Posted on 03/10/2008 12:53:54 PM PDT by Momaw Nadon
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 2008 Presidential Election.
If the traders are correct, the Republican Presidential candidate would receive 232 Electoral Votes and the Democratic Presidential candidate would receive 306 Electoral Votes.
If the weighted probabilities of the Republican Presidential candidate winning in the states are added up, and then divided by 538, and multiplied by 100, then the Republican Presidential candidate should get 240.18 Electoral Votes.
270 Electoral Votes are needed to win the Presidency.
Opinions and commentary are welcome.
2008 Projected Presidential Electoral Votes as of 3/3/2008
2008 Projected Presidential Electoral Votes as of 2/25/2008
2008 Projected Presidential Electoral Votes as of 2/18/2008
2008 Projected Presidential Electoral Votes as of 2/11/2008
2008 Projected Presidential Electoral Votes as of 2/4/2008
2008 Projected Presidential Electoral Votes as of 1/28/2008
2008 Projected Presidential Electoral Votes as of 1/21/2008
2008 Projected Presidential Electoral Votes as of 1/14/2008
2008 Projected Presidential Electoral Votes as of 1/7/2008
That map seems to assume an Obama candidacy, as it gives the Dems states that would seem to favor Obama (e.g. Virginia, Colorado) rather than states that would seem to favor Clinton (Florida, Arkansas, Nevada).
In a race with Obama, Surveyusa gives PA and NJ to McCain. The PA race isn’t close (McCain by 5); the NJ race is essentially a tie but they give it to McCain. VA is also a tie, but Obama wins by one vote so they give it to him.
I will still be surprised if Obama wins VA.
No matter how discouraged anyone may be by these numbers, I am surprised that the RATS are not ahead by a lot more. IIRC Kerry and Dukakis were leading by 15 points around this time of the 2004 and 1988 elections. Most polls that show Obama and Clinton leading show leads in the low single digits.
Shocking....my state (Maryland) is projected to vote for the Democrat.
However, I believe Dole was up quite a bit over Clingon at this point in 1996. It is hard to say, however, as Dole was still fighting for the nomination at this time. Going into the primary season, Dole was way up... shortly after, Clinton. I don’t think it will take long for the MSM to Dole McCain after he actually wins the nomination.
It was even better for Bush-Quayle back in 1992 at this point.
A lot can happen between now and November.
Right now the dems are getting all the attention because it is really close. If Hillary is the nominee, a lot of blacks will feel like they (once again) got shafted by the democrat party.
If Obama wins, a lot of moderate democrats will vote for McCain.
Personally, I think Obama has the dem race locked up. And he has peaked way to early. By the time we get to November, people will be over him.
Republican electoral prospects have been improving. Flip Colorado, Virginia, and Ohio ( all very plausible ) and you have an electoral majority for the GOP. The major hazard remains the economy, and who voters will blame for any serious downturn.
Obama will not carry Virginia against McCain. Won’t happen. Bank on it.
Using the probabilities in the table above, the expected value of the GOP vote is 238 to Democrats 300.
Based on 20,000 simulations, the probability of Republicans getting at least 270 electoral college votes is 20.38%.
-PJ
Actually Obama’s stronger in Nevada than Clinton (whose fav. rating there is high 30s). At this point Obama has a small edge over McCain there but I don’t expect it to last.
We’d better start getting used to stinky poo...of one kind or another.
McCain would be favored (if slightly) to carry Pennsylvania versus Obama, as opposed to Hillary.
Yes, if the election where held today. We have a lot on Obama - hardly scratched the surface yet.
Survey USA is a quality pollster. However, their Presidential maps are odd. Obama takes ND and is competitive in ND. Plus Texas a battleground state?
Yeah, Virginia just isn't ready to vote for a liberal black Democrat, at least not in a statewide race.
ND and NE are both weird -- Nebraska almost elected two Democrat congressmen in '06 and between them they have three Democrat Senators. I think in the end they'll go for McCain, but the Heartland can spring for charisma. I'm thinking about how Montana (which is similar to ND poltically) is now dominated by Dems on the state level, and went for Bill Clinton in '92.
As for Texas, it's not now and won't soon be a battleground state, but Texas is only really at heart +10 GOP, not +20. GOPers have been doing better than normal there, of late, partly because of the DeLay redistricting, partly because of the unbelievable incompetence of the TDP, and partly because Texans are proud of having a native son at the top of their ticket. With Bush leaving office, my guess is that Dems will do a little better there, but won't be able to present a credible threat to a GOP candidate.
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.