XPost: alt.rush-limbaugh, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.california 
 XPost: alt.politics.usa, alt.law-enforcement, alt.thebird.copwatch 
 From: email@isBelow.Text 
  
 October 25, 2004, 7:59 a.m. 
 And the Winner Is... 
 ...Bush (at least the political scientists think so). 
  
 By Gary Andres 
 NRO 
  
 My copy of PS: Political Science and Policy - a quarterly journal 
 published by the American Political Science Association - arrived at 
 home this week with some encouraging news for the White House: Bush is 
 the likely winner. At least that's what some of the top political 
 scientists who do election forecasting say. 
  
 The October 2004 issue of PS includes a symposium on election 
 forecasting, highlighting seven different statistical models prepared 
 by a venerable group of political scientists predicting Bush will get 
 around 53.8 percent of the vote. The models, which are technically not 
 predictions of who will "win" the presidential election, but rather 
 forecasts of the share of the national two-party vote President Bush 
 or Senator Kerry will achieve, are nonetheless good news for the 
 incumbent's reelection prospects. 
  
 The authors and co-authors of the seven models include: Alan I. 
 Abramowitz of Emory University, James E. Campbell of SUNY-Buffalo, 
 Robert S. Erikson of Columbia University, Thomas M. Holbrook of the 
 University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Michael S. Lewis-Beck of the 
 University of Iowa, Brad Lockerbie of the University of Georgia, 
 Helmut Norpoth of Stony Brook University, Charles Tien of Hunter 
 College, and Christopher Wlezien of Nuffield College, Oxford 
 University. 
  
 As Professor Campbell notes in an introductory essay, most of the 
 models share some common features. First, they generally incorporate 
 some measure of public opinion toward the president, such as job 
 approval, into the model. Second, most use measures of the 
 pre-election economy to help generate predictions. Finally, many of 
 the models incorporate some measure of "incumbency advantage" as a 
 part of their prediction. 
  
 While all the models diverge after this point in terms of the 
 variables they include to generate predictions, each spits out a 
 percentage of the two-party vote for President Bush. Here are the 
 results, with each scholar listed next to the percentage of the vote 
 he predicts President Bush will win: 
  
 Abramowitz: 53.7 percent 
 Campbell: 53.8 percent 
 Wlezien and Erikson: 51.7-52.9 percent 
 Holbrook: 54.5 percent 
 Lewis-Beck and Tien: 49.9 percent 
 Lockerbie: 57.6 percent 
 Norpoth: 54.7 percent 
 Median Forecast: 53.8 percent 
  
 The American Political Science Association, which publishes PS and is 
 composed primarily of academic political scientists, is not generally 
 known for its pro-Republican tilt. Indeed, one of the featured events 
 at their annual convention in Chicago last month, was "an evening with 
 George Soros." 
  
 The researchers also caveat their predictions, noting they are aimed 
 at capturing the share of the two-party vote, not Electoral College 
 outcomes, and that each of the estimates is banded by a margin of 
 error. 
  
 They also recognize that the election-forecasting business can be a 
 humbling task. As Lewis-Beck and Tien note in the beginning of their 
 essay: 
  
     During spring 2000, we released to the press a preliminary 
 forecast of a Gore victory. Indeed one of us, in a widely-read 
 quotation, declared, 'It's not even going to be close.' We were wrong, 
 as were all of our fellow modelers. Indeed, among 'five of the best 
 forecasters' identified by Robert Kaiser (Washington Post, May 26 2000 
 p.1) the Gore projection ranged from 53% to 60% of the two-party vote, 
 pointing to a Democratic landslide. 
  
 Still, as Professor Lockerbie of the University of Georgia points out 
 in his essay, despite the relatively dismal performance of forecasters 
 in 2000, all of the models presented at the 1996 American Political 
 Science Association convention predicted President Clinton would win 
 reelection. Also, four years have passed since political scientists 
 suffered their humiliating forecasting performance of Bush vs. Gore. 
 No doubt, along with the academics, the White House probably hopes 
 they got some of the "kinks" worked out. 
  
 -- Gary Andres is vice chairman of research and policy at the Dutko 
 Group Companies and a frequent NRO contributor. 
     
     
  
      Good morning. Or as Jean-Fran€ois Kerry would say, Bonjour. 
  
 Ken (NY) 
  
  
 "Almost no one disagrees with these basic facts: that 
 Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a menace; that he has 
 weapons of mass destruction and that he is doing everything 
 in his power to get nuclear weapons; that he has supported 
 terrorists..." 
    --John Edwards October 10, 2002 
  
 Beer comes 24 cans in a case. 
 There are 24 hours in a day. 
 Coincidence? 
  
 email: 
 http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm 
  
 spammers can send mail to uce@ftc.gov 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)