SwiftVets.com

[Chuck54]

Pulled this off of freerepublic. Keep positive folks, do not, I repeat, do not let the bastards get you down!!!!!


Why Bush Will Win Big Tomorrow
PoliPundit.com ^ | 11-1-04 | D. J. Drummond


Factors

Here we are, the last day before the Federal Election, and a great many chattering outlets are playing that smash hit, “We Dunno What’s Gonna Happen“, with that riveting cast, The Wild-A Guesses. And we have seen all sorts of ’signals’ and ‘indicators’, from the winners of certain football games to the more popular coffee cups at convenience stores, from Al Franken and Michael Moore to Michael Savage and Ann Coulter, from the ridiculously partisan John Zogby to, well, the just as ridiculously partisan Dan Rather. The political landscape looks and smells like the explosion of a wastewater treatment plant.

I have received a lot of emails asking me to say who has the reliable polls, who I’m reading these final days to see what’s going on. I have also received a lot of mail suggesting hidden factors and important subgroups. For all of this, thanks, but I have worked in all the salient information in my predictions already. Some of what was suggested is not really relevant, and some is relevant, but not to the degree suggested. To explain this, I want to put together a model of the voters for this year.

To start with, both Bush and Kerry have a central core of voters upon whom they may rely, no matter what. For President Bush, it’s not hard to see where these come from. They are the people who voted for him in 2000, who have not seen any reason to leave. From what I have read and heard, it appears that about 60% of the original Bush backers have stayed on board as his 2004 core. Since Bush pulled 47.9% of the Popular Vote, his base for 2004 starts around 28.7%, which sounds low, but remember, that’s his hard base.

Senator Kerry also starts with a base, which in his case are the people who strongly oppose the President. Gallup shows that at least 35% of the voters polled have held an unfavorable impression of Bush. About 60% of that number is pretty hard-line, so once he became the Democrat Front-Runner, John Kerry pulled a base of 21.0% for his base.

That leaves 50.3% to sort out.

With all the attention on the ‘Battleground’ states, the ‘Safe’ states have not been getting a lot of attention. When you look at them, however, what you generally see are two things. The big-population states are settling for 2004, very much as they did in 2000. However, there are a number of states which are showing changes, and generally they are showing Bush has gained in many places. Even where he has not gained by enough to win the state, he has gained support (New Jersey for example; while Kerry may well still take NJ, it’s pretty obvious he won’t win it by the 15-point margin Gore enjoyed). So, I add 10 points to Kerry, but 15 more to Dubya, making it 43.7% Bush, 31.0% Kerry, with another 25.3% to sort out.

Now, it’s clear that Ohio and Florida are tough places. Florida is acting pretty much the same way it did in 2000, but Ohio is looking bit weaker for Bush. Add another 3 points to Kerry for the effect in New Hampshire and Ohio. 43.7-34.0, 22.3 left to work out.

At this point, I stop to consider one of the fables of the 2004 campaign: That millions of newly registered voters are going to swarm in and flood turnout. I don’t think so, and here’s why: The 2004 Election, when you get past the hype, is not all that different from other elections called “The Most Important Election of Our Lifetime“. I’m old enough to remember when the Democrats warned in 1976, that a Ford victory would overturn Roe v. Wade, even though Gerald Ford never once made such a claim. Of course, in that election at least, RvW was recent enough to be a relevant issue, as opposed to the shrill paranoia voiced today. I can recall in 1980, when we were told that the choice for President would decide whether we lost to the Soviets or not. I can recall in 1992, when we were assured that only a lawyer should have a say in writing law, not a man who can’t spell ‘potato’. I can recall in 2000, how Al Gore promised that “black churches will burn” if Bush is elected. In all of those elections, there was a big push to get people registered to vote, but when it came time to actually go vote, many of these newly registered voters had other things to do, instead. Historically, that’s been engrained. Historically, getting anything above 60% turnout (of the VAP) is considered a miracle. Now then, as it happens, about 80% of the Voting Age Population (VAP) gets registered (that’s not so bad; many of the remaining 20% are not eligible to register), so that somewhere between 70 and 75% of the Registered Voters go and vote. Compare the remaining 25% of the RV sample, to the 22.3% my sample shows remaining, and you can see a rough-draft sample of 77.7% of the RV voing, or 62.2% estimated turnout of the VAP, allowing for record turnout (or at least the best in many years), with Bush well ahead of Kerry.

Now then, we can refine things a bit, but recalling that Kerry does well in urban areas (which will also increase his numbers in bad-weather states; it’s simply easier to get to the polls in a city during bad weather, than in many rural states) and enjoys a smooth machine for getting people to/from polling places. That’s worth about 3% right there. Also, however, the GOP grass-roots effort this year is much better organized than the Democrats, giving the GOP a couple points back, I’d say.

Anyway, with 77.7% of the RV actually projected to vote, Bush’s 43.7% of the total RV becomes 56.2% of the actual vote. Kerry’s 34.0% of the RV becomes 43.8% of the actual vote. Give Ralph somewhere around 1% of the vote, and another 1% float out to other candidates, and we shake out to something like 55% Bush, 43% Kerry.

So, is this just a guess? Maybe so, but it’s an educated guess; all this talk about changing the definition of “Likely Voters” and assuming that people who had to be prodded to register will suddenyl be enthusiastic about actually voting, or that the difference all year between the strength-of-support for Bush and the strength-of-support for Kerry won’t show up in the voting results, is just hype to spin a story. People, I have found, are generally creature sof habit, and what they used to do they will continue to do. In some ways, that’s good for Kerry, because there are a lot of people who consider themselves Democrats, and they have pretty much made clear that Democrats will support Kerry, while GOP will suport Bush. However, the information at hand indicates that Bush has been steady and strong in his base of support, while he has made in roads in a number of key demographics, like Women, Blacks, Jews, Catholics, People Able to Pay Attention to Facts, etc. The information I see, coupled with Bush’s trips into a number of “blue” states, indicates a confidence that indicates the President’s pollsters tell him the same information I am reading.

In the end, it always comes down to getting the butts out and voting, but if you want a clear call, it’s going to be Bush, and it’s going to be big. Not saying this so we can relax, but so we can be optimistic while we work.

-- DJ Drummond
_________________
"And no pair has been more wrong, more loudly, more often, than the two Senators from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry"

Zell Miller

[joeshero]

Reasonable arguments. It doesn't make any sense if Bush gets less than what he got in the last election. In the last election he got around 47%.
_________________
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

[Kimmymac]

Thanks for the post, Chuck the Cigar Guy. This election cycle has been more than normally schizophrenic; I am seeing and hearing and sensing one thing, and being told another by the OIM and their court jester pundits. Ah well, what else is new?

Illegitimi non Carborundum: Never let the bastards get you down.
_________________
The last refuge of scoundrels is not patriotism; it is finicky liberal humanitarianism.--Martin Paretz

[Stee]

no need to get the panties in a bunch. the poll data is supplied by the same people who do not want the truth to come out. BUT IT WILL!!! spread the word about the treasonist liar and put him in his place..........

[P. Aaron]

It's still going to be a "Maloxx Moment".
_________________
A willing tool of the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" since 1981.

[deserturtle]

Rush's poll analysis was so interesting. The way they are weighting the polls sounds all wrong....the pollster that was more correct than others state by state was Mason-Dixon and their polls have Bush up in crucial states......I am sure Rush will have his transcript up for today's show soon.
_________________
The door to the room of success swings on the hinges of the opposition.

[lrb111]

I've been figuring 56/43, but on straight voting. Not repeat voters.
With rain and cold in the forecast for some heavily dem areas, i feel dems will vote, but won't try going precinct to precinct voting multiples.
Cold and rain will also discourage young first time voters..
_________________
said Democratic Chairman Terry McAuliffe. "It is inexcusable to mock service and sacrifice."
well, when even the DNC can see it,,,,, then kerry is toast.

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

The transcript of Rush Limbaugh's analysis of the polls - read it and smile!!!!

[IYDKMIGTHTKY]

this is my first time voting, BUSH had better win

(still am scratching my head about how Kerry made it this far)

I should've voted in past elections, perhaps the country would not be in the same shape as it is.

all that I can say is that I'm proud of President BUSH and will forever vote from now on in future elections.

PS: this website ROCKS!!!

[Keith]

DJ is very knowledgeable about this stuff. I've seen him kick butt in many online debates on the topic. Here's to hoping he's right.

Keith
http://thinkinboutstuff.netfirms.com/

[misako]

Read another biased piece by Zogby against Bush today in Financial Times which is in same league as Guardian in UK. Reckon Zogby trying to appear objective pollster in USA whilst writing tendentious garbage in UK, typical slimey trick, but it doesn't work. And I'll be writing to FT later re their biased B.S. in other articles. It sometimes pays to read the opposition, but it's a tough duty.

[Woodrow]

A guy called in on DFW radio station today, said his dad in NM is lifelong Democrat went to vote for Kerry. When he got in the booth, he couldn't vote for him. Said he couldn't change horses in mid-stream. Alot of good people will cross party lines this election. Character counts.

[Inatizzy]