John Zogby and Charlie Cook now see an uphill battle for Bush

[59millionmorons]

Bush by the numbers
President Bush 's rise in the polls late last week doesn't eliminate the pressure for a rousing performance at the convention, says independent pollster John Zogby. His surveys show that while 96 percent of Gore voters plan to vote for Sen. John Kerry, only 89 percent of those who voted for Bush in 2000 are currently committed to supporting him again in November. Bush, the way Zogby figures it, will need to boost that to 95 percent to win in November. The president, he says, "has to bring Republicans home."

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/040906/whispers/6whisplead.htm

Cook
Depending on which numbers you find most persuasive, you can convince yourself that President Bush is virtually certain to be re-elected or will surely lose in November. The vast majority of political scientists and economists who forecast elections based on computer models will be pre- senting their papers at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association this week in Chicago, and they are projecting a Bush victory over Sen. John Kerry -- in a landslide, some say. Other analysts, myself included, think Bush faces an uphill struggle.

The boldest prediction is from Yale University economist Ray Fair, the dean of the election-forecasting academicians whose model projects that Bush will get a whopping 57.48 percent of the major-party (combined Democratic and Republican, no independent) vote. Fair's model is based entirely on economics -- the real gross domestic product growth rate and inflation -- and it carries, he says, a standard error rate of 2.4 percent in either direction. In his July 31 "Note to the Media" on his Web site, Fair cautions that a change in economic data could affect his forecast but that "no realistic economic values can bring the predicted vote share to even about 53 percent." Of course, Fair, like most other modelers, predicted a landslide for Al Gore in 2000.

http://conventions.nationaljournal.com/archives/2004/08/election_foreca_1.html

[krkaufman]

1. Question is....

... how many malleable meatheads will be swayed by a return to the oxymoronic "compassionate conservative" nonsense that will be spewed this coming week at the RNC, in an effort to erase Boosh's legacy of extremism he's built over the last 3 1/2 years?

[aquart]

2. Fair's model does not include jobs.

So an American-registered corporation can show a hefty profit by outsourcing and destroying American opportunity.

Fab model. Looking forward to the man's humiliating destruction.

[Cha]

4. You mean the one who won't come in "second"?

Yeah, me too!

[speedoo]

13. Jobs, or family income.

Economists hold on to models that have been succesful in the past until they have a lot of data that makes them change the model. There is nothing extraordinary about Fair's model. Calling him "the dean" carries no meaning whatsoever.

People obviously do not vote after looking at GDP and other economic data. Their vote on economic matters is based on how the economy AFFECTS THEM. And Kerry's consistent hammering away at the "middle class squeeze" is based on very solid information about how people feel about their economic situation, and it ain't good.

[Cha]

3. There is no way he is going to do that.

bush is a lyin', thieving, murdering monster...welcome home, repubs.

[BillZBubb]

5. These economic models are the dumbest of exercises.

There is no way just looking at GDP and inflation that you could predict an election accurately. There are too many other significant variables.

Pay no attention to this nonsense. These guys should know better.

[59millionmorons]

6. Kerry won the cock roach race

Olberman did a story were every election a group runs a cock roach race and 80% of the time the winner of the race wins the election. Kerry's roach won, Bush's roach didnt move. I think this is as about as good as a predictor as these economic models that by the way also had Gore wiining in a landslide.

[DU9598]

8. Economic models

are seriously flawed as the Bu*h regime floats false numbers and corrects them later. In addition, Bu*h has pumped so much money into the economy from his tax cuts that businesses are making profits without sharing with the people. If corporations could vote Bu*h would get 58%. Fortunately for us, just the people get to vote.

[Myrina]

7. Let's not tell George ....

I :scared: to think about what that lunatic and his fringe cabal would do if they started to think they might lose.

[Toots]

9. Let me get this straight..96% of Gore voters will vote Kerry and

Bush* will win if 95% of Republican voters vote Bush*. Gore won the popular vote in 2000. Somehow I am lost with this logic.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

17. 2 factors can make that a true statement

1- Shited demographics ,and which states will turn out their "Gore/Bush" voters. (electoral college effect).

2- Voters who either didn't vote last time or voted for someone else.

It's not really straight "math".

[Inland]

10. Does it still matter which league wins the World Series? n/t

[elfin]

11. So now he'll play

the "scrappy underdog" and get the press to root even more for him.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

12. It's about time that the truth came out!!!

[59millionmorons]

14. Thats right

What is going on here is the media trying to make a close race to keep up there ratings.

[Julien Sorel]

15. I wish people could get it straight.

Of course, Fair, like most other modelers, predicted a landslide for Al Gore in 2000.

Fair did not predict a landslide for Gore; he predicted Gore with 50.8% of the vote, almost exactly what Gore got.

[Julien Sorel]

16. I wish people could get it straight.

Of course, Fair, like most other modelers, predicted a landslide for Al Gore in 2000.

Fair did not predict a landslide for Gore; he predicted Gore with 50.8% of the vote, almost exactly what Gore got.