# Election 2004 Predictions **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 16, 2004, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744 "2004-01-16T12:50:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2004, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/41 "2004-01-18T10:26:03Z")
I pick Edwards to win Iowa, place 3rd in NH, and win SC, making him the front runner and allowing him to eek out the nomination. Clark’s non-participation in Iowa and continued Dean-like gaffes is going to hurt him. Edwards will start off way behind Bush in the polls, but an awesome performance in the convention will vault him into the lead, and he will only expand it in the debates. He will also be helped by choosing Evan Bayh as his running mate, a VP from the crucial industrial Midwest. Edwards wins in November with 53% of the vote to Bush’s 46%. Republicans make big gains in the House and Senate. Edwards will smile and make optimistic speeches. Life is good. ---
**Author:** ![quixotic78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/3ab097/32.png) [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2004, 11:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/42 "2004-01-18T11:00:51Z")
Well, first off, I’d like to say that the thought of Edwards as VP is… intriguing. Imagine putting charismatic, affable, and competent Edwards next to surly, churlish, and competent-but-unquestionably-evil Cheney. That’d be fun to watch. Anyways, here’s I go… Dean wins Iowa, Kerry second, Edwards third, Gephardt fourth. Gephardt drops out but never endorses anyone during the campaign. Dean wins New Hampshire, Kerry places second, Clark third, Edwards a distant fourth. Clark’s campaign is all but dead, but he doesn’t drop out. Edwards picks up momentum in the South and generates a lot of excitement, but his campaign doesn’t have the organizational skills to keep it going for long. Kerry and Clark end up withering and dying, and Dean ends up winning the nomination by virtue of not losing. Dean chooses someone Southern and probably not a candidate (although _maaaaybe_ Edwards) for his Veep. Bush crafts events in the late summer to his liking – hell, he can declare Iraq a success at any point he wants, even if it’s bullshit, and most people will lap it up because they want to. Despite valid attacks on Bush – shit like “This guy is a uniter??” and “Didn’t you say you wouldn’t build any nations last time you did this?” – Rove continues to wrap Bush in the flag. Hell, the economy might even make a slight bump, which will be heralded as a new boom: “We created 628 jobs this quarter!” Bottom line: Bush wins with almost every state going the same way it did last time. ---
**Author:** ![Milum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ea666f/32.png) [@Milum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Milum)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2004, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/43 "2004-01-18T21:36:57Z")
My dime, your donut… Bush wins 59 % to 49% over Hillary Rodam Clinton in November. The Democratic whimps in contention whine and collapse when Hillary spreads her political legs at the Democratic Convention. What a bitch. Bush marches in while the integrity of our borders shuffles off to Mexico. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Seven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Seven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Seven)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2004, 8:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/44 "2004-01-19T08:41:53Z")
> [@Jonathan Chance](#): > > I should also point out the tremendous bragging rights available to those who make predictions far out and are right. Bush wins just by the hairs on his chinny-chin-chin. While at the reception speech the first lady bumps into Bush casuing his face to fall off revealing a small control center ala Men in Black being driven by the amputated nose of Michael Jackson. It is decided the nose couldn’t hold office because he ran not as itself but as Bush. A re-election is held and the nose wins again, this time by a landslide. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/45 "2004-01-20T12:53:15Z")
OK, with Iowa behind us let’s see how we’re doing… My pal (the reporter) was wrong wrong wrong. Brutus predicted a Gephardt win…wrong. John Mace is our first winner. He predicted a Kerry win in Iowa. Well done! pantom predicted a Dean win in Iowa…wrong. Furt predicted that Gephardt would be done after Iowa…another winner! He also predicted a ‘strong but not first’ showing for Edwards. Well done! adaher predicted an Edwards win…wrong. quixotic78 predicted a Dean win…wrong. So our winners so far are **John Mace** and **furt**! Well done folks! Now our next question: New Hampshire. We had Fightin’ Joe Lieberman and Wes Clark to the mix. How will they all fair? Will Gephardt even show? If not who will he endorse? So pick 'em, folks! Pick 'em! I’ll post my pal’s predictions when he crawls out of his hole this morning. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/46 "2004-01-20T13:23:35Z")
Gephardt isn’t going to New Hampshire. He flew home today instead of going there. He’ll probably officially drop out today, he’s quitting in any case. If he gives an endorsement, I’d imagine it’ll be for Kerry, who’s of the party (as opposed to outsider Dean). I’m gonna regret posting a prediction this early, but I think New Hampshire will go Kerry, Clark, Edwards, Dean. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/47 "2004-01-20T13:26:05Z")
And my reporter (and disgraced) pal will only predict a Clark win in New Hampshire. That should make the following month interesting, shouldn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/48 "2004-01-20T13:55:31Z")
After hearing Dean’s speech last night (audio on drudge), I wish I could withdraw my prediction of him getting the nod. The man is utterly batshit insane. Mind you, I find that entertaining, but he will never be a vaible national candidate. Dean will stay in for a while, but the “unelectable” tag is on for good. Kerry’s stiffness is too Gore-like. Edwards will the demo nomination. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/49 "2004-01-20T14:23:15Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > I think Kerry is going to take Iowa. Dean seems to have lost momentum and I can’t see him doing well there after getting an endorsement from Reiner and Sheen. Damn, you’re good. 🙂 My predictions for New Hampshire is that Dean will win, Clark second, Kerry third. The media will cover it as a major comeback. The primaries will continue without a clear front-runner for some months still. For the general election, Bush will win by at least 5% of the popular vote, and a very large margin in the Electoral College. Democrats will file a lawsuit over something or other in the election. When it is thrown out, they will claim that it invalidates the election, and refer to Bush as “the President who never won an election”. The economy will continue to recover, and Democrats will complain that it is bypassing those at the bottom. The unemployment rate will drop, and Democrats will claim that they are mostly “dead-end” entry level jobs that don’t earn enough to support a family, or high-demand jobs that poor people cannot aspire to. The Usual Suspects on the SDMB will continue to post paranoid accusations of secret plots to steal the elections. **Stoid** will start a long thread the day after the election claiming that the world is coming to an end and that the Republicans will grind up poor people for dog food . And I will post in every available thread saying, essentially, “Neener neener neener!” in a completely class-free, annoyingly superior whine. And I estimate Cheney’s chances of stepping down at 40%. If he does, Condi Rice will replace him, and be elected in 2008. (IhopeIhopeIhope…) Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/50 "2004-01-20T14:24:51Z")
The Democrats are not idiots. Despite the disproportionate influence of the lefter-leaning party activists during primaries, it seems clear now that Dean isn’t going to manage anything this time around. I’m disappointed, because as I hinted before, I thought Dean was a sure loss in November. The party sees that as well. I wish it were otherwise, because Kerry and Clark are both formidable candidates against an incumbent president running on a war record. It will be interesting to see how they approach each other. Clark’s message seems to be along the lines of, “Hey, Kerry was a junior officer - a hero junior officer, and I respect that heroism, but a junior officer nonetheless. I was a four-star.” - Rick ---
**Author:** ![plnnr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7ea924/32.png) [@plnnr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/plnnr)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/51 "2004-01-20T15:33:47Z")
Kerry/Breaux will be the Dems ticket ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/52 "2004-01-20T16:37:58Z")
OK, **plnnr**. You’re on record now! ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/53 "2004-01-20T17:14:13Z")
> [@](#): > > It will be interesting to see how they approach each other. Clark’s message seems to be along the lines of, “Hey, Kerry was a junior officer - a hero junior officer, and I respect that heroism, but a junior officer nonetheless. I was a four-star.” If you were doing a prediction, **Bricker** , your foresight is outstanding - that’s almost EXACTLY what Clark said. From the New York Times: “I’ve negotiated peace agreements,” he said. “I’ve led a major alliance in war. It’s one thing to be a hero as a junior officer. He’s done that, and I respect him for that. He’s been a good senator. But I’ve had the military leadership at the top as well as at the bottom.” ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/54 "2004-01-20T17:30:17Z")
For November, I want points, or odds, either one. Bush is quite reasonably the favorite. In an even-odds bet, I’d put my money on Bush in a heartbeat. But at 3-2 odds in Bush’s favor, I’d bet on the Democrat. Hey **John Corrado** , you say Bush will get at least 56% of the vote. I say he won’t. Care for a small wager? I don’t know who the Dem nominee will be, other than that the field has been narrowed to Kerry, Edwards, and Clark. I think whichever of them ultimately wins the nomination _can_ beat Bush, which is not to say he _will_ beat Bush. I’ll pick Kerry to win NH. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/55 "2004-01-20T17:53:09Z")
If we’re getting points for far-out predictions, I want to reiterate my early call that Edwards was gonna take the nomination, and that the general election would depend on voter turnout, [as I said more than a year ago](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=156194&highlight=Edwards). Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/56 "2004-01-20T17:55:57Z")
The winning Dem. ticket will be Clark (Edwards as vp?), with a long shot to Dean (Clark as VP? I know he said no way to a VP spot, but I think this would be a formidable ticket.) People who think Dean has no chance to beat Bush are wrong, wrong, wrong. Bush is WAY more vulnerable than almost anybody is saying at the moment. He seems to be doing okayish for the moment, but November is a long way away, and he’s still riding on incumbency and the general ignorance of the public regarding the dems. [prediction mode] So, as election days looms, polls show Bush sliding further and further behind as more and more Americans grow tired of his handouts to the wealthiest and of his consistent pattern of deceit, Orwellian double-speak, and general smarminess. Just before November, Bush suspends free elections justified by fabricating a national emergency, disbands the SCOTUS, and establishes martial law to keep the opposition in line. Republicans cheer. American Democracy as we have known it will be over. [/prediction mode] ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/57 "2004-01-20T17:57:22Z")
The winning Dem. ticket will be Clark (Edwards as vp?), with a long shot to Dean (Clark as VP? I know he said no way to a VP spot, but I think this would be a formidable ticket.) People who think Dean has no chance to beat Bush are wrong, wrong, wrong. Bush is WAY more vulnerable than almost anybody is saying at the moment. He seems to be doing okayish for the moment, but November is a long way away, and he’s still riding on incumbency and the general ignorance of the public regarding the dems. [prediction mode] So, as election days looms, polls show Bush sliding further and further behind as more and more Americans grow tired of his handouts to the wealthiest and of his consistent pattern of deceit, Orwellian double-speak, and general smarminess. Just before November, Bush suspends free elections (justified by fabricating a national emergency), disbands the SCOTUS, and establishes martial law to keep the opposition in line. Republicans cheer. American Democracy as we have known it will be over. [/prediction mode] ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/58 "2004-01-20T18:16:13Z")
I find **kwildcat** ’s [analysis](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=4477324&postcount=38) quite insightful: > [@](#): > > If I were a political strategist, I would find all this very interesting from a strategic perspective, and frankly playing out very well thus far for the Democratic party. > > -raving northeast liberal whips the party into a frenzy, boosting interest, turnout, and grassroots fundraising. The contest is successfully defined most importantly as a way to get rid of GWB. > -raving northeast liberal goes too far, prompting questions of electability. The party base, though, is already energized by the drama of stark raving lunacy, attack ads, wacky debate antics, etc. High voter turnout during the primaries and the general election is seemingly assured. > -plodding centrist candidates, sensing opportunity, decide to engage in good old fashioned mudslinging at the raving liberal. They are so out of date they do not realize that it damages them just as much as their target. > -his ego stung by the attacks, raving northeast liberal whines and mudslings back, forgetting that it was anything but old-fashioned political tactics that made him the front runner. In the process, he looks like an ass. > -the less strident, more visionary, more progressive candidates at last become the hot topic of coverage. Having benefitted from the mobilization of the electorate by the catfight among the competition, people are now primed to focus on **message** over fist-shaking. He picks Kerry and Clark to finish 1-2 in NH, with Edwards winning the nomination and the election. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/59 "2004-01-20T19:05:05Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > My predictions for New Hampshire is that Dean will win, Clark second, Kerry third. Interested in a wager? You say Dean, I say Kerry. Anyone else, we call it a wash. A bottle of champagne under $50, perhaps? > [@](#): > > For the general election, Bush will win by at least 5% of the popular vote, and a very large margin in the Electoral College. Define ‘a very large margin’, and we might have a wagering opportunity here, as well. Just take into account the magnifying tendencies of the EC: a candidate that wins 60% of the popular vote is likely to win 90-99% of the electoral vote, for instance. So I’m assuming you mean a larger margin than one would expect from a 5% popular margin, based on past elections. (In 1992, Clinton won by just over 5% popular, and by 202 electoral votes; the 1988 and 1952 elections were decided by about 7.5% popular, and by margins of 315 and 353 electoral votes.) > [@](#): > > Democrats will file a lawsuit over something or other in the election. When it is thrown out, they will claim that it invalidates the election, and refer to Bush as “the President who never won an election”. If Bush wins in the manner you predict, this won’t happen. Saying it will is just throwing needless partisanship into an otherwise respectable post. > [@](#): > > The economy will continue to recover, and Democrats will complain that it is bypassing those at the bottom. If corporations are doing a lot better, but it isn’t making a difference in people’s paychecks, that’s a pretty reasonable thing to complain about. > [@](#): > > The unemployment rate will drop, and Democrats will claim that they are mostly “dead-end” entry level jobs that don’t earn enough to support a family, or high-demand jobs that poor people cannot aspire to. Hey, the unemployment rate _did_ just drop, and without even creating any new jobs! A lot of people simply gave up looking for work. > [@](#): > > And I estimate Cheney’s chances of stepping down at 40%. If he does, Condi Rice will replace him, and be elected in 2008. (IhopeIhopeIhope…) Won’t happen, absent a genuinely incapacitating health event. And if that happens, Dubya’s veep will be someone who isn’t likely to use it as a springboard for 2008. Why? Jeb. I’ve said this a number of times before. I’ll put my wallet where my mouth is on this. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2004, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744/60 "2004-01-20T19:59:26Z")
> [@John Carter of Mars](#): > > I predicted back in 1999 that the primary reason Shrub wanted to be President was so he could conquer Iraq. Does that get me points? So many posters here seem to be shocked and amazed that he did it, I just wonder. I continue to be amazed that anyone is amazed. I knew that, why does everyone else seem to think it only came up after 9/11? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/election-2004-predictions/224744.md?page=4)