James Fine, a Yale University economics professor (an admitted Kerry supporter) has been predicting presidental outcomes for many years based on numerous factors related to the economy. According to him, while giving an interview to a reporter for the New York Times, he has been "right on" within his margin of error of +/-2.5% since he begain the process 6 elections ago.
According to his analysis, in a two party race Bush wins 57.4% to 42.6% for Kerry. When a third party is factored in (Nader) the differential between Bush/Kerry stays about the same. The reporter seemed to be upset with these findings by Dr. Fine and tried to spin the results he predicted to make it more favorable toward Kerry. The good Dr. would have none of it, even said he wasn't pleased himself with his analysis, but said the facts are the facts.
The reporter went on to say that "the polls" certainly don't support his findings and tend to predict a very close race. His reply was"the polls are historically flawed in the questioning methodology they employ".
I, of course, don't know what the outcome of this election will be, but as far as I'm concerned, JIM FINES THE MAN!
According to his analysis, in a two party race Bush wins 57.4% to 42.6% for Kerry. When a third party is factored in (Nader) the differential between Bush/Kerry stays about the same. The reporter seemed to be upset with these findings by Dr. Fine and tried to spin the results he predicted to make it more favorable toward Kerry. The good Dr. would have none of it, even said he wasn't pleased himself with his analysis, but said the facts are the facts.
The reporter went on to say that "the polls" certainly don't support his findings and tend to predict a very close race. His reply was"the polls are historically flawed in the questioning methodology they employ".
I, of course, don't know what the outcome of this election will be, but as far as I'm concerned, JIM FINES THE MAN!
