Laying Bets: W Will Win

Max Sawicky sawicky at
Tue Aug 15 07:32:36 PDT 2000

As I recall, I said after the convention Gore would be creaming Bush in two-way polls, but the Nader-Buchanan factor made the ultimate outcome uncertain. I'm standing by that prediction, such as it is. Gore has smart people working for him. Regardless of how witless he is in some impromptu settings, they're going to make sure he looks good.

I agree w/Nathan that complacency is the enemy of the Dems. that's why Clinton tried to emphasize differences between the parties and the importance of turning out. I sensed an implicit message to Nader-inclined voters there. I thought it was Clinton's best speech, incidentally.

There is in fact one major difference between the candidates. Gore seems much more likely to me to protect budget surpluses from either tax cuts or spending increases. One would think that would be decisive in how elites treat the candidates.

Interesting piece this a.m. in the Post about evangelicals and Jews, to the effect that there has been a rise of philo-judaism among fundamentalists over the past decade or more. The same stereotypes, but seen in a benign light, sort of like we're ET. I guess that's an improvement, tho I suspect it could turn around under adverse circumstances.


Nathan Newman wrote:

>Doug and Max a week ago predicted that Gore will win the election.

Not exactly. I said the official LBO model is likely to predict a Gore victory. But I'm not convinced. I'm trying to figure out the consensus of the ruling class, which seems tilting towards W.


More information about the lbo-talk mailing list