Reply #28: From the analysis... [View All]

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

You have to scroll down through the Overview and click through...

"Here's the math:

"In analyzing Zogby's results we begin by assuming that the District of Columbia and the 34 states that aren't in the battleground poll will vote for the same political party this November as they did in the 2000 election. Therefore, Mr. Bush begins with 189 electoral votes and Mr. Kerry with 172. A candidate needs 270 votes to win.

"Next, we add in the electoral votes from the latest poll, regardless of the margin or error or the spread between the candidates. Mr. Kerry's nine states have 92 electoral votes, while Mr. Bush's seven control 85. Adding up the votes from battleground and nonbattleground states, Mr. Bush would win by a slim 274-264."

Now here's the analysis from October 6:

"If the results on Election Day matched Zobgy's numbers, Mr. Kerry would win. Here's how:

"To analyze Zogby's results, we begin by assuming that the District of Columbia and the 34 states that aren't in the battleground poll will vote for the same political party this November as they did in the 2000 election. Thus, Mr. Bush starts with 189 electoral votes and Mr. Kerry with 172. A candidate needs 270 electoral votes to win.

"To those numbers, we add the electoral votes from the latest poll, regardless of the margins of error or the spread between the candidates. Mr. Kerry's 13 states have 150 electoral votes, while Mr. Bush's three have 27 votes. The bottom line: Mr. Kerry would have 322 electoral votes and the president would have 216."

Got it? Based on the data they're reporting today, Bush wins. We're left with hoping that there's enough wiggle room in the "Margin of Error" for us to steal one state away. Today's numbers are demonstrably worse than they were two weeks ago. And I'll say it again, doing better in a state where you were already winning doesn't earn you and style points, much less electoral votes.