Election 2004 Predictions

Not what you WANT to happen, what you think actually will happen. Give candidates and results…

I say:

Republicans Bush 57%
Democrats Kerrey 48%
Independant Sharpton 5%

Call me crazy.

What are your predictions? Winner gets two weeks in Tuscanny, including air fare, 5 star accomodations, day trips and all meals, provided winner is willing to pay for it himself.

Republicans Bush 57%
Democrats Kerrey 48%
Independant Sharpton 5%

Let me amend the above to:

Republicans Bush 57%
Democrats Kerrey 38%
Independant Sharpton 5%

What a maroon…:smack:

My prediction is that Edwards will win the Democratic primary, by virtue of having less baggage, being a Southern candidate, and being good looking than all the other Democrats.

I’m not confident that he’ll win against Bush. I think he’ll do great in the debates: he’s a lawyer used to arguing in front of juries, and he knows how to play to a crowd. Bush will pound him for inexperience, and if Edwards can sidestep that blow successfully, he’ll win the debates.

If he takes care to differentiate himself early on from Bush, showing that he stands for liberal values, then he’ll face no significant challenge from a third-party left, and Bush will move farther to the left to pursue the Soccer-Mom vote (or whatever we’ll be calling it in 2004). Bush might then face a substantive challenge from Buchanan on the right.

So I’ll be optimistic, and put the final totals at Edwards 49%, Bush 48%, Buchanan 1%, other candidates making up the loose change.


If Kerry gets the nomination, he may get 42-44% of the popular vote. He’s sort of Ed Muskie throwback. Not a chance.

No Democrat will beat Bush in 2004, unless his war in Iraq turns into another Viet Nam. Edwards or Gary Hart might have a chance if the war goes badly.

When Al Gore was in the Democratic party had a chance. Now that he’s gone the only candidate people really know (and the most “popular” candidate, thus far) is Hillary Clinton. Who would vote for the Ice Queen? Let’s hope one of the better candidates gets some recognition by then.

I like Kerry so far and I feel he’s the strongest candidate but he never does anything from his gut. There’s something missing in a politician when he does that.

Now that the Democratic party is broke and CFR prevents Dreamworks from bailing them out the Democratic party is going to have a tough time running any campaign.

The Republicans will have it pretty easy now that they are in power in every branch of government, are rolling in the dough, and have the Golden Boy[sup]TM[/sup] Karl Rove. ::Angry muttering::.

Like kevja said, the biggest chance the Democrats have is if Iraq turns into another Vietnam. But I’m not optimistic about that. The war will be pretty quick initially, with terrorist reprisals. Naturally after the terrorist reprisals the Republicans will find a way to stay in power. Once occupying Iraq turns into another Afghanistan Bush will find a new enemy to go to war with past election day.

With so much of the electoral map pre-decided no matter who runs (IMHO) a southerner is the only real chance a Democrat has for the White House.

Despite the sluggish economy, global uncertainty and not much short term hope for improvement, it’s still most likely Bush’s to lose.

Obviously, a thousand things can change in the next two years, so making predictions right now is a crapshoot. If a war with Iraq goes well and the economy rebounds, GWB wins in a walk. If the war stalls (and there are heavy casualties) and/or the ecnomy continues to sputter, the Democrats can win even with a weak candidate.

At the moment, however, I’d say that regardless of who wins the Democratic nomination, we’re looking at a repeat of the 2000 elections. Virtually every state that went for Gore last time will go for the Democrats again. And virtually every state that went for Bush will go for him again. Only a handful of “swing” states exist.
Expect both candidates to spend most of their time in those states (especially Florida).

So… I’m inclined to think the next election will ALSO go down to the wire.

I can’t help but see the parallels between GW and his father. Here we are two years into his term, his approval ratings are sky-high, we are going to war with Iraq, and the economy is kinda shaky. Why not believe that a little-known Democratic senator from the South might just get the election to go his way.

The reality is a lot can happen in two years, but I also get a vibe where I live that people are really hurting, out of work, scared, worried about the safety of the nation. A lot of people are wishing for the good times of the 90’s again, ie pre-GWB. Sure, I know GWB can’t be blamed for everything that has gone wrong since he took office, but I think a lot of voters associate him with bad times. And as much support as he has in public opinion polls, I think people are gonna be scared or worried enough to vote against him next election.

last I heard, his approval rating dropped from the post 9/11 “approval hike” in the neighborhood of 85% to a much smaller 59% (approximations). Sorry to nitpick.

I believe Bush will stay for a second term. I agree, the democrats for Gore are gonna push EVEN HARDER for the next Democratic candidate. However, I believe their party has lost enough “voter power” that they won’t win, no matter who the Dems come up with… but Edwards has a durn good chance.

You guys are all assuming the elections in 2004 will be free and fair. C’mon, was the 2000 election stolen by a corrupt Republican Supreme Court or not? Why wouldn’t the same thing happen in 2004?

Evil Captor, it happened once because of weird circumstances: while I absolutely agree that the Supreme Court stole the election, they only got their theft off in the final moments of the controversy. They certainly weren’t responsible for the mass election-night confusion, in which the election was called for Gore, and then for Bush, and then for nobody.

Having experienced a John Edwards campaign firsthand, I know that the boy can put up a great fight. Hell, in North Carolina, he beat the incumbent even though Jesse Helms was stumping for the incumbent! That says something.

I don’t really think that the election will be Bush’s to lose: unless the economy takes off again, it’ll be super-easy for a Democratic challenger to appeal to people’s pocketbooks. Edwards can ask folks, are you better off now than you were four years ago under a Democratic President? And whether or not that question is fair, it’ll resonate with a lot of folks.

I don’t see this as a repeat of 2000. I see it as a repeat of 1992.


There is no way Sharpton will run as an independent. Sharpton will hurt Edwards like Jackson hurt Gore in 1988. On the Democrat side I expect it will play out alot like 1988.
The real candidates are Lieberman, Edwards and Kerry. Kerry has the money, his war hero status and his being the first one in going for him. However, no one in the party likes him, the press hates him and the realists in the party won’t want another Massachusetts liberal at the top of the ticket. Edwards is good looking, seems to be a good speaker, will be able to tap into the trial lawyer money, and is a southerner. He is not very experienced, no one in most of the country knows much about him, so he will have to spend alot of money very quickly to get his name recognition up because the primary season is so short. He will have to handle the Sharpton candidacy with alot of delicacy since Sharpton could do well in the South which is Edward’s base. His handling of the South Carolina boycott has been poor so far and may indicate he is not up for dealing with the racial minefield that comes with a Sharpton candidacy. Lieberman has the best name recognition from 2000 and he can wave the bloody shirt without appearing to do so. His hawkish views will appeal to moderates and he should be able to raise plenty of money. His VP run will contrast nicely with Edwards who is a newcomer to politics. The press likes him. However, he is a very boring person with an unfortunate voice. He will also have high expectations and the first primary states will all have candidates from adjoining states in them.
I think Lieberman is a slight favorite over Edwards with Kerry being a long shot.
Whoever wins will have to deal with Sharpton which will be extremely difficult.
Bush has the war, Sharpton, and the Boy Genius all going for him out of the gate. The economy and the war are wildcards which could make him very vulnerable or allow him to coast to an easy victory. He showed in 2000 he is a disciplined campaigner and the practice should make him better this time. Also this time he won’t have any last minute DUIs to sabotage him.
My predictions:
Bush 54%
Lieberman 45%
Green 1%

While I’m not sure that Bush has a shot a re-election, I’m even less sure that Kerry will get the democratic nod. I’m not sure if it made national news, but he just had surgery for prostate cancer earlier this week. http://www.boston.com/dailynews/042/region/Kerry_to_Undergo_Surgery_for_C:.shtml While he says it doesn’t make a difference in his goal to run, cancer is a terrible and unpredictable thing. He may be fine now, but then again he may not.

At this point I’d say that Bush will win re-election by a slender margin. However, I also predict that there will be record numbers of dems voting in the next election.

Some comedian will pretend to run for president. This is funny and amusing and certainly hasn’t been overdone at all.

I’m not sure if we’ll have an election in 2004. It might interfere with the War on Terror.

You don’t list a location … is it Florida per chance? :smiley:

If it were Florida, It would be a poll in which voting for Bush added one vote to Sharpton’s total :D. No, I think he’s posting from Bush’s Office of Budget Math.


…the war drags on… but Bush has a “secret plan to end the war”,after the election…Sen. Edwards’ campaign plane is lost over the Rockies before the Boston convention…Bush promises a full investigation…Jeb Bush and Elizabeth Dole to head the commitee…a flag waving victory for Bush over Lieberman and Gephardt in November…war drags on…terrorists strike on US soil over and over…“secret plan to end the war” is contigent on Jeb Bush and Frist being elected in 2008…

I’ve got a bottle of 100 year old scotch on the line with Bricker saying that GWB loses in 2004.

War or not…it’s all about the pocketbooks, folks. If the economy stays soft the democratic candidate can hammer GWB with ‘Are you better off now than four years ago’ and turn Reagan’s catch phrase on it’s head.

He might not be much of a name right now but several commentators have named him as the Dem most likely to give Bush the heave ho in a general election.

He is a fighter. He has his own agenda and will not back something just to make the polls bounce. He is an unapologetic Democrat, unlike most other Dems in the last thirty years who ran on the campaign slogan, “I’m just like the Republicans!”

And most importantly he is a fighter.

Take a look and jump aboard.

Howard Dean