Economic models predict Bush election win

Despite an embarrassing failure in their forecasting four years ago, political scientists and economists are again predicting the outcome of the presidential election, and most foresee a win for President George W. Bush. "If this election follows historical patterns, it looks very likely that Bush is going to win," said Ray Fair, a Yale University economist whose model is built mainly around gross domestic product growth and predicts that Bush will take 58.5 per cent of the vote. Current polls show a very close race with many suggesting that Democratic nominee John Kerry may be slightly ahead.

There is a wide variety of election models available. Each takes different combinations of factors to calculate a prediction for the November 2 vote but all rely heavily on economic data - usually growth, inflation, unemployment, wage growth or a combination of these factors.

Chris Wlezien, a political scientist based at Nuffield College at the University of Oxford in Britain, is predicting Bush will win 52.5 per cent of the vote in a model that combines income growth with presidential approval ratings.

Four years ago, Mr Wlezien forecast that then-Vice President Al Gore would win with 54.5 per cent of the vote. In fact, he took 50.5 per cent and lost the state-by-state Electoral College vote after the Supreme Court settled a bitter dispute over the outcome of the vote in Florida.

"Of course, forecasting tomorrow's weather is a lot easier than forecasting what it will be on Christmas Day," Mr Wlezien said. "It's 60-40 the numbers will move in Bush's direction between now and Election Day but nothing is certain."

Michael Lewis-Beck at the University of Iowa, is predicting that Bush will win 51 per cent of the vote, which makes the election too close to call. After predicting an easy victory for Gore in 2000, Mr Lewis-Beck has changed his model to take account of jobs growth over the four-year presidential term. Under Bush, there has been a 1.1 million net job loss.

"Bush has the worst jobs record of any incumbent since the Second World War and that is hurting him," Mr Lewis-Beck said.

History suggests that when economic growth exceeds 2.6 per cent, an incumbent president or another candidate of his party will win. Gross domestic product climbed at annual rates of 4.5 per cent in the first quarter of 2004 and three per cent in the second.

Only three 20th century incumbents lost - Herbert Hoover in 1932, Jimmy Carter in 1980 and Bush's father in 1992. In all three elections, the economy was either in recession, or in Hoover's case, depression.

The big unknown in this election is the effect of the war in Iraq, which most models struggle to capture.

"Our equation says the economy ought to be good enough for Bush to win the election," said Nigel Gault of Global Insights, a consultancy based in Lexington, Massachusetts. "If the election turns out to be not entirely or not mainly about the economy, Bush might be vulnerable," he said.