Skip to comments.
2004 Projected Presidential Electoral Votes as of 9/20/2004
TradeSports.com ^
| Monday, September 20, 2004
| Momaw Nadon
Posted on 09/20/2004 4:17:19 AM PDT by Momaw Nadon
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-30 last
To: Teacher317
No, if I were a statistics major, I could account for statistical linkage. :^).
21
posted on
09/20/2004 8:06:52 AM PDT
by
dangus
To: Momaw Nadon
Two events have recently occurred in NM that make it unlikely that Bush will win the state in spite of a recent ABQ Journal Poll that shows him ahead.
1. In the past several months a group called "Moving America Forward" has been registering many new voters; maybe as many as 10-20% (or higher percent) of existing voters. The group, a 527 supported by Rat Richardson, focuses on Hispanics and Indians. There already have been documented cases of voter fraud with children and out of state people receiving voter ID's and reporting same to the county clerk offices. There is no requirement that persons voting present an ID at the polls (the Rat controlled legislature has defeated proposals each year) EXCEPT for those who registered by mail. Because of the fraud already documented, some clerks have tried to require ID's be presented, but the Dim controlled courts have ruled against it. See this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1214404/posts
2. On Friday, a state district court judge kicked Ralph Nader off the ballot because he is running as an independent. Over the weekend, it was revealed that she was a Dim supporter with a recent large contribution to that party. She did not reveal that fact nor did she recuse herself. She may be cited, but higher court justices also are mainly Democrats. Given the large Dim registration advantage and without Nader on the ballot, it is unlikely that Bush can get enough votes by himself to crush Kerry. See this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1220651/posts
22
posted on
09/20/2004 8:17:26 AM PDT
by
CedarDave
(Viet Nam Vet, USN Coastal Div. 13, Cat Lo, XO USCG patrol boat, 1968: No atrocities on my watch!)
To: CedarDave
23
posted on
09/20/2004 8:25:39 AM PDT
by
CedarDave
(Viet Nam Vet, USN Coastal Div. 13, Cat Lo, XO USCG patrol boat, 1968: No atrocities on my watch!)
To: Momaw Nadon
I wouldn't bet on CA or NY going to Kerry.
CA--strong Republican governor, large Catholic and Hispanic population, sick of excessive taxes, strong conservative enclaves
NY--9-11. No, they have not forgotten. They will never forget.
24
posted on
09/20/2004 8:31:29 AM PDT
by
Palladin
(Proud to be a FReeper!)
To: Momaw Nadon
I've being monitering these data since 5 July, and have decided to produce two rolls of honour. The first consists of the 16 states who have always been 90% or greater for Bush. These are:
- Alabama
- Alaska
- Georgia
- Idaho
- Indiana
- Kansas
- Kentucky
- Mississippi
- Montana
- Nebraska
- North Dakota
- Oklahoma
- South Dakota
- Texas
- Utah
- Wyoming
The second is the states who have been most likely to go for Bush on most weeks.
In joint sixth place: South Carolina and Wyoming (most likely once).
In joint fourth place: Mississippi and North dakota (most likely twice).
In third place: Oklahoma (most likely three times).
In second place: Alabama (most likely four times).
But the clear winner, being most likely to vote Bush on no fewer than nine occasions, the great state in which he has made his home - Texas.
Incidentally, I am sure that everybody will fall of their seats to discover that the position of utter dishonour goes to the District of Columbia, which has always been least likely to vote Bush. A Bush victory there has been ranked at 0.5%, 0.9% and 1%.
25
posted on
09/20/2004 3:01:25 PM PDT
by
tjwmason
(Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.)
To: CedarDave
, ballots are being printed right now, evidently without Nader, the excuse being that ballots are required to be printed a certain number of days before the election This was posted on another thread. Do you know if they can reprint them with Nader's name, because guess he will be able to run in NM after all.
To: jdege
27
posted on
09/20/2004 4:04:28 PM PDT
by
Momaw Nadon
(Goals for 2004: Re-elect President Bush, over 60 Republicans in the Senate, and a Republican House.)
To: sturmde
The slate for Maine should be divided into:
Maine (overall) 2 e-votes
Maine 1st District 1 e-vote
Maine 2nd District 1 e-vote
I wish TradeSports futures contracts would reflect the Electoral Votes according to the Congressional Districts in Maine and Nebraska.
28
posted on
09/20/2004 4:09:34 PM PDT
by
Momaw Nadon
(Goals for 2004: Re-elect President Bush, over 60 Republicans in the Senate, and a Republican House.)
To: tjwmason
Thank you very much for the rolls of honour.
29
posted on
09/20/2004 4:15:43 PM PDT
by
Momaw Nadon
(Goals for 2004: Re-elect President Bush, over 60 Republicans in the Senate, and a Republican House.)
To: Momaw Nadon
Truly have enjoyed watching Ohio progress from light pink to white to light blue now finally a bright blue. It has taken a lot of hard work and we will keep on working to keep Ohio in the Bush column. Thanks for your posting
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-30 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson