Fair-Parke is still predicting a G.W.Bush win in November. A historical ~90% accuracy rate is not be to ignored lightly.
Going into this election, the main caveat is that the underlying macroeconomic model has systematically underpredicted the magnitude of the changes in the U.S. Fed discount rate.
I tried -5.25% real GDP growth in Q1-3 of 2004, 2.5% inflation, and 0 quarters of growth greater than 3.2% and still got a dead heat (Republicans getting 50% of the vote). I don't think that growth has been that bad for 3 quarters since before the 1973-4 recession (maybe going all the way back to 1938, but I don't have older numbers handy). Somehow I suspect that this equation overweights inflation relative to growth because of lack of data during periods of very low growth.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2004-07-15 03:36 pm (UTC)Going into this election, the main caveat is that the underlying macroeconomic model has systematically underpredicted the magnitude of the changes in the U.S. Fed discount rate.
[Saudis]
Yes.
no subject
Date: 2004-07-15 03:50 pm (UTC)===|==============/ Level Head
It gets worse at the boundries
Date: 2004-07-15 05:08 pm (UTC)