John Thornton
>Having bet against the models back in 2000 in better for a Gore loss, I
>will reprise that and bet against them this year to predict a Bush loss.
>
>If folks want the reasons, here are the ones I gave back in July 2002 and
>when even fewer folks were thinking Bush would do anything other than romp
>to reelection.
>http://www.nathannewman.org/log/archives/000182.shtml
>http://www.nathannewman.org/log/archives/000183.shtml
>
>I said back then that Bush's lies would kill him in the end, even before
>the Iraq War. As I said:
>
>"the bottom line is that Bush is a Political Liar and that is what kills
>candidates. He made too many cynical promises in 2000 with his
>"compassionate conservatism" talk that he had no intention of fulfilling---
>and the voters will punish him for that as that becomes clearer. He has no
>intention (or money), despite promises, for really dealing with the health
>care crisis, decent funding for schools, or for maintaining social security
>stability."
>
>Add in lies on WMDs et al and Bush just loses on credibility to make
>promises for a second term that anyone will take seriously.
>
>-- Nathan
>
>----- Original Message -----
>Subject: [lbo-talk] it's Bush!
>
>
>Academics Use Formulas to Predict Bush Win
>By Rolando Garcia
>
>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Polls may show the presidential race in a dead
>heat, but for a small band of academics who use scientific formulas
>to predict elections President Bush (news - web sites) is on his way
>to a sizable win.
>
>That's the conclusion of a handful of political scientists who, with
>mixed results, have honed the art of election forecasting by devising
>elaborate mathematical formulas based on key measures of the nation's
>economic health and the public's political views.
>
>But one glaring error is what the forecasters are perhaps best
>remembered for: they predicted in 2000 that Democrat Al Gore (news -
>web sites) would win easily, pegging his total at between 53 and 60
>percent of the two-party vote.
>
>This dealt a fatal blow to the models' credibility, said Thomas Mann,
>a scholar at the Brookings Institution who has written about election
>forecasts.