Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 36 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 536

Thread: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

  1. #1
    C-A-T-S CATS! CATS! CATS! WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Almost Heaven
    Posts
    8,445

    Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    Figured it might be a good idea to get this started a day early, and keep the board less cluttered.

    Election Websites(polls and the like)

    Electoral-vote.com(electoral map of projected polls)

    RealClear Politics=good website for all the new polls, including national and battleground states

    Electoral Vote Calculator

    Fire away...
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Administrator GIK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    4,056

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    Well, if we're doing this a day early...here's Slate's election scorecard:

    http://slate.msn.com/id/2108751/

    Currently Bush is up 286-252

  4. #3
    C-A-T-S CATS! CATS! CATS! WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Almost Heaven
    Posts
    8,445

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    thanks for the sticky.
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  5. #4
    Administrator GIK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    4,056

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    Slate's poll is now tied at 269:

    Analysis Nov. 1, 2:45 p.m. ET: You'd think that since polls are published daily, analysis based on them would last more than a couple of hours. But you'd be wrong. Last night we got a new poll and moved Florida to Kerry. This morning we got another new poll and moved it back to Bush. Guess what? We've got a third poll now, and—oh, what's the point of explaining any more. The balance of evidence in Florida is back on Kerry's side. But fear not, Republicans. Another new poll has arrived in Wisconsin, tilting the balance of evidence in that state by the teensy-weensiest margin to Bush. The result, appropriately, is a tie, which sends the election to the House, where Bush wins. And if you don't like that projection, just wait an hour.
    :MandJ:

  6. #5
    C-A-T-S CATS! CATS! CATS! WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Almost Heaven
    Posts
    8,445

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    Some of the newest battleground polls out look good for Bush in Ohio, and suprisingly Pennsylvania.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bus...erry_sbys.html

    Fox News and Zogby have Bush up by 3 and 4 respectively in Ohio, but CNN/USA Today/Gallup(one poll) has Kerry up by 4. A UC poll has Bush up by 0.9 as well.

    Pennsylvania has three new polls, with CNN/USA/Gallop having Bush up by 4, Zogby with Kerry up by 5, and Quinnipac with a tie.

    Fox News has Bush up by 3 in Wisconsin, while Zogby has Kerry by 7. CNN/USA/Gallop had Bush up by 8 there yesterday.

    More contradicting by Zogby and Fox News with Iowa, where Kerry is up by 6 and Bush is up by 4 respectively.

    Minnesota is looking like a lock for Kerry, with Zogby and CNN/USA/Gallop having Kerry up by 2 and 8 respectively.

    Michigans a lock for Kerry

    Zogby is tied in New Mexico

    Colorado is leaning Bush according to Zogby yesterday.
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  7. #6
    Smells Like Teen Spirit jmcclain19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    6,490

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    Any polls that have the difference in the margin of error aren't worth their salt, this late in the game, considering no one can guess what the turnout will be.

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    The Bush Leagues
    Posts
    9,180

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    considering no one can guess what the turnout will be.
    I'm going to guess the turnout will be very high -- and I don't think I'm going out on a limb on this one.

    This is why Kerry wins.
    The widow is gathering nettles for her children's dinner; a perfumed seigneur, delicately lounging in the Oeil de Boeuf, hath an alchemy whereby he will extract the third nettle and call it rent. ~ Carlyle

  9. #8
    C-A-T-S CATS! CATS! CATS! WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Almost Heaven
    Posts
    8,445

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Rojo
    I'm going to guess the turnout will be very high -- and I don't think I'm going out on a limb on this one.

    This is why Kerry wins.
    One of the projections I read had the turnout being the same(or less) than 2000. If thats the case, better luck in 2008.

    Im thinking Kerry is relying on the college vote(18-23) for voter turnout. There is really no legitimate way you can predict how that vote will turn out.
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  10. #9
    Smells Like Teen Spirit jmcclain19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    6,490

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    I've heard that the voter turnout would be high for the last several elections.

    I don't see how this is any different. Expect all kinds of coverage showing massive lines and people "geared up" to vote then in a few weeks when the numbers are final it'll be about the same as it has been for the last 20 or so years.

  11. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    4,949

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    I heard on the news the other day in NC that over 1,000,000 people had voted early, and that in years past it had been just 300,000. I was barely listening to the television, but I'm pretty sure that those are the numbers I heard. Regardless, I do remember hearing that it was much higher than it had been in years past.

    With the fiasco of the last election, as well as all the numerous voter drives I've seen, I'd be quite shocked if the turnout in this year's election wasn't much, much higher than it has been in past elections.

  12. #11
    Smells Like Teen Spirit jmcclain19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    6,490

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by letsgojunior
    I heard on the news the other day in NC that over 1,000,000 people had voted early, and that in years past it had been just 300,000. I was barely listening to the television, but I'm pretty sure that those are the numbers I heard. Regardless, I do remember hearing that it was much higher than it had been in years past.

    With the fiasco of the last election, as well as all the numerous voter drives I've seen, I'd be quite shocked if the turnout in this year's election wasn't much, much higher than it has been in past elections.
    That just follows the trend of early voting.

    Over the last decade, early voting has been made more accessable nationwide and has grown exponentially because of it.



    I wouldn't put too much stock in it. These are the same stories that are recycled from the week before the 2000 election day.

  13. #12
    Pre-tty, pre-tty good!! MWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    12,324

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    It's all about Ohio and Florida.

    I also think turnout will wind up extremely high. That's a good thing (insert hypocrite joke below).
    Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David

  14. #13
    SERP Emeritus paintmered's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Cbus
    Posts
    7,048

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    I have a question - if on the off chance a ruling has to go to the U.S. Supreme Court while Rhenquist is out on medical leave, does the court wait until he is healthy enough to hear the case? Do they continue with the remaining Justices? Is there a temporary judge from a lower court that sits in his absense? Who takes the role of Chief Justice?

    What if this wasn't a rhetorical question?

    All models are wrong. Some of them are useful.

  15. #14
    Smells Like Teen Spirit jmcclain19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    6,490

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by paintmered
    I have a question - if on the off chance a ruling has to go to the U.S. Supreme Court while Rhenquist is out on medical leave, does the court wait until he is healthy enough to hear the case? Do they continue with the remaining Justices? Is there a temporary judge from a lower court that sits in his absense? Who takes the role of Chief Justice?

    The Senior Most Justice, in this case Justice Stevens, presides in the event the Chief is gone. That's what happened today.

    I would bet that Rehnquist, being the long time GOP activist before his judicial career, would crawl thru broken glass to make sure he was there to hear oral arguments for a Bush v. Kerry case.

    As long as he's there during Oral, he can vote on the case, as he can obviously just take the case work home and work on it with his staff from there.

  16. #15
    Big Red Machine RedsBaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Out Wayne
    Posts
    22,854

    Re: Your Official 2004 Election Day Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by paintmered
    I have a question - if on the off chance a ruling has to go to the U.S. Supreme Court while Rhenquist is out on medical leave, does the court wait until he is healthy enough to hear the case? Do they continue with the remaining Justices? Is there a temporary judge from a lower court that sits in his absense? Who takes the role of Chief Justice?

    If one justice is unavailable or recuses himself/herself, the remaining justices decide the matter. No temporary judge from a lower court can serve. I can recall that the Supreme Court's ruling during the Watergate scandal that Nixon had to turn over the tapes was an 8-0 decision. I believe that Rehnquist had recused himself from that case.
    Of course, if only eight justices are deciding the matter, that would give us the possibility of a 4-4 tie.
    "Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25