redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 149
   
Posts: 4229/7530
EXP: 41236130
For next: 99105
Since: 24.7.02
Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 4 hours
|  #1 Posted on 15.10.04 1405.12
Reposted on: 15.10.11 1406.44 | Two weeks out from the election, time to go out a limb and make picks.
President: I can easily see Kerry rolling up large margins of victory in urban areas and winning the popular vote. However, that is meaningless. Bush swings a few states he lost close to Gore in '00 and wins the electoral college 312-226. Love him or hate him, Richard Nixon was a brilliant political mind and his electoral philosophy (sacrafice the urban areas to the Democrats and rely on carrying the South and the non-urban Midwest) carries the day again.
Senate: Republicans will have a theoretical 52-48 hold on the Senate. Theoretical because I can see 1 or 2 Republicans jumping ship between '04 and the '06 election. However, Tom Daschle goes down in a bitterly fought and contested (before and after the election) race 50.4-49.6, as Bush's coattails are just long enough to knock out the former Majority Leader.
House of Representatives: Until the next 'Throw the Bums Out' movement, the House will stay Republican, as people like the thief they know more than the thief they don't know. Republicans control 222-212-1.
Under Tip O'Neill's 1984 pronouncement that Reagan carrying 49 states wasn't a mandate because he didn't win the House, that means Bush will have a 2nd term mandate by being re-elected with control of both the House and Senate. | Promote this thread! |             | Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 122
Posts: 4128/4700
EXP: 20367764
For next: 270308
Since: 11.7.02
From: MD
Since last post: 778 days
Last activity: 575 days
| #2 Posted on 15.10.04 1423.54
Reposted on: 15.10.11 1424.10 | Bush 303, Kerry 235. The popular vote? Who cares?
Senate: Daschle may actually survive, and there are other seats in trouble. Republicans wind up 53-47.
House: Republicans retain, pick up a few toss up seats that are vacant. | spf
Scrapple
Level: 130
Posts: 2990/5354
EXP: 25344002
For next: 386644
Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada
Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 9 hours
| AIM: |  |
| | |
| #3 Posted on 15.10.04 1424.23
Reposted on: 15.10.11 1428.36 | I'm seeing a reversal of last election. The major urban states are not nearly as big a margin for the Dems as usual (IL for instance is looking to go Kerry by 6-7 instead of 20 for Gore last time). Considering Bush will roll over Kerry in most of his states, I wouldn't be surprised to see Bush win the popular vote. However, I am seeing most of the swing states breaking at the end narrowly for Kerry, as he takes PA, OH, MN, NJ, NV which is enough to nudge him over the top with around 285 electoral votes.
House stays GOP for the reasons RSN said.
I think the Senate stays very closely GOP, possibly even breaking to 50-50. | Big Bad
Scrapple
Level: 141
Posts: 3358/6510
EXP: 33975615
For next: 144483
Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario
Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 15 min.
|  #4 Posted on 15.10.04 1443.25
Reposted on: 15.10.11 1443.50 | | I actually think the Senate is tight enough that it might end up being decided by the presidential race. If Kerry loses, that means he's still a senator (Edwards is giving up his seat regardless of the election's outcome). If Kerry wins the presidency but has to resign his seat, that might swing things back the Republicans way if they can somehow find a way to win a Senate seat in Massachusetts. | Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 122
Posts: 4130/4700
EXP: 20367764
For next: 270308
Since: 11.7.02
From: MD
Since last post: 778 days
Last activity: 575 days
| #5 Posted on 15.10.04 1450.02
Reposted on: 15.10.11 1450.16 | Originally posted by Big Bad
If Kerry wins the presidency but has to resign his seat, that might swing things back the Republicans way if they can somehow find a way to win a Senate seat in Massachusetts.
Mass. had been working on a state law change that would have forced a special election as opposed to an appointment, so I don't think that is an issue any longer. | OMEGA
Lap cheong
Level: 80
Posts: 1219/1747
EXP: 4628756
For next: 154233
Since: 18.6.02
From: North Cacalacky
Since last post: 1450 days
Last activity: 1418 days
| #6 Posted on 15.10.04 1455.13
Reposted on: 15.10.11 1457.42 | My prediction: Bush- 278 Kerry- 260
Bold prediction: Bush wins Florida, while Kerry win Ohio and Pennsylvania. However, Bush ends up winning New Jersey to take the election. | Gugs
Bierwurst
Level: 82
Posts: 1233/1857
EXP: 5059908
For next: 149341
Since: 9.7.02
From: Sleep (That's where I'm a viking)
Since last post: 26 days
Last activity: 1 day
| AIM: |  |
| | | Y!: |  |
|
| #7 Posted on 15.10.04 2215.58
Reposted on: 15.10.11 2220.23 | President: Kerry 280, Bush 258.
Senate: 50-49-1 Republican.
House: 223-211-1 Republican. | The Thrill
Banger
Level: 97
Posts: 1406/2760
EXP: 9264098
For next: 53260
Since: 16.4.02
From: Green Bay, WI
Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 1 day
| #8 Posted on 16.10.04 1315.43
Reposted on: 16.10.11 1316.53 | Nationally, this thing's so close, I have no f'n clue how it's gonna go.
However, here in Wisconsin, I'm gonna predict Bush wins, based solely on my scientific observation of seeing more Bush than Kerry lawn signs. :-) (Although the Kerry campaign has increased their Green Bay signage as of late...)
The Badger State is one helluva battleground. Both Bush and Kerry visited here Friday night. Click here for the WBAY.com (my employer) front page and see video of their visits to the Sheboygan/Oshkosh/Appleton areas. | MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 86
Posts: 1731/2079
EXP: 6129607
For next: 12524
Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY
Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 1 day
| #9 Posted on 16.10.04 1326.21
Reposted on: 16.10.11 1329.01 | I'm going to (regretably) say that due to some late Bush attacks and dirty tricks, Kerry does not manage to close the deal on terrorism with swing voters, and Bush wins 53 - 46 - 1, with about 320 electoral votes.
However, I'm also calling the Senate 50-49-1 for the Dems (biggest upset - Crazy Jim Bunning gets knocked off in Kentucky), and pick up two house seats to boot. Bush proceeds to have a disaterous second term, lose the House in 2006, and have the Dems COngress make his life miserable for the next two years. This leads to a reformer/outsider/good government McCain type being elected President decisively in 2008. Think a kind of 1972 repeat.
By the way, I've been saying "Bush wins handily, has horrible second term" consitently since "who's going to win in 2004" was a question. | A Fan
Liverwurst
Level: 67
Posts: 851/1164
EXP: 2568875
For next: 24011
Since: 3.1.02
Since last post: 3066 days
Last activity: 3066 days
| #10 Posted on 16.10.04 1353.38
Reposted on: 16.10.11 1357.33 | I see this way, Bush wins Florida another round of craziness, yet Ohio is too close to call before midnight. Ohio will decide the election even though Pennsylvania and New Jersey go Kerry. I think it will be Kerry, but I still say something crazy will happen that will taint the winner.
I think the Senate is going to the Dems, I just have a feeling that Bush doesn't have enough coattails and you never know how things are going in other states. It will kinda balance out the power. House will never go back to the Democrates unless there is another Watergate in the White House.
I will just hedge my bet and say Kerry wins, because the popular vote really doesn't matter and Zogby/Electoral vote both conscende that Kerry needs one swing state to win regardless of Florida. | OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst
Level: 101
Posts: 2241/3014
EXP: 10555847
For next: 161865
Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Since last post: 22 days
Last activity: 4 days
| AIM: |  |
| | |
| #11 Posted on 17.10.04 1145.11
Reposted on: 17.10.11 1145.29 | | Extremely close - and I don't think they'll be able to sucessfully call it by midnight - but when the smoke clears, Bush wins (or "wins") Florida again, takes Iowa and pulls the upset in New Hampshire, but Kerry takes Pennsylvania, Nevada and Ohio to push him slightly - slighty - over the edge, 273-265. | BigSteve
Pepperoni
Level: 63
Posts: 134/1091
EXP: 2055070
For next: 42093
Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD
Since last post: 2350 days
Last activity: 2078 days
| #12 Posted on 17.10.04 1322.06
Reposted on: 17.10.11 1324.36 | | The Baltimore Sun has an article about the electoral votes today. Of course it's not gospel, but they have Kerry up 175 to 159, with each man having an additional 63 electoral votes leaning their way, for a 238-222 Kerry lead. Then there are 76 more undecided votes out there -- Nevada, New Mexico, Iowa, Wisconsin, Florida, and Ohio. I think Bush wins four of the six (OH, FL, IA, and WI) and takes the whole ball of wax. Then again, maybe that's just what I hope :-) | Big Bad
Scrapple
Level: 141
Posts: 3365/6510
EXP: 33975615
For next: 144483
Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario
Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 15 min.
| #13 Posted on 17.10.04 2013.38
Reposted on: 17.10.11 2014.08 | Originally posted by MoeGates
However, I'm also calling the Senate 50-49-1 for the Dems (biggest upset - Crazy Jim Bunning gets knocked off in Kentucky), and pick up two house seats to boot. Bush proceeds to have a disaterous second term, lose the House in 2006, and have the Dems COngress make his life miserable for the next two years. This leads to a reformer/outsider/good government McCain type being elected President decisively in 2008. Think a kind of 1972 repeat.
I think you mean 1976, when Jimmy Carter won.
The Jim Bunning campaign is an interesting subplot to the Senate race. electoral-vote.com is supposing that Bunning might be showing symptoms of early-onset Alzheimer's, and his weird avoidance to debate is turning off voters even in conservative Kentucky.
I hope you're wrong about Bush being re-elected, but look on the bright side....by 2008, we'll have a definitive answer to the "worst president ever" debate and ol' Warren Harding will be off the hook. ;) | BigSteve
Pepperoni
Level: 63
Posts: 137/1091
EXP: 2055070
For next: 42093
Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD
Since last post: 2350 days
Last activity: 2078 days
| #14 Posted on 17.10.04 2113.17
Reposted on: 17.10.11 2113.32 | "I hope you're wrong about Bush being re-elected, but look on the bright side....by 2008, we'll have a definitive answer to the "worst president ever" debate and ol' Warren Harding will be off the hook. ;)"
They're reevaluating Herbert Hoover's tenure in 2008? Really, worst president EVER? I don't think so.
(edited by BigSteve on 17.10.04 2213) | Freeway
Scrapple
Level: 108
Posts: 2359/3496
EXP: 13370876
For next: 149667
Since: 3.1.02
From: Calgary
Since last post: 245 days
Last activity: 14 days
| AIM: |  |
| | |
| #15 Posted on 17.10.04 2120.05
Reposted on: 17.10.11 2120.21 | CRUNCH TIME!
Kerry LOSES popular vote, but somehow wins the electoral college, shocking the world in an amazing bit of irony. | bash91
Merguez
Level: 54
Posts: 286/711
EXP: 1226554
For next: 7323
Since: 2.1.02
From: Plain Dealing, LA
Since last post: 307 days
Last activity: 8 hours
| #16 Posted on 17.10.04 2123.24
Reposted on: 17.10.11 2124.39 | Originally posted by Big Bad
I hope you're wrong about Bush being re-elected, but look on the bright side....by 2008, we'll have a definitive answer to the "worst president ever" debate and ol' Warren Harding will be off the hook. ;)
Harding was never on the hook. The all-time worst can only be the man who started his presidential campaign less than a mile from the house in which I grew up, the man who was too stupid to put on his hat in the cold and rain of his inauguration, the man whose biggest claim to fame prior to his campaign was attempting, and failing, to massacre a relatively peaceful village of Native Americans, the man whose name adorned my high school; William Henry Harrison.
Tim | Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 122
Posts: 4140/4700
EXP: 20367764
For next: 270308
Since: 11.7.02
From: MD
Since last post: 778 days
Last activity: 575 days
| #17 Posted on 18.10.04 0813.50
Reposted on: 18.10.11 0814.10 | | You can't throw Harison under the bus. I mean, he was President for a month... | AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 104
Posts: 939/3183
EXP: 11581713
For next: 280452
Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY
Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 19 hours
| AIM: |  |
| | | Y!: |  |
|
| #18 Posted on 18.10.04 0918.50
Reposted on: 18.10.11 0919.23 | with regard to predictions, I have a lot of trouble.
Obviously, it's a sharply divided electorate and we're a country at war.
During wars in the past of any kind, I wondered how many times we have changed presidents when the possibilty was offered of keeping the current president or switching to a new one.
So, short of minor battles, let's call the wars these
War of 1812
Mexican american
Civil
Spanish American
WW1
WW2
Korean
Vietnam
Desert Storm
Iraqi
Obviously, some other stuff cound be in there (Indian wars, Grenada, etc)
War of 1812 - lasted from June 12, 1812 to Early 1815 - actual battles (Battle of New Orleans, for example) happened after the treaty was signed unding the war in December) - Madison was renominated after the start of the war and ran againt Dewitt Clinton of NY. He won with 128 to 89 electoral votes. Basically, Clinton took New England and Madison got the rest of the country. I thought this was an interesting line from Historycentral.com
"Dewitt Clinton of New York was selected to by the Federalist. He hoped to defeat Madison by both attacking him as both for fighting the war and for not fighting the war hard enough." Sounds Familiar to me
Mexican american war - Apr. 25, 1846 to Sept. 14, 1847
Polk was president throughout, but in 1848, he wasn't even renominated and a Mexican-American war hero, Zachary Taylor, was elected,
Civil war - I think we all know the story here, right?
Spanish American war - on February 15, 1898 the Maine was sunk by explosives in Havana harbor and the war was fought in Cuba and the Philippines and in Puerto Rico until Mid July of 1998.
McKinley, who was the wartime president, was renominated and reelected
WW1 - Wilson was president throughout and retired at the end of his second term
WW2 - Roosevelt - the same and died at the start of his 4th term. His vice President took over and dropped the Bomb and later was elected to a full term
Korea - Truman was president during this was running from 1950 to July 27, 1953. Ike said he would resolve the war as he ran against Stevenson (Truman did not run for re-election after nearly 8 yrs in office). He won in a landslide.
Vietnam - 1963 (about) to May, 1975. Basically, the turning point were the protests in 1968. LBJ didn't run for re-election and Humphry and Nixon duked it out. Humphry was anti-war and Nixon was resolve the war. Nixon won, but the war didn't actually end until well after he resigned in August of 1974. Oddly enough, he expanded the war before he started pulling us out. And he won reelection during this time with one of the largest landslides in history against a strong antiwar opponent in McGovern in 1972. Of course, he may have had a little advantage...
Gulf war - Bush the senior was Prez and very popular til the economy dropped out of sight. He was defeated by slick Willie in 1992.
and I think we're up to date.
My prediction? I think Bush squeeks it out in a very, very close race and Michael Moore remains indignant, but with consistantly high speaker's fees. | redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 149
Posts: 4238/7530
EXP: 41236130
For next: 99105
Since: 24.7.02
Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 4 hours
| #19 Posted on 18.10.04 0945.12
Reposted on: 18.10.11 0946.15 | Originally posted by AWArulz
Civil war - I think we all know the story here, right?
But, that probably is one of the most interesting elections in American History, war or peacetime. The Republicans admit Nevada and their 3 electoral votes just in case the general election comes down to it. Lincoln genuinely believing in the months prior to the election that he would be handily defeated by McClellan. The question over if the North claims that the South could not legally secede, how do you conduct an election in the Southern areas under Northern control? And, what everyone forgets now: Lincoln was probably the most despised President in American history. The South disliked him virtually completely, and large segments of the North despised his policies of suspending habeas corpus, had draft riots etc. It wasn't until death that he shifted from hated to beloved in the minds of most. | AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 104
Posts: 940/3183
EXP: 11581713
For next: 280452
Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY
Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 19 hours
| AIM: | |
| | | Y!: | |
|
| #20 Posted on 18.10.04 1222.44
Reposted on: 18.10.11 1223.02 | Originally posted by redsoxnation
Originally posted by AWArulz
Civil war - I think we all know the story here, right?
But, that probably is one of the most interesting elections in American History, war or peacetime. The Republicans admit Nevada and their 3 electoral votes just in case the general election comes down to it. Lincoln genuinely believing in the months prior to the election that he would be handily defeated by McClellan. The question over if the North claims that the South could not legally secede, how do you conduct an election in the Southern areas under Northern control? And, what everyone forgets now: Lincoln was probably the most despised President in American history. The South disliked him virtually completely, and large segments of the North despised his policies of suspending habeas corpus, had draft riots etc. It wasn't until death that he shifted from hated to beloved in the minds of most.
Yeah - but in the final analysis, Honest Abe crushed McClellan by nearly 200 electoral votes and nearly 10% of the popular vote as a margin (by the way, they had a 73+% turnout - and the Bluebellies went like crazy for the commander in Chief). The Dem's wanted a cease-fire (no comments needed) and the Republicans wanted to save the Union.
McClellan wasn't for the cease-fire, but he was against emancipation, I think. Plus his abilities as a General were not all that great when a drunk like US Grant could out-general him. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
