OJ - this helps but what did the model predict for 2000? If I remember correctly it had Gore getting low to mid 50% of the vote.
I take this number (58%) and knock it down a bit for non-economic factors such as the war, anti-Bush fervor, and so forth to get Bush in the low 50s.

This whole thing about how Bush is going to be in a tight election that he might even lose reminds me of the run-up to the Iraq invasion. Everyone underestimates him then in the end does not know what hit 'em. How many times can they fall for this? It is damn entertaining though.

Presidential Vote Equation--October 27, 2000

http://fairmodel.econ.yale.edu/vote/vot1000.htm

The NIPA data for the third quarter of 2000 were announced today, and so actual values of all the economic variables are available for the vote prediction. There are 8 quarters from 1997:1 on in which the per capita real growth rate has exceeded 3.2 percent: 1997:1, 1997:2, 1998:1, 1998:4, 1999:3, 1999:4, 2000:1, and 2000:2. There are thus 8 good news quarters that are relevant for the 2000 election. The per capita growth rate in the first three quarters of 2000 (at an annual rate) is 3.5 percent, and the inflation rate in the past 15 quarters (at an annual rate) is 1.7 percent. The economic variables are thus:

* n = 8
* g3 = 3.5
* p15 = 1.7
The predicted Democratic share of the two party vote (V) is thus .508:

* .508 = .423 + .0070*3.5 - .0072*1.7 + .0091*8
The Democrats are thus predicted to win with 50.8 percent of the two party vote. Given that the standard error of the equation is 2.15 percentage points, the election is essentially predicted to be too close to call. The equation will have done well if the election is close regardless of who wins. If either Bush or Gore wins by a fairly wide margin, say with 54 or 55 percent of the two party vote, the equation will have done poorly.

OJ - thanks.
I wonder why model, given similar GDP growth and inflation to 2000, is generating a much higher number. Has the first variable (.423) been increased in the current modeling?

Bush is seeking re-election, which gives a big bounce. Had Gore been Clinton he'd have had a similar benefit from similar numbers.

AWW: The current model values are here HERE

The much simpler misery index is giving off the same vibes as the Prof's complicated system. The unemployment rate today ticked down to a historically low 5.6%. The inflation rate for the last twelve months was a miniscule 1.9%.

A misery index under eight means an easy re-election, unless LOTS of other things go wrong or Bush runs an increibly inept campaign. When all is said and done and all the wobbles in the polls have come and gone, Bush should cruise with an eight-ten point margin. The media will do their best to make the economy look horrible, but the numbers will out.

AWW: don't know why that tag didn't work (operator error no doubt) but here it is long hand:
http://fairmodel.econ.yale.edu/vote2004/computev.htm

AAW -- Gore "getting low to mid 50%" is exactly what happened. Not that I buy these equations...

As the 1992 election demonstrated, the perceived state of the economy is a better predictor of the incumbent's chances than the actual state.

The U. of Mich. Consumer Sentiment Index on election day has been a reliable predictor in recent elections.

Carter 75.0
Reagan 96.3
Bush-41 73.3
Clinton 96.5

The current level is 103.8, which gives Bush some breathing room.

Modeling aside, I suspect that Kerry's poll numbers of early this week are as high as they will ever be. No one knows him yet. By June, the public will be quite tired of the media dousing the economy with every sigh and shudder. By September, the President will be spending time and money to get re-elected, which he is not doing now. I'll bet the Democrats don't even get a convention bounce (which is what happened in 2000 as well). But Bush should get a good bounce coming out of NY, especially if he gives a good speech.

Remember, one of Bush's best attributes is his patience.

I wonder what will happen if there is a riot in NYC during the Republican convention. I know there are a lot of angry lefties who are planning demonstrations. They will not be satisfied just to walk with insulting signs this time.

Two words: Get Osama