GW has lost his lead. - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-30-2004, 03:30 PM   #61
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:59 AM

Fear not little flock

WASHINGTON (AP) - Labor Department staff, analyzing statistics from private economists, report in an internal memo that President Bush is likely to do "much better" in Tuesday's election than the polls are predicting.

The Kerry campaign said the analysis was an improper use of taxpayer money, and the Labor Department acknowledged Friday, "Clearly, this kind of armchair political analysis doesn't belong in government memos, even if they are entirely internal."

The Labor Department report, obtained by The Associated Press, includes an analysis of economic models that suggest Bush will beat Democrat John Kerry. Titled "In Focus: Predicting the Election Outcome," the memo says, "Nearly every single model has him winning."

"Some show the margin of victory being smaller than the models' inherent margin of error, while others report the lead as substantial. And this is without the consideration of a third-party candidate."

Bush's win of the popular vote could be 57.5 percent, 55.7 percent or 51.2 percent, said the paper, dated Oct. 22 and prepared by the department's Employment and Training Administration staff for the assistant labor secretary.

The Bush administration blamed midlevel employees for preparing inappropriate government material.

"This appears to be an internal ETA document prepared by midlevel ETA staff," said Labor Department spokesman Ed Frank.

Kerry's campaign contended the Bush administration was wasting taxpayers' money.

"If the Bush administration focused more on the economy and less on politics, George Bush would not be the first president in 70 years to lose jobs," said Kerry campaign spokesman Phil Singer. "George Bush has turned the government into his own taxpayer-funded political machine."

The document also includes a Washington Post story, an article from Monster.com and charts and briefs on the latest economic indicators.

One factor in the election that has been "downplayed is the president's popularity," a variable the report says may be important. "Fortunately, there are models (that) incorporate this concept," it says.

The economic models are not infallible, but they do "systematically measure past data, which is a far cry better than relying on anecdotal evidence," the paper says. The models looked at an array of economic indicators, including gross domestic product, unemployment and inflation.

The analysis also discusses a futures market that lets players bid on a probable election outcome. It also checked Web sites of oddsmakers in America and abroad.
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-30-2004, 03:43 PM   #62
New Yorker
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,637
Local Time: 08:59 AM
I call bullshit. Once again, the Bush admin. is using a non-partisan institution for partisan efforts. Oh what a coincidence -- a leaked document about Bush winning two days before the election from a government agency. go figure.

And let's really look at this garbage. It includes an article from Monster.com about the economy? If I want news about the economy, I would go to the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, Business Week etc. Not Monster.com. And the latest economic indicators eh? Let's look at the economic indicators from this week:

-- Consumer Confidence Index -- 92.8. Consensus estimate was 94.0 and previous month was 96.7. No president has won when October Consumer Confidence was below 100.
-- Initial Jobless Claims -- up 20k. Economists expected a 7k increase.
-- GDP -- +3.7%. Analysts expected a 4.3% increase.
-- New home sales -- +3.5%. Last month saw a 9.4% increase so obviously there was a slow down despite Bush repeatedly saying that the housing market is strong.

I'm really glad I got that $5 tax break from the government this year so my money wouldn't all be wasted on this crap.
__________________

__________________
sharky is offline  
Old 10-30-2004, 04:50 PM   #63
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:59 AM
hi sharky
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-30-2004, 05:01 PM   #64
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
sue4u2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: hatching some plot, scheming some scheme
Posts: 6,628
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox

I love it when people forget that this election is not based on who wins the most votes.
What exactly would it take to abolish the electorial college system?
I really take offense to the fact that my state takes my vote and gives it to Bush, who I'm not voting for.
Can I start a petition or a class action suit? It wasn't originally to be used forever anyway.. I don't think, was it?
Just really ticks me off..
__________________
sue4u2 is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 01:31 AM   #65
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:59 AM
Re: GW has lost his lead.

Quote:
Originally posted by thane
click link.

GW has lost his lead.
as in pencil?


Is that why Laura was ordering the little blue pills from CanadianDrugs.com?
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 01:34 AM   #66
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Kieran McConville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Auto Dafoe
Posts: 9,600
Local Time: 11:59 PM
Actually the election IS based on who wins the most votes. Partly.

It is based on who wins the electoral college (in the legalistic sense) and on who wins a popular vote (in conferring some sort of legitimacy on the victor).
__________________
Kieran McConville is online now  
Old 10-31-2004, 03:47 AM   #67
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Kieran McConville
Actually the election IS based on who wins the most votes. Partly.

It is based on who wins the electoral college (in the legalistic sense) and on who wins a popular vote (in conferring some sort of legitimacy on the victor).
If you want to get technical, it is based on who wins the most votes in each state......largely populated states = more points....but winning a majority of votes nationwide has nothing to do with becoming President other than the illusion of legitimacy.

[Q]What exactly would it take to abolish the electorial college system?
I really take offense to the fact that my state takes my vote and gives it to Bush, who I'm not voting for.
Can I start a petition or a class action suit? It wasn't originally to be used forever anyway.. I don't think, was it?
Just really ticks me off..[/Q]

I would not change it personally. I do believe it is completely up to the states how their electoral college delagates are awarded. Colorado, I believe has reacted to the last election with a ballot question that would award proportional delagates to the candidates rather than winner takes all. The sad part is, this was introduced by the democrats in reaction to 2000. They then wanted it removed because it appeared that Kerry was going to possibly take Colorado.

The fact is, I support the electoral college system. It assures that the candidates are going to address the issues and concerns of rural America. Otherwise, the little states are not going to see candidates.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 05:18 AM   #68
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 01:59 PM
I'm from the same state as Sue, Alabama. My vote isn't going to count in the EC either. The fact of the matter is that no electoral system is perfect. Nothing made up by people is. If we did it strictly by popular vote, then the people in the smaller or less populated states might indeed be ripped off. This way a state like Wyoming is guaranteed at least three electoral votes. We are all thinking of 2000 and how we do not want a repeat of that horror. It would be really bad for the country if the election is decided by the lawyers and not by the voters.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 05:53 AM   #69
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 06:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


I love it when people forget that this election is not based on who wins the most votes.
I love it when you forget that we are not idiots. Only 4 presidents in US history have won the election without winning the popular vote: John Qunicy Adams (1825-1829), Rutherford B. Hayes ((1877-1881), Benjamin Harrison (1889-1893), and GWB, and none of the first three were re-elected for a second term. Who wins the popular vote is significant.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 08:53 AM   #70
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by joyfulgirl


I love it when you forget that we are not idiots. Only 4 presidents in US history have won the election without winning the popular vote: John Qunicy Adams (1825-1829), Rutherford B. Hayes ((1877-1881), Benjamin Harrison (1889-1893), and GWB, and none of the first three were re-elected for a second term. Who wins the popular vote is significant.
Interesting the distaste I sense in your last post.

If you could please point out where I said anyone in here was an idiot?

Sorry if my post does not meet your approval....Maybe you can block my posts if you feel they are directed at you or maybe you could try not to twist them into something they are not.

I recently had a parent in September come into my classroom and explain that I was wrong about the electoral college......I posted the story in here somewhere.

Oh, one thing, can you show me ANY examples of someone winning the presidency by popular vote and not the electoral college. If you could, you popular vote statement would make sense. I must be an idiot.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 11:45 AM   #71
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox




I recently had a parent in September come into my classroom and explain that I was wrong about the electoral college.....

Perhaps some of your opinions are not correct?

It might be useful to go back and re-educate yourself.

After the 2000 debacle I did a lot of reserch concerning the EC.

Not everything I was taught and often hear repeated is correct.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 12:05 PM   #72
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 06:59 AM
Sorry, Dread, but I thought your comment about everyone forgetting that the election is not based on popular vote had a patronizing tone. I mean really, NO ONE in FYM has forgotten that it is about the electoral college. But despite the fact that the electoral college will determine the winner, what I meant by the popular vote being significant is that with the exception of the 4 instances I mentioned, everyone who has won the popular vote has also won the election, so therefore it is not unreasonable or ridiculous to speculate about who will win the popular vote and to think that might also indicate who will win the election. If GWB is re-elected, he will be the first president in U.S. history to win a second term after losing the popular vote the first time.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 12:10 PM   #73
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep



Perhaps some of your opinions are not correct?

It might be useful to go back and re-educate yourself.

After the 2000 debacle I did a lot of reserch concerning the EC.

Not everything I was taught and often hear repeated is correct.
Thanks for the advice deep.....



But I do not educate based on MY opinions....

But I do appreciate your concern....
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 12:10 PM   #74
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Zogby has just conducted a poll of mobile phone users. You can find the results here.

In short, 6039 likely voters were polled and the margin was:

Kerry 55%
Bush 40%

Also significant is that only 2.3% of those polled ages 18-29 did not plan on voting.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 12:14 PM   #75
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by joyfulgirl
Sorry, Dread, but I thought your comment about everyone forgetting that the election is not based on popular vote had a patronizing tone. I mean really, NO ONE in FYM has forgotten that it is about the electoral college.
When people get excited about national polls rather than polling in states that will make the difference though, it does seem that people are forgetting that it is each state that counts. My tuppance worth....


and no harm no foul.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com