TIA ELECTION FORECASTING MODEL DAILY UPDATE

[TruthIsAll]

TIA ELECTION FORECASTING MODEL DAILY UPDATE
(based on latest available polling data)

Historical Data: 
LAST THREE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS				
(for Comparative analysis) 

Total Votes (millions)
Dem: 138.75 (52.60%)
Rep: 125.03 (47.4%)                             				
.......................................................

	ELECTORAL VOTE SIMULATION  			

STATE POLL DATA SOURCE: 
www.electoral-vote.com                         				

	Most Likely Scenario:70% Undecided/other to Kerry	
	Kerry	52.85%	329	EV	
	Bush	47.15%	209	EV	
	Kerry wins	99	of 100 trial runs		

	Conservative Scenario:50% Undecided/other to Kerry	
	Kerry	51.02%	300	EV	
	Bush	48.98%	238	EV	
	Kerry wins	90	of 100 trial runs		

.......................................................

	NATIONAL AVERAGE POLLING TREND MODEL														

Data Source: www.pollingreport.com    
NATIONAL POLLS included in Average Poll:				
IBD,ABC,NWK,ARG,NBC,CBS,PEW,LAT,ZOGBY,TIME				
	
		10-Poll Average     	TIA Projection					
		Kerry	Bush 	Diff	Kerry	Bush 	Diff					
	Jan 	42.50	50.17	-11.5	46.48	53.52	-7.03
	Feb	48.00	45.43	2.57	52.60	47.40	5.20
	Mar	47.50	44.75	2.75	52.93	47.08	5.85
	Apr	47.38	44.88	2.50	52.80	47.20	5.60
	May	47.11	44.22	2.89	53.18	46.82	6.36
	June	47.13	45.00	2.13	52.64	47.36	5.28
	July	49.57	44.29	5.29	53.87	46.13	7.74

.....................................................................
			
												
	BUSH JOB APPROVAL											
	 www.pollingreport.com    											
2004	 
....Average	Nwk	Fox	CNN	Pew	Harris	CBS	ABC	Time	NBC	AP	Zogby
Jan.	54.50	50	58	60	56	na	50	58	54	54	56	49
Feb.	49.67	48	48	51	48	51	50	50	54	na	47	na
Mar.	48.75	48	48	49	46	na	51	50	na	50	48	na
Apr.	48.80	49	50	52	48	48	46	51	49	na	48	47
May	45.20	42	48	47	44	na	41	47	46	47	48	42
June	47.00	na	48	49	48	50	42	47	na	45	48	46
July	48.00	48	na	na	na	na	na	na	na	45	50	49
												

[Jack Rabbit]

1. Could you please explain how you arrive at these numbers?

I find your figures encouraging and I hope they have a sound basis and, if they do, that they hold up or even improve.

Nevertheless, I would like to know exactly how you are arriving at this forecast.

[TruthIsAll]

2. Hope this helps

The National % and State EV simulation models assume that
Kerry's polling  numbers increase by 70% (the most likely
case) of the undecided/other vote. This assumption is based on
historical data, which show that undecideds break for the
challenger over 80% of the time. 
                                                              
 
For example, assume Kerry is leading in a state by 46%-44%.
with 10% undecided. Allocating 70% of the undecide to Kerry
adds 7%
to his total. The adjusted projection is now Kerry,  53-47%.

The same 70% allocation is applied to the average of 10
national polls.
		

NATIONAL AVERAGE POLLING TREND							

Data Source:
 www.pollingreport.com    						

      Average Polling		 TIA Projection		
      Kerry	Bush 	Diff	 Kerry Bush	Diff

IBD						
Feb	44	41	3	54.50	45.50	9.00
Mar	45	43	2	53.40	46.60	6.80
Apr	40	44	-4	51.20	48.80	2.40
May	43	42	1	53.50	46.50	7.00
June	43	44	-1	52.10	47.90	4.20
July	49	44	5	53.90	46.10	7.80
						
						
ABC						
Feb	52	43	9	55.50	44.50	11.00
Mar	53	44	9	55.10	44.90	10.20
Apr	48	49	-1	50.10	49.90	0.20
May	49	47	2	51.80	48.20	3.60
June	53	45	8	54.40	45.60	8.80
						
						
						
AP						
Jan 	37	54	-17	43.30	56.70	-13.40
Mar	45	46	-1	51.30	48.70	2.60
Apr	44	45	-1	51.70	48.30	3.40
May	43	46	-3	50.70	49.30	1.40
July	45	49	-4	49.20	50.80	-1.60
						
						
NWK						
Jan 	41	52	-11	45.90	54.10	-8.20
Feb	50	45	5	53.50	46.50	7.00
Mar	48	45	3	52.90	47.10	5.80
Apr	50	43	7	54.90	45.10	9.80
May	46	45	1	52.30	47.70	4.60
July	51	45	6	53.80	46.20	7.60
						
						
ARG						
Jan 	47	46	1	51.90	48.10	3.80
Feb	48	46	2	52.20	47.80	4.40
Mar	50	43	7	54.90	45.10	9.80
Apr	50	44	6	54.20	45.80	8.40
May	47	44	3	53.30	46.70	6.60
June	48	46	2	52.20	47.80	4.40
July	49	45	4	53.20	46.80	6.40
						
						
NBC						
Jan 	35	54	-19	42.70	57.30	-14.60
Mar	45	47	-2	50.60	49.40	1.20
May	42	46	-4	50.40	49.60	0.80
June	47	47	0	51.20	48.80	2.40
July	54	43	11	56.10	43.90	12.20
						
						
FOX						
Jan 	32	54	-22	41.80	58.20	-16.40
Feb	43	47	-4	50.00	50.00	0.00
Mar	44	44	0	52.40	47.60	4.80
Apr	42	43	-1	52.50	47.50	5.00
May	42	42	0	53.20	46.80	6.40
June	42	48	-6	49.00	51.00	-2.00
						
						
CBS						
Jan 	48	43	5	54.30	45.70	8.60
Feb	47	46	1	51.90	48.10	3.80
Mar	43	46	-3	50.70	49.30	1.40
Apr	48	43	5	54.30	45.70	8.60
May	49	41	8	56.00	44.00	12.00
June	45	44	1	52.70	47.30	5.40
July	49	44	5	53.90	46.10	7.80
						
						
CNN/Gallup						
Jan 	43	55	-12	44.40	55.60	-11.20
Feb	48	49	-1	50.10	49.90	0.20
Mar	52	44	8	54.80	45.20	9.60
Apr	46	51	-5	48.10	51.90	-3.80
May	49	47	2	51.80	48.20	3.60
June	48	49	-1	50.10	49.90	0.20
July	50	46	4	52.80	47.20	5.60
						
						
PEW						
Jan 	41	52	-11	45.90	54.10	-8.20
Feb	47	47	0	51.20	48.80	2.40
Mar	48	44	4	53.60	46.40	7.20
Apr	47	46	1	51.90	48.10	3.80
May	50	45	5	53.50	46.50	7.00
June	46	48	-2	50.20	49.80	0.40
						
						
LA Times						
Apr	49	46	3	52.50	47.50	5.00
June	51	44	7	54.50	45.50	9.00
						
						
						
ZOGBY						
Mar	48	46	2	52.20	47.80	4.40
Apr	47	44	3	53.30	46.70	6.60
May	47	42	5	54.70	45.30	9.40
June	44	42	2	53.80	46.20	7.60
July	46	44	2	53.00	47.00	6.00
						
						
TIME						
Jan	43	54	-11	45.10	54.90	-9.80
Feb	48	50	-2	49.40	50.60	-1.20
May	51	46	5	53.10	46.90	6.20
July	49	45	4	53.20	46.80	6.40
…………………………………………………………………………………………………….						

Data source of state polls: 	
 www.electoral-vote.com 

COMPARISON OF KERRY % VS. LAST 3 DEM % IN EACH STATE
AND PROBABILITY OF KERRY WINNING STATE                     
				

	Elec.	Dem%	Proj.	Proj.	%Probability	
	Votes	Last3	Kerry%	Diff	of Kerry win 	
AL	9	44.8	45.0	0.2	1.0	
AK	3	37.6	40.7	3.1	0.1	
AZ	10	48.8	47.2	-1.6	16.4
AR	6	55.2	50.6	-4.6	55.8
CA	55	57.4	57.2	-0.2	99.0
CO	9	48.8	49.3	0.5	41.4
CT	7	57.7	62.6	4.9	99.0
DE	3	56.8	57.1	0.3	99.0
DC	3	90.3	90.4	0.1	99.0
FL	27	50.7	53.3	2.6	88.4
GA	15	47.6	45.9	-1.7	1.0
HI	4	59.0	60.9	1.9	99.0
ID	4	35.7	39.0	3.3	0.1
IL	21	57.9	60.0	2.1	99.0
IN	11	44.8	45.9	1.1	1.0
IA	7	51.8	53.6	1.8	95.0
KS	6	42.4	41.6	-0.8	0.1
KY	8	46.7	45.3	-1.4	1.0
LA	9	49.2	49.0	-0.2	37.5
ME	4	57.1	52.3	-4.8	76.9
MD	10	57.8	58.6	0.8	99.0
MA	12	65.3	66.3	1.0	99.0
MI	17	54.7	54.2	-0.5	97.5
MN	10	55.7	53.3	-2.4	88.4
MS	6	44.3	36.3	-8.0	0.1
MO	11	52.5	52.1	-0.4	75.0
MT	3	44.9	42.8	-2.1	0.1
NE	5	37.5	36.5	-1.0	0.1
NV	5	49.9	51.4	1.5	65.4
NH	4	51.7	56.7	5.0	99.0
NJ	15	56.5	56.6	0.1	99.0
NM	5	53.0	55.3	2.3	99.0
NY	31	62.6	66.4	3.8	99.0
NC	15	46.6	49.9	3.3	48.5
ND	3	40.8	37.2	-3.6	0.1
OH	20	50.8	51.1	0.3	61.5
OK	7	42.8	35.2	-7.6	0.1
OR	7	53.6	56.2	2.6	99.0
PA	21	54.2	54.1	-0.1	97.5
RI	4	65.6	64.2	-1.4	99.0
SC	8	44.4	47.5	3.1	20.2
SD	3	44.5	44.8	0.3	0.1
TN	11	50.5	50.8	0.3	57.7
TX	34	44.3	42.6	-1.7	0.1
UT	5	33.6	29.7	-3.9	0.1
VT	3	59.4	60.1	0.7	99.0
VA	13	47.3	48.5	1.2	31.7
WA	11	55.9	55.1	-0.8	99.0
WV*	5	54.0	47.2	-6.8	16.4
WI	10	52.7	51.3	-1.4	65.4
WY	3	38.3	30.8	-7.5	0.1
					



ELECTORAL VOTE SIMULATION FORECAST 					
based on latest state polling					
 www.electoral-vote.com                         					

Kerry wins	99	of 100 Trials			
with average of	329	electoral votes			

	Electoral Votes				
Trial	Kerry	Bush	Winner		
1	331	207	Kerry		
2	328	210	Kerry		
3	327	211	Kerry
4	350	188	Kerry
5	371	167	Kerry
6	326	212	Kerry
7	342	196	Kerry
8	309	229	Kerry
9	340	198	Kerry
10	350	188	Kerry
11	266	272	Bush
12	290	248	Kerry
13	308	230	Kerry
14	363	175	Kerry
15	365	173	Kerry
16	380	158	Kerry
17	348	190	Kerry
18	342	196	Kerry
19	325	213	Kerry
20	349	189	Kerry
21	358	180	Kerry
22	343	195	Kerry
23	330	208	Kerry
24	335	203	Kerry
25	346	192	Kerry
26	313	225	Kerry
27	308	230	Kerry
28	348	190	Kerry
29	304	234	Kerry
30	329	209	Kerry
31	365	173	Kerry
32	322	216	Kerry
33	341	197	Kerry
34	377	161	Kerry
35	368	170	Kerry
36	328	210	Kerry
37	322	216	Kerry
38	343	195	Kerry
39	335	203	Kerry
40	301	237	Kerry
41	331	207	Kerry
42	323	215	Kerry
43	316	222	Kerry
44	337	201	Kerry
45	306	232	Kerry
46	324	214	Kerry
47	347	191	Kerry
48	352	186	Kerry
49	334	204	Kerry
50	335	203	Kerry
51	353	185	Kerry
52	331	207	Kerry
53	333	205	Kerry
54	351	187	Kerry
55	308	230	Kerry
56	313	225	Kerry
57	329	209	Kerry
58	338	200	Kerry
59	337	201	Kerry
60	342	196	Kerry
61	302	236	Kerry
62	331	207	Kerry
63	348	190	Kerry
64	373	165	Kerry
65	333	205	Kerry
66	330	208	Kerry
67	347	191	Kerry
68	343	195	Kerry
69	311	227	Kerry
70	297	241	Kerry
71	343	195	Kerry
72	308	230	Kerry
73	339	199	Kerry
74	305	233	Kerry
75	311	227	Kerry
76	324	214	Kerry
77	303	235	Kerry
78	324	214	Kerry
79	310	228	Kerry
80	315	223	Kerry
81	310	228	Kerry
82	310	228	Kerry
83	330	208	Kerry
84	345	193	Kerry
85	320	218	Kerry
86	320	218	Kerry
87	290	248	Kerry
88	334	204	Kerry
89	347	191	Kerry
90	342	196	Kerry
91	330	208	Kerry
92	296	242	Kerry
93	303	235	Kerry
94	341	197	Kerry
95	312	226	Kerry
96	292	246	Kerry
97	314	224	Kerry
98	341	197	Kerry
99	326	212	Kerry
100	319	219	Kerry



Notes:			
1) State and National polls are adjusted assuming that			
70% of undecided/Nader/others will split for Kerry.           
                			
2) State polls are weighted by its ratio of total votes cast
in the last 3 elections			
3) Third party candidates not considered for this analysis.   
                           			
4) The analysis is only as good as the quality of polling
data			
5) State polls are taken over weeks; National polls are taken
over days.			



Simulation Methodology:
Monte Carlo simulation uses random numbers applied to
probability distributions of uncertain events in order to
generate a range of
sampled outcome scenarios. For the analysis, I used the
latest state polling numbers to simulate an election outcome.

                                
In this case, an "event" is defined as Kerry's
forecast share of a
state's popular vote. An "outcome" is the simulated
probability of Kerry winning the election, based on the total
electoral votes for the states he "wins"..          
                     
                                
For example, if we run 100 trials in the simulation and
Kerry's
electoral vote total exceeds 269 in 90 of the 100
trials, we can reasonably conclude that he has a 90%
probability of winning the election. Each state poll is
assumed to have a
margin of error of +/-4% and a uniform distribution
around the polling numbers.                                   
                       
                                
We assign a probability to Kerry winning each state,
determined by the latest polling numbers.

For example, assume these are the probabilities that Kerry
would win the following states:
Kansas: .001                            
New York: .99                          
Florida: .807                           

This means that if the latest Kansas poll is 60% Bush, 40%
( a 20% spread) then Kerry has a 1 in 1,000 chance of
winning the state. Conversely, he has a 99% chance to win NY.
                        
In the case of a close state, like Florida, a Kerry lead of 5%
assigns him an 80.7% probability of winning the state.        
                      
                                
Excel's random generator function returns a random  
number X between 0 and 1. If X is less than
the probability of Kerry winning the state, the state goes to
Kerry, otherwise it goes to Bush.                             
 
                                
For instance, if X = .72 for Florida, then Kerry wins the
state, since X = .72 is LESS than the .807 probability
that Kerry will win the state.

                                
The simulation runs identically for all states. The electoral
votes are summed for those states which fall in Kerry's
column.                           
                                
The model assumes that Kerry's polling  numbers in each state
will increase by 70% of the undecided/other vote. This
assumption is based on historical data, which show that
undecideds break for the challenger over 80% of the time. .
                                                              
 
For example, assume Kerry is leading in a state by 46%-44%.
with 10% undecided. Allocating 70% of the 10% to Kerry adds 7%
to his total. The adjusted projection is now Kerry winning by
53-47%.

[ps1074]

3. I don't agree with your model

I think you're doing a superb job but I just don't trust it.

Let me say why.

I started posting a reply 10 minutes ago and Iwas almost finished when my computer crashed :(

This time I will try to make the post shorter and explain what I mean.

Post coming in 5 minutes :) Stay tuned.

[ps1074]

6. Okay, here it goes

There are too many variables not included in your model. These are not included in any model I have seen.

First - too many people left out of the "getting polled" process. How many of you get never polled? 90% would a correct guess.

Second - There is 13-15% "voting material" difference in each presidential election. I couldn't come with better term for it. Here is what I mean:

Lets say the average voter lives 73 years. Since turning 18 till his death he can vote in what... 73-18=55 years - it means 14 presidential elections. It is not "scientific" but it means each presidential cycle 6 or 7% of the voters from the previous election have died. Now new voters come to voting age - they are usually 1 to 2% more than the ones that died. But are they as motivated to vote as the elderly? What are their issues? Have they been polled ever? Are they included in all the "models"... No, No, No and No. Too little is known about these new voters.

Third - How much the base is energized to vote? Even a 3-5% crack in the base of one party means the opposite party wins. Many people got polled and say "yes I approve the chimp" or "no, I do not approve the chimp" but will this guys vote? If he is a conservative he might say "yes" just from loyalty to his president but come election date he won't show to vote if he is not happy with him. And vice versa... You get the idea :)

Fourth - this is my bold prediction for this election. It is not scientific and totally pulled out of my a** but I think there will be 110 to 115 million votes cast in this election. In 200 there were 103 million or so. Yes, I predict 10 million more votes... How will these people vote? They will have strong enough reason to vote but what will it be? The war on terror and their belief that only Bush can win it? Or the hatred for the Chimp and the disgust for him.

That is why I do not trust any polls at the moment. If 90% of the polls show 10% or more advantage to either Bush or Kerry than I think there is a good possibility the one they show ahead will win it. But right now polls mean nothing.

Once again - you are doing a great job. It is just me not trusting any of these models :)

[TruthIsAll]

9. I appreciate your comments...

And I agree with everything you are saying, especially your comment that a 10% lead in the polls will pretty much lock it up.

But...

You are making things unnecessarily complicated by factoring these known unknowns. I am a firm believer in KISS (keep it simple stupid).

The key to model development is not to overburden the analysis with too much minutia - you lose the overall.

In the analysis, I assume only the following.

1) The national polls are usually correct within a MoE of +/-3%. By averaging them we cut the MoE further.

2) The MoE for each state poll is +/-4%. Simulating the forecast of all the individual state polls lowers the total simulation MoE.

3) The challenger usually gets the bulk of undecided (I include Nader) voters. I assume Kerry will get 70% of the allocation , at minimum. Even at 50%, Kerry has a 90% probability of winning, based on the latest polling numbers. At 70%, its 98-99%.

4) Using the random numbers applied to the Kerry-Bush spread in each state (from which in turn we can infer the probability of a Kerry win) I run the state electoral vote simulation 100 times. This gives me a simulated probability of a Kerry win.

Note that I ignore third party candidates, like Nader. I don't believe he will get anywhere near the 2.7% of the vote he got last time. So its just between Kerry and Bush.

Again, your comments are valid. But in the real world of forecast modeling, its best to KISS.

[Jack Rabbit]

5. Thank you. That is helpful

EDITED for spelling

What polls are you considering state-by-state? A very important question (at least for me) is: How accurate are these polls historically?

Also, generating random numbers seems unnecessary. I would think that if candidate X has an 80% chance of carrying a given state over candidate Y, then can't we assume that a random generator giving a decimal fraction between 0 and 1 will produce a number of 0.8 or less 80% of the time? It's been a long time since I took statistics in college, but it seems to me that such an assumption would be based on the central limit theorem. Am I incorrect?

[TruthIsAll]

10. Without the simulation, we would get the same result every time.

Kerry would NEVER lose.

But I like to see what the unlimited combinations of states provided by the simulation can yield in terms of EV.

I want to see Bush win 1 out of a 100 - or less. I neeed a simulator for that.

I use all the latest state polls provide by electoral-vote.com. I cannot vouch for their historic accuracy. But I accept their MoE assumptions.

[Jack Rabbit]

12. Thank you agian

!!

[TruthIsAll]

13. Here is an example of the first 10 scenarios

		ELECTORAL VOTE SIMULATION FORECAST 											

		Latest state polling from:											
		 www.electoral-vote.com                         											

		Kerry wins	98	of 100 Trials									
		with average of	330	electoral votes									

	Last3	Proj.	Kerry										
State	Dem%	Kerry% Pr(win)	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
AL	44.8	45	1.0%										
AK	37.6	40.7	0.1%										
AZ	48.8	47.2	16.4%					10					10
AR	55.2	50.6	55.8%	6	6		6		6		6		6
CA	57.4	57.2	99.0%	55	55	55	55	55	55	55	55	55	55
CO	48.8	49.3	41.4%		9		9	9		9		9	
CT	57.7	62.6	99.0%	7	7	7	7	7	7	7	7	7	7
DE	56.8	57.1	99.0%	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3
DC	90.3	90.4	99.0%	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3
FL	50.7	53.3	88.4%	27	27	27	27		27	27	27		27
GA	47.6	45.9	1.0%										
HI	59.0	60.9	99.0%	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4
ID	35.7	39	0.1%										
IL	57.9	60	99.0%	21	21	21	21	21	21	21	21	21	21
IN	44.8	45.9	1.0%										
IA	51.8	53.6	95.0%	7	7	7	7	7	7	7	7	7	7
KS	42.4	41.6	0.1%										
KY	46.7	45.3	1.0%										
LA	49.2	49	37.5%		9	9		9	9				
ME	57.1	52.3	76.9%	4	4	4	4	4	4		4		
MD	57.8	58.6	99.0%	10	10	10	10	10	10	10	10	10	10
MA	65.3	66.3	99.0%	12	12	12	12	12	12	12	12	12	12
MI	54.7	54.2	97.5%	17	17	17	17	17	17	17		17	17
MN	55.7	53.3	88.4%		10	10	10		10	10		10	10
MS	44.3	36.3	0.1%										
MO	52.5	52.1	75.0%	11	11	11		11	11	11	11	11	11
MT	44.9	42.8	0.1%										
NE	37.5	36.5	0.1%										
NV	49.9	51.4	65.4%	5		5		5	5	5	5	5	5
NH	51.7	56.7	99.0%	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4
NJ	56.5	56.6	99.0%	15	15	15	15	15	15	15	15	15	15
NM	53.0	55.3	99.0%	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5	5
NY	62.6	66.4	99.0%	31	31	31	31	31	31	31	31	31	31
NC	46.6	49.9	48.5%		15		15	15	15	15	15	15	15
ND	40.8	37.2	0.1%										
OH	50.8	51.1	61.5%		20	20	20	20	20		20		
OK	42.8	35.2	0.1%										
OR	53.6	56.2	99.0%	7	7	7	7	7	7	7	7	7	7
PA	54.2	54.1	97.5%	21	21	21	21	21	21	21	21	21	21
RI	65.6	64.2	99.0%	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4
SC	44.4	47.5	20.2%	8					8		8	8	
SD	44.5	44.8	0.1%										
TN	50.5	50.8	57.7%					11		11		11	
TX	44.3	42.6	0.1%										
UT	33.6	29.7	0.1%										
VT	59.4	60.1	99.0%	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3
VA	47.3	48.5	31.7%	13	13					13	13		
WA	55.9	55.1	99.0%	11	11	11	11	11	11	11	11	11	11
WV*	54.0	47.2	16.4%										
WI	52.7	51.3	65.4%		10	10	10		10		10		10
WY	38.3	30.8	0.1%										
	52.6	52.85%		314	374	336	341	334	365	341	342	309	334

[Jack Rabbit]

14. Thanks yet again

What I am most concerned about in your method is that you cannot tell us just how accurate the polling data is. If this poll falls within the margin of error most of the time, then we are looking good. Otherwise, we don't really know how good we are looking.

You may remember my response to Bev Harris a few weeks ago when she was looking for how to show that electronic voting could be less reliable than more primitive methods. I advised her that she look at a given poll's historical accuracy. If a poll usually predicts the actual result within a margin of error, then that is a good baseline; a poll that falls outside the margin of error as often at it falls within it proves nothing.

[lanparty]

15. Them is good odds ...

I think the national popularity number is pretty useless unless it's showing a ten point lead by one candidate or the other. The state by state breakdown is what it's all about. And that breakdown is showing that Kerry is rock solid in core Democratic states. Bush by contrast is down in the battleground states.

I'll repeat my much simpler analysis .

1) Everyone who voted for Gore in 2000 will vote for Kerry in 2004.
2) Many Nader supporters from 2000 will go back to voting Democrat (Kerry) in 2004).
3) Many of the independents and swing voters of 2000 will vote for Kerry.
4) Many fringy John Birch/Libertarian folks will be voting for either Kerry or Nader.
5) Many traditional Republicans will switch to voting for Kerry or Nader.

Basically, Bush's performance hasn't convinced any swing voters. He certainly hasn't one over any Gore voters (besides maybe Ed Koch). All the states that Gore won in 2000 are solidly Democratic. The purple states where Bush won narrow victories are swinging in Kerry's direction. States that have consistently voted Republican are now in play.

Bush is fighting a defensive battle against a tide of unpopularity. Bush is on the defensive. He has no record to run on and his campaign ads show it.

If Kerry and Edwards run a solid campaign, this election should be a landslide. But we can't forget that a more profound battle will be taking at least one wing of Congress so Kerry won't be spitting into the wind for the next two years.

[Gman]

4. I am really starting to think that analysis based on past elections

is pretty much irrelevant, not that I don't appreciate what you're doing, because I do. But I say that because this is really the very first presidential election to be driven so much by the Internet. The Internet was around in '00 and it did play a role in the election, but IMHO, it was really a "version 1.0" use of the Inet. And, for non-geek types, a version 1.0 usually has bugs, isn't thoroughly tested but it does have great potential application. In '96 the Inet was in it's infancy.

But I firmly think that the reason there are only 6 - 8% undecided right now is because of the vast amount of information on the Internet. In fact, only 8 - 10% of the electorate has been undecided for the last 3 months or so which is unprecedented in any past presidential election data. And, these percentages are declining sooner than they ever have.

For example, because of all this, I would be surprised to see either Bush or Kerry get more than a 5 - 8% bump from their conventions. If either candidate has a bump upwards of 10%+ it would mean that the candidate is pulling voters from the other's more moderate/center base rather than gathering undecideds.

So, I attribute all of this to the direct role the Internet is playing in this election because voters are now more educated about issues than ever before and probably (hopefully for our sake) more motivated. One thing not controlled for by my take on all this is what effect Bush's divisiveness has had on all this and/or what effect the still fresh feelings about 2000 have to do with any of this.

One thing is for sure, if Bush is behind by 8 or 10 points by the end of September, for your own safety, stay out of tall buildings, take cabs rather than the train and in general stay safe because Bushco will make something happen. They stole the last election. They had no problem doing it. To me, that means they are capable of literally anything. And I think they will do literally anything to keep the White House including killing innocent Americans, but I digress.

[TruthIsAll]

8. I agree with what you say, except: my analysis is based on

the latest polling numbers, not on historical data.

I only use the past 3 elections state voting totals to calculate an appropriate vote distribution to the total vote for each state, in order to determine the Kerry popular vote percentage.

I adjust each state poll by an "undecided/other" allocation factor of 70%. Of course, this is just an estimate, but I believe it to be a reasonable one. I expect undecided and Nader votes to move sharply to Kerry.

[linazelle]

7. And you do this for fun TIA?

Great info and a display of pure genius. It's just hard to believe that you do this much work on your own--although it's needed. Thing is, it needs to be placed in front of a wider audience. I'm sure if you keep doing what you love, it will pay off one way other other for you and for us. In the meantime, I certainly enjoy it.

[TruthIsAll]

11. Thanks, I appreciate it. If it helps us to see things more clearly

through the fog that the spinmeisters create (especially on FOX), then I have accomplished something.

I feel much more confident in a Kerry victory than I did prior to creating the model.

BTW, my simulated EV numbers are a little more optimistic than those 5 or 6 other sites who predict the election on the Net. You can get the links to them at Democrats.com

tia