 |
| |
|
|
Sava
|
 |
GO GO GO!
Mar 2001
time: 23:33
|
|
quote:
Times/CBS poll show Bush ratings down
NEW YORK, Jan. 17 (UPI) -- Democratic voters held a 2 point edge over those who would vote for President Bush if the U.S. election were held now, a CBS/New York Times poll said.
The poll published Saturday found that 45 percent of voters said they would vote for a still unspecified Democratic candidate and 43 percent would vote for President Bush.
Late last month, the president held a 49 percent to 40 percent edge. The standing now is similar to what it was in November 2003, before the capture of Saddam Hussein.
The poll was conducted among a nationwide random sample of 1022 adults, interviewed by telephone between Jan. 12 and Jan. 15.
Much of this sentiment seems already locked in place, suggesting the coming year could see a tight struggle for undecided voters: 63 percent say their mind is already made up, while 36 percent say it is too soon to say for sure.
A CBS/New York Times poll also shows the president's approval rating is down to 50 percent, matching his lowest level ever, along with the largest percentage ever, 45 percent, disapproving his performance.
|
I found this particularly entertaining, especially since it's from a right wing rag. 
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-brea...74346-3402r.htm
He's gone. 
Although I still maintain my prediction that OSAMA BIN LADEN, will be magically found around election time.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ming
|
|
From US News and World Report
quote:
So who's going to win the November election?
Current political punditry calls for a Bush Dean matchup, with the incumbent the victor. "Bush has a lot going for him with the economy right now," says Nigel Gault, U.S. economic research director at Global Insight. "That puts him in a similar position to Nixon and Reagan in 1972 and 1984, both of whom won overwhelming victories."
But Gault and other rely on more than the shifting political winds to make their predictions. Gault's analysis of the the 14 presidential elections since WWII found that the two key economic factors matter most in determining winners and losers. The first is the growth rate in the real per capita disposable income in the year preceding a presidential election. The second factor is the direction of the unemployment rate in the year before the election. Plugging in his firm's forecase of a 2.4 percent income growth rate in 2004 with a jobless rate of 5.7 percent gives Bush 56.7 percent of the the vote in 2004. (in 2000, the model had Al Gore winning with 51.8% of the two party vote, pretty close to Gore's actual 50.3% share)
Lower the assumptions and the margin of victory shrinks. With income growth of only 1.4 percent and a jobless rate of 6.2 percent, Bush's vote tally falls to 54.3 percent. So how could Bush lose? Combine weak GDP growth with robust productivity increases resulting in less than 1 percent income growth and an umemployment rate of 7.9%. Then Bush loses narrowly, with 49.4 percent of the vote.
Yale University Prof. Ray Fair also counts on a Bush win. He looks at a combiniation of income growth rate, inflation, and the number of quarters of rapid income growth in the first 15 quarters of a president's term. Fair sees Bush garnering 58.3 % of the two party vote.
|
Out of all predictive models, economic based ones are the most acurate for predicting presidential elections.
These two models, and every other one I've seen shows Bush winning easily no matter who the Dems put up. The economy has to go into the tank (and nobody, even the traditional doom sayers are predicting that) or something really weird has to happen to keep Bush from getting re-elected 
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-01-2004 21:48
|