Election Predictions

Bill Call · Post by **Bill Call** » Fri Oct 31, 2008 2:25 pm

The polls are all over the place. All agree that Obama is ahead by at least 4 points. However this is interesting:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/ ... 22051.aspx

Independent polls show Obama ahead by 8 too 10 but both campaigns internal polls show the campaign dead even. If that is true then the independent polls are way off (at least in Iowa, but if off in Iowa then are they off elsewhere?)

Anyway:

McCain 50.1
Obama 49.1

Bill Call · Post by **Bill Call** » Fri Oct 31, 2008 2:27 pm

Bill Call wrote:McCain 50.1
Obama 49.1

The actual vote will be:

McCain 50.1
Obama 52.2

Stan Austin · Post by **Stan Austin** » Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:39 pm

This is a prediciton I'll take

In Lakewood---------Obama 55%, McCain45%

In Ohio Obama52%. McCain48%

Nationally--------- Elecotral College----decisively Obama

Mandate (combination of popular vote, electoral vote, issues votes)

6 months to get something going

sharon kinsella · Post by **sharon kinsella** » Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:30 pm

I don't really think polls are going to be relevant and are relevant, in this campaign.

Most younger people and many other people, no longer have land lines. They can't call get the cell phone numbers without spending a lot more money, which they aren't doing, as far as I know.

We have an unusually high number of younger voters this election. The polls just don't reflect their votes.

Now, if they're doing exit polls at early polling sites, those numbers might be more accurate. But I don't know if they are doing that.

I think that Obama will when with a healthy percentage.

Brian Pedaci · Post by **Brian Pedaci** » Fri Oct 31, 2008 9:44 pm

Bill Call wrote:Independent polls show Obama ahead by 8 too 10 but both campaigns internal polls show the campaign dead even. If that is true then the independent polls are way off (at least in Iowa, but if off in Iowa then are they off elsewhere?)

Let's be clear here. McCain's campaign spokesperson says they have polling that puts him even, and says that Obama must have the same to be going back there for a visit.

What exactly would you expect them to say if they were down? "Oh yeah, we're gonna get slaughtered?" Of course their narrative for the final days is the come-from-behind upset.

Every election cycle the losing candidate claims to have internal polling that shows them in much better shape than any of the national tracking polls. Why is this? What magic are pollsters within the campaign able to do that every single other poll is unable to duplicate?

Jim DeVito · Post by **Jim DeVito** » Fri Oct 31, 2008 10:07 pm

Did I miss something or weren't the dems slated to win from the get go. That is just how it works. The repubs had their 8 years the dems will have theres and the cycle will repeat.

Bill Call · Post by **Bill Call** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 5:39 am

Brian Pedaci wrote:Every election cycle the losing candidate claims to have internal polling that shows them in much better shape than any of the national tracking polls. Why is this? What magic are pollsters within the campaign able to do that every single other poll is unable to duplicate?

That's a good point. However, supposedly Obama's posters are telling him the same thing (in Iowa anyway). And if Obama was ahead ten in Iowa why campaign there?

I am skeptical of all of the polls. If I was betting money instead of hot air I would bet on Obama. Butttt... last nights Zogby had McCain ahead.

Gary Rice · Post by **Gary Rice** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 7:10 am

The truth is, whatever the polls say, it all depends on the vote turnout. Quite a few have already voted ahead of time by mail, and in the states where early voting has been allowed, I've also seen those amazing long lines on TV. We may indeed be watching history unfold.

Pundits are also saying that it looks as if the Democrats just might do some serious house (and senate!) cleaning on November 4th, as well.

But, as anyone who studies politics for any length of time will tell you, Republicans VOTE in numbers solid, consistent, and strong. I'm sure that they have no intention of relinquishing power without a strong effort. I'm guessing that for either party, it may well turn into a late night nail-biter.

I would also expect that there will be challenges to the election, particularly if it is a close contest. :roll:

You know, there are other presidential candidates on the ballot too. Who knows? Maybe one of THEM will get the nod.... :shock:

Gary Rice · Post by **Gary Rice** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 7:24 am

One more point.

Although I, (probably like many of you) am feeling REAL tired of all this election stuff right about now, I do like the way that more and more people have become involved in the process of politics. This will probably NOT be one of your apathetic "who-cares-who-gets-in?" elections. I think you've see a genuine policy choice with these candidates and I think you'll see a higher voter turn-out than we've probably ever seen. Whichever side wins, the other side will continue to organize and hold the future incumbent accountable. More people will now be interested in the operations of our American government than ever, and that can't be a bad thing at all.

Brian Pedaci · Post by **Brian Pedaci** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 11:48 am

Bill Call wrote:That's a good point. However, supposedly Obama's posters are telling him the same thing (in Iowa anyway). And if Obama was ahead ten in Iowa why campaign there?

He had a rally in Des Moines on Friday. Before that he hadn't been there since August. If you're talking about putting ad money into the state, Obama's got enough to buy ads on the moon if he wanted to. And, again, your "supposedly" in that statement is according to McCain's spokesperson Rick Davis.

Obama might have gone to Iowa yesterday for the same reason that McCain went to New Hampshire this past week (a state where he's going to get trounced). It was an important part of his campaign timeline - it's where it all began, so it makes sense to have a big rally there to wind it up.

I am skeptical of all of the polls. If I was betting money instead of hot air I would bet on Obama. Butttt... last nights Zogby had McCain ahead.

Specifically, Zogby said McCain polled higher in one day's polling data. Obama still holds a five point lead in his three-day rolling average. I'm not inclined to believe an immediate 5-point jump in the polls absent earth-shattering news.

Zogby Interactive has had one of the worst records of accuracy in prediction this entire election season. I will also remind you that Zogby was the one who famously called 2004 for Kerry. So take that into consideration...

Brian Pedaci · Post by **Brian Pedaci** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 1:21 pm

Oh and since we're taking predictions:

Obama 52%
McCain 46%
Barr/Nader, Etc. 2 %

Stephen Eisel · Post by **Stephen Eisel** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 4:49 pm

Obama 49%
McCain 49%
Bar/Nader 2%

Jim DeVito · Post by **Jim DeVito** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 5:32 pm

Stephen Eisel wrote:Obama 49%
McCain 49%
Bar/Nader 2%

obama 49%
mccain 98%
bar/nader -2%
palin 49%

thanks dibold !! ;-)

Stephen Eisel · Post by **Stephen Eisel** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 5:36 pm

Jim DeVito wrote:
Stephen Eisel wrote:Obama 49%
McCain 49%
Bar/Nader 2%

obama 49%
mccain 98%
bar/nader -2%
palin 49%

thanks dibold !!

Wow... Diebold rocks

Brian Pedaci · Post by **Brian Pedaci** » Mon Nov 03, 2008 10:56 am

sharon kinsella wrote:I don't really think polls are going to be relevant and are relevant, in this campaign.

Most younger people and many other people, no longer have land lines. They can't call get the cell phone numbers without spending a lot more money, which they aren't doing, as far as I know.

Here are a couple of interesting posts showing the effects of the polls that do and don't take cell phones into consideration.

Election Predictions

Election Predictions

Re: Election Predictions

Re: Election Predictions

Re: Election Predictions

Re: Election Predictions