Red vs. Blue...which states will change in '04 election?
This, as you may guess, is a map of the 2000 election results, state by state. As I have been thinking about the upcoming election, I have been wondering where will we see the changes, and what states will be the most crucial?
My bias will probably shine in the following statement, but I am unconvinced that any 2000 gore supporters will be supporting bush in the upcoming election, so I think the map should be mostly the same.
The closest states were the usual midwest swing states, new hampshire, and of course florida. I think that if the Dems can take Ohio, they will win the election. In fact, no republican president has ever won office without winning Ohio. I am also an Cincinnati resident, so this makes me feel very important.
Florida I think will stay red. Even though if everyone in florida voted for whom they intended to in 2000 it would be blue, i don't feel that minority voters, who in florida traditionally vote democratic, will make it to the polls. I've heard, and this makes a lot of sense, that the attitude of many city minorities in florida is, "Why vote? They (the people in power) are gonna do what they want to anyway."
But what states will turn Red? I can't really see that any will. How does New York City traditionally vote? What do you guys (& gals) think?
Comments
CA will be interesting with Arnold at the helm. if he stumps for GWB, he'll pull a lot of non traditional voters out of the woodwork.
NM is also up for grabs, will probably go Bush.
WI was really close, not sure it will change though.
Originally posted by progmac
In 2000, New Mexico went to Gore by a fluke. Bush will take it. He'll also be competitive in Pennsylvania and Michigan, but his fumbling of steel tarrifs will probably prevent him from taking one, or both, of those states.
If Clark is the nominee, the Democrats have a chance at Arkansas. They'll have a chance at Missouri regardless, since Missouri historically goes to whoever wins nationally.
Bush has no chance in California. Schwarzenneger won because of the unique circumstances and the insidious awfulness of Gray Davis. A Governor Davis would be better for Bush than a Governor Schwarzenneger.
The Democrats always have a shot in Ohio and West Virginia. If the Dem nominee is better liked than Gore by labor, they could make either of those two states competitive. It would be hard to pick a nominee liked less by labor than Gore.
The other states won't move.
The Midwest and nearby states: Ohio, Missouri, West Virginia, Michigan and Pennsylvania, will determine the next president.
Originally posted by Kirkland
Bush has no chance in California. Schwarzenneger won because of the unique circumstances and the insidious awfulness of Gray Davis. A Governor Davis would be better for Bush than a Governor Schwarzenneger.
For once, I agree with you.
If Davis was still in office, there'd be no chance that Californians would be pissed off at a Republican governor in November '04. In order for Bush to win California, Schwarzenegger has to work a miracle in less than a year. Maybe he can turn California around, but not in a year.
California is not a swing state.
Over 70% of the reserve in NH has been called to duty in Iraq or Afghanistan, and a ton of people in NH are in the armed services. Many people just got called up for their 3rd tours of duty since 9/11. Morale is very low. I think NH will be in play.
Edit: When I entered this thread, I was hoping that it was about http://redvsblue.com/
It also depends a lot on the nominee. Clark would probably win Arkansas, Gephardt would probably Missouri, and Dean - well at least he would keep Vermont!
[edit]Oh yeah, this is pretty cool. It's an interactive electoral map on John Edwards' web site.
he he.
Alaska 3
Idaho 4
Montana 3
Wyoming 3
Utah 5
Nebraska 5
North Dakota 3
South Dakota 3
Kansas 6
Oklahoma 7
Texas 34
Indiana 11
Virginia 13
Kentucky 8
Tennessee 11
North Carolina 15
South Carolina 8
Alabama 9
Mississippi 6
19 States for 157 Electoral Votes. For the Donkey:
California 55
Washington 11
Oregon 7
Hawaii 4
Maryland 10
Delaware 3
DC 3
New Jersey 15
New York 31
Connecticut 7
Rhode Island 4
Massachusetts 12
Maine 4
13 States for 166.
That leaves:
Nevada 5
Arizona 10
New Mexico 5
Colorado 9
Minnesota 10
Iowa 7
Arkansas 6
Louisiana 9
Wisconsin 10
Illinois 21
Michigan 17
Missouri 11
Ohio 20
Pennsylvania 21
Vermont 3
New Hampshire 4
West Virginia 5
Florida 27
Georgia 15
Kentucky 8
19 States for 215.
The Democrats need 104. You have to expect that the elephant captures GA, KY, AR and LA even if those will be contested. Any realistic strategy for winning probably involves Eeyore getting down with MI, IL and PA. GOP could flip PA but if that happens then Bush gets another term probably so I'll assume that doesn't happen. That puts the Dems at 225. OH and CO most likely to the shrubbery so that gets you to 224 for 4 more years. Basically then you're back to the same thing as always, everyone spends all their time in FL because once you can add them you're over 250 and probably you can get there either way.
The one interesting thing to me is if Dean (were he the candidate) can flip some of hte more moderate Western states, Colorado, Nevada, and Arizona. They've been trending more moderate and libertarian plays much better out west than Bush's moralistic, big budget, Christian message which kills in the South. If not I think Bush is pretty much housed.
Illinois and Wisconsin are swing states... as is Colorado.
Dean will get Vermont if he gets the nomination.
If Clark gets it he could pull in Arkansas.
The Republicans have a veritable lock on 21 states with 178 electoral votes:
Texas (34)
Oklahoma (7)
Kansas (6)
Nebraska (5)
North Dakota (3)
South Dakota (3)
Utah (5)
Mississippi (6)
Alabama (9)
Georgia (15)
South Carolina (8)
North Carolina (15)
Virginia (13)
Tennessee (11)
Arkansas (6) -- Yes, even if Clark runs
Kentucky (8)
Indiana (11)
Montana (3)
Wyoming (3)
Idaho (4)
Alaska (3)
The Republicans will almost certainly also win these 7 states, which will bring them to 247 electoral votes :
New Hampshire (4) -- Tax cuts trump all in New Hampshire
New Mexico (5) -- Gore won on a fluke
Louisiana (9) -- the most abnormal Southern state, but still Southern
Colorado (9) -- Swingable, but fairly solid GOP
Arizona (10) -- Same
Nevada (5) -- Same, but with prostitutes!
Florida (27) -- This state has drifted GOP since 2000
The Democrats can rely on the following 12 states and DC for 162 electoral votes:
California (55)
Washington (11)
Hawaii (4)
Maine (4)
Vermont (3)
Massachusetts (12)
Connecticut (7)
Rhode Island (4)
New York (31)
New Jersey (15)
Delaware (3)
Maryland (10)
DC (3)
The Democrats will almost certainly also win the following 5 states, raising their total to 217 electoral votes:
Wisconsin (10) -- close in 2000, but historically democratic
Minnesota (10) -- Same
Iowa (7) -- National GOP politics just plays poorly here
Illinois (21) -- Cook County usually delivers this to the donkeys
Oregon (7) -- Razor thin in 2000, but Bush's environmental record will help the Democrats here
Which leaves the entire election up to the following 5 states:
Michigan (Gore in 2000) (17)
Pennsylvania (Gore in 2000) (21)
West Virginia (Bush in 2000) (5)
Missouri (Bush in 2000) (11)
Ohio (Bush in 2000) (20)
In other words, the presidential battleground has shifted to the Mid-West, which as demographic trends go is a good thing for the Democratic Party, given Union strength and the appeal of the New Democrat sort of "Third Way" in this region.
None of these states went to their respective winners in 2000 by more than 6 percentage points. And some of these states have mutually exclusive demographics -- for instance, Bush has pissed off voters in both Michigan and Pennsylvania at different points with his steel tariffs imbroglio, which exacerbate the union situation in both states, making them hard for him to pick up. If the Democrats get both of these states, then they just need two of the other three to win. Of the two, look for Bush to make his biggest push for Pennsylvania, where the deeply-rooted Catholic religiosity could help him overcome
Bush probably has the inside track on Ohio, which despite it's Mid-West character is more like Indiana than it is Michigan or Pennsylvania. If Bush gets Ohio and West Virginia, he wins. West Virginia, however, is a heavily-Democratic state, and Bush's win there was something of an upset in 2000.
Missouri is always a tight race whenever the electorate is sharply divided, as it is likely to be in November, given the way that Missouri demographics so closely tend to mirror national trends.
So for all the sturm and drang that will come in the Fall, look for most of the political attention to be concentrated in the Mid-West and Missouri. If you live in West Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania or Missouri, be prepared to be inundated with political ads. Because unless the Subelt West opens up for the Democrats or the Northeast for the Republicans, the Mid-West is where this election will finally be fought and won.
Originally posted by progmac
How does New York City traditionally vote?
Democratic and heavily too. Bush was popular in NYC after 9/11, but the EPA disaster and the upcoming RNC convention will loose him any goodwill he had. If there is anything that New Yorkers hate it's big wigs that fück up traffic.
NY will go to Bush.
FL will go to Bush.
CA will go to Bush.
oh... oops... wrong "Red and Blue"...
NY and CA will NOT... I REPEAT. NOT go to Bush.
Pataki, Bloomberg and Bush aren't very popular here at the moment.
And Californeeya went to Gore last time. And it will go for a democrat again.
New Hampshire (4) -- Tax cuts trump all in New Hampshire
With 70% of the state's reserves called to duty in Afghanistan or Iraq, people around here don't give a damn about tax cuts at the moment. Taxes on the state level, people care about. Taxes on the national level, are mainly ignored, unless it calls for some kind of national sales tax.
Plus, people are still upset about the federal government trying to change logging regulations in our state parks (which are *huge* in NH), and the fall of the Old Man only brought the issue to the front. Benson's handling of the whole situation sent his numbers plunging.
Also, if Dean was to win the nomination, he's from right next door in Vermont, and that does help his chances here quite a bit. He has basically lived in NH since the beginning of the campaign, which is a big reason he has such a large lead up here. Likewise, if Clark wins the nomination, his strong military record/background is going to really help him up here.
Most of these states that are so called 'locked up' for both sides really aren't. I think if any thing, states are more likely to stay 'red' now instead of 'blue', but there hasn't even been a primary yet. and we're talking about who is going to win the general election. It's just way too early to tell.
Originally posted by Blue Shift
If Dean wins it's game over.
NY will go to Bush.
FL will go to Bush.
CA will go to Bush.
Florida will likely go to Bush regardless of the Democratic nominee. New York and California will not, unless the Democrats were to nominate Dennis Kucinich.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Blue shift... what does that mean game over?
NY and CA will NOT... I REPEAT. NOT go to Bush.
Pataki, Bloomberg and Bush aren't very popular here at the moment.
And Californeeya went to Gore last time. And it will go for a democrat again.
Mark my words!
Whether you agree or disagree with him, like or dislike him, Bush has a spine. He stood up, said what he had to say, and followed through in an unwavering manner - despite scathing WORLD criticism. Dean, as many of his Democratic rivals have already pointed out, has been all over the map - and just with regards to Iraq. Dean very soon, will also have to make a sprint to the right if he wishes for any chance of success in the general election.. and this is where he will automaticaly lose.
My theory is, people vote someone for president based on how trustworthy they perceive that person to be. And Dean is going to come out a big loser in this regard. Dean, in sharp contrast to Bush, will be perceived, and rightly so, as yet another spineless politician whose words cannot be trusted and whose actions are determined by political expediency. Hence, the predicted LANDSLIDE defeat for Dean..
No child left behind. UNFUNDED.
Medicare. UNFUNDED
Protecting the environtment. Then opening up our national forrests and reserves to lumber and energy interests.
That tireless search for Osama? Can't catch him if you're looking in IRAQ.
The list goes ON and ON.