Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama 52% Victory Forecast by Yale Professor's Economy Model

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
swag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 07:23 AM
Original message
Obama 52% Victory Forecast by Yale Professor's Economy Model
Source: Bloomberg

Oct. 10 (Bloomberg) -- With 25 days before Election Day, a forecasting model that has called the top vote-getter in the last three presidential races predicts a solid victory for Barack Obama.

The Democratic presidential candidate will get about 52 percent of the popular vote on Nov. 4, according to an economic model developed by Yale University Professor Ray Fair.

``The model has predicted all along that the Democrat will get the majority of the two-party vote, and it's still saying that,'' Fair, who has been forecasting a Democratic victory since November 2006, said in a telephone interview from New Haven, Connecticut.

Fair, 66, cautions that his algorithm doesn't measure the effects of race, age or foreign policy, all of which may play an outsize role this election, the first in which a black candidate is a major-party nominee. ``All the political stuff isn't accounted for,'' said Fair.



Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aPnl.m5.6Sa8&refer=home
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
unapatriciated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 07:54 AM
Response to Original message
1. 52% is not solid enough...
It falls within the margin of cheating
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
galateaparty Donating Member (5 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 07:56 AM
Original message
You've got that right n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
galateaparty Donating Member (5 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. You've got that right n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crim son Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. What are you talking about? It's a freaking "MANDATE."
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 08:35 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. yes
Edited on Fri Oct-10-08 08:35 AM by Skittles
it means theft is the vehicle by which a repuke mandate becomes possible
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crim son Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Okay, when looked at from that angle,
I see the problem. Fuck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HopeHoops Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #3
16. According to Bush, a second place popular showing + 5 USSC votes is a mandate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crim son Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Exactly my point, HopeHoops!
I'm hopeful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
apnu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
4. Translation: Its a coin toss. :( (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
5. So they predicted Gore 2000 and Kerry 2004?
And predicting Clinton in 1996 wasn't exactly a tough one. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fluffdaddy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Wow 1 out of 3. I now know where to stick their predictions
:hurts:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. no, they are three for three
they're saying who SHOULD have won
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
road2000 Donating Member (995 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
7. This says nothing.
I'd like to know which candidate he called as "the top vote-getter" in 2000 and 2004. And even though he says he's not counting "all the political stuff," it appears the Bradley Effect is taken into account.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northsongs Donating Member (77 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
11. It's all about the Electoral College anyway...
and in that regard, Obama is WAY ahead!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tclambert Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
12. These are good prediction tricks.
Instead of predicting the future, you predict the present, or even better, the past. Obama is already at 52%. The other trick is to add a lot of weasel words, so if your basic prediction is wrong, you can claim success anyway. "Race, age, foreign policy." "All the political stuff isn't accounted for."

I do prognostication as a hobby. On other posts, I've made my predictions for this election. A brief recap: 1) Obama wins. 2) He wins by a clear majority. 3) He doesn't make it to 60%. 4) McCain may dip below 40%. 5) Obama wins electoral college vote by a margin of about 200.

Note there are some weasel words in there, and if things remain unchanged from right now, I can claim 5 out of 5. See? Predict the present.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
13. This prediction doesn't take into account The Bushie Voter Suppression and Election Fraud Model
Edited on Fri Oct-10-08 09:56 AM by tom_paine
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carincross Donating Member (145 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
14. Greg Palast says Obama needs at least 56%! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorentz Donating Member (302 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-10-08 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. And Greg Palast is more qualified to make a prediction than a Yale professor because...?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC