An Essential Site For Following This Year's US Elections:

[paul]

Good job remicks.
My own personal poll is if Barack is up by 7 or more in national polls, he wins. Less than that, I give it to McCain because of cheatin' and some people unwilling to vote for a nonwhite candidate.
All that said, I think your state by state maps is a better indicator.

[remicks]

Originally Posted by paul

Good job remicks.
My own personal poll is if Barack is up by 7 or more in national polls, he wins. Less than that, I give it to McCain because of cheatin' and some people unwilling to vote for a nonwhite candidate.
All that said, I think your state by state maps is a better indicator.

Thanks Paul !
All credit goes to the hard working Votemaster at:


Electoral-vote.com: President, Senate, House Updated Daily


Obama has held a large steady lead for the past several days on the electoral map.
From here on out .... witness unscrupulous measures of desperation from the trailing Republicans .


Obama/Biden 349
Sarah/McCain -174
Ties ---------- 15
270 Electoral votes needed to win

Strong Dem (218)
Weak Dem (59)
Barely Dem (72)
Exactly tied (15)
Barely GOP (11)
Weak GOP (63)
Strong GOP (100


OCTOBER 9 2008 :







......... unscrupulous measures of desperation :

The Votemaster


Liberty University to Cancel Classes on Election Day

Liberty University, founded by Rev. Jerry Falwell and located in Lynchburg, VA, is trying very hard to get all its students to register to vote in Virginia and is canceling classes on election day so they can vote. The university has about 20,000 students. It is thought that the vast majority are Republicans.

*****

[HairInTheWind]

Very interesting charts thanks for showing them.

I feel this country is in a bad situation no matter who gets in.

I feel Obama is too wet behind the ears...and tap dances and says things that he will do...but where is he planning on cutting in order to do the things he proposes. It certainly can't be the military...because he plans on moving everyone over to Afghanistan.

McCain on the other hand is also a bumbling fool. Nuf said on him.

Now Bush was not given a fair shake at the early onset of his first term...with just months in the office he had to deal with 9/11. Clinton left us vulnerable when he cut back on military big time and ignored warnings of such an attack.

Bush, when he opens his mouth makes me cringe with complete and utter embarrassment on his behalf.

Now when you consider the voting that went on in congress and the house for most of things we are living with and dealing with currently, wouldn't it be wise to say that both parties are at fault..I mean things get passed in congress and it's no immaculate conception without both parties voting on these issues!

The problem lies with greed and that is on both parties faces....when you have lobbyists like insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, oil companies...that can grease every politicians hands and why you see companies like AIG closing it's doors claiming bankcruptcy and their parting gift is millions!

I personally think the parties should be done away with because it's all biased. Voting should be based on the where the candidates stand on issues.

What we are seeing here is NOT just what went on over the past 8 years this has been brewing for quite some time. Everyone spending and living way above their means!

My concern is not so much who will be our President...it's congress I worry about...let's face it...pointing the blame at just one man for everything that is going on...is impotent and not educated logic.

Yes, it's time for a change....but I think our choices are very sad...very sad indeed.

My advice to everyone....watch what you spend....make an honest living...and love one another!

[remicks]

****

Originally Posted by HairInTheWind

Very interesting charts thanks for showing them.

I feel this country is in a bad situation no matter who gets in.

I feel Obama is too wet behind the ears...and tap dances and says things that he will do...but where is he planning on cutting in order to do the things he proposes. It certainly can't be the military...because he plans on moving everyone over to Afghanistan.

McCain on the other hand is also a bumbling fool. Nuf said on him.

Now Bush was not given a fair shake at the early onset of his first term...with just months in the office he had to deal with 9/11. Clinton left us vulnerable when he cut back on military big time and ignored warnings of such an attack.

Bush, when he opens his mouth makes me cringe with complete and utter embarrassment on his behalf.

Now when you consider the voting that went on in congress and the house for most of things we are living with and dealing with currently, wouldn't it be wise to say that both parties are at fault..I mean things get passed in congress and it's no immaculate conception without both parties voting on these issues!

The problem lies with greed and that is on both parties faces....when you have lobbyists like insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, oil companies...that can grease every politicians hands and why you see companies like AIG closing it's doors claiming bankcruptcy and their parting gift is millions!

I personally think the parties should be done away with because it's all biased. Voting should be based on the where the candidates stand on issues.

What we are seeing here is NOT just what went on over the past 8 years this has been brewing for quite some time. Everyone spending and living way above their means!

My concern is not so much who will be our President...it's congress I worry about...let's face it...pointing the blame at just one man for everything that is going on...is impotent and not educated logic.

Yes, it's time for a change....but I think our choices are very sad...very sad indeed.

My advice to everyone....watch what you spend....make an honest living...and love one another!

We very much agree HITW ! My only exception is I do worry very much about who will be our next President. It very much matters... & the past eight years is proof of that !


****

[remicks]

*****


Obama is on a roll ..... including .... North Dakota !!!!!


Obama/Biden 346
Sarah/McCain -181
Ties ---------- 11
270 Electoral votes needed to win

Strong Dem (235)
Weak Dem (47)
Barely Dem (64)
Exactly tied (11)
Barely GOP (26)
Weak GOP (24)
Strong GOP (131)





10/13/08




Here's how the map looked four years ago on this very day :

Bush -291
Kerry 228
Tied ----19


10/13/2004



Its a much prettier map this time around ....would you agree???


The Republican spokesholes like Sean Hannity repeat endless diatribes about Obama's close friendships with "terrorists" ... citing William Ayers as proof ( you suppose this kind of slimy campaigning is one reason the Repugs are losing )
Anyway here's the verdict of one of the political accuracy / truth squad websites concerning the issue ....

The Votemaster:

Politifact Debunks Obama-Ayers Connection

The McCain campaign and the RNC are still using ads (e.g., like this one that link Obama and 1960s radical William Ayers. Now Politifact has examined the ads closely and concluded that the claim that Obama and Ayers ran a radical education foundation together is a "pants-on-fire" lie. While it is true that Obama was the nominal head of the foundation in question, Ayers never had a paid position on the foundation's staff, never was on the board, and never had a vote on anything. His connection to Obama was attending some board meetings that were open to the public, and this 20 years after his radical days, by which time he had reformed enough to get a Ph.D. in education from Columbia University and was able to win Chicago's "Citizen of the Year" award in 1997 for his work for nonprofit organizations. In short, while Ayers was a despicable person in his youth, the McCain campaign's relentless harping on the close relationship between Obama and Ayers is very misleading. They weren't close at all.

Suppose Sean Hannity is interested in reviewing this fair and balanced summation before he again repeats his distortions yet again tomorrow and the next day on the national radio airwaves ?


*****

[remicks]

Originally Posted by HairInTheWind

My concern is not so much who will be our President...it's congress I worry about....

So let's look at what is happening election wise for the Congress

Here's the current map for this year's Senatorial elections :


October 14, 2008


Projected Senate:

Dem 59
GOP 41

Dem pickups (vs. 2002): 8)- AK CO MN NH NM NC OR VA
GOP pickups (vs. 2002): (None)

Senate Map

The current House tally (no map) :

House :

Dem 247
GOP 186
Ties -- 2


*****

[remicks]

*****



October 20 , 2008:


Obama/Biden 364
Sarah/McCain 171
Ties -------------- 3
270 Electoral votes needed to win





Strong Dem (264)
Weak Dem (22)
Barely Dem (78)
Exactly tied (3)
Barely GOP (19)
Weak GOP (15)
Strong GOP (137)

Dem pick-up (vs. 2004): CO FL IA MO NV NM ND OH VA

GOP pick-up (vs. 2004): None

News from the Votemaster

Cindy McCain Releases Summary of Her Tax Returns

Under pressure, Cindy McCain has released the summary pages of her 2006 and 2007 tax returns. Her adjusted gross income in 2006 was $6.2 million; in 2007 it was $4.2 million. The average is $5.2 million, of which about $300,000 was salary and the rest was from rental real estate, royalties, partnerships, S-corporations, trusts, and the like. From this data we can make a guess at her net worth. If we assume she got an average of 4% on her assets, she must have about $123 million in assets. If she was able to get 5%, she must be worth $98 million. Unless she managed to get an appreciably better return than 5%, she must be worth something like $100 million. It is perhaps worth noting that she didn't earn this money herself. She inherited it from her father, who built up one of the largest beer distributorships in the country.

-- The Votemaster

Hey, no wonder the ideas of SHARING THE WEALTH ( hmmm....what would Jesus do ...) and increasing the taxes of only the very rich upset a certain married-into-wealth presidential candidate !!!


*****

[remicks]

*****


Oh Marky!!!!

I think you especially will appreciate the calculations electoral-vote.com has put together today :

Comparison of 2004 and 2008

It is instructive to compare the state of polling in 2004 as of the Tuesday before the election with state of polling yesterday. The table below shows the the Kerry - Bush score on Oct. 26, 2004 in column 2. Hawaii is an outlier because there was one freaky poll, but, on Oct. 26, 2004, the map showed Kerry ahead of Bush by 9 points in California, by 8 points in Illinois, and behind Bush by 8 points in New Mexico. The third column is the Kerry - Bush election result. For example, the prediction of a 9-point lead in California and an 8-point lead in Illinois were pretty good as Kerry won those states by 10.3 and 10.0 points respectively. The mean of the second column was a Bush lead of 4.4 points whereas the final results was a Bush lead of 6.0 points. These averages are not weighted by population, so they are not predictors of the popular vote, but they do give an idea of how good the 51 polls were a week before the election.

State Kerry - Bush Election Obama-McCain 2008-2004

Hawaii -1.0 8.7 41.0 42.0
Montana -21.0 -20.8 0.0 21.0
North Dakota -20.0 -27.4 0.0 20.0
California 9.0 10.3 27.0 18.0
Illinois 8.0 10.0 26.0 18.0
New Mexico -8.0 -1.1 10.0 18.0
Indiana -13.0 -20.9 3.0 16.0
Georgia -17.0 -16.7 -3.0 14.0
Iowa -3.0 -0.9 11.0 14.0
New York 21.0 17.3 34.0 13.0
South Dakota -22.0 -21.5 -9.0 13.0
Wisconsin -2.0 0.4 11.0 13.0
Wyoming -36.0 -39.9 -23.0 13.0
Alaska -27.0 -26.9 -15.0 12.0
Connecticut 9.0 10.3 21.0 12.0
New Jersey 7.0 6.2 19.0 12.0
Texas -23.0 -22.9 -11.0 12.0
Washington 5.0 7.3 17.0 12.0
North Carolina -10.0 -12.6 1.0 11.0
Michigan 8.0 3.4 18.0 10.0
Nebraska -29.0 -34.5 -19.0 10.0
Virginia -3.0 -8.7 7.0 10.0
Delaware 7.0 7.5 16.0 9.0
Maryland 10.0 12.4 19.0 9.0
Nevada -6.0 -2.6 3.0 9.0
Oklahoma -33.0 -31.2 -24.0 9.0
Ohio -1.0 -2.5 7.0 8.0
Pennsylvania 3.0 2.2 11.0 8.0
Vermont 13.0 20.2 21.0 8.0
Kansas -19.0 -25.7 -12.0 7.0
Oregon 6.0 4.0 13.0 7.0
South Carolina -18.0 -17.2 -11.0 7.0
Colorado 1.0 -6.2 7.0 6.0
Minnesota 5.0 3.5 11.0 6.0
Maine 11.0 8.1 16.0 5.0
Massachusetts 14.0 25.1 19.0 5.0
Missouri -5.0 -7.3 0.0 5.0
Florida -1.0 -5.0 3.0 4.0
Kentucky -17.0 -19.8 -13.0 4.0
D.C. 67.0 80.2 69.0 2.0
Rhode Island 20.0 20.6 22.0 2.0
Utah -37.0 -44.7 -36.0 1.0
Idaho -29.0 -38.1 -29.0 0.0
Arizona -5.0 -10.4 -6.0 -1.0
Louisiana -15.0 -14.6 -16.0 -1.0
New Hampshire 9.0 1.3 8.0 -1.0
Tennessee -12.0 -14.3 -14.0 -2.0
Mississippi -9.0 -20.3 -12.0 -3.0
West Virginia -3.0 -12.9 -8.0 -5.0
Alabama -12.0 -25.7 -20.0 -8.0
Arkansas 0.0 -9.8 -11.0 -11.0
Average -4.4 -6.0 3.9 8.3

Now consider column 4. It shows the difference between Obama and McCain a week before the 2008 election (taken from yesterday's spreadsheet). As of yesterday, Obama was leading McCain in Hawaii by 41 points, was tied in Montana and North Dakota, and leading in California by 27 points, and so on.
Finally we come to column 5, which is column 4 minus column 2, in other words, how much better the Democrat is doing in 2008 compared to 2004. Ignoring Hawaii on account of one outlier in 2004, we see Obama is doing 21 points better than Kerry was in Montana because yesterday's map showed Obama and McCain tied whereas the Oct. 26, 2004 map showed Kerry 21 points behind Bush. Thus Obama is outperforming Kerry in Montana by 21 points. He is outperforming Kerry in Indiana and Georgia by 16 points and 14 points, respectively. On the other hand, he is underperforming Kerry in the lines colored red. For example, he is underperforming Kerry in Arkansas by 11 points and in Alabama by 8 points. Nevertheless, he is doing better than Kerry was in 41 states plus D.C. and underperforming Kerry in 9 states, only one of which he is likely to win (New Hampshire).
In other words, an alternative way to look at the election is how well is Obama doing compared to Kerry and the clear answer is: "a lot better." Also interesting is to see how many rows have different signs in columns 2 and 3. For example, the two entries for Wisconsin are -2.0 and 0.4 meaning the polls a week out showed Kerry losing Wisconsin by 2 points but he ultimately won the state by 0.4 points. There are four states where the signs don't agree: Hawaii, Wisconsin, Colorado, and Arkansas. As mentioned above, there was one weird poll that completely messed up Hawaii in 2004 and the pollsters were saying Arkansas was too close to call (when it wasn't at all). But in 46 states plus D.C. the candidate leading in the polls a week before the election did, in fact, carry the state.
If you want to play with the numbers yourself, an expanded version of the table above is available in Excel format and in .csv format.

OK ..that came out really ugly .... to see these figures presented in a cleaner smarter format .... ala markydefad style .... check it out at: Electoral-vote.com: President, Senate, House Updated Daily


Here're the raw numbers for October 29, 2008:

Obama/Biden 364
SARAH/McCain 157
------------Ties 17

Dem pickups (vs. 2004):CO FL IN IA NV NM NC OH VA

GOP pickups (vs. 2004):(None)


2004:

Bush 281
Kerry 236

*****

[remicks]

*****

Electoral Map comparison time !!!!


now: 10/29/08:



then: 10/29/04:




comparing those two maps ...then and now .... makes me want to break out into disco song !!!!!


Lets see .... how about ......... FLASHDANCE :




"what a feeeeeliiinnnngggg !!!!!! ........."



******

[remicks]

*****

I am VERY nervous about the results come Tuesday .

Here's partly why ....

.... I remember all too well feeling so hopeful on this very day exactly four years ago :


NOVEMBER 1 , 2004:

Kerry: 298
-Bush: 231









Today

NOVEMBER 1, 2008 :

--------------------Obama/ Biden: 353
Joe The Plumber/ Sarah / McCain: 185





http://www.electoral-vote.com/index.html


******