Featherman's Fearless Forecast - Aug 1 edition

[featherman]

(expanded and edited version of previous thread for your amusement, edification, and criticism)

With a tip of the hat to Truth is All's poll analysis, my approach is past actual vote with historical and demographic trends supported by (or adjusted to) current multiple state census and polling data analysis. According to this model, 1992 was a kind of watershed election for party identification and that the parties split into culturally distinct geographic regions of power.

The DEM strongholds are the Pacific States (HI, CA, OR, WA), the Upper Midwest (IL, MI, WI, MN, IA), and the Northeast/Mid Atlantic (DC, MD, WV, PA, DE, NJ, NY, CT, RI, MA, NH, VT, ME). This three region coalition of 22 states (inc DC) was a winning 270 EV’s in 2000 but represents a smaller 264 EV's this year It needs 6 more EV’s in 2004 for a majority. All of these states have voted DEM for the past three elections (with the fatal exception of WV and NH in 2000). Bush leads in none at this point this year although some are close.

Opposed is the GOP base: AK, ID, UT, MT, WY, ND, SD, NE, KA, OK, TX, MS, AL, GA, SC, NC, VA, IN. Essentially much of the Confederacy, the Plains, and the Mountain States: 18 states with 151 EV's.

Up for grabs and depending on effort and money are the Swing States which are basically the group of states that have voted DEM 1-3 times in the past three elections. Most share a common border with both a GOP and DEM base state and some are trending DEM and some GOP: Southwest Swing (NV, CO, AZ, NM) Midwest Swing (MO, OH, KY) and Southern Swing (TN, AR, LA, FL). 11 states with 112 votes. (There are some anomalies like MT and GA that voted DEM in 1992 but are not included since they seem solidly GOP now).

Bush's big problem, then, is that I doubt he can make much headway with the core DEM 22 against a credible, competitive, well funded candidate and with a weakened Nader candidacy. In the end, it is my opinion that all 22 will vote DEM, some more closely than others, for 264 EVs.

Caveats:
This model requires level playing field (matched spending and effort, no Kerry scandal, no effective October surprise or martial law, etc).
I attribute most of the closeness on the 2000 vote in OR, IA, MN, WI, PA and the loss of WV and NH to a combination of above average Nader strength in all those states and a somewhat depressed DEM turnout (Clinton scandal, media-caricatured Gore, apparently harmless "compassionate conservative" Bush, shrinking Gore campaign finances, unopposed NRA effort, local issues, etc)

My call at this early date (assuming the level playing field):
Kerry gets his 22 “base” for 264 plus NV, AZ, NM, MO, OH, FL = 342
Bush gets his 18 “base” for 151 plus CO, AR, LA, TN, KY = 196

Popular Vote: Kerry 51%, Bush 46%, Nader, Libertarian, & other 3%

[GainesT1958]

1. North Carolina is now a "swing state"...

According to the most accurate of pools for the state, the Mason-Dixon poll. Add its 15 electoral votes to the bunch!:D

B-)

[featherman]

2. I agree that Kerry is likely in an even stronger position

than this model offers. Given sufficient resources, confidence, and hard work the Kerry campaign should be able make a credible play for these GOP states: NC, VA as well as these "lean GOP" tossup states: CO, KY, TN, AR, LA. But I didn't want the model to look TOO rosily optimistic.

[never cry wolf]

3. I like the way you think!

And...I pray you are correct.

Welcome to DU, featherman!

:hi:

[Redneck Socialist]

4. I'll play

Kerry base: CA, CT, DC, DE, HI, IL, MA, MD, NJ, NY, RI, and VT
Bush base: AK, AL, GA, ID, IND, KS, KY, MS, MT, ND, NE, OK, SC, TX, UT, WY

Kerry swing: AR, FL, IA, ME, MI, MN, NH, NM, OR, PA, WA, WI
Bush swing: AZ, CO, LA, MO, NC, NV, OH, TN, VA, WV

Kerry EV total: 297
Bush EV total: 241

OH, PA and FL are the key states. We need two out of three to win.

I'm a little more pessimistic then you are. I think it is going to be very close in most of the swing states.

[featherman]

7. Agree about the two out of three fomula: PA, OH, FL

I am confident about PA so if Bush loses either OH or FL he cannot win barring earthshaking changes elsewhere. However Kerry can still win with my model while losing both FL and OH (unlikely)

From a historical standpoint I can see no reason for OR, WA, IA, MN, WI, or MI to vote anyway but DEM this cycle, however close it may be. All six have voted DEM for the last FOUR elections (inc Dukakis in '88). Bush would have to be WILDLY popular (ha, ha) to be the FIRST Bush to win in these states.

I like NH, NV, WV to return to the DEM fold over local and cultural issues.
FL, AZ, CO are trending DEM demographically IMO.

[Redneck Socialist]

8. I pretty much agree

I am reasonably confident that OR etc will go for Kerry, but it won't be by an overwhelming margin. NV, WV, AZ and Co are going to be tough for Kerry. Look for bush to go hard and heavy on god, guns and gays in those states.

On the plus side based on the themes that I saw outlined at the convention the Kerry campaign is not going to cede rural voters and culturally conservative voters. I believe that those folks are "getable" and it seem the Kerry campaign is thinking the same.

[whistle]

5. Assuming the model is correct and BushCo realizes this...

...is the likely situation moving beyond the RNC, what is the likelihood of any of the caveats being superseded?

1. Bush out spends Kerry by a material amount and by how much to change voter sentiment?

2. A perceived Kerry scandal whether real or contrived and what could that possibly involve to change voter sentiment?

3. A October surprise which would give rise to a declaration of martial law and a significantly delayed or permanently postponed election that would ensure Bush remains in office for another term?

My feelings are that Bush has a spending war-chest of $125 million to Kerry's $75 million or about $50 million that can be used from now until the conclusion of RNC the end of August, then they are pretty much equal on what each has to spend through election day. $50 million buys a lot of air time, but the voter may be immune to blatant negative ads, so unless it is spent on what Bush can do about the issues, its pretty much wasted effort. So, I give 2 points maximum for Bush, but those could be regained by Kerry in the debates.

The only conceivable scandal that could be made an issue BushCo is already attempting to exploit and that's the attacks on Kerry's Vietnam War record and metals, but that too has been pretty much debunked as petty and can't compare to Bush's irresponsibility as to his record with the national guard. So, Kerry is pretty much immune to further attacks there, except Bush propaganda could sway some undecideds by seeding doubt as to Kerry's ability as commander in chief to remain steadfast for the good of the country. I call this a draw and neither side gains or loses an advantage from their behaviors as younger men.

That leaves the October surprise and Bush's call for martial law to stop the election and keep himself in office for 4 more years. Because we can't possibly know what such a plan involves (else it would not be a surprise), I know that I can not comment on what such an event would entail and therefore the likelihood that such an event would happen. The fact that so many people believe that Bush is very capable of doing such a thing, tells me that continuous vigilance of events leading up to the election is necessary to set alarms that something like this is inevitable and a plan by lawmakers to prevent it is needed.

I personally believe that if Kerry/Edwards i are going to be defeated, it will be where it happened before, in the voting process, as this is where the most obvious abuses have already begun, voter disqualifications by list purges and voting machine tampering as we clearly know that the system is now totally corruptible without a trace. Polls or no polls, Bush could be shown to win and no one could challenge the result.

[davhill]

6. I Expect a Lot More "Anomalies"

Like MT and GA this year. The Bush "base" is evaporating fast.

[tcfrogs]

9. Cool & good work, Featherman

I like this site for latest polls, FYI.

If you've seen it, please forgive.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/