Reader poll: Who will win the White House?
Well, here we are, folks -- election eve. Who do you think will prevail in the presidential election? Not necessarily the candidate you voted for, or the one you want to win. We want your prediction:
Well, here we are, folks -- election eve. Who do you think will prevail in the presidential election? Not necessarily the candidate you voted for, or the one you want to win. We want your prediction:
Comments (36)
I'm going for 302 to 236, Romney for the EC win, and the popular vote by 4%, 47-51%. Yes, I'm an outlier, a rebel, a total non-conformist.
Posted by Harry | November 5, 2012 8:15 AM
To quote the great Woody Allen:
“More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.”
Posted by Steve | November 5, 2012 8:32 AM
It is as true today as it was in 2004: http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s08e08-douche-and-turd
Posted by The Original BobW | November 5, 2012 9:22 AM
My preferred candidate isn't here. As in every election year since 1988, I write-in Charles Manson, on the campaign slogan "Because A Nation of Freaks Deserves To Be Led By One". We certainly can't do worse than to let Charlie be in charge, now can we?
Posted by Texas Triffid Ranch | November 5, 2012 9:42 AM
Now you should report on the findings of this poll and put a headline like: Obama wins the election
Report it as news.
Posted by Patrick | November 5, 2012 10:04 AM
"Now you should report on the findings of this poll and put a headline like: Obama "
A writer actually wrote to a Q&A column in my local newspaper last week to ask (seriously) if the election process counted all the votes or just took a random sampling of them as polls did.
Posted by sally | November 5, 2012 10:15 AM
The only thing that is for sure is that "we the people" are going to be the real losers.
Posted by Tim | November 5, 2012 10:19 AM
Harry, I think its going to be a little bigger than you may think... Romney 312 EC votes and wins popular vote by 5.5%.
Polling shows Obama never breaks 50%, the polling is skewed towards the historic 08 turnout (therefore oversampling D's), with no correction for '10 turnout.
Jack: is there a prize for those who go on a limb with actual numbers and come closest?
Cheers, It's Mike
Posted by It's Mike | November 5, 2012 10:28 AM
There may be prize Mike, but you ain't winning it with that prediction.
Posted by Snards | November 5, 2012 11:19 AM
Obama: 328 Romney: 206. Obama: 51.1% Romney 48.4%.
Unless the polls are way off, Obama should cruise to victory. Once he wins Ohio and Virginia, the race is over. Expect this to be called early for Obama. Like 5pm PST, early.
Posted by Justin Morton | November 5, 2012 11:21 AM
I predict that I will be disappointed no matter what happens. And then my life will go on and, since the President has very little real power, I won't really care much.
The House and Senate races are much more interesting.
Posted by TacoDave | November 5, 2012 11:25 AM
So you get one guy that will systematically disassemble this country piece by line-item piece, like an expense report...or the guy who will hunt your American citizenship holding ass down and throw away the key with a drone, produced in White Salmon.
We need more less party affiliation.
Posted by Jubei | November 5, 2012 11:56 AM
Obama he electoral voe, Romney the popular vote.
he Blue Oregon ideologues will be on he opposite end of Bush - Gore. Maybe hey'll finally shut up.
Well, I can at least hope they will.
Posted by Nonny Mouse | November 5, 2012 12:27 PM
(Darn "T" key keeps sticking.)
Obama the electoral vote, Romney the popular vote.
The Blue Oregon ideologues will be on he opposite end of Bush - Gore. Maybe they'll finally shut up.
Well, I can at least hope they will.
Posted by Nonny Mouse | November 5, 2012 12:30 PM
The Blue Oregon ideologues will be on he opposite end of Bush - Gore.
Nonny, have you really forgotten what actually happened in 2000, or are you betting that the rest of us have?
Posted by Allan L. | November 5, 2012 1:19 PM
Romney gets 279 EC votes and 52%. Don't blame me. I voted Gary Johnson.
Posted by rw | November 5, 2012 1:19 PM
The POTUS has a problem. He can't pull anywhere near 50%, he relied heavily on independents four years ago. Democrat registrations are down generally and those indep. votes he received last time are headed out the barn.
Not all of the democrats are willing to hold their respective noses as well.
Posted by BoBo | November 5, 2012 1:44 PM
Nonny, have you really forgotten what actually happened in 2000, or are you betting that the rest of us have?
Apparently, some of "us" never knew.
Bush won the EC, Gore won the PV.
BO screamed bloody murder.
If this outcome is reversed, I'm sure BO's silence will be deafening.
Posted by cc | November 5, 2012 1:52 PM
Um, you guys do realize that Obama is going to win right? I mean, bluster has its place, but....
Posted by Snards | November 5, 2012 2:04 PM
Problem is, Snards, everybody is blustering.
Posted by sally | November 5, 2012 2:10 PM
Allen L.
I haven' forgotten what happened in 2000.
Bush won he Electoral college fair and square.
I know that clashes with your alternate reality. Get over it.
Gore won the popular vote.
Popular vote alone doesn't decide he elecion.
This time Obama will win the Electoral college.
Romney will win he otal popular vote.
No "mandate" for Obama. Four more years of uter gridlock.
Lucky us.
Its a damn shame Obama wased he wo years when he had a majoriy in boh Hopuse and Senate from January 3, 2009 hrough January 3, 2011.
An even greater shame that the feckless Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid hasn'tfigured out the actual Senate rules on filibisters, and required a few Repugnicans o actually exhaust themselves with a real filibuster.
That spectacle,on C-Span, parallel to Gingrich's stupidity during the Clinton Administraion, of "shutting down he government", would garner the Senate Repugnicans the same public opprobrium earned by Gingrich and Company, and result in more than a few losses of Repubnican seats in the Senate.
Its hardball, it takes balls, and both Reid and especially are woefully deficient in cojones.
Posted by Nonny Mouse | November 5, 2012 3:00 PM
Last line should read:
Its hardball, it takes balls, and both Reid and especially Obama are woefully deficient in cojones.
Posted by Nonny Mouse | November 5, 2012 3:02 PM
Snards: I dont realize it at all... Maybe I travel too much to other parts of the country (Even MSP, not exactly red-state), and talk to too many other people across the spectrum that tell me that while they may have voted Obama in '08, they are not going to do so again. Not that they are staunch Romney advocates, but they are let down by the actualities of the current administration (talk to folks in Fremont about Solyndra: your eyes will be opened, and that is NOT a red area of CA).
And I may not well win the prize for my prediction above, but i went out on the limb and made it (you can too, put some numbers behind your "everyone knows").. and yes, my limb includes PA for Romney; which is the only time the limb shakes a little.
The "buyers remorse" will be seen on Wednesday morning as much deeper than anyone thought, or got mentioned in the polls..
On the last couple of presidential elections, a quite liberal friend of mine and i have a gentleman's wager where the loser contributes a fixed pre-determined amount to the winners charity of choice. No one loses, and in '08 the winner was the Oregon Food Bank ('04's winner was Oregon Humane Society)
Cheers, It's Mike
Posted by It's Mike | November 5, 2012 3:06 PM
What puzzles me is what purpose is served by rewriting the history of the 2000 election. First of all, there is no popular vote election for anyone to win. You can add up the numbers, but in our system the totals have no political significance. As for the Electoral College, we really don't know who won it, because of the intervention of the courts.
Posted by Allan L. | November 5, 2012 3:10 PM
Watching Ohio and Florida devolve into chaos, one wonders how we can expend blood and treasure on "establishing democracy in the Middle East" while not ensuring -- and indeed, taking steps to inhibit -- the full voting participation of all citizens wishing to exercise their privilege.
Posted by Roger | November 5, 2012 3:24 PM
Well good luck Mike. If it doesn't bounce your way remember that the polls have basically been saying the same thing for a year, so the surprise is not really a surprise.
My prediction is that Obama wins EC with 290 to 300, and popular vote by less than 1%.
Posted by Snards | November 5, 2012 3:25 PM
The polling pundits that aggregate the state and national polls predict Obama at about 300 in the EC and maybe 1% in the general popular vote. But I think Mike is on to the issue that might discredit those statistical models. My rational analysis tells me Obama, but there's a small voice of intuition that's screaming Romney. So I'm trying to limit my expectations.
Just hope that with a second term, Obama has the will and determination to make the hard compromises on his party's side of the aisle,necessary to get the deficit and future debt profile of our Country under control, and that the Tea Party Republicans don't take us all hostage again. Oh, and I wish for world peace too.
Posted by Drewbob | November 5, 2012 5:09 PM
279-279 tie. House stays GOP but they lose a few seats. Senate remains dem or tied. Romney gets the majority in the House. If the dems retain control of the Senate they elect Biden. If the Senate is tied . . . civil war followed by amendment getting rid of the stupid electoral system.
Posted by Nick | November 5, 2012 5:53 PM
errr. . . 269-269
Posted by Nick | November 5, 2012 5:59 PM
I have it as tie with Romney firmly taking the popular vote. It goes to the legislature and Romney takes it.
Of the swing states:
Romney: The south (FL, VA, NC) and the western swingers (NV & CO, both went for Bush).
Obama: The entire mid west including Ohio, PA, etc...
Then it comes down to Iowa and New Hampshire. If Iowa goes Romney and NH go Obama we have a tie. If that flips, Obama wins by 2.
Posted by Jo | November 5, 2012 6:13 PM
Barack coasts with 300+ EV, and 51+ in the PV. The GOP did themselves no favors by letting the Limbaugh wing take over.
Posted by john | November 5, 2012 7:01 PM
Romney will win, not before the whole sentient population steps on their very last collective nerve, and has a gigantic absence seizure under the bedcovers, with the TV firmly switched off, from midday PST through the long, long night of the election...
This election reminds me of ditching an abusive boyfriend on the very same day you enter an arranged marriage with someone you've never met, who comes highly recommended, and is easy on the eyes. The relief of escaping a hellish interpersonal trap produces a euphoric level of optimism about the new member of the household.
I have my ear protectors and eyepatches all prepped to go. If my prediction is right, I will remove them for coffee in the morning. If wrong, they will be replaced and I will return to bed for at least a few more hours.
Posted by Gaye harris | November 5, 2012 8:22 PM
266 Obama/272 Romney.
He wins Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, and Iowa.
If Romney loses Iowa, then he has to win Colorado or Wisconsin. Unless PA is actually in play, which seems unlikely.
My preferred outcome: Romney loses Iowa, but picks up Oregon...Wouldn't that be a surprise?
Posted by Mister Tee | November 5, 2012 8:51 PM
All you Romney predictors should have waited until the measure passed making that stuff legal before you smoked it.
Posted by Allan L. | November 6, 2012 12:07 PM
The measure "making that stuff legal" is not going to pass, Allan. So there's one you got wrong. I wish it were the other.
Posted by sally | November 6, 2012 4:27 PM
Sally, I made no prediction in that last post about anything.
Posted by Allan L. | November 7, 2012 7:07 AM