Windows Forum

Ask something
Discussion Locked

November 4th Prediction (edited)

0 helpful
62 replies

by maxwell edison

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

Edited because I forgot to count all the states. (Don't ask me how!)

John McCain will defeat Barack Obama by a comfortable margin, and he will become the 44th President of the United States.

The best case scenario for Barack Obama will see him winning the following states:

California (55)
Connecticut (7)
D.C. (3)
Delaware (3)
Hawaii (4)
Illinois (21)
Iowa (7)
Maine (4)
Maryland (10)
Massachusetts (12)
Michigan (17)
Minnesota (10)
New Hampshire (4)*
New Jersey (15)
New Mexico (5)*
New York (31)
Oregon (7)
Pennsylvania (21)*
Rhode Island (4)
Vermont (3)
Virginia (13)*
Washington (11)
Wisconsin (10)

Best Case Scenario: 277 Electoral votes for Obama (and he would win)

* Indicates the states that could go either way.

Worst Case Scenario: 234 Electoral votes for Obama, if all four * go to McCain, (and he would lose).

Personal prediction: Throw New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Virginia into the McCain column:

John McCain: 283
Barack Obama: 255

62 replies

by jdclyde

If things level off (or as stocks did today, improve), it will be the worst thing that can happen for Democrats.

What is bad for the country is good for Obama.

Weather will also be a factor. Many voters that don't feel strongly about their candidate won't bother if it is bad out.

And of course, we haven't even had the first debate yet. There have been many examples of Obama falling to pieces when he has to think on his feet.

The "born living" issue is also starting to haunt Obama as well.

by jdclyde

they flooded the voting sites, PRAYING to find something/anything, but zilch.

Guess those evil Republicans are just to smart for them? :p

by ic-it

Rasmussen
With this change, McCain now leads in states with 200 Electoral College votes while Obama is ahead in states with 193 Electoral College votes. When ?leaners? are included, it?s Obama 259, McCain 247.

Currently, states with 124 Electoral College votes are leaning slightly in one way or the other. Four states with a total of 32 votes -- Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Virginia -- are pure toss-ups.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/election_2008_electoral_college_update

http://www.270towin.com/2008_polls/mccain_obama/

by maxwell edison

I realized I forgot to count a few states. (Don't ask me how I overlooked that!)

My prediction outcome is the same, but a lot closer.

by jmgarvin

I'd be amazed if New Hampshire and New Mexico went McCain.

New Hampshire is just too close to call and with Biden in the race, it will probably swing slightly for Obama.

New Mexico has Richardson, who a New Mexico really respects. Not to mention you have Mayor Marty Chavez in Albuquerque working closely with Richardson on many issues that are effecting that state. So you have two powerhouses that are behind Obama. That will probably swing the voters to the D side.

Virginia is pretty iffy. I'm going to say if it goes McCain it's gonna be by a nose hair. I think Obama has a lot going against him in Virginia, but at the same time if he dumps money into ads he could take it.

I still think it'll be Obama and look like it did in 1980 for Reagan.

I'm not on either side of the coin, but to be honest, McCain and Obama really need to debate and stop the silly mud slinging. I'd like to see where McCain and Obama really stand on Iraq policy and hear them really comment on the economy.

by jdclyde

McCain has been fairly consistent,while Obama has had to change his position a few times. A dart to the left to win the primary, and now a dart to the right to try to get independents. Round and round he goes, where he stops....

by jmgarvin

First it was the 100 years comment, not it's the "planned governmental hand off" crap. With that being said, they're both spinning like tops. I can't f'ing stand it. Obama is really irritating because it's a different spin every friggin' day.

'Course, if it turns out Palin is really a Creationist that really tried to ban books, I'm voting Obama.

by av .

Personally, I think you can't ever count John McCain out and thats the spirit that we need to bring this country back to what it once was.

Now that Wall St. has collapsed, someone should ask Barack Obama how he intends on paying for his universal healthcare program.

I think the Hillary Clinton voters come into play here too. This recent defection from Obama to McCain is part of the new Clinton 2012 campaign after Obama loses, I think.

http://beltwayblips.com/video/wolf_with_lynn_forester_de_rothschild_on_the_dem/

Bill Clinton didn't really dis Sarah Palin on CNN, http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0809/18/sitroom.03.html

I know that the transcript of the show is wordy, but you can find his comments if you search on Palin. It wasn't what I would expect to hear from an Obama supporter.

AV

by jackofalltech

Quote from the site "John McCain has not accepted Stephen's invitation to appear on the show, so he has no choice but to spread horrible lies about him. (03:29)"

He is a TV host who thinks he is a 'comedian'.

by av .

There's plenty of bull flying right now on both sides. Personally, I love Jon Stewart, but he really doesn't affect how I vote. Its more of a humor thing.

AV

by tonythetiger

with those stars :)

I don't think Wisconsin or Michigan are gimmies, and I'd take the star off of Virginia and give it and Hawaii to McCain. Obama may struggle to come up with 200. And the popular vote won't leave any room for doubt... McCain by >10 million

by jdclyde

Detroit and Ann Arbor are going to hand the state over to Obama, easily. VERY liberal, and Ann Arbor is on the short list for most liberal in the country.

It is a waste of time to even campaign here. :(

(even if this was a Hilary state)

by jiminpa

Pittsburgh and Philly elected our governor and the will hand our state over to Obama...

by jdclyde

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/06/the-bogus-sarah-palin-banned-books-list/

As pointed out, many books on the list didn't come out until years after she alledgedly put out the ban list. First Harry Potter was 1998 and the "list" was suppose to be out in 1996.

Every reference I can find talks about it, but funny, no one can find any evidence of it.

If she were as unpopular as some of the stories suggest, how does she have the single highest governor approval rating in the country? (or so we hear, I haven't looked it up. I know she has Michigans gov. beat hands down)

by jdclyde

get their political "news" from Colbert and from "The Daily show".

Rank and file democrats are bored with news and politics, which is why there aren't liberal shows on the radio. There just isn't a market for it. To busy watching American Idol.

by jamesrl

Which I do watch by the way, not alot, but I do find him funny.

The first hint is that it appears on the Comedy network. The second, if you watch an O'Reilly and then a Colbert back to back, you'd realize that it was satire. Of course when Colbert plays a right winger and interviews a left winger and tears into them, and the subject of the interview is stifling a belly laugh, that would give it away for most people.

Be rest assured that if Obama wins, the left will be complaining about the daily show and Colbert as well.

James

by jdclyde

the jokes are then used for talking points around the water cooler by people to dumb to know it was a joke.

Stewart TORN into the DNC at the convention 4 years ago. I loved when Colbert was trying to interview someone while one of the big speeches was going on.... :D

I like political humor that isn't partisan and isn't hateful. If you go after BOTH sides, rock on.

Bill Maher hasn't been entertaining in a very long time..... Hard to be funny when you are so angry all the time.

People that think it is funny to call Bush stupid, wellll "takes one to know one"? :p

by charliespencer

Dude, I've been a proud contributor for a couple of decades, but even I admit NPR is about as liberal as 'Pride Parade' in SF, and it's doing it partly funded by your tax dollars.

by jdclyde

There is not a single commercially viable liberal radio program. They can not survive in the open market because there is not a market for it.

The only way one can survive is to leach government funds to promote a leftist agenda.

The idea of public radio is a great one. The second they take a political leaning, they should be prohibited from wasting a cent of tax payer dollars. (which any honest person has to admit, they have a leftist agenda.)

Yes, they get a lot of money from donations and whathaveyou, but a huge portion comes from the states and federal governments.

by charliespencer

"Morons"

There are always going to be idiots who believe anything ridiculous because they've already decided to believe anything against those they're opposed to. The best response is for those who claim to have any brain cells to get off their sofas and vote.

by netman1958

I predict that if McCain get's ahead and stays ahead in the polls, Biden will bow out for some reason (maybe health issues) and Obama will replace him with Hillary.

by jdclyde

because he has said that Hilary would have been the better choice.

I think Obama hates her more than he wants to win. He knows he could never turn his back on her, and could never trust her.

He might end up having an "accident" if she got that close..... and he knows it.

by thechas

While we can speculate all that we want about assorted scenarios, the decision of the VP candidate boils down to polling results.

Obama both won the primaries and did not select Hilary as his running mate precisely because the poles show that McCain wins with Hilary on either side of the ticket.

The only way this "might" change is if the Democrats can agree on someone else who can raise the same level of buzz that Palin has.

Chas

by charliespencer

But if Hillary is on the ticket, I'd sooner vote for any liberal arts major who's only experience is asking if I want to Super Size.

by nicknielsen

He's not stupid. Ignorant, intolerant, stubborn, uneducated, and lacking in good sense, but not stupid.

Besides, I wouldn't call him stupid; that's an insult to too many people :p

by thechas

Max, I'm not going to question your prediction. I have neither the time nor the desire to do the level of research that you do prior to posting your comments.

That said, at least part of me hopes that your prediction is wrong. Much like in 2000 with 'W', I do not trust John McCain and do not want him to be our next President.

While I cannot cite sources or point to web sites with the details, back in January when McCain was campaigning in the Michigan primary, he lost in part because he was following his straight talk strategy. He told it like it is, and flatly stated that Michigan can forget about the high paying low skill jobs with the auto industry coming back. His words were along the lines of those jobs are gone forever. Now, McCain is touting how he is going to bring back the auto industry. What changed?

Also, much like in 2000, I'm not so sure that I want the Democratic party candidate to win either.

Further, for very personal and selfish reasons, I feel I have no choice but to vote for Obama and hope and pray that the Democrats control the White House for the next 12 years.

Going back to the Nixon administration, my personal economy has taken an ever larger negative hit every time there is a first term Republican President. My income and financial health has always improved dramatically when any Democrat has been President. Including Jimmy Carter!

I just don't know if I can survive the financial hit of another first term Republican President.

Now, I know that none of these financial setbacks were directly caused by the President himself. Still, the incident of coincidence is too strong and repetitive to ignore.

So, I am going to follow what many other Americans do, and vote my pocketbook.

Chas

by thechas

Like it or not, the US is functionally a 2 party system.

Further, the average person in the US likes to be on the side of the winner.

I'm not sure how significant a number there are, but many people choose who to vote for based on who is ahead in the last pole before the election.

The third parties are going at things in the US from the wrong end of the equation. Until a third party starts getting candidates elected to local office, school boards, and then state government offices, they are not going to pull significant numbers of votes for Federal offices.

Unless a third party Presidential candidate were to win by a substantial land-slide, they would not have the political capital to effectively run the government.

Chas

by michael jay

I have experienced the exact opposite effect, when the dems are in power my taxes go up, when the republicans are in power my taxes go down.

Right now my taxes (federal) are lower than they have ever been. State, not so much.

by thechas

My income has always risen significantly when we have had a Democrat as President. Usually so much that it has offset any tax increase.

Near the beginning of each first term for a Republican President, my income has dropped drastically. Often by more than 50%.

I just cannot afford another new Republican President if I want to hold out any hope of retiring before I turn 75.

As far as the tax rate goes, I am of the opinion that deficit spending has a greater negative impact on the US economy and our freedoms than a high Federal tax rate does. Especially now that China is holding large amounts of US debt.

I've said this before and I will say it again. We are not going to get government spending under control until people start asking to have the programs that they benefit from eliminated or cut back. It's easy to ask for cuts to programs that you don't use or see a benefit from. But, each program has a constituency. Until those who benefit from these programs start asking for cuts, change in spending ain't gonna happen.

Our elected officials have learned that they are much more at risk when they cut programs that are popular with their constituents then they are when they raise taxes.

Chas

by leezx10

This is all I want to know, do you really think Sarah Palin is ready to be a Vice President?

I don't think so, McCain threw her in to get votes but supposedly he puts the country first. There was way more qualified candidates out there then Sarah Palin, not that I have any thing against her but come on. McCain could have picked any one else and he picked her to get votes, and I feel like that's not country first at all.

I mean lets be real!!!

by leezx10

Here's the questions like Obama say let me
make myself clear.

1. Did McCain pick Sarah Palin to get votes?

And to add insult to injury she wasn't his
first choice he picked her because the
Republican party needed a boost. Now McCain
slogan is country first.

Question number two
2. Did McCain put the country first by
picking Sarah Palin or is he just trying to
win?

by charliespencer

Of course he picked her to attract votes; that's what all VP nominees have been for for decades.

But what does the VP have to do? Constitutionally, break ties in the Senate. This assumes neither party has enough of a majority to pass legislation without the VP's vote. That's not going to be the case in the next Congress, since the Dems are going to pick up a few more seats. Job requirement: party loyalty, and Palih gets a passing grade.

Effectively, show up at funerals of foreign heads of state. When Bush the First was VP, the motto of Air Force Two was, "You die, we fly." Requirements: not getting plane sick and looking good in a suit. Palin passes again.

Of course, Biden passes these two requirements. Let's remember what John Garner said the vice presidency was worth.

by delbertpgh

She just plain scares me. She runs as a hick from the woods who will use her crafty wiles to set the mess straight. Can she swim the same way in Washington, and lead the free world in the same style? She's also mildly paranoid, turning every issue she sees into something personal. I think her style suits a place like Alaska, places with a rugged frontier myth, lots of insider dealing in government, and a small dispersed population. I don't her administration would play in a big state.

She certainly has a natural gift for framing political problems so that her opposition has to vote with her. That's an unquestionable political talent. She's being swept along by a celebrity-struck base who don't want to doubt her or ask questions. Nobody has been asked to vote on her. If she had been running in the primary, she would have washed out by February, as a hopeless unready oddity.

I figure there's a good chance she will be President in the first two years of McCain's term. He's old and visibly wearing out, and he's had four surgeries for skin cancer so far. I don't want President Palin.

by netman1958

my point was that it really doesn't matter WHY McCain picked Palin. What matters is that I would sleep a lot sounder with Palin in charge than I would with Obama in charge.

But I'll play along and address your questions:
(1) Possibly, as everything ANY politician does is designed to get votes. That's what politicians do!
I hadn't heard the one about Palin being his 2nd choice. Just out of curiosity, who was his first choice?

(2) Both.

by nicknielsen

I've compared resumes. Don't we already have a male version of Palin in office? :p

I'll sleep better knowing I voted responsibly. Powell for President. Write it in.

by thechas

There is a reason that many of the best and brightest leaders from both industry and the military do not run for President.

The President does not have the same level of freedom to make and implement decisions as a CEO or General does.

Very few people question the orders from a CEO or a General. Usually, at least half of the people in the country question decisions made by the President.

Further, a CEO or a General can either replace, transfer, or discipline lower level staff within the organization. The President has very few options for dealing with Congressmen and Senators that question or block his initiatives.

Chas

by netman1958

I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. Too bad he won't run, but that just proves he really is smart. A write in huh? I'll have to give that some thought.

by charliespencer

He's tanned, he's rested, he's ready. Well, maybe not so tanned any more.

I could write in Colin Powell, simply because he's already demonstrated his intelligence by declining to run for the office.

Say, if all those TV pundits are so smart, why aren't any of them running? Say what you will about Steven Colbert, at least he tried to enter the primary here in his home state of SC! :D

by charliespencer

I notice you've given the entire South to McCain, excluding VA. (No, Florida isn't the 'South'.)

Do you really think he can carry the entire region? If the Dems can mobilize the African-American vote, Obama may carry three or four of them. If they can't he may still carry a couple, including NC (15 votes). Even if he only also picks up MS's 6, that's a 21-vote swing.

by charliespencer

and probably won't until after Halloween, but I suspect there are just as many false rumors about Palin as Obama.

by delbertpgh

Among the approximately 80% of this country that is non-Hispanic white, there are still a lot who put the race issue in terms of, "I don't think the country is ready yet for a black president," and won't ever vote for Obama because of that by itself. The doubts of 80% more than wipes out the enthusiastic support of the 10% that is black.

People like to put it terms of "the country is not ready," because to say "I'm not ready" seems racially prejudiced. I guess it's a sign of progress that people feel uncomfortable saying they are guided by race, and that they're just worried about the country instead.

It probably makes people more ready to believe incredible rumors about Obama having a secret Muslim identity. From what I read in polls, about 12% of the people are sure Obama actually is a Muslim, and close to 30% are not sure because they've heard there is conflicting evidence.

Liberals fell in love with Obama because he was black and sounded so intelligent. The Republican base distrusts him for exactly the same reasons. Liberals like a black man who seems so remarkable because his success would be a symbol to history and the world that America could put its race problem definitely in the past. (Actually, it never will be completely past, not until centuries of intermarriage makes us all the same oatmeal color.) In fact, liberals love Obama for his complex identity in just the same way that Republicans love Palin for her simple identity: irrationally, and as a symbol of some greater level of truth.

I don't know how things will shape up. It'll be interesting, to say the least. Max may be completely right, and we'll get as President and Vice President a team who have tried to appear as ordinary as ordinary Americans.

by jamesrl

One of the things I studied in Political Science statistics is content analysis - part of which is measuring the amount of coverage on particular issues, the placement (newspaper front page, opinion page etc), and the content itself.

If you look at it from a content perspective, Palin's appointment has certainly shifted the focus away from Obama's campaign, and taken away significant momentum. This of course could turn around before the vote, but things certainly are not as rosy for the Democrats as they were in July.

I haven't done a state by state analysis, I think Max and others can hash it out.

James

by charliespencer

Is there no viable commercial liberal radio because liberals have been smart enough to get the government to fund it for them? Or is it because liberals are smart enough to develop their own opinions without a radio pundit telling them what to think, and secure enough not to need a faux authority figure to confirm them?

:-)

by charliespencer

According to CBS, the "toss up" states of NH, NM, and VA all went to Obama, not McCain as predicted - 22 votes, or a 44-vote swing.

FL, IN, OR all went for Obama, not McCain as predicted - 45 votes, or a 90-vote swing.

MO and NC are still to close to call - 28 votes, but not enough to change the final outcome.

Oh, that's too bad. We've got a case of Turtle Wax and a lifetime supply of Rice-A-Roni , "the San Francisco treat!" Thanks for playing our game, and we hope you'll return for our 2012 "Tournament of Champions"!

by thechas

Max,

How did your prediction turn out wrong?

I did see your new thread where you point a finger at campaign spending.

In my own estimation, there are 2 major facts that changed the political landscape and resulted in the win for Obama.

1. Your prediction was before the financial melt down and resultant bail-out package. A lot of people want to see some serious new regulations and oversight of the financial industry. And, the voters trust the Democrats to better regulate the markets than they do Republicans.

2. The independent vote went more to Obama than to McCain. A lot of people I talked with over the past few weeks were very concerned about the prospect of a fundamentalist in charge of the country. While Sarah Palin shored up the core Republican vote for McCain, she scared the crap out of independents and Democrats.

My 2 cents for what it is worth.

Chas

by charliespencer

Her nomination may have brought the support of many party members previously displeased with McCain, and of the disappointed "Anyone with estrogen" Hillary supporters, but it smacked of blatant pandering to me. It appeared to be a decision made more for political reasons than policy ones, the kind and degree of decision I had previously not associated with McCain. Her lack of experience also made it difficult for the Republicans to make an issue of Obama's brief time in office.

by maxwell edison

Put yourself right in the middle ? between election cycles. We?ve all seen the slams against legislators/leaders ? of both parties ? because they were [i]politics as usual[/i]. These people go on to say that a [i]normal, every-day person[/i] ought to take the spot. Fast forward to an election cycle. When someone who even slightly resembles a [i]normal, every-day person[/i] enters the arena, he/she is blasted for being inexperienced.

I just don?t get it.

By the way, Harry S Truman was a [i]normal, every-day person[/i]. At the time, he was despised and criticized. In hindsight, he?s admired.

by maxwell edison

I can't really disagree with your estimation. I'm sure it's a combination of all of those things, and then some.

I'm going to wait a few days, let the events sink-in, and maybe start a discussion on how I see the upcoming Obama presidency. One thing is certain, however; regardless of who occupies the White House, I still control my own destiny. I won't fall into the trap of predicting doom and gloom because of who wins an election.

by charliespencer

Losing opponents won't be shot, there won't be a military coup, the transition of power will be reasonably orderly, and in four years we'll take another run at it.

by charliespencer

I'm not much on the "normal every-day person" approach. I think Bush II included the phrase "someone you'd like to have a beer with" in his '00 campaign. I've had beer with a lot of people, but I wouldn't want most of them in a policy-making position.

I understand your confusion, because I feel the same way when people say they don't want "educated elitists" in office. Many of the people saying that are also trying to get their children in college. Do they think the experience won't change the kids? Do they not realize their child will emerge well on the path to being one of those same elitists?

How many of them do you think would jump at the chance to be regarded as being among the elite? You never hear someone say, "I wish we had a Double-A pitcher instead of this elite athlete with the .320 batting average and the 1.2 ERA" or "I'm so glad my auto mechanic doesn't have a bunch of ASE certifications" or "I'd really prefer to eat at McDonald's instead of Ruth's Chris for the same price." Let it come to politics and suddenly it's poisonous to be elite. I'd rather vote for someone with a degree or two than someone who's a good drinking buddy but barely finished high school.

by charliespencer

I wouldn't try to pick the 2012 NASCAR champion, a subject I know far more about than presidential politics. I don't even pick my fantasy team until after qualifying and practice, the equivalent of the primary elections.

I meant only that we would go through another election cycle in four years, with the same peaceful response to the results. I was not implying the winner would (or would not) be a different person.

This discussion is closed to new replies.