Will George W. Bush Win With 446 Electoral Votes?

Skewed Polls

In 1992, the polls were indicating a substantial 'victory' for Clinton over Bush.
They completely misread and missed the Republican victory in the 1994 Congressional races. And in 1996, a supposed lead by Clinton over Dole
of over 20 points turned out to be a margin of only 8. Then, too, Clinton had
the 'help' of the siphoning off of votes from Bush and Dole by Perot. The polls
are regularly wrong. This is not a phenomenon of the 90's only. Engler was
down in the polls in Michigan when he won his first term as governor. Pollsters
seem unable to perform with any accuracy at all.

There is little question that the media and a good many pollsters have a bias.
It is not, it should be suggested, a conscious effort on the part of the pollsters
to skew the results. Their methodology, however, is skewed by their preferences.
They miss important aspects of electoral behavior in their samples, and their
questions also contribute to the bias.

Now, they are keeping with the line that this is a very close contest. But the
supposed lead of Gore after the Democrat Convention has turned to a Bush
advantage of between 4 to 10 or so points in most polls:


Bush leads Gore in 4 of 5 major tracking polls:
ABC CNN MSNBC Voter W.Post
Bush 48 49 44 44 48
Gore 44 39 44 40 44

(ABC News, CNN/USA Today/Gallup, Reuters/MSNBC, Voter.com/Battleground and Washington Post. Note: ABC and the Washington Post are sharing data but applying their own likely voter estimates.)

Gore leads Bush 46%-45%, according to a Democracy Corps (D) poll.

Latest state polls:
IL MN NH
Gore 47 41 44
Bush 40 44 41
Nader 3 8 1
Buchanan 1 1 1

(IL, Research 2000; MN, Minneapolis Star Tribune; NH, Research 2000.)

But if we suppose for a moment that the polls may be as far off as they have
regularly been, then the closeness of the race, even now with Bush showing
growing margins, may be in error. It may turn into a romp for the Republicans.
This analysis would apply to the Presidential race, and to that for Congress.

If that 'bias' is factored into the race in each state, then, what Bush may have
is a huge landslilde in the making. Even California may be a close race:

CBS Some California Democrats are getting nervous about Al Gore's strategy in the Golden State.

Garry South, a top adviser for Gore in California, said this week that the vice president has done too little point out the Clinton administration's successes - and has failed to respond to TV ads for GOP rival George W. Bush that are running in the state.

"We're at a critical juncture here where there has to be some serious recalibrations with what we're doing, or we could be in trouble," said South in a speech to the Sacramento Press Club.

Though he and other political observers still predict Gore will win California's 54 electoral votes, South said the race has tightened to "single digits" in state polls he has seen - a decrease from an independent Field Poll released earlier this month which gave the vice president a 13-point lead over Bush.

South put part of the blame on the Gore campaign for not doing enough to emphasize Bush's record as Texas' governor. "Californians are not yet onto the fact that there's a huge chasm between what George W. Bush is blabbering about and what he can actually prove up on," said South.

The Bush campaign, which has long fended off questions of whether it will write off California, seized upon South's call for "recalibration."

"How can you recalibrate what you're doing if you're not doing anything?" said state Sen. Jim Brulte, finance chairman for the California GOP. While Republicans are spending about $1.5 million a week promoting Bush in the state's expensive TV markets, the Democrats and Gore have spent nothing.

And that's not expected to change.

"Obviously it's an important state to us. Californians agree with Al Gore on most of the issues that count and that's why Al Gore is running strong in the state. And we have no plans to put ads on TV," said Gore spokesman Mark Fabiani.

"We're not in trouble here," said Bob Mulholland, a strategist for the California Democratic Party. Mulholland said Democrats have always known Gore's lead would dwindle to the single digits if the Republicans continued to pour money into the state.

Is there worry brewing among the Democrats? "There never was, and never will be," said Mulholland.

But others aren't so sure. Los Angeles-based Democratic consultant Darry Sragow suspects there's a reason South articulated his concerns about the campaign in such a public forum, calling it a "shot across the bow" to the Gore campaign to get its attention.

"The Gore campaign is clearly not paying enough attention to California," said Sragow, who served as state director for Gore's presidential bid in 1988 and currently advises Democratic candidates for state Assembly.

While Sragow acknowledges the campaign can't afford to spend too many resources and too much time in California when several key Midwest states remain up for grabs, he suggests that one or two "high visibility" visits to the state between now and Election Day would go a long way. Like South, he complained that the vice president's most recent visits have been to attend fund-raisers in the Bay Area and Los Angeles, where the Democrats already have a strong foothold.

"There has to be an Al Gore presence. You can't leave the playing field wide open," said Sragow, who's concerned about the size of Gore's margin of victory in November. "The better Al Gore does (in the state) the better it is for all of us," he said.

And that's what Cal-Tech political scientist Michael Alvarez sees at play in South's remarks: a concern among Democrats over Election Day turnout and the fate of Democratic state and congressional candidates down the ticket, many of whom face very tight races.

"What we're seeing here is frustration," said Alvarez, who believes Democrats have been discouraged by the erosion in Gore's standing in the polls. Considering such factors as the thriving economy and the similarity of Gore's positions with those of most Californians, "Gore should be eating Bush's lunch."

But he's not. And like South, Alvarez sees an apparent reluctance on Gore's part to emphasize issues that strongly resonate with Californians such as gun control, which Californians largely support and Bush opposes.

As an example, Alvarez cited two questions in the third presidential debate in which the Texas governor was asked about his lack of support of the Brady Bill and Bush's appearance of pride in the fact that Texas leads the nation in executions. "That was a softball (to Gore) to really nail down some important issues," said Alvarez.

Sragow believes that Democrats must be reminded that if Republicans win control of the Congress and the presidency "we'll see a reversal of policy in this country the likes of which we haven't seen in a long time. I'm astounded (the Gore campaign) is not making that point."

Still, he stressed there was no animosity between California and Nashville. "We're simply the early warning system," he said.

Copyright 2000, CBS Worldwide Inc.

The Electoral Vote

The only states that seem locked for the Democrats if a bias in the polling is taken into account may be:

DC 3
Hawaii 4
Mass 12
Md 10
NY 33
RI 4
Vt 3

69 electoral votes (Bush with 469)

but there are some reasons to wonder about even New York.

The National Journal which had Gore with over the 270 electoral votes necessary to
win last week, is now putting their projections at:

STATES EVs
Bush 29 252
Gore 19 256

It is difficult to believe that the race could end up so one-sided. And there are still
more than two weeks until the election.

In the meantime, Bush continues to apparently 'surge' with developments such as
a major labor endorsement:

"George W. Bush nabbed the endorsement of the National Association of Government Employees, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO. The union, which represents 100,000 fed employees backed Clinton-Gore in '92 and '96"

Potential for Vote Fraud in Northwest

Oregon Holds First Vote-By-Mail Election

Ballots Sent Out Friday
Candidates Will Have To Push For Votes For Three Weeks
At Least 80 Percent Voter Turnout Expected

SALEM, Oregon, Oct. 20, 2000



AP / CBS







AP Nearly three weeks before the general election, Oregon residents are preparing to start casting ballots - but not from the polls.

The state's all vote-by-mail general election, the first in the nation, gets underway Friday when county offices begin sending out more than 2 million ballots.

There are no more polling places. Voters can fill in ballots at home, then mail them or take them to drop boxes as long as they are returned to election offices by 8 p.m. on Nov. 7.

Secretary of State Bill Bradbury said Thursday he expects a voter turnout of 80 percent or better, partly because Oregon's unique system makes it more convenient to cast ballots.

But for candidates and political operatives, mail voting means the final push to win over undecided voters is a three-week marathon instead of a last-minute dash.

Democrat Gore's campaign announced Thursday that the vice president will campaign in Oregon on Sunday and Monday for the state's seven electoral votes, just as people begin marking their ballots.

“This is a very important time in Oregon,” Gore campaign spokesman David Chai said. “Al Gore understands that it's critical to be in Oregon with the ballots being dropped off.”

GOP vice presidential contender Dick Cheney will travel to Eugene on Tuesday, and George W. Bush will be returning to the state soon after that, Bush spokesman Dan Lavey said.

“We will have volunteers going door-to-door on Saturdays and Sundays for the next three weekends urging people to fill out their ballots and send them in,” he said. “What we normally would spend 12 hours doing we will be doing for three solid weeks.”

Despite the prolonged voting period, Bradbury believes a lot of people will hold onto the their ballots until the last-minute.

Some 40 percent of voters returned their mail ballots in the last two days leading up to the state's all-mail ballot primary on May 16. That, too, was the nation's first such primary.

“The main thing is there are 26 measures on the statewide ballot. That large number of measures to decide on will slow people down in casting their ballot,” Bradbury said.

Oregonians passed statewide vote-by-mail in 1998 after using the system for years in local contests and some special elections.

Critics have said the mail ballot offers too many possibilities for fraud.

Copyright 2000, The Associated Press.

10/23

ELECTORAL COLLEGE TOTALS: (270 needed to win)
LEADS OUTSIDE MoE ALL LEADS
STATES EVs STATES EVs
Bush 18 141 Bush 29 252
Gore 9 131 Gore 18 231

STATE BUSH GORE POLL DATE MoE
(+ indicates lead inside the MoE, ++ a lead outside)
AL (9) ++53 33 Mobile Register 10/16-19 +/- 5
AK (3) ++47 26 ARG 9/11-17 +/- 4
AR (6) +45 43 Mason-Dixon 9/26-28 +/- 4
AZ (8) +47 40 AZ Republic 10/5-9 +/- 5
CA (54) 39 ++48 Research 2000 10/12-15 +/- 3.5
CT (8) 32 ++48 Univ. of CT 9/26-10/1 +/- 5
CO (8) ++45 33 Talmey-Drake 9/29-10/4 +/- 4
DC (3) 14 ++73 ARG 9/7-11 +/- 4
DE (3) 43 +45 Mason-Dixon 10/4-5 +/- 4
FL (25) 45 +47 American Research 10/12-16 +/- 4
+44 43 McLaughlin (R) 10/15-18 +/- 4
GA (13) +48 40 Mason-Dixon 10/12-14 +/- 4
HI (4) 29 ++57 ARG 9/5-11 +/- 4
IA (7) 39 +47 Research 2000 9/25-27 +/- 4
42 +44 PSI Poll 9/25 +/- 4.8
ID (4) ++53 31 ARG 9/6-9 +/- 4
IL (22) 40 +47 Research 2000 10/16-18 +/- 4
43 45 KRC Comm 10/16-17 +/- 3.9
IN (12) ++54 38 Research 2000 10/13-15 +/- 4
KS (6) ++55 32 ARG 9/12-15 +/- 4
KY (8) ++51 41 Bluegrass Poll 9/18-21 +/- 4
LA (9) +44 38 Southern Media 9/15-21 +/- 4
MA (12) 26 ++57 ARG 9/8-13 +/- 4
MD (10) 38 ++49 Mason-Dixon 10/6-8 +/- 4
ME (4) +42 37 Critical Insights 10/15-17 +/- 4.1
MI (18) 43 43 EPIC/MRA 10/16-19 +/- 4
MN (10) +44 41 Market Solutions 10/14-18 +/- 3.5
MO (11) +42 41 Research 2000 10/15-16 +/- 4
MS (7) ++48 37 ARG 9/12-16 +/- 4
MT (3) ++55 30 A and A Research 10/13-15 +/- 5
NE (5) ++53 32 ARG 9/7-10 +/- 4
NV (4) 43 +44 Public Opinion (R)9/19-21 +/- 4
NH (4) 41 +44 Research 2000 10/16-18 +/- 4
NJ (15) 37 +46 Star Ledger 10/12-15 +/- 4.5
34 ++49 New York Times 10/12-15 +/- 3
31 ++45 Gannett NJ 10/12-14 +/- 4.2
NY (33) 31 ++60 Princeton Survey 10/11-15 +/- 3.5
35 ++51 Marist Inst. 10/10-11 +/- 4.5
NM (5) 42 42 NM State Univ. 9/26-28 +/- 4
+44 41 Mason-Dixon 9/28-30 +/- 5
NC (14) ++50 38 KPC Research 10/12-17 +/- 4.9
ND (3) ++47 35 Public Affairs 10/2-5 +/- 4
OH (21) +45 41 Mason-Dixon 10/18-19 +/- 4
OK (8) ++51 33 Consumer Logic 9/23-10/2 +/- 3.5
OR (7) 43 +44 American Research 10/12-16 +/- 4
+44 40 Riley Research 10/2-12 +/- 4.3
PA (23) 45 +46 American Research 10/12-16 +/- 4
RI (4) 31 ++46 Fleming Assoc. 10/10-13 +/- 5
SC (8) ++52 39 Mason-Dixon 9/28-30 +/- 4
SD (3) ++55 34 ARG 9/6-10 +/- 4
TN (11) +46 43 Mason-Dixon 9/25-27 +/- 4
TX (32) ++58 30 ARG 9/14-19 +/- 4
UT (5) ++57 29 ARG 9/8-12 +/- 4
VA (13) +46 39 Rich. Times-Dis. 9/22-10/2 +/- 4.4
VT (3) 37 ++51 Research 2000 10/10-11 +/- 5
WA (11) 43 +45 American Research 10/12-16 +/- 4
WV (5) +39 37 WV Research Ctr 9/18-16 +/- 6
WI (11) 38 +43 Market Shares 9/18-20 +/- 4
WY (3) ++57 37 Mason-Dixon 9/16-17 +/- 5


10/24

ELECTORAL COLLEGE TOTALS: (270 needed to win)
LEADS OUTSIDE MoE ALL LEADS
STATES EVs STATES EVs
Bush 19 152 Bush 30 263
Gore 8 77 Gore 16 197

STATE BUSH GORE POLL DATE MoE
(+ indicates lead inside the MoE, ++ a lead outside)
AL (9) ++55 37 Capital Survey 10/18-20 +/- 4.7
++53 33 Mobile Register 10/16-19 +/- 5
AK (3) ++47 26 ARG 9/11-17 +/- 4
AR (6) +45 43 Mason-Dixon 9/26-28 +/- 4
AZ (8) +47 40 AZ Republic 10/5-9 +/- 5
CA (54) 39 +44 PPIC 10/11-18 +/- 3.5
39 ++48 Research 2000 10/12-15 +/- 3.5
CT (8) 32 ++48 Univ. of CT 9/26-10/1 +/- 5
CO (8) ++45 33 Talmey-Drake 9/29-10/4 +/- 4
DC (3) 14 ++73 ARG 9/7-11 +/- 4
DE (3) 43 +45 Mason-Dixon 10/4-5 +/- 4
FL (25) 45 +47 American Research 10/12-16 +/- 4
+44 43 McLaughlin (R) 10/15-18 +/- 4
GA (13) +48 40 Mason-Dixon 10/12-14 +/- 4
HI (4) 29 ++57 ARG 9/5-11 +/- 4
IA (7) 39 +47 Research 2000 9/25-27 +/- 4
42 +44 PSI Poll 9/25 +/- 4.8
ID (4) ++53 31 ARG 9/6-9 +/- 4
IL (22) 40 +47 Research 2000 10/16-18 +/- 4
43 +45 KRC Comm 10/16-17 +/- 3.9
IN (12) ++54 38 Research 2000 10/13-15 +/- 4
KS (6) ++55 32 ARG 9/12-15 +/- 4
KY (8) ++51 41 Bluegrass Poll 9/18-21 +/- 4
LA (9) +44 38 Southern Media 9/15-21 +/- 4
MA (12) 26 ++57 ARG 9/8-13 +/- 4
MD (10) 38 ++49 Mason-Dixon 10/6-8 +/- 4
ME (4) +42 37 Critical Insights 10/15-17 +/- 4.1
MI (18) 43 43 EPIC/MRA 10/16-19 +/- 4
MN (10) +44 41 Market Solutions 10/14-18 +/- 3.5
MO (11) +42 41 Research 2000 10/15-16 +/- 4
MS (7) ++48 37 ARG 9/12-16 +/- 4
MT (3) ++55 30 A and A Research 10/13-15 +/- 5
NE (5) ++53 32 ARG 9/7-10 +/- 4
NV (4) 43 +44 Public Opinion (R)9/19-21 +/- 4
NH (4) 41 +44 Research 2000 10/16-18 +/- 4
NJ (15) 37 +46 Star Ledger 10/12-15 +/- 4.5
34 ++49 New York Times 10/12-15 +/- 3
31 ++45 Gannett NJ 10/12-14 +/- 4.2
NY (33) 31 ++60 Princeton Survey 10/11-15 +/- 3.5
35 ++51 Marist Inst. 10/10-11 +/- 4.5
NM (5) 42 42 NM State Univ. 9/26-28 +/- 4
+44 41 Mason-Dixon 9/28-30 +/- 5
NC (14) ++50 38 KPC Research 10/12-17 +/- 4.9
ND (3) ++47 35 Public Affairs 10/2-5 +/- 4
OH (21) +45 41 Mason-Dixon 10/18-19 +/- 4
OK (8) ++51 33 Consumer Logic 9/23-10/2 +/- 3.5
OR (7) 43 +44 American Research 10/12-16 +/- 4
+44 40 Riley Research 10/2-12 +/- 4.3
PA (23) +45 43 Pblc Opn Strat. 10/18-19 +/- 3.5
45 +46 American Research 10/12-16 +/- 4
RI (4) 31 ++46 Fleming Assoc. 10/10-13 +/- 5
SC (8) ++52 39 Mason-Dixon 9/28-30 +/- 4
SD (3) ++55 34 ARG 9/6-10 +/- 4
TN (11) +46 43 Mason-Dixon 9/25-27 +/- 4
TX (32) ++58 30 ARG 9/14-19 +/- 4
UT (5) ++57 29 ARG 9/8-12 +/- 4
VA (13) +46 39 Rich. Times-Dis. 9/22-10/2 +/- 4.4
VT (3) 38 ++47 Mason-Dixon 10/18-19 +/- 4
WA (11) 43 +45 American Research 10/12-16 +/- 4
WV (5) +39 37 WV Research Ctr 9/18-16 +/- 6
WI (11) ++49 40 Harris Inter. 10/18-21 +/- 4
WY (3) ++57 37 Mason-Dixon 9/16-17 +/- 5


Return to beginning of ejps
Retutn to beginning of this issue