For Kerry to have a 99.99% win probability, he needs...

[TruthIsAll]

to add a little more than 1% to his current poll spread vs. Bush and
his projected national vote to rise to approximately 52.87%.

The model currently projects Kerry at 51.52%, assuming he gets 60% of the undecided voters.

Kerry can get to 52.87% by winning 86% of the undecideds. He will then have an expected EV total of 337.

Think he can do it?

http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/

[dave502d]

Sounds good

[salinen]

1. Watch for the Greens

to breakout.

[joanne]

2. What about all the newly registered voters?

Kerry will take the overwhelming majority of these, I am sure.

[Zinfandel]

18. And what makes anyone think these votes are going to be counted?

VOLUNTEER! At any voting place to oversee, and speak out, on the spot if you see fraud.

We can't let them get away with this...the polls are BULLSHIT, just there to say Bush is close so no one will question it when they steal the election again...They are going to just wipe us off the map and say sourgrades again by the democrats and people WILL accept this from their corporate media.

Shit, these same polls had Bush up by as much as ten points on election eve 2000 and Gore Won!!!!

The polls are Rove controlled BULLSHIT!!!

[KansDem]

16. True...

Just this morning my wife informed me that of at least four Greens she knows of where she works, three are voting for Kerry. Last election, all four voted for Nader.

[ClevelandSportsCurse]

3. He also needs Green Bay to beat Washington on Oct. 31

How the Redskins do in their last home game before a presidential election has been a 100% accurate predictor of who takes the White House.

[barbaraann]

4. Yes.

Things are looking good. ;-)

[bush equals idiot]

5. What are your feelings about

what the four million overseas ballots are going to add for Kerry? There has been a record numbers of non military overseas voters requesting ballots. Expected to be huge toward Kerry.

The Pentagon even shut down their registering website to try to stop it. Now they are trying to drag their feet in getting the ballots out to prevent them from being returned on time. The Kerry legal beagles are on this case already.

Have you factored these into your model?

[Polemonium]

15. My 2 cents

I don't think you can even imagine modeling such an unknown. Historically overseas votes have broken 2 to 1 for the rethugs. This year that certainly won't be the case, but it's damn near impossible to quantify. In Australia we registered (conservatively 4500 voters), and I'm sure many more than that figured out registration on their own (there are an estimated 100,000 Americans here). But there is no census on overseas voters (can't even get it to the nearest million 3 to 7 million are the estimates I've heard). Further, there is obviously no polling overseas. So modeling such a thing would be all smoke and mirrors.

It is, however, likely that most overseas voters excluding the military, the upper class business types, and perhaps some of the old conservative retirees living south of the border,,, aside from those folks it would be hard to imagine much support for *. As you stay overseas as an Expat you begin to adopt some of the culture. Being exposed to much better news (even here in Murdock's birth place) most people can't help to be against *'s policies. So if Expats living overseas follow their host countrymen then 60+ percent goes to Kerry. Of the 4500 voters we registered 90% of them were against *, they just couldn't help sharing that when registering. (not to imply that 90% of the Expat vote will go to Kerry, as overseas conservatives tend to stay more networked with other Americans and get voting assistance from the military, consulates, business, etc.) Long story short -- the anecdotal evidence looks good world wide, but no way anyone should try to add such an unknown to any modeling attempt.

[Awsi Dooger]

6. I think you're very accurate on that

I looked at my numbers today and tinkered with them up and down via Excel. I came up with Kerry needing to pick up an additional 1.5% net to be a near cinch.

I adjust state polls slightly based on previous years and whether the state polls tend to err toward Democrats or Republicans, even after undecideds-toward-the-challenger have been factored in. This year some of the states in play show a slight tendency to be too kind to Democrats in poll average. That probably accounts for the .5% difference.

[TruthIsAll]

7. Awsie, it's good that you confirm my numbers. We diff by .15%=1.50%-1.35%

TIA

[ArkDem]

8. Who was the last Democrat to get at least 51% of the

popular vote?

[TruthIsAll]

9. Clinton, in both elections, got over 53% of the 2-party vote.

Take out the 3rd party candidates.

The calculations:

Clinton/(Clinton+Bush)= 43/(43+38)= 53%

Clinton/(Clinton+Dole) = 49/(49+41)=54%

[ArkDem]

10. Of the popular vote. Clinton never got to 50%.

Lyndon Johnson was the last in 1964. After that Carter in 1976 got 50.1% of the popular vote.
Your taking out the 3rd party voters is meaningless. Not to mention that it doesn't answer the question.

[TruthIsAll]

17. It answers the question you should have asked. The votspread is

The voting spread is all that matters, isn't it?

The 2-party vote is what you need to analyze Dem vs. Rep. performance.

Clinton won handily both times - by substantial margins.
And the 2-party vote shows it.

[geek tragedy]

11. Jimmy Carter. The last candidate to get 50% was Poppy Bush. eom

[ArkDem]

12. carter got 50.1% in 1976 less in 1980.

[Teaser]

13. 86% is too high to hope for.

We should work for that number, but I don't want to believe in it.
I'm conservative...I think U's will break 60-40 for Kerry.

[Chili]

14. TIA, I just wanted to thank you...

...for all the hard work you've done this year. Whenever one of those distressing polls came out that had everybody tearing their hair out, you'd post a "never fear" thread that always made me feel better!