| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Experts Wary of Predicting Win for Bush |
| 2004-10-09 |
| It seems the Yale prof who predicted 57.5 % for GWB is busy covering his a**, just to be on the safe side. President Bush will be the first president in 72 years to face the electorate with a net job loss. The Iraq war has deeply torn the nation. National polls show a neck-and-neck race. Yet economy-based projections still show a decisive Bush victory on Nov. 2. What gives? Political scientists and many economists say this may be the year to throw the economic models out the window. Forecasters are flummoxed about the impact of Iraq, uncertain about the true state of the economy, and less sure about their projections than in any recent election. Domestic policy is the designated topic for final presidential debate on Wednesday at Arizona State University. And the topic drew testy exchanges in Friday night's debate in St. Louis, where Democrat John Kerry accused Bush of running up massive deficits with wartime tax cuts for the wealthy, and the president portrayed Kerry as an unabashed liberal who would raise taxes on the middle class to pay for big government programs. Despite record deficits, surging oil prices and the loss of jobs under Bush's watch, mathematical and statistical models continue to project a Bush victory. Economists, however, are raising questions about their own models. "Foreign policy on the average is not that big a deal. But this time could be different. You never know. Iraq is such a big issue," said Yale economist Ray Fair, who has one of the best track records for predicting elections. His model predicts Bush will get 57.5 percent of the vote, using such variables as economic growth, inflation, incumbency and duration in office. He has been accurate in five of the past six elections, missing only in 1992 when Bush's father lost. The Labor Department on Friday delivered more disappointing news to Bush, reporting that the U.S. economy added just 96,000 jobs in September, about 50,000 fewer than expected. Because it was the last employment report before Election Day, it means a job loss is now baked in the political cake. Though 1.8 million jobs have been added to business payrolls in the past year, there are 821,000 fewer jobs in the country than when Bush took office in January 2001. Democrats are quick to point out Bush is the first president since Herbert Hoover in the Great Depression to oversee a net job loss. "I have a plan to put people back to work. That's not wishy-washy," Kerry asserted in Friday's debate, responding to a suggestion by a questioner that he was "wishy-washy." Republicans, of course, emphasize the recent gains — not the overall losses. Moments after Friday's jobs report, the Bush campaign put out a television commercial crediting Bush policies for "nearly 2 million new jobs in just over a year." In Friday's debate, Bush said: "Small businesses are flourishing. Homeownership rate is at an all-time high in America. We're on the move." The question President Reagan famously raised in his 1980 debate with incumbent Jimmy Carter — are you better off now than you were four years ago? — is being asked again this year by Democrats. Why do economic models still show a Bush victory? Principally because the unemployment rate — 5.4 percent in September — is not high by historical standards, interest rates and inflation remain relatively subdued, and economic growth is moderate, if not robust. Most economic statistics have inched up since the end of the 2001 recession. "Things are not terrible," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard and Poor's in New York. "But I'd rather be on Kerry's side of the argument." An economic model Wyss uses — based on the unemployment rate, the growth in real income, the change in the core inflation rate and the change in oil prices — shows a Bush victory by 54 percent, even with the run-up in oil prices. But Wyss is not so sure. "Usually elections get decided on domestic issues. But there are a lot of non-economic issues this time," he said. Economy.com, an online provider of economic and financial research based in West Chester, Pa., gives Bush 53.7 percent of the vote and suggests he could win as many as 373 electoral votes, far more than the 270 he needs. But Mark Zandi, chief economist at the company, is skeptical. "The economy is losing momentum going into the election, there is a lot of angst among voters. The models may not be picking that up," he said. Economist Lawrence Chimerine, president of Radnor Consulting, an economics firm in Philadelphia, said economic models can go only so far — and don't take into account a lot of things that influence the vote. "I wouldn't give you a nickel for those models. I think the polls showing the race is reasonably tight are probably a lot more accurate than those models," Chimerine said. |
| Posted by:Anonymous5089 |
| #3 Good works, not faith. Call a Cheney-Bush office and ask how you can help persuade swing voters or mobilize likely Bush voters on Nov 2. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-10-10 2:54:30 PM |
| #2 Barbara S. Have faith. Have faith. |
| Posted by: John QC 2004-10-09 11:50:41 PM |
| #1 I don't want to predict a win for him either. I'd hate to jinx it. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2004-10-09 11:10:48 PM |