Quote:
Originally Posted by HansMoleman";p="
actually, the consensus is the Bush is definately leading in the electoral votes. He is leading in Ohio, he is leading in NH, and he is tied in PA and NJ of all places, which he lost badly to Gore in 2000.
If you want to remain confident about Kerry, fine. But many Democrats are not. He is not doing especially well, and you should worry that he could lose to the man who you have spent a great deal of energy hating for the last four years.
|
We all must agree that this is going to be a very close race up until the end...right? We must also agree that the undecided voters are going to play a big hand in the outcome of this election. If Hans is correct and Bush is leading in the electoral votes and not popular votes, I wonder what effect this has on undecided voters.
After what happened in 2000, I think a lot of people are upset that the popular voice was not heard. My theory is that if it stays this way with electoral votes opposing popular vote, undecided voters that are leaning toward Kerry because they dislike Bush, but don't want to vote because they aren't sure about Kerry will come out in droves to make sure that we don't have a repeat of the 2000 election. Those undecided who see Bush in the lead electorally and are possibly leaning toward Bush or at least not anti-Bush or anti-kerry might just leave well enough alone.
My predicted eventual outcome of this theory is that the election will be mostly tied with likely voters as usual based on polls up to the election. Then the undecided voters will tip the scale in favor of Kerry...Kerry will win this election.
Either that or my main theory will occur that Kerry is going to clean up in the debates to get these undecided voters on his side regardless, still getting the popular vote and the electoral vote in this years election.
