I’m projecting Al Gore as the winner.
electoral-vote.com/ now has Kerry up over Bush, 283-246 in the electoral college.
“Let’s take a look at what happened state by state. New polls in Iowa, Michigan and New Mexico reverse Bush’s previous leads and now favor Kerry by 1% in each case, well within the margin of error (about 4% in most cases). New Hampshire, which had been in the Bush column is now tied at 47% each. Finally, New Jersey is now safely back in the Kerry column with an 8% lead. Kerry retains his lead in Florida and Bush retains his lead in Ohio.”
I think it’ll be Bush. But, the sudden, and recent, friendliness of some of the neo-con posters on here makes me wonder what they know…
The Supreme Court won’t refuse to hear the case–that would be unseemly, it being kind of their job to decide things like this. I think they would be inclined to support Kerry this time around, so people won’t accuse them of partisan behavior.
No ideer.
early voting exit polls are good for Kerry:
30% OF VOTERS IN FLORIDA HAVE ALREADY VOTED EXIT POLLS SHOW KERRY LEADING 51% TO 43% (USA TODAY 11/1/04)
EARLY VOTERS IN IOWA CHOOSE KERRY 52% TO 41%
DesMoines Register poll of early voters released today. Kerry has taken the lead overal lead 48% to 45%. 27% in Iowa have already voted.
[quote=“Tigerman”]
Which part of what I wrote above is superstitious?[/quote]
It isn’t superstitious to rely on the outcome of a game as an indicator of an election?
If Bush wins, it’ll be all my fault for not registering. I will hold myself personally responsible for him getting into office. I just hope my lack of action doesn’t hinder Kerry from getting the presidency. I don’t think I could handle bearing guilt for giving Bush four more years to finish ruining the world.
Don’t blame yourself. I am sure that the pro-Bush crowd is not certain what they are voting for in Bush. How they can think this man is the one to lead the USA after watching his many mistakes these past four years?
Your lack of a vote cannot equal their blind adherence to Bush, a man who has been personally responsible for the death of many people.
If Bush gets put back into office, you are not the one responsible for that human error. However, the many fools who support this idiot have a lot to answer for in the next four years because Bush is going to keep sending troops to their deaths in Iraq, and, I am sure, other places as well.
Still, I believe that the American people have had enough of this clown and will decide that he is not worthy to continue holding the job he has so famously screwed up since he has been in office.
ImaniOU, I wish the USA and the world the best of luck. We sure do need it.
Don’t worry, Imani, I’m sure the Democrats will vote for you. You’ve probably been registered multiple times already and don’t even know it.
Of course, the Democrats have to cheat to win. 
Just like in the last election the Demo, er, oh sorry, that was the Republicans who got their man into office through less than honest means.
His estimate of the popular vote:[ul]Kerry: 50.3%
Bush: 47.7%
Nader/other: 2.0%[/ul]
[quote=“EEzzee!”]it moved away, then closed up again…and Kerry seems to have momentum with 6 days to go:
-see zogby/rasmussen/washington post numbers here:
nowchannel.com/tracking/
and this:
[/quote]
ok, i just gotta say this graph is completely bonkers. how can you go from 85% for a bush win to 25%, back up to 68%, down to almost 0%, and now almost back to 50%? and all within a month! seems it’s easier and more accurate to just go and say “it’s a close race”.
[quote=“Flicka”][quote=“Tigerman”]
Which part of what I wrote above is superstitious?[/quote]
It isn’t superstitious to rely on the outcome of a game as an indicator of an election?[/quote]
I’m not relying on the outcome of the game as an indicator. It is a fact, however, that the Redskins’ games have indicated correctly the election results for over 60 years.
Pointing out that fact doesn’t make one superstitious, especially when I predicted that the election outcome will differ from the game result indication.
[quote=“Richardm”]Goofus votes for Bush
The Weekly Reader has correctly predicted the winner 11 out of 12 times since 1956. That balances out the Redskin thing.
(I’m sure Gallant voted for Kerry.)[/quote]
Wow, I guess the goat story and the Commander in Chief flight suit action figure were more helpful than many of us realized.
[quote=“flike”]
His estimate of the popular vote:[ul]Kerry: 50.3%
Bush: 47.7%
Nader/other: 2.0%[/ul]
[/quote]
well, duh. if you take all the polls and then give kerry an extra 3-4% across the broad then he wins big. do you really need a phd to see that?
Bush to win - based on nothing but guesswork and intuition. But I figure I have a 50-50 chance of being right I don’t really care for either of them, not that it matters.
Up to date polll result, if ya like polls, at Real Clear Politics.com.
It looks close. I predict, for what thats worth - Florida, Ohio and very possiblr California for Bush.
I also predict a party on my lane in Tainan tommorrow.
Me and 3 amahs sipping Mint Julieps, Kentucky bourbon of course, and chanting "Go Busxi! Go Busxi!!
Well as long as we all remember on election day that we are all Americans first and then Democrats or Republicans second, that is the main thing.
We will have plenty of chances to fight over the next few years.
[quote=“Tigerman”]
I’m not relying on the outcome of the game as an indicator. It is a fact, however, that the Redskins’ games have indicated correctly the election results for over 60 years.
Pointing out that fact doesn’t make one superstitious, especially when I predicted that the election outcome will differ from the game result indication.[/quote]
I was just making an interesting point–in that Westerners tend to point fingers at the locals for being superstitious yet here we are looking at the outcome of a game as an indicator of an election. This was not a personal attack on you.