[1smallVoice]

Bush landslide begins...

[Rumierules]

RealClearPolitics shows the opposite. EV count tightening with sKerry leading in all remaining toss-ups.

[MNJohnnie]

From you mouth to God's ear.

[Petronski]

Yawn.

Twenty days is an eternity. Talk to me October 30th, not 13th.

[sarasota]

No surprise here, in spite of everything the MSM is doing to elect Kerry. Only thing to fear is voter fraud/Dem lawyers.

[Sister_T]

Your "Obama" url leads to his website.

[paulklenk]

If he lost why did so many states turn blue?

Blue is Kerry's color.

[Phantom Lord]

There is no way Kerry will win this election.

Of yes there is. And it can be summed up in two words...

Vote Fraud

I believe there is going to be fraud on a scale never before perpetuated in American history.

[Shryke]

Your title brings an image to my head of millions of shrubberies, all sliding down a hill face.

[LesbianThespianGymnasticMidget]

The DummycRat that runs the site pulled the final projections because his Rat buddies would lynch him for showing it. The page is still there and updated every day.

see: http://www.electoral-vote.com/fin/oct11p.html

tommorow will be: http://www.electoral-vote.com/fin/oct12p.html

Enjoy ;-)

[kcvl]

Electoral Vote Predictor 2004: Kerry 228 Bush 291

[dalebert]

Bush did not lose either debate. Kerry lied his butt off. The press just isn't calling him on his lies.

[MadAnthony1776]

I won't feel comfortable until November 2 if Bush wins.

[45semi]

They provide a link to a constantly updated vote count graphic.
Link Here

[jdm]

The projected map for Nov. 2 looks even better.

Latest....

Projected Electoral College Votes (Nov. 2): Kerry 203 Bush 316

Electoral Vote Predictor 2004 (as of Oct. 13): Kerry 228 Bush 291

[cripplecreek]

Last night on Hardball the entire panel of pundits agreed that republicans are registering to vote in greater numbers than democrats. Ron Reagan Jr and Tom Oliphant did insinuate that republicans were trying to supress democrat registrations.

[chimera]

Recent electoral history shows that if there is a landslide in the making, it is evident much earlier in the contest than now. Clinton in '96, Reagan in '84, Nixon in '72, and Johnson in '64 all had clear and substantial leads for months in advance of the vote. The exceptions might be Reagan in '80, when he pulled away from Carter in the last week of the campaign, after his performance in the debates (and Carter's weak performances) convinced voters that "he was okay" for the job. Bush 41 took the lead after the GOP convention in '88, but held it through the Fall, so that race might be one other recent contest where the eventual winner won big but gained the lead late. I discount Clinton in '92 since 43% of the vote is hardly a landslide (even though is electoral margin was quite large).

So, bottom line, the historical trends seem to be against a Bush landslide at this point, unless things happen very, very rapidly on a somewhat unusual timescale. More likely a redux of 2000, or something close to it.

[diamond6]

I don't want to burst any bubbles, but what about the widespread voter fraud?

[MEG33]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1242764/posts

Bush Landslide Beginning, look at new EC Numbers!!!!



Why are you doing this?..This is the same thing you posted yesterday.

[MEG33]

http://realclearpolitics.com/

[PBRSTREETGANG]

Something about "counting chickens" comes to mind here.

(Taking a day off from Obama?)