 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
JannDallas
Seaman
Joined: 26 Sep 2004
Posts: 166
Location: Dallas, TX
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:01 pm Post subject: National Geographic - Jim Campbell Picks Winner |
 |
|
http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0411/online_extra.html
| Quote: | By Shelley Sperry
Jim Campbell waited a little longer than usual this year to predict who would win the U.S. presidential election. With the Republican Party convention held just before Labor Day, the University at Buffalo, SUNY political scientist tweaked his model a bit to account for George W. Bush receiving a post-convention bounce in the Labor Day Gallup Poll, Campbell's most important factor in predicting the November vote. In the end, he created post-convention and pre-convention models, and both say that Bush will win. Campbell does not take into account the presidential debates. Using pre-convention polling numbers, Campbell says Bush wins 52.8 percent of the popular vote for the Republican and Democratic parties. Post-convention numbers predict he wins 53.8 percent. But what about the all-important electoral college vote? "If my forecast is close, within two points," Campbell declares, "Bush will clearly win the electoral vote as well."
Campbell created his current forecasting model in 1990 using two kinds of predictors: public opinion and economic growth. "The Labor Day Gallup Poll of likely voters accounts for about two-thirds of the model," he explains. That poll showed Bush ahead of Democrat John Kerry by 7 percentage points. But Campbell believes we have to read polls along with other factors to put them in context. "Historically, there is a relationship between the economy and people's voting patterns." So the second factor in the model is the gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate in the second quarter of the election year. This year's rate was 3.3 percent, and, according to Campbell, anything roughly over 3 percent favors the incumbent.
In early September, Campbell and colleagues who specialize in analyzing elections and public opinion took part in a lively roundtable in Chicago, where they discussed their 2004 election predictions. Of seven diverse models, six forecasted Bush would win in November—and the seventh saw another election "too close to call."
Although Democrats may see these as gloomy projections, they can take heart from a similar group of prognosticators who picked Al Gore as the winner of the 2000 election. That year Campbell came closest to predicting the popular vote outcome, saying Gore would win 52.8 percent. Gore did win the popular vote, with 50.3 percent, but lost the electoral college contest and the presidency. None of the pundits predicted the election would be a virtual tie, ultimately settled by the Supreme Court.
|
And according to my National Geographic he came closer to predicting the popular vote in 2000 than any other political science prognosticator. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ProudDaughterofVet
Commander
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 340
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well well..we shall see. Question? and this is the problem with these pollsters and the MSM, they seem to forget two things:
WE are at war
9-11 has changed in my opinion all the former models used
WE are at war
..I have said this before, but it is worth repeating, my mom and dad, when FDR was going through re-election, went through the same problems as Bush seems to be, defending decisions, casualities, so forth..attacks on the war..then in the end, the Americans voter realizes..We are right..and we must defend this nation. The psychology of war and voting, now that is something I would love to see researched. It is someting that no one really talks about..a hidden secret vote, that comes out in the privacy of the polling booth..I pray it is true this time!!
PD
_________________
"We will not tire, We will not falter, We will not fail."
-President George W. Bush
www.timetotakeastand.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jataylor11
Vice Admiral
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 856
Location: Woodbridge, Virginia
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Exactly -- you need to look at the American mindset while at war and then subtract about 10% for the barking moonbats and the brain dead ( no offense to those who are medically brain dead)... you still will come out with 55% to 60% |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
