Hostname: page-component-5d59c44645-dknvm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-02-29T18:20:23.172Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Introduction—The 2004 Presidential Election Forecasts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2004

James E. Campbell
University at Buffalo, SUNY


This symposium presents seven presidential election forecasting models and their predictions of the popular two-party vote in the 2004 election. The modern age of election forecasting is now into its third decade. Models have been tested quite publicly in the heat of battle—with some doing well, others not quite so well, and still others making way for new models. In this introduction, I provide a brief overview of the models, a summary of this year's forecasts, and some thoughts about how the forecasts should be judged.

© 2004 by the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


Bartels Larry M., and John Zaller. 2001. “Presidential Vote Models: A Recount.” PS: Political Science & Politics 34 (March): 920.Google Scholar
Brody Richard, and Lee Sigelman. 1983. “Presidential Popularity and Presidential Elections: An Update and Extension.” Public Opinion Quarterly 47: 325328Google Scholar
Campbell James E., and James C. Garand. 2000. Before the Vote: Forecasting American National Elections. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Fair Ray C. 1978. “The Effect of Economic Events on Votes for President.” Review of Economics and Statistics 60: 159173.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck Michael S., and Tom W. Rice. 1984. “Forecasting Presidential Elections: A Comparison of Naive Models.” Political Behavior 6: 921Google Scholar
Rosenstone Steven J. 1983. Forecasting Presidential Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sigelman Lee. 1979. “Presidential Popularity and Presidential Elections.” Public Opinion Quarterly 43: 53234 Google Scholar