Talk Elections

This would be the case for Arkansas as well except that it was not yet a state when Andrew Jackson won in 1828 and 1832. Last time a Democrat won without West Virginia was Wilson's narrow re-election in 1916. Last Democrat to win without Tennessee and Kentucky was Kennedy in 1960. Last Democrat to win without Louisiana was Johnson in 1964.

Well McLame was the best Republican for Missouri, and Obama was the worst Democrat.

Jay Nixon won big.. hopefully he may be a potential nominee in 2012.

But I am going with Hillary! I love her!

HILLARY THE ONE!

I will never look at MO the same again.

a real shame.

Hillary would have won it.

We all know that Gore did so.

Unless the Dem is from MO, we can expect it to go GOP as long as the national margin isn't greater than D+6.

We ought to make a list of these things other than the obvious "first black president", "oldest presidential candidate", etc.  I like the whole senator vs. senator thing.

     I wouldn't go that far, though it has definitely trended to the Republicans over the last 10 years or so.

And so would Mark Warner (and Warner would've been the best President out of the 3).

Shut up.

---

These historical comparisons are meaningless. Until 2000, no Republican had ever won without California.

The most uninspiring President of the United States of those three politicians too.

---

Who cares if he lost Missouri Franzl? (I never expected Obama to win, though I did for some bizarre reason a week out from election day). He won the Presidency of the United States!! You didn't want Obama to be a greedy electoral whore now did you?

She wouldn't have won 349 electoral votes though.

Then why did Obama win the MO primary?

-looks at who posted this-

nevermind. don't worry about it. play with your blocks.

Missouri is a disgusting state.

When you say Missouri fast, it sounds like "Misery". I think that the fact that Obama got slaugtered in the lower Mississippi Valley and the Cumberland Highlands and not only won, but won 365 electoral votes  is just another sign that this election was a realignning election.

     Or a sign of the fact that he had absolutely no appeal to voters in that region.

Look at the nasty trend compared to the national average for Mizzourah.

1992=D+4.5
1996=R+3
2000=R+4
2004=R+5.5
2008=R+7
2012=R+9?????

The state has been seized by a wave of rampant stupidity since 1996.

Actually, the Republican candidate won in 1880 without California. The statement is, however, true about Illinois and Vermont.

Actually the Missouri Presidential race hasn't been called yet for a reason.  There are still thousands of provisional ballots yet to be counted (provisional ballots generally go disproportionately to Democrats), and the margin is now less than 5,000 votes.  So it may be a little bit too early to make this proclamation.

In any event, I would have to say that even Obama eeks out a win in Missouri, it is clear that the state is losing it's bellweather status.  With demographic changes being what they are, I don't know if there are really any good bellweather states left.  Remember when Deleware was a bellweather?

It ain't over yet, apparently.

     If MO swings, that'll mean I was right on everything except IN & NE-2.

Missouri borders on Arkansas, probably the most racist state in this election.

You think that alone accounted for a 6 point swing? Maybe, considering all the other appalachian/upper south states didn't do much moving.

I can hear the banjos now...

2004.

MO was so close in '08 the fact that McCain won it is of statistical interest only. I think the important thing is Obama, unlike Clinton, was the first Dem to win while losing virtually the entire South.