I dunno. I haven't checked his numbers, but Sabato is showing a large chunk of the South as being narrow wins for Bush. To me, that raises questions about accuracy similar to what I'd have if I saw a WWII movie that had British troops carrying Moisin-Nagant rifles. (Or Soviet troops with Lee-Enfields)

Haven't been paying much attention to Elections 2004 (as a Malaysian, as long Ralph Nader have no chance on earth or in heaven of winning, either way doesn't affect me).

But I'm rather suprise California is firmly Kerry's state. You'd think after Gray David and with AH-nold, the state would at least would be too close to call... Hmm...

The WSJ looks about right for now. Let's see what kind of bounce (if any) Kerry gets from the convention. The polls the past week or so have been moving slightly in Bush's direction. Also note that more of the yellow states are ones Kerry must win to match Gore's wins in 2000 (i.e. PA, WA, OR, MI, MN, IA) than Bush (OH, MO, FL). As for the election the predictions are for a close Kerry win (i.e. Sabato) or Bush win. I think Bush will begin to pull away after the GOP convention and we'll see a repeat of '96 or '88 (solid but not spectular win).

I think Bush holds Nevada and WVA and takes Pennsylvania. Just a hunch.

That's a very generous map for Kerry, and one that I doubt will hold. It's probably the best he could hope to do.

I don't think there's any way Kerry gets Florida, Michigan, Wisconsin, *and* Pennsylvania. Sabato awarding Ohio to a defeated Bush also goes against 50 years of history. The last time Ohio voted for a losing Republican was Nixon in '60...and Kerry is no Kennedy.

I don't quite think the Bush can pull off a Reagan level win (although if he really rebounds after the convention it's possible), but he'll at least match Clinton's handling of Dole in 1996. There's a lot of similarities between this race and that one, and Kerry just doesn't have what it takes to win broad support.

Poppycock. Complete poppycock.

Sabato has been making faulty predictions for years.

Scarey, that looks about right.

1- Don't expect much of a 'post-convention bounce' for Kerry. For challengers, the convention is the place where it is settled once and for all which of several candidates will be THE MAN, and who will be his running mate. The other candidates give "we're all behind you" speeches, and their supporters present a united front, and whoever gets to be the Great (fill in party preference here) Hope gets introduced to the public and vice versa. For Kerry, all of this happened months ago. In effect, he had his post-convention bounce already. To quote Jack Nicholson: "Did you ever think that this might be as good as it gets?"

2- My personal betting line - gut feeling- is Bush by 5%. There will be enough to keep him in office, but not to be played as a mandate.

3- All that said, Bush could still lose the race with just a few bad decisions. Biggest- but not only- example: If a continuance of the AWB lands on his desk and he signs it, he might as well write out his resignation before putting the pen down.

4-What we ALL should be watching is the Congressional races. On that, my bet is that the Reps will continue to make small gains in the House and will probably lose the Senate (through too many Reps retiring at once and through the oft-fabled ability of the RNC to screw up any given good thing without apparent effort).

Wow, Sabato's really going out on a limb here. It looks just like the 2000 Electoral map with the exception of NV and NH.

Note that if you take Sabato's map, and then flip any one out of Nevada, West Virginia, or New Mexico to Bush, you've got an extremely plausable recipe for an electoral tie.

If you use a tabbed browser to redirect javascript popups you can get the link to the OJ tool

Dave P - I agree with #1 (this may be Kerry's high point) and #2 (modest Bush win). For #3 I figured Bush's statement on the AWB was meaningless in that he knows the GOP house will never get it to his desk. For #4 if the GOP doesn't pick 4 Senate seats it will be a dissapointment. Illinois is a sure loss while Georgia is almost a sure gain so they cancel. GOP has good pickup opportunities in Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina, South Carolina, and South Dakota while they should hold Alaska, Oklahoma, and Colorado. Note that all of these states, except Florida, should be easily won by Bush.
As for the electoral map polls show Bush ahead in WV and nearly tied with Kerry in IA, MN, WI, and NH. And if Bush wins by 5% he probably pulls out some other states like NV, PA.

3- All that said, Bush could still lose the race with just a few bad decisions. Biggest- but not only- example: If a continuance of the AWB lands on his desk and he signs it, he might as well write out his resignation before putting the pen down.

...and that's why the Congressional party leaders aren't going to let it get to his desk- the D's tried attaching it to one bill as an amendment, and the R's killed the bill on account of it. That thing's going to die in committee.

I was reading Will Saletan's diary of his trip to West Virginia. He basically couldn't find anyone who would publicly admit to supporting Kerry. And this is from a guy who has been almost Begala like in his reflexive Bush-bashing in recent years.

I don't buy Sabato's predictions. If it gets close, they can just start running that clip of Kerry calling all US soldiers war criminals. That should be enough to seal Western Virginia and every southern state.

AWW, Rosignol: Don't forget, there's an awful lot of legislation being legally enforced today- including the original Federal gun control laws, IIRC- that got greenlighted because everybody thought that somebody else would kill it. Bush's announcement might have been good tactics but it was lousy politics; convincing your party base that you do not share their beliefs and will betray them at the first chance is NOT BRIGHT.

The AWB was only one illustrative example, however. I'm sure y'all could come up with a half-dozen more ways that Bush II could imitate Bush I (lose the election by alienating his party base) without trying hard. Kerry may be as nonpresidential as they come but Bush is a poor campaigner.

Sabato basically has Kerry taking all the states Gore took and picking off Nevada, West Virginia, AND New Hamspshire. I could see New Hampshire and maybe WV (though Saleton's comments mentioned above make me doubt that) but Nevada? no way. Plus I'm skeptical of Kerry's ability keep New Mexico, and it wouldn't take much to tip Wisconsin, Minnesota or Iowa Bush's way. I'm thinking Sabato's partisanship has affected his numbers ths time around. This is fun spec, but not to be taken seriously until after the GOP convention next Month.

Re West Virginia - at RealClearPolitics the last two WV polls listed (both by Zogby who tends to favor Dems) show Bush at +6 and +8. Except for a few polls in early June which showed Kerry with a small lead (again Zogby polls) Bush has had a steady single digit lead in this state. WV should be fairly solid for Bush barring a big setback.

This kind of reporting is dependent on polls. Polls help shape the voting without being actively involved in the political process. Are you like me? Do you grow weary of the constant polls, yet they're reported as news? Well... here's an answer to show the pollsters what we all think of the seemingly neverending polls.
www.lietothepollsters.com is a site where you can register your choice: whether you'll tell the truth, or lie to the pollsters when they call. (So far, it's in favor of lying!)

If enough of us sign up we could render results useless. Or, we could at least have some fun in the process. For those activists among us, what better way to thwart a process that has become part of the political process?