Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Yale Economic Model Still Predicts Bush Landslide in November
Yale - Fairmodel Presidential Equation ^ | February 14, 2004 | nwrep

Posted on 02/14/2004 5:20:01 PM PST by nwrep

The highly accurate "Presidential Vote Equation" created by Ray Fair, a Yale economist, continues to predict a Bush landslide victory in November, despite several recent polls showing a decline in President Bush's popularity.

The model is updated every quarter with the release of quarterly economic statistics by the government.

The latest update to the model was made on February 5, 2004 based on data for the 4th quarter of 2003.

The model prediction is as follows:

Presidential Vote Equation--February 5, 2004

The predictions of GROWTH, INFLATION, and GOODNEWS for the previous forecast from the US model (October 31, 2003) were 2.4 percent, 1.9 percent, and 3, respectively. The current predictions from the US model (February 5, 2004) are 3.0 percent, 1.9 percent, and 3, respectively. In the previous forecast 2003:4 was predicted to be a GOODNEWS quarter, but it turned out not to be. For the current forecast 2004:1 is predicted to be a GOODNEWS quarter, so the total number of GOODNEWS quarters is the same at 3. The prediction of GROWTH, the per capita growth rate in the first three quarters of 2004 at an annual rate, has increased to 3.0 from 2.4 for the previous forecast. Given that the coefficient on GROWTH in the vote equation is 0.691, an increase in GROWTH of 0.6 adds 0.4 to the vote prediction.

The new economic values thus give a prediction of 58.7 percent of the two-party vote for President Bush rather than 58.3 percent before.

This does not, of course, change the main story that the equation has been making from the beginning, namely that President Bush is predicted to win by a sizable margin.


*********************************************************************

The equation, based on Ray Fair's economic model has an excellent correlation percentages of two party popular votes. The only times it has significantly deviated from the November election results was in 1992 due to the presence of a strong third party.

The equation has worked as follows since 1916:


                          Table

Presidential Elections Since 1916

Party Actual Predicted
in Vote Growth Infl. Good Vote
Power Share Rate Rate News Share
1916 D Pres. Wilson beat Hughes 51.7 2.2 4.3 3 50.7
1920 D Cox lost to Harding 36.1 -11.5 16.5 5 38.9
1924 R Pres. Coolidge beat Davis 58.2 -3.9 5.2 10 57.9
1928 R Hoover beat Smith 58.8 4.6 0.2 7 57.3
1932 R Pres. Hoover lost to F. Roosevelt 40.8 -14.9 7.1 4 39.2
1936 D Pres. F. Roosevelt beat Landon 62.5 11.9 2.4 9 64.3
1940 D Pres. F. Roosevelt beat Willkie 55.0 3.7 0.0 8 56.0
1944 D Pres. F. Roosevelt beat Dewey 53.8 4.1 5.7 14 52.9
1948 D Pres. Truman beat Dewey 52.4 1.8 8.7 5 50.5
1952 D Stevenson lost to Eisenhower 44.6 0.6 2.3 6 43.9
1956 R Pres. Eisenhower beat Stevenson 57.8 -1.5 1.9 5 57.3
1960 R Nixon lost to Kennedy 49.9 0.1 1.9 5 51.1
1964 D Pres. Johnson beat Goldwater 61.3 5.1 1.2 10 61.2
1968 D Humphrey lost to Nixon 49.6 4.8 3.2 7 49.6
1972 R Pres. Nixon beat McGovern 61.8 6.3 4.8 4 59.8
1976 R Ford lost to Carter 48.9 3.7 7.7 4 48.6
1980 D Pres. Carter lost to Reagan 44.7 -3.8 8.1 5 45.6
1984 R Pres. Reagan beat Mondale 59.2 5.4 5.4 7 61.4
1988 R G. Bush beat Dukakis 53.9 2.1 3.3 6 52.4
1992 R Pres. G. Bush lost to Clinton 46.5 2.3 3.7 1 50.9
1996 D Pres. Clinton beat Dole 54.7 2.9 2.3 3 52.7
2000 D Gore lost to G.W. Bush 50.3 3.5 1.7 8 50.8


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; catholiclist; electionpresident; tdids; thebusheconomy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last

1 posted on 02/14/2004 5:20:02 PM PST by nwrep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *Election President; Howlin
PING
2 posted on 02/14/2004 5:20:28 PM PST by nwrep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nwrep
I don't see any adjustments made in this model for Democrat vote fraud. Therefore, it's not valid.
3 posted on 02/14/2004 5:24:40 PM PST by So Cal Rocket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: So Cal Rocket
Therefore, it's not valid.

Oh, man. You're post #3.......I hardly had any time to wallow in the beauty of this story. LOL

But, you have a dang good point.

4 posted on 02/14/2004 5:53:31 PM PST by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I will defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nwrep
The highly accurate "Presidential Vote Equation" created by Ray Fair, a Yale economist, continues to predict a Bush landslide victory in November, despite several recent polls showing a decline in President Bush's popularity.

You mean this?


5 posted on 02/14/2004 5:55:00 PM PST by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country. What else needs to be said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nwrep
I posted this on another thread...

It's not business as usual in American politics. That's why the left has to contort itself so in order to win the attention of the public.

A good many people are tired of sluts and liars and con men and adultery and parading homosexuality and terrorism and everything else they had tolerated from 1992 - 2000. It seems like more and more people know it's time to get down to business. The left has played its ridiculous hand. It does not stand a chance in this election.

6 posted on 02/14/2004 5:55:04 PM PST by the invisib1e hand (do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nwrep
A bump 4 this story!
7 posted on 02/14/2004 5:56:59 PM PST by BellStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand
I think the FAIR Model is flawed for one reason.

In the past there was a strong correlation between GDP growth and Job Growth. Thus 4% GDP often correlated to over 3m new jobs (See 1994 and 1983-84 BLS.GOV).Last 6 months of 2003 had 6.1% GDP growth but only about 250,000 new jobs. Thus if we have 4.5% GDP growth for 2004 as is forecasted, the FAIR model will predict BUSH winning in a landslide. But if job growth doesnt reach the 3m-3.5m plus that should correlate with 4.5% GDP growth, the model will overstate BUSH's popular vote total.

Given past levels of job growth, in 2003 there should have been about 2m new jobs correlating to 3.1% GDP (similar to 1986 and 1995 see BLS.GOV) plus over 3m in 2004 for a total of at least 5m new jobs the past two years. BUSH would be quite popular and would be up about 3m new jobs for his term

So the model is flawed because there is now a disconnect between strong GDP growht and Job growth that didnt exist in the past.
8 posted on 02/14/2004 6:08:44 PM PST by raloxk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: raloxk
You are probably correct. I think it clear by this point that in the past few years there's been a major discontinuity in the significance of any number of economic reports. If the job market in particular continues to stagnate as it has, there will likely be a lot of shocked Yale economic modellers come November.
9 posted on 02/14/2004 6:25:24 PM PST by AntiGuv (When the countdown hits zero, something's gonna happen..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: nwrep
If Bush gets 58% of the popular vote, even I will be floored!
10 posted on 02/14/2004 6:30:03 PM PST by GeronL (www.ArmorforCongress.com ............... Support a FReeper for Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raloxk
Easy peasy...We just make the Pell Grant a government paycheck with one week of compulsory service and viola 5 million new jobs.

However, you are a smart cookie to focus on this issue.
11 posted on 02/14/2004 6:31:11 PM PST by ijcr (Age and treachery will always overcome youth and ability.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: raloxk
It was even accurate during depressions and recessions in the past.
12 posted on 02/14/2004 6:31:40 PM PST by GeronL (www.ArmorforCongress.com ............... Support a FReeper for Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: raloxk
Is jobs a real issue? Is off-shoring of jobs a real issue? If so, and it doesn't look so, that is about the only thing that might derail the Republicans
13 posted on 02/14/2004 6:32:46 PM PST by RightWhale (Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
If the job market in particular continues to stagnate as it has,

Where? Certainly not here in the US!

Either you associate yourself with a lot of useless lazy bum's that don't want to work or find it, or your altering your mind with an illicit substance, or you didn't clarify yourself as to the country of which you were referring.

14 posted on 02/14/2004 6:41:06 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS; AntiGuv; GatorGirl; maryz; *Catholic_list; afraidfortherepublic; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; ...
Everyone I know who wants a job has a job. Period.
15 posted on 02/14/2004 6:43:35 PM PST by narses (If you want OFF or ON my Ping list, please email me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
If Bush gets 58% of the popular vote, even I will be floored!

Define "floored" and send me a picture, if you would, when you are floored.

I'll mark it on my calender in November.

16 posted on 02/14/2004 6:44:35 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: So Cal Rocket
"I don't see any adjustments made in this model for Democrat vote fraud. Therefore, it's not valid."

For the Bush-Gore election:
They predicted 50.8% of the 2 party vote for Gore and he got only 50.3% (of the 2 party vote).

Very Close - and underestimating Bush slightly.

The two factors unaccounted for:
Disgust with democrats in the Clinton Administration.
Democratic vote fraud.
17 posted on 02/14/2004 6:45:36 PM PST by edwin hubble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS
OK.. now I have most of the year to think of the funniest and weirdest definition of 'floored'.
18 posted on 02/14/2004 6:53:29 PM PST by GeronL (www.ArmorforCongress.com ............... Support a FReeper for Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: nwrep
"...continues to predict a Bush landslide victory in November."

If that happens I'm moving to India to get my job back and then sneaking back in through Mexico to get all the health & other bennies that US taxpayers will be paying for.

Two can play at the "jobless recovery" game.

19 posted on 02/14/2004 6:54:06 PM PST by tubavil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: narses
Everyone I know who wants a job has a job. Period.

But the government hasn't given everyone they job the want and deerve. And I'm still waiting for my Mercedes.

20 posted on 02/14/2004 6:58:31 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson