Dude...you are the man!

Please let my state get it's head out of it's A$$, come on for the big win PA.

Quoted: I was about to send the EMS out to your place, fearing the worse.

Red X.

I see WA went from Dark Blue to light Blue.....

Watch for changing colors......Blue border next!

I SWEAR, I'M GOING TO HAVE A NERVOUS BREAKDOWN LOOKING AT THESE EVERY DAY!!!!!

I  DONT THINK I CAN TAKE THIS LEVEL OF SUSPENSE FOR ANOTHER 20-DAYS  

Get that PA and we are looking good!

My numbers never change


45 states.


SGatr15

outstanding!

Thanks,  Pray for us up here in the cold and frozen tundra.  It's the fools that live in the metro that scare me.  We live in the country and MOST of the signs in yards out here are for W.   A drive into the metro and most signs are "give peace a chance"??????

Oct. 13 projection of the final map

Projected Electoral College Votes:   Kerry 203   Bush 316


www.electoral-vote.com removed the link for the final projection page because he was embarrased that it continues to predict a Bush victory, however  he still produces the Final Prediction Map but does not provide a link. I will provide a link

Link here (not published)

Colorado currently has a propositon on the ballet that would divy up its electoral votes according to percentage of the vote each candidate gets in that state. If passed, it would come into effect this election. Hence, if Kerry got WI and OH, which are toss up states as you say, and got the majority split from Colorado, he could win.

And just so you know they will always deny anything that isn't good for them.

One more debate to go, Bush better nail this one. He's gotta beat Kerry by alot for any of the media to say it was at least a tie.

Quoted: Colorado currently has a propositon on the ballet that would divy up its electoral votes according to percentage of the vote each candidate gets in that state. If passed, it would come into effect this election. Hence, if Kerry got WI and OH, which are toss up states as you say, and got the majority split from Colorado, he could win.

Even if it passes, it would not stand up in court.  This decision is contrary to the Constitution.   In several cases in our nation's history when conflict between state laws and the Constitution have arisen, as established in the Constitution, the primacy of the Constitution has always been maintained.  Ultimately, this was decided by the outcome of the "War of Northern Agression".

It will remain thus...

Whats the deal with NH, and NJ?

Anyone notice that the bigger the lead is between Bush over Kerry that the more anti-Bush crap the "E-V" guy starts to write in the text? By election time, it will probably be 4-5 pages long

Quoted: Quoted: Colorado currently has a propositon on the ballet that would divy up its electoral votes according to percentage of the vote each candidate gets in that state. If passed, it would come into effect this election. Hence, if Kerry got WI and OH, which are toss up states as you say, and got the majority split from Colorado, he could win. Even if it passes, it would not stand up in court.  This decision is contrary to the Constitution.   In several cases in our nation's history when conflict between state laws and the Constitution have arisen, as established in the Constitution, the primacy of the Constitution has always been maintained.  Ultimately, this was decided by the outcome of the "War of Northern Agression". It will remain thus...

Try again, 2 states already split the EC votes and the constitution specifically says the states determine the method.

Hiram, i too look forward to your map in the morning! believe me i do.

Eric, and i thought i was the only one that did my morning 'thing' with the dog! it pisses the wife off, well, sort of! we both get up at 5AM.

be well
maxwell

Hey Nevada get your head out of your ass!  NJ a toss-up, I love it!  I saw Cheney was campaigning there the other day.

GunLvr

Actually, go to the Gallup website and run the electoral numbers - almost anyway you cut it, a decision to split Colorado's electoral votes hurts Kerry because there are few scenarios where a split in the Colorado votes gives Kerry a decisive edge.

In most of the poll-based scenarios I ran, the extra 4 votes Kerry got from a Colorado split made no difference. However, in the event of a really close race between Bush and Kerry, there were several scenarios where a split of the Colorado vote actually cost Kerry the election.

From a legal standpoint, I don't know how they are going to argue that they can apply the decision to split electoral votes retroactively - especially since the Republican governor can just decline to certify the law until after the Electoral College has already voted. Seems like a stupid and desparate measure by the Dems - they are going to eternally screw Colorado in voter representation in hopes of having the tiniest thread of a potential legal challenge that MIGHT let them win this election. Talk about hard up...

you know, I see a patern here...
Left Coast is blue... East Coast is half blue...

I am so glad I don't live in NJ any more.

It ain't over till the morning after...regardless of polls and predictions....these numbers and maps mean nothing....

I'm remaining pessimistic until I wake up the next morning and see that W has won...

WOW!

California is listed as "Weak Kerry!"

That surprizes even me!


SGatr15

Quoted: Please let my state get it's head out of it's A$$, come on for the big win PA.

Com on, MN, and pull our collective A$$ out and vote for Bush!  It was neutral a few days ago, and now it's leaning Kerry.  Rats!

But last night on the radio I heard a segment start something like "And now that Kerry has taken a lead over Bush in the poles...."  Funny how diff people can look at the same thing and see something totally differant.

Oh thank you bearer of good news!

Quoted: You might be waiting a lot longer than the next morning... let's hope not, but I think the scumbag liberals were tame in 2000 compared to what they will be this time around.

My fear as well.  Let's hope it isn't close.

Quoted: You might be waiting a lot longer than the next morning... let's hope not, but I think the scumbag liberals were tame in 2000 compared to what they will be this time around.

agreed. i'm hoping President Bush takes at least 300 EVs, if he does, it will be hard for the libs to challenge.

Quoted: Quoted: You might be waiting a lot longer than the next morning... let's hope not, but I think the scumbag liberals were tame in 2000 compared to what they will be this time around. agreed. i'm hoping President Bush takes at least 300 EVs, if he does, it will be hard for the libs to challenge.

Sometimes, there's no such thing as overkill.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Colorado currently has a propositon on the ballet that would divy up its electoral votes according to percentage of the vote each candidate gets in that state. If passed, it would come into effect this election. Hence, if Kerry got WI and OH, which are toss up states as you say, and got the majority split from Colorado, he could win. Even if it passes, it would not stand up in court.  This decision is contrary to the Constitution.   In several cases in our nation's history when conflict between state laws and the Constitution have arisen, as established in the Constitution, the primacy of the Constitution has always been maintained.  Ultimately, this was decided by the outcome of the "War of Northern Agression". It will remain thus... Try again, 2 states already split the EC votes and the constitution specifically says the states determine the method.

State LEGISLATURES, not ballot initiative.

Quoted: Actually, go to the Gallup website and run the electoral numbers - almost anyway you cut it, a decision to split Colorado's electoral votes hurts Kerry because there are few scenarios where a split in the Colorado votes gives Kerry a decisive edge. In most of the poll-based scenarios I ran, the extra 4 votes Kerry got from a Colorado split made no difference. However, in the event of a really close race between Bush and Kerry, there were several scenarios where a split of the Colorado vote actually cost Kerry the election. From a legal standpoint, I don't know how they are going to argue that they can apply the decision to split electoral votes retroactively - especially since the Republican governor can just decline to certify the law until after the Electoral College has already voted. Seems like a stupid and desparate measure by the Dems - they are going to eternally screw Colorado in voter representation in hopes of having the tiniest thread of a potential legal challenge that MIGHT let them win this election. Talk about hard up...

I agree, but it sets a dangerous precedent.

If te popular vote in the state can force the electoral vote to reflect the popular vote, then we have a de facto disbandment of the electoral college.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Colorado currently has a propositon on the ballet that would divy up its electoral votes according to percentage of the vote each candidate gets in that state. If passed, it would come into effect this election. Hence, if Kerry got WI and OH, which are toss up states as you say, and got the majority split from Colorado, he could win. Even if it passes, it would not stand up in court.  This decision is contrary to the Constitution.   In several cases in our nation's history when conflict between state laws and the Constitution have arisen, as established in the Constitution, the primacy of the Constitution has always been maintained.  Ultimately, this was decided by the outcome of the "War of Northern Agression". It will remain thus... Try again, 2 states already split the EC votes and the constitution specifically says the states determine the method. State LEGISLATURES, not ballot initiative.

Excellent point Torf!

Article II, Section 1 specifically states: "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors..." Ballot initiative is NOT legislative action, and may be Constitutionally void.

It would almost definitely end up in Federal Court to resolve this very issue.

Quoted: Quoted: You might be waiting a lot longer than the next morning... let's hope not, but I think the scumbag liberals were tame in 2000 compared to what they will be this time around. agreed. i'm hoping President Bush takes at least 300 EVs, if he does, it will be hard for the libs to challenge.

Sad to think so many support this lying socalist SOS

Quoted: I agree, but it sets a dangerous precedent. If te popular vote in the state can force the electoral vote to reflect the popular vote, then we have a de facto disbandment of the electoral college.

Yes; but voters would have to be borderline retarded to accept it as it practically guarantees their state will be ignored in favor of winner-take-all states when the federal hog trough is wheeled out. It will also never gain ground in any of the "solid" states... note how the Dems aren't trying to push this idea in California or New York?

Quoted: My numbers never change 45 states. SGatr15

Amen, Brother.

Quoted: Quoted: I agree, but it sets a dangerous precedent. If te popular vote in the state can force the electoral vote to reflect the popular vote, then we have a de facto disbandment of the electoral college. Yes; but voters would have to be borderline retarded to accept it as it practically guarantees their state will be ignored in favor of winner-take-all states when the federal hog trough is wheeled out. It will also never gain ground in any of the "solid" states... note how the Dems aren't trying to push this idea in California or New York?

The winner take all electorial college was put into the Constitution for a reason, so that the candidates would not ignore the people in the less populated states, this was a stroke of genius on the founding fathers of the USA. Canada has a poplular vote for govt officials, and that is the reason why the western provinces have so little say in the laws governing Canada. Most of Canadians laws come out of the Canadian southeast areas of Canada such as Ontario province where most of the population resides.

I predict 295-305 EVs for Bush...

All evidence to this point indicated that will be the likely result...

www.electoral-vote.com was running in the 300-vote range since Sept, and is now BACK in that range...

www.presidentelect.org has allways been 295-305...

And so on...

www.nationalreview.com/gregg/gregg200410120833.asp

George W. Bush was opening a significant lead over John Kerry until that fateful Thursday night when he slouched at his podium and appeared disgruntled and tired. The national polls then started to tighten and Bush's second debate performance, along with that of his running mate, seems to have been good enough to stop the bleeding and freeze the race.

Whatever the national polls may say, though, a simple national plurality won't elect a president this year. A series of concurrent majorities in states all over the nation will choose the next president and that race is not quite as tight as the national polls indicate. The battle for the electoral college is close enough that either candidate has the possibility of winning, but Kerry has a hard row to hoe to get there.

After consulting numerous state polls and historical trends, here is where I see the race going into the final presidential debate.

Bush Red: Bush seems to have wrapped up 21 states with 176 electoral votes. Not surprisingly, most of these states spread through Dixie and up into the upper Midwest and mountain states.

Kerry Blue: Kerry seems to have insurmountable leads in 10 states and the District of Columbia, worth a combined 153 electoral votes. More than half of Kerry's solid votes come from just California and New York. The remainder of the Kerry states come from the northeast corridor, except for Hawaii and Illinois.

Looking only at the states solidly in one camp or another gives the impression of a rather tight electoral-college battle. However, the race in the paler states demonstrates Bush's significant advantage.

Bush Pink: Bush seems likely to win another 8 states worth 88 electoral votes.

Kerry Powder Blue: Kerry is poised to win 5 more states worth 67 electoral votes, including the essential states of Pennsylvania and Michigan.

Toss-up Yellow: Six states are toss-ups and represent 53 electoral-college votes. Additionally, this year Maine's rural 2nd congressional district seems to be up for grabs. Maine has never split its electoral-college votes but this year it seems possible that Bush could win the district but lose the state to Kerry.

In the states that are clearly leaning one way or another, Bush is ahead 264 electoral votes to 221 for John Kerry. That means that as of right now, if he holds his leads in red and pink states, Bush only needs six electoral votes from the yellow states that have not yet made up their minds. That means Bush can actually do what many have thought impossible for a Republican — win without Ohio. Bush could win New Hampshire, which he won in 2000 and New Mexico, which he only lost by 366 votes in 2000 and win the presidency with 273 electoral votes. If he wins Ohio, he can win the presidency handily without taking any other of the Yellow toss-up states. Indeed, if Bush wins Ohio's 20 electoral votes, which I assume in the end he will, he can afford to lose up to 14 of the electoral votes now showing pink and leaning his way.

Kerry's road to the presidency is much more difficult. Starting from a base of only 220 electors, he has to win almost all the yellow toss-up states while holding all those leaning his way today. In fact, as things stand now, the only yellow state he can afford to lose is New Hampshire, which would give him exactly the 270 needed to win. Kerry has almost no room for error. Unless he can cut into the states leaning Bush's way, he has to run the table in every toss-up state except the Granite State. If he loses Ohio, which is likely, he would have to find 17-20 electoral votes from the pink states leaning Bush. He can do it, but a strategy for Kerry to win without Ohio could almost only come about by pulling off a victory in that state we remember so well from 2000 — Florida.

Even after his poor debate performance, the electoral map tilts Bush's way with Kerry still trying to firm up the Gore states of 2000 so he can move aggressively to take the battle to Bush on his home turf. Rather than the national polls, follow the yellow-state road to the White House in 2004.

I hope it isn't even a close call. Maybe then the left will get the message.

keep posting this ridiculous electoral post count shit like it's credible or means anything. this is a dogfight we'll be lucky to win.

Quoted: keep posting this ridiculous electoral post count shit like it's credible or means anything.

In the end, the electoral vote count means everything.

Quoted: keep posting this ridiculous electoral post count shit like it's credible or means anything. this is a dogfight we'll be lucky to win.

It's so much easier to be pessimistic isn't it?  

Edited to add:  

Quoted: Quoted: keep posting this ridiculous electoral post count shit like it's credible or means anything. In the end, the electoral vote count means everything.

you don't say.