One prediction site above the rest.

[espera17]

Election Predictions... run by a high school student. Who would think that his predictions could be closer than veteran predictors like Scott Elliot @ Election Projection.

I urge you to check out http://electionpredictions.blogspot.com

He predicted Bilbray 50%, Busby 46%, and other candidates 4%. Awfully damn close. Closer than other sites I have seen.

[gordontron]

1. considering the projections for the senate/house let's hope it's wrong

we end up not having a majority in either, yikes!

[Gloria]

6. Only 50-50 chance according to Tom Oliphant today on Franken...also

you may not be interested in what he says, but the new Carville report for Democracy Corps really is quite chilling...says Dems won't pick up either house unless they really ratchet things up...the potential is there, people want to vote Democratic....if they are given a reason to....Very specific in terms of what needs to be done...

http://democracycorps.com/reports/analyses/Democracy_Corps_June_7_2006_Memo.pdf

[espera17]

8. exactly

it seems like the Democrats dont put any solutions forward

[blm]

10. They DO put up solutions all the time, but corporate media mutes them.

Ever hear withdrawal plans discussed in detail? Small business proposals for Katrina's thousands of small businesses? Kid's First universal healthcare legislation for all children? Apollo Project to focus on alternative fuels and renewable energy? Detailed port security plans?

You don't hear anything substantive in the media, yet all of these are out there.

[espera17]

11. its not entirely the medias fault

the democrats just dont have any bold plans.. and appear alot more fractured than the
GOP

[blm]

12. EVERY plan I mentioned was bold or necessary - YOU haven't heard about

them and are not willing to wonder WHY the media won't spend any airtime discussing them SO you can know about them?

[BigYawn]

14. Oh puleez....don't give the repugs any fodder for saying there they go

again...tax and spend.

Small business plans....more spending
Kids Healthcare.........more spending
Subsidize Energy redearch..more spending
Port Security plans.....more spending

I think people want less spending, less government intrusion.
People want less tax burden. People want government to stay
out of their bedrooms and out of their pockets and out of their
telephones.

[espera17]

15. yes

maybe democrats should be putting forward plans to cut government rather than enlarge it

[blm]

16. You prefer all the tax dollars spent on Katrina go to BIG BUSINESS ONLY?

You prefer the tax dollars that will be spent on Homeland Security BYPASS PORT SECURITY?

You prefer the tax dollars spent on tax breaks for the oil companies INSTEAD of alternative energy research? (Which will pay for itself within 6 months of implementing a discovery)

I'd say it's pretty shorstighted of anyone who thinks that these programs are less important and that the money should instead be spent the way it is - including on limos and callgirls.

[espera17]

17. no.. the money just shouldn't be spent. period.

that is how we will woo away traditional republican voters. cut the inefficiencies of government.

[blm]

19. Except, it's ALREADY been determined that money will be spent - do you

realize you're siding with the money to be distributed only amongst Bush's big business friends and that the small business and minority business owners SHOULDN'T have any Democrat looking out for their interests?

[espera17]

20. how has the money already been spent?

why dont we just use it to pay off our national debt? rather than increasing the size of government. that would appeal to voters

[BigYawn]

18. IMO the worst use of taxpayer dollars is corporate subsidies...

I would never have risked taxpayer dollars to rescue Chrysler.

Government should spend the tax dollars only on the following items:

1. Defense

2. Taking care of the REAL needy who can not take care of themselves.

3. Protect environment.

Rest of the spending should be left to the taxpayers themselves. I worked for
the US Dept of Energy and worked on several alternate energy projects. NONE OF
THEM HAVE PRACTICAL VALUE. But the govt. funds provided great jobs for us.

Alternate energy except solar and wind power is a waste of time & money until
oil runs out. No one in their sane mind will invest in building alternate
energy infra-structure since there is still too much oil left in the ground.
The oil producers can run all the competition bankrupt in a hurry by dropping
oil prices.

The government is the most IN-efficient spender of money. The 3 items I listed
above can not be done by any one else so it falls on the federal govt to do it.
The rest should be left to the market place.

[Bjorn Against]

26. So are you suggesting that we stop spending on...

Education, health care, and transportation?

Gee that will get you a lot of votes.

That is a position that is to the right of virtually all Republicans even.

[Bjorn Against]

24. dupe

[Bjorn Against]

25. But the Republicans are the real big spenders

Look at Iraq, look at the military budget, look at the contractors like Halliburton, and then look at the massive tax cuts for the wealthy while the largest deficit in history continues to grow.

Sure the Democrats want to spend more on social programs, and they should not be afraid to say so. Social programs are much more popular than the corporate media makes it appear. People like having health care and good schools. What the Democrats should be talking about is responsible spending because it does not take a math wiz to figure out that Republicans have far worse spending problems than Democrats do and they are spending money we do not even have.

[PATRICK]

2. Formulas and instincts

This exactly is the reality many here fear about Dem caution and choice of candidates. As things stand, without the passion and focus many here hope for, the Dems are steadily driving to another minority status. Too many incumbent leaders consider bold change what is exactly more of the same insufficiency, more money, more caution, more brilliant issue parsing. As with unhindered fraud, this is the kind of ruthless trajectory of reality we can't seem to influence party leadership with. And they think we are starry eyed idealists! The cock-eyed optimism of waiting for some logical conclusion to fall into their laps and some imitation(without strong attack or defense) of the GOP has some mathematical reality for Dem chances. OUR cock-eyed optimism is that by election time strategy will shift into high gear and maybe in spite of party leadership, the grass roots that performed well in 2004 will save the day.

I had that cock-eyed optimism about the best and brightest whom news reports told knew that Vietnam was a doomed and destructive effort. Naturally I thought these smart people would find a way out. Instead they plunged deeper into discredited delusions and while I was merrily about my life not considering the dangers of being drafted into a forever war. Both parties had a wake-up call. For different reasons they will not change, except that the ruthless GOP methods have more unnecessarily unchallenged election power. Their money, media and methodology advantage is virtually untouched. Their failures have alienated people but that can work for them too.

We all have in the past and still now, with new faces and old lessons, hope for better, but as with election cheating, as it stands now, much has simply been surrendered or lost and with it millions of ripe votes and a chance to have a democratic opposition to the crisis afflicting America. It will take a lot more than being a polite punching bag under a cloud of prejudice to represent the lost Republican voters and critical Democratic base.

Or maybe the predictor is just lucky. As far as luck goes, the party would need a whole lot more to replace lack of campaign fire. And such luck would end up empowering the notion that playing it safe and nice and corporate well into legislative doldrums and the next electoral disaster.

[espera17]

3. dems need to focus on solutions

and not campaign as an alternative... lets start seeing some proposals

[Awsi Dooger]

4. Great site but he embraces the most recent partisanship numbers

In his formulas. That's a mistake that will spit out the wrong percentage and winner too frequently. You need to have more of a historical base and not overreact to current form.

Last week the other site, electionprojection, used the Newsweek 50-31 generic congressional numer in its prediction. That was wildly high and I posted that in one thread. Using that number contributed to his prediction being too close.

On electionpredictions he's got some optimistic numbers like Ohio +5 partisanship leaning toward Democrats, courtesy of a SurveyUSA poll. That's nuts. It's been a 2-4 point red state for decades. I don't care about all the scandals. It's not 5 points our way and won't be in November or in 2008. We may win the gov race via superior candidate but you can't start giving us a significant partisanship edge in Ohio.

[espera17]

7. the partisanship thing is based on voter registration

i know that is a poor indicator because of states like kentucky that have overwhelming DEM registration

[Awsi Dooger]

9. In the Ohio formula he specifically uses a SurveyUSA poll

A 35-30 or +5 toward Democrats, which does not match the registration numbers nor recent elections in the state.. No way he can use registration numbers in states like Oklahoma with all the DINOs.

The basic formulas are sensible for statewide races but only threaten accurate if reasonable partisanship projections are entered. I'd guess there has been a 4 point tilt from typical nationwide, in our favor. So if Ohio is +2 Republican at base instinct, it might be +2 Democratic at this specific window in time. That's just my guess, but I think it's better than the +5. Ohio drifted toward even partisanship in 2004, instead of the +2-4 GOP, due to the lousy state economy. I'll give us 2 more points now due to GOP implosion and the continuing Republican ethics problems in Ohio, but anything beyond that is lunacy, like the projections estimating Ohio would go to Kerry by several points.

[OneBlueSky]

5. we best pray he 's not right . . .

three more years of BushCo unopposed will most assuredly destroy this nation once and for all . . .

[Awsi Dooger]

13. Here's another type of prediction site

http://politicalbetting.bestbetting.com/Default.aspx?&market=14041317&help=false

Whenever I post a political betting link it plummets without a reply. So I'll stick the link here in an existing thread. You can actually bet on this stuff, folks. Plenty of opinions around here.

Notice Hillary is 4/5 or -1.25 from one bookmaking source, and +1.32 on another. Major difference. Betting $100 at 4/5 would win $80, while the same $100 earns $132 on the other.

Somehow Bill Richardson is only 4/1 in the first outlet yet a more sensible 37/1 on the right.

Mark Warner has been making the steady climb, down from 10/1 to consensus 4/1 at various sites, and 3.9/1 in the second source listed here.

In the overall 2008 race, Democrats are a slight favorite to retake the White House, but basically pick-em.

John McCain is the 8/5 and 2/1 favorite for the GOP nomination on these two outlets. If you think he'll be rejected, plenty of high prices available on the other guys.

[espera17]

21. interesting

i will be sure to check it out

[guidod]

22. Great link, thanks!

Just as I thought, Miami Heat will lose! I'm a Laker fan, Shac sucks!! :applause:

[Awsi Dooger]

23. Big move on Wes Clark in the last week

When I posted this link he was 89/1 and 139/1 to win the nomination. Now he's down to 50/1 and 35/1. That's right, the 139/1 is all the way to 35/1.

Probably a case of the 139/1 simply being too high and someone took a flyer on it. No reason Clark was such a longshot compared to others on that list.

[CTLawGuy]

27. I'll like it better when it updates CT-Sen

NT