e-mail Scott at:
thebloggingcaesar
@electionprojection.com

February 15, 2004

Mail call

I've gotten a lot of email over the last week.  I've responded to most of it and posted some of it in the Reader Comments section of this website.  Be sure to check it out if you've written or if you're interested in reading what others think about the site and the prospects for the upcoming election.  A large majority of the feedback has been positive, with a sprinkling of dissension mixed in.   Keep those emails coming!

posted by Scott Elliott at 6:15pm 02/15/04

Link to this post |

February 14, 2004

Election Projection is one month old today

What a month this has been!  On January 14, I moved the Election Projection from a free hosting service to its current location.  The site that began on a whim has given me quite a ride this first month.  The response has been enormous, and I am humbled by it.  I would like to take this opportunity the express my gratitude and thanks to all who have visited, linked or referenced this site in its short life.  May God bless you all.  I look forward to seeing what God has in store for this site in the coming months.

posted by Scott Elliott at 11:50pm 02/14/04

Link to this post |

Projection vs. Prediction

As a clarification, I'd like to explain the difference between the projections and the predictions you'll see on this website.   Projections are located here.  They are the product of inserting recent polling data into the formula I created.  The results of the formula project how the election would turn out if it were held today.   Predictions, on the other hand, are my attempt to guess the actual results of the election come November.  They are listed here.  So, the projections will change from week to week as new polling data is released, while my predictions will only change when my views on the outcome change.

posted by Scott Elliott at 10:30pm 02/14/04

Link to this post |

Ralph Nader expected to run

According to The Seattle Times, Ralph Nader is likely to run again for president this year. (link via Viking Pundit) The article states:

Former Green Party candidate Ralph Nader is poised to declare that he will seek the presidency again this year, this time as an independent and despite a vigorous effort by the left to dissuade him, according to friends and associates.

This is, of course, good news for President Bush.  Nader voters will be comprised mostly of liberals and Democrats.  However, I don't think he will be nearly the draw he was last time.  In 2000, votes for Nader cost Al Gore the states of New Hampshire and Florida - and, in turn, the presidency.  Only die-hard protest voters will make the same statement this year.  I expect Nader's vote in November to be less than half his 2000 total.

posted by Scott Elliott at 8:30pm 02/14/04

Link to this post |

February 13, 2004

A "justified mistake"

I recommend checking out a great post over at Viking Pundit.  Eric Lindholm ties together three different articles very nicely to make the case that, regardless of the real WMD situation in Iraq, our war to take out Saddam was completely justified.  Be sure to read the post and the articles it references.  In conclusion, he writes:

It’s impossible to measure the abstract of a free Iraq versus 500+ dead American soldiers.  I’d like to think they died to prevent another 9/11, another U.S.S. Cole, another Khobar Towers.  I’d also like to think the world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein, Libya giving up their weapons, Syria on the ropes, and Al-Qaeda on the run.

Here, here!  To all those who have lost love ones in the struggle to bring down Saddam and bring freedom to the Iraqi people, you can raise your heads high.  Don't listen to the naysayers who want to degrade the loss of American life by politicizing the war.  Take comfort in knowing your loved ones died in the defense of this country even as they liberated another. Their sacrifice has, without a doubt, made our country safer.  I, for one, am deeply indebted to them, one and all.

posted by Scott Elliott at 11:10pm 02/13/04

Link to this post |

February 12, 2004

Polling data update

Due to the explosive nature of the revelation of John Kerry's possible affair, I thought it would be good to update the polling data.  Updating now will allow us to see what effects, if any, this story has on the numbers.

It appears that Bush's low-water mark may have been seen last week.  This update shows Bush regaining some of the advantage he lost last time.   Election Projection now has Bush back over 50% of the popular vote.  He is leading the Democrat by 2.18%, 50.59% to 48.41%, in that category.  The President picks up Wisconsin, adding 10 electoral votes to his total.  The electoral vote count now stands at 300-238.   I don't expect Bush's numbers to be as low as they were last time at least until the Democratic convention.  The inevitable bounce the Democratic candidate will get then may push the President's numbers back down to that level for a short time before they begin rebounding as we head to the GOP convention and then on to the election.

Since I began tracking these projections in August, 2003, the President's most impressive numbers have been 477 electoral votes and a 17.60% margin seen on the 12th of January. His previous lows were 181 EVs with a margin of -6.63% on September 5, 2003.

posted by Scott Elliott at 11:30pm 02/12/04

Link to this post |

The power of the early primaries

I just ran across an amazing set of numbers.  RealClearPolitics keeps a record of polls for the upcoming Democratic primaries.  I always enjoy watching the numbers they track there.  As I was browsing the data again tonight, something jumped out at me.  It is startling proof of the importance Iowa and New Hampshire have on the rest of the nominating process.  Look specifically at the numbers for California.

Here are the numbers in California from a field poll a week before Iowa:

Dean 25%, Clark 20%, Kerry 7%, Edwards 3%

That's some turnaround, huh?  It just demostrates once again how vital it is for candidates to start well.  In the race for the Democratic nomination, starting well, in most cases, equates to ending well.

posted by Scott Elliott at 8:45pm 02/12/04

Link to this post |

John Kerry, The Unfaithful

Has anyone not heard the latest? This is the type of bombshell to force me out of recovery early and back on the job.  According to Drudge, John Kerry has been caught in a recent affair.  Apparently, there's a lot a scrambling going on in the Kerry campaign - spin control, I'd imagine.  I don't want to get drawn into tabloid journalism, but, if this is true, I do want to address the political ramifications.

Judging from the Democrats' past history, Kerry's indescretions won't hurt him too bad among the Democratic faithful (pardon the pun).  The one unknown is Kerry's famous wife.  If Teresa is as "forgiving" as Hillary, Kerry can still wade through the rest of the Democratic primaries and secure the nomination.  However, if fidelity is more important to her than power, Kerry could face some potentially lethal political consequences at home.  "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."  Only time will tell, but at this point I'd say the Ketchup Lady holds the key.

If she decides to make a fuss, Kerry will probably implode as Wesley Clark predicted.  If she swallows her pride and opts to go along, Kerry can still pull this off.  Either way, the nomination is certainly back in play.  This is good news for Bush.  The longer it takes the Democrats to settle on a nominee, the more mud-slinging and fund-spending will be needed. So, the President stands to be the real winner, regardless of how this plays out.

Update:  Reader Tom alludes to another thought that I've been chasing around concerning this news.  If Kerry can hold on and win the nomination, one thing is certain.  The conservatives and moderates he'll face in the general election will care a whole lot more that he's sleeping around than the liberal Democrats who give him the nomination.  In other words, if Kerry does emerge to run against Bush, this development will definitely hurt him in November.

posted by Scott Elliott at 8:00pm 02/12/04

Link to this post |

February 9, 2004

No posts for a few days

I just wanted to let everyone know that I won't be posting for the next couple days.  I'm going under the knife Wednesday morning.  It's nothing too serious, but it will be the first time I've been put under since I was 4 years old.  I've got a lot of work to do tomorrow in advance of the surgery.  I expect my next post will probably be Thursday or Friday.  Talk to you shortly.

Update:  The surgery went well, and I'm back home laid up in bed.  Thank you to everyone for your comments, emails, and prayers.   They have been a real blessing to me.  I have many emails to respond to, and I plan on trying to get through them before next week.  Again, I sincerely appreciate your concern and your prayers.  May God bless you all.

posted by Scott Elliott at 11:55pm 02/09/04

Link to this post |

February 7, 2004

Polling data update

This week's polling data update is online.  John Kerry's high tide has washed away almost all Bush's prior advantage.   Election Projection now shows Bush leading the Democrat by a scant 0.38%, 49.69% to 49.31%, in popular vote percentage and only 290-248 in electoral votes.  The President has lost Wisconsin, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Maine (district 2), and Minnesota since the last update.

If the President loses just a little more ground, we'll be right back where we started after the election in 2000.  Bush leads Iowa now by only 1.1%, and New Mexico is practically tied. Interestingly, since I give Ralph Nader's votes to the Democrat, Bush's lead in New Hampshire is actually less than in Iowa.  He leads there by only 1.0%.

Since I began tracking these projections in August, 2003, the President's most impressive numbers have been 477 electoral votes and a 17.60% margin seen on the 12th of January. His previous lows were 181 EVs with a margin of -6.63% on September 5, 2003.

posted by Scott Elliott at 6:00pm 02/07/04

Link to this post |

February 6, 2004

Bush is headed for victory

Are you a Republican feeling discouraged by Bush's descent and Kerry's rise?  Do you worry that your beloved President is doomed to a re-election defeat just like his father?  Well, take heart my friends, here's just the thing for you.   Bush losing?  Get real.  I've got 21 reasons why there will be no moving day at the White House until 2009.  Pull up a chair, get yourself a drink, and relax as The Blogging Caesar brings you:

Twenty-one Reasons Why Bush Will Win

posted by Scott Elliott at 11:45pm 02/06/04

Link to this post |

It was a just war

Here's a great little article on the justification of the war against Saddam.  Sounds like the stuff I've been saying, here, for example.

posted by Scott Elliott at 8:40am 02/06/04

Link to this post |

Temporary numbers

Democrats are heralding his rise in the polls as proof of his "electability," while Republicans brush it off as a temporary high, induced by near wall-to-wall positive publicity.  The results of one particular question in Gallup's latest survey show the fleeting nature of Kerry's current political stature.   Gallup asks people if they have a favorable view of the two major parties. The results are eye-opening:   Republicans garnered the favor of survey participants by a slim 48-43% margin.  By contrast, Democrats were view favorably by a whopping 25% margin, 59-34%.

It's easy to see why Kerry is leading in the polls, isn't it?  If anyone thinks these numbers reflect the lasting sentiment of the electorate, you should check yourself in.  There's absolutely no way the Democratic party will be viewed that much more favorably than the GOP come November.  Rest assured Kerry's astronomically high polling numbers will settle back down to earth long before the first vote is cast.  The President will rise again.   It's just a matter of time...

posted by Scott Elliott at 1:45am 02/06/04

Link to this post |

Iraq, WMDs, and the truth

An interesting blog, soundfury, has posted an exhaustive and very important summary of all things WMD.  The author has scored several big time links for a thorough recap of the truth about what was said, what was believed, and what is now known about Saddam Hussein's WMDs.  The author also just happened to link this site in the post.  Yea!  No excerpt would do it justice, so just go read it.

posted by Scott Elliott at 1:20am 02/06/04

Link to this post |

February 5, 2004

A fork in time

Daniel Drezner paints an effective picture of what the future may hold for the President.  He explores both the optimistic and pessimistic outlooks.  He contends that if we take the positive fork in the road, Bush could be following Reagan's footsteps in 1984, leading to a landslide re-election and an undeniable mandate from the American people:

If the experiment of turning Iraq into something resembling a market democracy works out, it obviously gives lie to arguments that democratic forms of governance cannot thrive in the Arab world.  The occupation of Iraq has not run as smoothly as some would have liked.   But in less than a year there are positive signs that democracy has found fertile soil.  As former White House adviser Mary Matalin put it yesterday, "Getting a whole region to bring in the hallmarks of a modern state, private property, human rights, rights for women, a judicial system, market principles, it takes more than a campaign cycle."  Wait a few years--if Iraq looks more secure, more democratic, and more affluent, then the WMD contretemps will fade from view in the same way that Reagan's claims about "windows of vulnerability" vis-à-vis the Soviet nuclear arsenal suddenly vanished. A similar phenomenon is taking place on the economic front.  The current lack of job growth is frustrating, particularly with media reports focusing on the outsourcing of service sector jobs to faraway lands.  Yet in both the 1960's and the 1990's, bursts in productivity growth were a harbinger of employment gains down the road.  And sustained increases in employment and economic growth will partially alleviate the problems created by the looming budget deficit.

If the future sticks more to the negative road, Bush most probably will track the unenviable path of his father, suffering election defeat at the hands of a largely disapproving electorate. Here, he describes the negative view:

Iraq is not the cornerstone of remaking the Middle East, but a distraction from the more important goal of defeating Al Qaeda; the absence of WMD stockpiles merely reinforces the concept of Iraq as a sideshow.  Worse, the administration now seems less concerned with turning Iraq into a model Arab state than with getting large numbers of U.S. troops out of the country as quickly as possible--hardly a recipe for successful state-building.  If Iraq disintegrates into either civil war or general lawlessness, then the administration will have squandered a great deal of diplomatic capital for a failed state.  Iraq could well be to Bush what Lebanon was to Reagan. As for the economy, what's unusual about the Bush years is that productivity surged even during a downturn.  As Morgan Stanley's macroeconomic analysts bluntly state: "There's never been anything like it.  The U.S. economy is currently in the midst of the most profound hiring shortfall of any modern-day business cycle."  Even more alarming, this is happening despite expansionary fiscal and monetary policies and a moderate dollar depreciation (the latter of which should be helping to create jobs in the short run by stimulating exports). Over the long term, the explosive growth of the federal budget deficit has the potential to choke off private investment.  Reagan reluctantly raised taxes in 1982 when it became clear that the budget deficit would otherwise reach astronomical levels. Bush, by contrast, wants to make his tax cuts permanent.

Drezner then poses the obvious question, "Which side is right?"  He refrains from saying which path he believes we'll take.  I, on the other hand, don't mind risking being wrong.  While the arguments in both directions are solid, I believe the positive is more likely to be our eventual route, and it's going to be a mighty fun ride!

posted by Scott Elliott at 8:30am 02/05/04

Link to this post |

February 4, 2004

More strong numbers for Kerry

If you look at Survey USA's latest numbers for several upcoming primary states, it becomes clear just how tough it will be for John Kerry to lose the nomination.  Check this out:

• California:  Kerry 49%; Dean 18%, Edwards 12%, Clark 8%  Kerry by 31%!
• Ohio:  Kerry 44%; Dean 15%, Edwards 13%, Kucinich 7%  Kerry by 29%!
• Georgia:  Kerry 30%; Dean 15%, Edwards 15%  Kerry by 15% in the heart of Dixie!
• Tennessee:  Kerry 31%; Clark 26%, Edwards 20%  Kerry leading in another southern state!

posted by Scott Elliott at 4:30pm 02/04/04

Link to this post |

Great political website:  Political State Report

I just ran across a great website for political junkies (like me!).  Check out Political State Report.  They have gobs of state-by-state information on the upcoming elections.  I'll be a frequent visitor, and I'm adding it to my favorite links.

posted by Scott Elliott at 9:50am 02/04/04

Link to this post |

Wictory Wednesday

From PoliPundit:

The death tax is slowly being phased out.  But, because of quirky Senate rules, it'll be resurrected in a few years unless Congress and the president kill it permanently. Do you want to keep the death tax alive? John Kerry sure does.  He's voted against every attempt to kill the death tax.  If he becomes president, he'll veto any attempt by Congress to permanently abolish it.  Kerry believes that death and taxes aren't just the only certain things in life, but that death ought to be taxed. And the death tax isn't the only tax Kerry likes.  He opposed both of President Bush's major tax cuts that returned some of your money to you.   We can't let a tax-raising Massachusetts liberal like John Kerry become president. Today is Wictory Wednesday. Every Wednesday, I ask my readers to volunteer and/or donate to the Bush 2004 campaign. If you've already donated and volunteered for the Bush campaign, then talk to your friends and enlist them in this battle for America's very soul. If you're a blogger, you can join Wictory Wednesdays simply by putting up a post like this one every Wednesday, asking your readers to volunteer and/or donate to the Bush campaign.

If you do decide to join, e-mail PoliPundit at wictory@blogsforbush.com so that he can add you to the Wictory Wednesday blogroll, which will be part of the Wictory Wednesday post on all participating blogs:

posted by Scott Elliott at 7:45am 02/04/04

Link to this post |

Kerry's big night

The seven primaries held Tuesday did nothing to make me think predicting John Kerry to win the Democratic nomination was premature.  In fact, had Kerry pulled in another 3 or 4 percent in Oklahoma, the night would have been as good as I could have hoped for.   Yes, Edwards' sizeable victory in South Carolina and Kerry's close third in Oklahoma leaves a bit of suspense in the game, but no one could argue now that Kerry is not the prohibitive favorite.

From a GOP standpoint, Kerry's current position is very favorable for us.  He isn't so far out in front that Clark and, especially, Edwards will see it pointless to bash him.  Yet, he is the front runner, so bash him they will.  As a result, the Senator will not be nearly as pristine in voters' minds as he is now when Bush gets his chance at him this summer.  As for recent polls showing Kerry ahead of Bush:  Enjoy those numbers now, my fellow Americans on the left, because they'll look a lot different come September and on through election night.

Miscellaneous reactions: