Bush 260.

On the flip side, the Blogging Caesar site (admittedly Right-leaning) has NV, CO, IA and NH all for Bush (B285,K253), when they are actually leaning Kerry. (Oddly enough he concedes PA to Kerry.) Switch those 4 states, and their 25 EV to Kerry and... look at that - Kerry 278, Bush 260.

Basically, the recent numbers show Kerry picking up the upper midwest (MN, WI, MI, IA, IL) and solidifying the northeast as far down as PA. He also grabs most of the west (HI, WA, OR, CA, NV, but not AK) and CO and NM. IF all that happens, he has 278.

For Kerry backers, that offers a little breathing room on OH and FL where the conspiracy theorists in the crowd are afraid of voter shennanigans from Jeb's folks (FL) and Diebold (OH). Given the above scenario, OH and FL would be cushioning, but not necessary. Of course, flip just MN or WI and it's K268, B270.

For those that thought 2000 was "interesting", take the K278 numbers and flip CO (or NV, NH) and it's 269-269. Won't that be fun...?

[St. Clown]

The following is from the race2004 site, and seems a bit counter intuitive to me. Does anyone have a reasonable guess or explanations?

If the election were held today we project the following results.

If Nader is on the ballot Kerry wins the presidency with 284 electoral votes. Bush places second with 254 electoral votes.

Kerry wins the popular vote with 55,125,698 votes (49.39%). Bush places second with 54,034,071 votes (48.42%).

If Nader is not on the ballot Kerry wins the presidency with 311 electoral votes. Bush places second with 227 electoral votes.

Kerry wins the popular vote with 55,188,252 votes (49.45%). Bush places second with 54,062,245 votes (48.44%).

[Rover]

St. Clown,

If your question is how they have Kerry winning based on recent events, I have two explanations that I can think of:

1) the website leans Dem, or

2) A big question in all of these polls is new voters. When a polling firm survey's "likely voters" sometimes that means they only call people who voted in 2000. This completely disregards the % growth of Hispanic voters in proportion to total voters. They also tend to vote Dem. In addition, it also may fail to take into account people who didn't like Gore but now will vote out of hatred for Bush.

Therefore, my only explanation if this is a non-biased analysis is the belief that Bush needs to poll better in some of these states to overcome the influx of potential Kerry votes that may not be taken into account. A good example is Ohio, where Bush needs a lead of several % to win, because on election day union voters make up a higher % of total voters than a random poll would ascribe to them.

[Todd]

Originally Posted by St. Clown

The following is from the race2004 site, and seems a bit counter intuitive to me. Does anyone have a reasonable guess or explanations?

It's simple. Nader will siphon votes from both candidates, but dispropotionatley more from Kerry than from Bush. In a tight race, that could make a difference, as some will say it did in many places (most notably FL) in 2000.

In this case:

If Nader is on the ballot in FL, Bush wins FL (and 27 EV), but Kerry wins w/ 284 EV overall.

If Nader is not on the FL ballot, Kerry wins FL, adds the 27 EV to his total and has 311.

[St. Clown]

You know what, I read that wrong. I thought it was saying that if Nader was on the ballot, Kerry would receive more votes. It makes perfect sense now that I've read it correctly.

[French Rage]

Originally Posted by Rover

While I follow the elections closely, I too can't tell what the holy hell is going on anymore. While I agree that Bush has the momentum, I can't figure out how Time has him up 11 while Fox and Zogby have him up 2%.

IIRC, that Time poll was discredited because a disproportionate number of people polled were Republican and less were Democrat than one can reasonable expect the national numbers to be. Thus, there were more Bush votes than usual. If the numbers were evened out (as Zogby did himself), it was Bush by about 2 or 3.

[Rover]

Originally Posted by French Rage

IIRC, that Time poll was discredited because a disproportionate number of people polled were Republican and less were Democrat than one can reasonable expect the national numbers to be. Thus, there were more Bush votes than usual. If the numbers were evened out (as Zogby did himself), it was Bush by about 2 or 3.

No kidding? I hadn't heard that. That poll is still cited however in news articles.

Zogby tends to be the most reliable IMO.

[Kepler]

Zogby (left leaning) and Rasmussen (right leaning) both heavily criticized Time for elementary sampling errors. I tend to trust both when it comes to analyzing the math, although I have heard Rasmussen uses an unconventional demographic balancing technique that hasn't really been battle-tested yet.

[Red Cloud]

Originally Posted by Todd

For those that thought 2000 was "interesting", take the K278 numbers and flip CO (or NV, NH) and it's 269-269. Won't that be fun...?

The House and Senate would go to a vote - each state getting one vote. Here's who controls the state delegations in each house of Congress.
House
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawai'i, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming.
Totals: GOP 30, Dem 15, Split 5

Senate
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawai'i, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming.
Totals: GOP 20, Dems 18, Split 12

Notes: Nebraska has one vacant seat in the House. Vermont's lone representative, Bernie Sanders, is an independent, however, he has endorsed the Kerry-Edwards ticket. Georgia also has a split Senate delegation, but the Democrat is Zell Miller, who has shown distinct public support for the Bush-Cheney ticket. Vermont's Senate delegation consists of a Democrat and an Independent, Jim Jeffords, who caucuses with the Democrats.

So a 279-279 result probably re-elects Bush-Cheney, although looking at the Senate, there's potential for a Democrat victory there, which could give us an odd Bush-Edwards combination.

As per the election, it looks like the swing states this year are AR, CO, FL, IA, MI, MN, MO, NV, OH, PA, TN, WV, and WI.

Also close are AZ, NC, and VA on the "should vote Bush" side, and CT, HI, ME, NH, NM, OR, and WA on the "should vote Kerry" side. These states are in play, but there's definitely a heavy favorite.

All of the other states are in the bag either one way or another (27 states plus DC).

[U2Bad1]

Originally Posted by RPIRED

As per the election, it looks like the swing states this year are AR, CO, FL, IA, MI, MN, MO, NV, OH, PA, TN, WV, and WI.

Haven't the DNC pulled ads from CO, NV, MO, and AR? The only state out of these three i see going to kerry is NV.

It looks more and more like Bush is going to win OH (strictly based on polls).

Basically, I see this election coming down to FL again


If Bush can pull away PA and IA or WI (not a likely scenario) , it wont matter.

[Kepler]

Originally Posted by RPIRED

As per the election, it looks like the swing states this year are AR, CO, FL, IA, MI, MN, MO, NV, OH, PA, TN, WV, and WI.

Also close are AZ, NC, and VA on the "should vote Bush" side, and CT, HI, ME, NH, NM, OR, and WA on the "should vote Kerry" side. These states are in play, but there's definitely a heavy favorite.

Almost completely agree. I'd say AR, CO, MO, TN & WV are Bush states and MI & PA are Kerry states, leaving FL, IA, MN, NH, NV, OH & WI as the only purple states. Of those, if FL and OH fall on the same side, then that side wins, (although theoretically Kerry can win if he pulls off a highly unlikely sweep of all other battleground states while still losing the big two).

[Kepler]

Originally Posted by U2Bad1

It looks more and more like Bush is going to win OH (strictly based on polls).

Maybe, although unions tend to really bring out the vote on election day, making it possible to overturn even late poll predictions. That's how Gore won MI last time.