An incumbent who can’t break 50 percent is in trouble, even if he’s ahead.

[swag]

The Big Five-Oh

An incumbent who can’t break 50 percent is in trouble, even if he’s ahead. Not that we’re referring to anyone in particular.
By Guy Molyneux

Web Exclusive: 10.01.04

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=8694

. . .

Think of it this way: The percentage that Bush receives in polls represents his ceiling of support; he may get a little less, but won’t get more. In contrast, Kerry’s percentage represents his floor, and he will almost certainly do better on election day. Assuming that Ralph Nader and other minor candidates will receive about 2 percent -- which is what current surveys suggest -- 49 percent becomes the critical line of demarcation in this election. If Bush can get to 50 percent or above in the polls, he should be able to win. At 49 percent -- where he is today -- we’re probably looking at another photo finish, lots of recounts, and narrow state-by-state victories dictating the Electoral College outcome. And below 49 percent, Bush is almost certain to lose.

You may also have heard that Bush is surging ahead in the crucial “battleground states” that will determine the Electoral College outcome. However, polls in these states actually reveal an even more precarious position for the president. Taken together, Bush receives a bit less support in these critical states than in the nation overall. In the latest NBC/WSJ poll, Bush receives 49 percent support nationally but only 47 percent in the battleground states, a typical finding. (Bush and Al Gore split the vote in these states evenly, 48 percent to 48 percent.)

More importantly, if we take an average of recent published polls of registered voters in individual states, Bush falls short of the 49-percent benchmark in nearly every one, including Ohio (47 percent), Florida (47 percent), and Pennsylvania (46 percent). Wisconsin (51 percent) is the only crucial battleground state in which Bush appears to have a fairly solid lead. Bush even fails to clear the 49-percent bar in such 2000 Bush states as West Virginia (47 percent), Missouri (49 percent), and Arkansas (48 percent). This year, it is quite possible that it will be Bush who ends up wishing we had scrapped the Electoral College in favor of a straight popular vote.

. . .

see also Ruy Teixeira's commentary on this at

http://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/index.php

[chaumont58]

1. I'm cautiously optomistic about this election

This is my opinion, no links to back it up, but...
Bush lost the 2000 popular vote. If not for help from Darth Nader, he wouldn't have been in a position for SCOTUS to select him. I can't imagine any Dems who voted for Al Gore voting for Bush this time around. I can imagine some who voted for Bush or Nader in 2000 voting for John Kerry this time. Bush was pretty much an empty slate in 2000. He could run as a compassionate conservate and fool a lot of people. This time around he doesn't fool anyone. He has NOTHING to call an accomplishment to show for his four years in office. On the other hand, Dems can point to 1000 plus dead American service personnel who'll never answer another revellie. If Bush wasn't such a son of a bith, that would haunt him to his grave, but it won't. Chimpie don't do windows, or sorrow.
I don't pay too much attention to the beltway whores. I think their influence is vastly overated. They are legends in their own minds.
God lord willing and the creek don't rise, our long national nightmare will end on January 20, 2005.