[Momaw Nadon]

I went to TradeSports.com which is a futures market in which people bet on the outcomes of various things.

According to the current trading prices of the futures contracts, an estimate can be found of what traders are betting will be the outcome of 2004 Presidential Election.

If the traders are correct, President Bush would receive 355 Electoral Votes and the Democratic candidate would receive 183 Electoral Votes.

Opinions and commentary are welcome.

[Momaw Nadon]

Previous projections:

2004 Projected Presidential Electoral Votes as of 1/26/2004
2004 Projected Presidential Electoral Votes as of 1/21/2004

[Conspiracy Guy]

Hope they are right. Did they do projections in previous election years?

CG

[Chi-townChief]

Nice but wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too soon.

[Vermont Lt]

If you are going to do a true probability, you would assign the electoral votes according to the probability--unlike the "real world" where the winner gets all.

That is, if the probability is 95% sure that Bush will win a state, then there is a 5% probability that the Dem will win. You would assign the wieght of the probability against the outcome.

If you do that, the results are similar, but not as rosy.

[Tacis]

I don't know. Awarding South Dakota to Bush grossly underestimates the power of the dead Indian vote and Dashole's need to continue the revenue stream from his bag lady wife so he can pay the staff at his new DC mansion.

[G.Mason]

The only realistic way for me to look at that projection list is to use it as a guide to tell me where not to spend my vacation money.

[Archie Bunker on steroids]

Bush has no prayer in Michigan or Pennsylvania. THose are the two grossest errors of the table I see. Both states have huge metro areas that more than cancel out the rural red zones. Both states trend more & more D every national election.

[UncleSamUSA]

As someone who lives in New York City and sees first hand how perceptions and beliefs have changed since 9/11, I can tell you that Bush has a MUCH better than 20% chance of winning NY's electoral votes.

It will still be a tough struggle, mind you, but this is definitely going to be an "in-play" state by the first Tuesday in November.

[BlueNgold]

Safe states (these are pretty accurate):
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virgina, Wyoming
These total 217 electoral votes (need 270 to win)

Other close states in play: (also fairly accurate)
Arkansas, Iowa, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, West Virgina, Wisconsin
These give us another 56 to put us ver the top at 273 EV

Among the Big 6 (CA, NY, TX, PA, FL, MI) 4 through 6 are still in play: PA, FL, and MI. Between them there are 65 EV at stake. We need to work hard in all 3 to get out the message, get out the vote, and bring home wins. Victories in these 3 will make this election a landslide and carry congressional coat-tails, and THAT is what we need to get our judges on the bench!

[GiveEmDubya]

My personal electoral vote tracker, which I updated yesterday, sees a 305-233 scenario right now.

Despite the bad week, Bush is still in a slightly stronger position since 2000, given he now has the benefit of incumbency.

As of now, I believe he would basically win most of what he won last time, adding on some smaller states (with the big prize being Minnesota). The Democrats (Kerry) hold Pennsylvania, California, Michigan, and Wisconsin among others.

It is kinda silly of me to forecast now, but I do this as a way of keeping up with the current scenario. Right now, while Kerry has been coming on strong with his good week and complete media coverage, the electoral votes are not there for him.

[PJ-Comix]

You put Wyoming in the Bush column. Aren't you being very overoptimistic on that projection?

[Snowy]

Is this with or without the dem cheating factor???

[BlueNgold]

A similarly rosy projection:
http://electionprojection.com/elections2004.html

Bush 356 EV
Dem 182 EV

[raloxk]

Unfortunately I dont think Bush will win Michigan. There is a very large Arab population that actually voted for him in his narrow loss in 2000. They now overwhemingly oppose Bush, thus I think he loses Michigan by an even larger margin this fall

[raloxk]

Unfortunately I dont think Bush will win Michigan. There is a very large Arab population that actually voted for him in his narrow loss in 2000. They now overwhemingly oppose Bush, thus I think he loses Michigan by an even larger margin this fall

[Wrigley]

No way is MI going for Bush.

[HoustonCurmudgeon]

Michigan and Pennsylvania can't possibly be that high, New Mexico at 70% is a joke and West Virginia may be lost this time.

[AuH2ORepublican]

These numbers are better than just about any "professional" projection you'll see out there. I think Bush has a better than 20% chance of carrying California and a better than 42.5% chance of carrying Delaware, but 71% is too high for Missouri and 75% is too high for Nevada. And keep an eye on Hawaii---pundits will say that it's as Democratic as Massachusetts, but incumbent presidents always do well in the state (it's difficult for many Hawaiians to vote against the Commander-in-Chief). The market gives Bush a 13% chance of carrying Hawaii, higher than Kerry's chances in Kentucky or Georgia, so obviously the market participants don't buy the canard that Republican Presidents can't carry Hawaii.

[ForOurFuture]

Wow. I live in one of the 4 states (excluding DC) that, according to this, has a less than 10% chance of going to Bush. In fact, according to this, no other state is less likely to go to Bush than mine. Expressed in the inverse, according to this, no other state, not Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Hawaii, or Rhode Island, is more hostile territory to Bush than mine, and my state is no less hostile to Bush than Washington DC, which has never given it's votes to a Republican. This has to score Maryland major points in the debate over which state is the most liberal/Democratic. Curiously, however, Maryland just recently elected a Republican governor and saw GOP gains in its legislature. I am forever amused at the tendency of many states to exhbit a split-personality in terms of their consistently supporting different parties for different offices. Maryland usually isn't one of them, but it is in this snapshot of time.

Further, this knowledge serves to cement my resolve to cast a "protest vote". I'm not needed to fend off evil by voting for someone whose evil is slightly lesser. What a burden to be relieved of! Living in a socialist dreamworld has at least one benefit: fanciful write-ins and 3rd-party rebellions are completely guilt-free, or in this one in particular, 98% guilt-free.