Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Initial Prediction

UPDATE: below

Using the interactive map at RealClearPolitics.com, my opening prognostication:

source: RCP

Result: a narrow McCain/Palin victory. Note, I have Republicans winning several "toss-up" states: West Virginia, Ohio, Colorado and Nevada.


An anonymous commenter goes off topic to claim that the Supreme Court decided the 2000 election and that massive voting machine fraud in Ohio and New Mexico gave the 2004 election to Bush. I've addressed the 2000 election here, responding to the same claim by, I suspect, the same commenter. I rebut assertions about the 2004 election in comments below--though I'd be surprised if the commenter ever took the time to read and research the point.


Geoffrey Britain said...

You're being way too conservative Carl. McCain is going to take WA, MI, PA and either MN or WI...

It's NOT going to be close at all, it's going to be a landslide.

Obama is toast, stick a fork in him, he's done.

I could list all the reasons but it would still boil down to: the handwriting's on the wall.

Iowa_John said...

Despite the handle, I live in Nevada-think McCain's pretty solid here and any Yucca mountain controversy is not going to be a major issue.

OBloodyHell said...

Carl's always been the cautious one in this. He's been loathe to grasp that the Left is too stupid to win the PotUS these days. BDS has got them stuck on stupid (actually, the force that is focused to form BDS has them stuck on stupid).

They're too ready to hate, too arrogant to grasp that people can differ with them and not be stupid and ignorant. As long as those two, and probably either of those hold sway, they're going to keep screwing up.


Carl said...

Cautious? I have us winning W.Va., Ohio, Indiana and Colorado, all of which we need and each of which will be tough.

Bob Combs said...

There is another dashboard that integrates this data with the Intrade data -- from Yahoo of all places.


Might want to check it out -- just a suggestion. Be sure to check the data on the RHS of the screen -- voter breakdown by race.

Anonymous said...

It depends whether we have a democratic election or whether it is fixed by Republicans (e.g., Ohio, Florida) or if the Supreme Court again undermines the democratic process by finding an excuse to interfere in the 2008 election. If it is an honest election, Obama will win.

Do you "conservatives" like the way Bush is interfering with free market processes by using your tax dollars to subsidize incompetents and crooks, e.g. AIG, BEAR STEARNS, Fannie and Freddie?

Anonymous said...

New Mexico was decided by 5,988 votes. "Malfunctioning" machines did not register a presidential vote on more than 20,000 ballots in the 2004 election.

According to the federal commission charged with implementing election reforms, as many as 1 million ballots were spoiled by "faulty" voting equipment. That's about one in every 100 votes cast in the 2004 election. (I didn't think American people were dumb enough to continue with the disastrous Bush administration after experiencing the first 4 years of his incompetent and otherwise questionable administration.)

In Ohio, where Bush's victory in the electoral college was apparently settled, tens of thousands of eligible voters were removed from the rolls, registration cards generated by Democratic voter drives were not processed, and a recount that would have given Kerry the presidency did not happen.

In Ohio, where less then 119,000 votes decided the election in 2004, a minimum of about 350,000 voters, mostly Democrats, did not have their votes counted or were prevented from voting. And why did 1 in 4 registered Ohio voters in the 2004 election find when they went to vote at the polls that somehow....in this state that apparently went for Bush.....that they were not listed as registered. Clerical errors? Computer glitch? Corruption?

As though that weren't bad enough, apparently there was evidence of simple fraud showing over 80,000 votes cast for Kerry were counted instead for Bush.

So you see, the bottom line of who wins this 2008 election might have to do with whether or not you Republicans really do believe in DEMOCRACY or not.

But, perhaps you are enjoying the meltdown in our economy and society caused by you Republicans. Remember when conservatives were honest people who believed in fiscal responsibility? Guess not.

Carl said...


When will you learn to research before you write? You might be able to get away with such outrageous distortions on some other blog, but not here.

Though plenty of leftists attempted fraud, the 2004 was not stolen. Don't believe me? Try The New York Times, MIT (Addendum), and Salon.

Regarding Ohio, "exacting scrutiny of the 2004 election in Ohio revealed a possible voter fraud rate of 0.00004 percent. Americans are more likely to be struck by lightning." In any event, Ohio held a recount--and Bush still won.

Regarding New Mexico, you seem to be claiming "the Democratic control of the New Mexico Governor's office, the State Legislature, the Courts, the Secretary of State office and the Bernalillo County Clerk's office were all part of an elaborate ruse to once again enable the Republicans to steal the Presidential election."

Finally, on a personal note, are you really so stupid or do you know me and are trying to pester me? Either way, grow up.

Carl said...


Glad to hear. Most of the polls colored Nevada red only in the past two weeks. If Reps have to fight for Nevada, they've lost already.

Anonymous said...

Carl: "Finally, on a personal note, are you really so stupid or do you know me and are trying to pester me? Either way, grow up."

I wonder why anyone who knows you would want to pester you. Please explain. Thanks.

Maybe the truth makes you feel uncomfortable.

Assistant Village Idiot said...

anonymous, I don't think you hear yourself well. Your tone as well as your information is unstable.

There was a state stolen in 2004, however. Kerry stole Wisconsin.

Anonymous said...

AVI, Consistency is not necessarily a virtue. Life is complex. Have you noticed?

Carl said...


Two words: "Summer Glau"

Anonymous said...

Can't tolerate different opinions, can you? You are more comfortable with agreement. That's understandable. "Conservatives" are well known for their inability to tolerate ambiguity. I guess "Liberals" are smarter. Based on the results caused by the policies of Ronald Reagan and the George Bushes, I guess it is pretty obvious that Republicans or "Conservatives" are short on brain cells. Oh, well. At least they stick to their guns. It's amusing to see that you think that's a virtue even when the facts of life (e.g., market meltdown, failure of deregulation, decline of all USA systems) has proven you wrong. Give it up. Be ashamed. Re-register as Independents. You have already done way more then enough damage to our beloved country. It's time to get honest. You know what that means. Do it.