--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, November 24, 2000 Volume XXV, No. 41
Roswell, New Mexico

In this issue:

Something to Look Out for in Florida
How did we do? The Midwest
Previous Issues

Something to Look Out For in the Florida Recount

Here are the final unofficial counts in the three key Florida counties PRIOR to the hand tallies being conducted now:

Gore leads Bush by the following ratios:

2.18 to 1 in Broward
1.14 to 1 in Dade
1.76 to 1 in Palm Beach

or, overall, by a ration of 1.59 to 1 in the three counties combined.

Bush started out in this second (or third) recount 930 votes ahead. Some of the reports coming out of Florida, which we hear incompletely and in starts and spurts, seem to indicate that Gore may be making up votes in ratios far in excess of what we might reasonably expect.

In other words, we hear things like "Gore picked up a net 88 votes (in such and such county) out of only 327 votes counted." While such an outcome (in a fair and legitimately conducted recount) is possible, it is mathematically unlikely.

Much more likely are changes---net gains or losses---in either candidate's totals that are in ratios reasonably similar to those already established in the course of the already counted 1½ million votes (shown above). That is a big sample.

The current recount began with Gore needing 930 votes to catch Bush (leaving aside a host of other issues involving the legitimacy of the entire procedure---and we see it as wholly illegitimate).

Based on the returns we already have, we can't assume it is reasonable for Gore to be the only one to gain. In fact, we have to assume Bush will get about 63 votes for every 100 additional votes Gore finds. Doing some simple algebra, and using "x" for the additional Bush votes which will be "found" in the ongoing recount, we know that Gore has a reasonable expectation of getting about 59% more (1.59x) than Bush. By using the equation 1.59x - 1x = 930, we can determine the minimum number of votes which have to be found for Bush before Gore can catch up.

That equation says that number is 1,576. If Bush gains 1,576, then it is not unreasonable for Gore to gain 2,506, and thus move into a tie.

So far, though, we don't see those kinds of gains being made for Bush. The reports seem to be much smaller and much more one-sided in favor of Gore. If that kind of numerical phenomenon (low numbers, big gains) shows up, you have a right to be very suspicious. (We mean even more suspicious than you may already be.)

If you see a report from one county which says Bush gained 50, but Gore gained 350, it just isn't statistically probable. Keep that in mind.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Midwest
Our Projections on October 9 (Unless Otherwise Indicated)
(Popular vote in 000's)

Summary:

Back on October 9th, we projected the region 68-44 for Gore. We revised that in our ELECTION EVE edition, switching Wisconsin's 11 electoral votes to Bush, and calling the region, 57-55 for Gore. The original 68-44 analysis turned out to be right on target.

The Wisconsin change was one of only two adjustments we made in the updating of our projection models just before the election. New Hampshire was the other one. However, Wisconsin turned out to be one of two states, thus far, whose outcome we missed (West Virginia being the other).

Our long-held view, first published in March, had been that Indiana is a given (until further notice), and that Ohio and Missouri had to be part of any Republican Electoral College strategy. Additionally, the weakness of the base in both Pennsylvania and Florida meant that Wisconsin---the only other Midwestern state we thought was winnable---had to become a targeted state.

We knew (although we had many detractors within both the Republican National Committee and the Bush Campaign Team) that Illinois was, and is, absolutely hopeless at this time for GOP Presidential nominees. We never wavered one iota from that position.

While we did not believe Bush could come as close as he did in Minnesota or Iowa, we did allow as how it was possible that many disgusted Lutherans and Catholics (the more liberal ones among those two groups---both of which count both strong Republicans and Democrats in their ranks in the Upper Midwest) in those states (and Wisconsin) who in other times might have voted Democrat would make Bush more competitive. They did.

We believed Wisconsin was reachable, but not Michigan. We would have concentrated resources in Ohio, Missouri and Wisconsin. Some of the staggering $12 million spent in California on TV alone would have won Wisconsin. Shame. Opportunity missed. The same goes for about $7 million completely wasted in Illinois.