Why do people in Minnesota hate Bush so much.  Your description kind of sounds like New Haven or New York City, where you cant walk a block without seeing anti-Bush grafiti.  But you could understand those two cities because they are in the northeast with high minority populations.

a bit of an exaggeration, but Bush is extremely hated, and last year you could definately see where the sign joke came from. For the most part, large cities in the Midwest aren't much different from large cities in the Northeast or West Coast, regardless of what the surrounding regions are like, unlike the South, where the overwhelming conservatism seeps into cities like Dallas and Birmingham. The Twin Cities as well as Milwaukee, Madison, Chicago, St. Louis, ect. aren't really much different from San Francisco or NYC. Culturally they're about the same. Another huge reason is the University of Minnesota, which is notoriously liberal and responsible for lots of activism that spreads throughout the area. Nader got 10% in Minneapolis in 2000, the largest in any major city. He'll be doing a lot worse this time though, with the good chunk of that going to Kerry.,

I think Alan Greenspan's latest proposal will make Kerry getting a larger margin of victory in Florida than Republican vote fraud a lot easier.

Schools are pretty good statewide,

Pretty good?  Pshaw!

Yes pretty good, according to Morgan Quinto, who considers many factors, including revenue, graduation rate, test scores, among other things.  MN ranks 12th of 50.  Not bad.  By comparison MA is first; VT and CT are next; OH is near the middle; TX is 31st; FL is 40th; CA is 44th, MS and NV are tied for next-to-last; and NM is dead last.  My point about the schools was to suggest the power the teacher's unions in that state, most of whom support ABB.

Brambilla, as you can see from the posts, it's a longshot, but take a look at the 2000 map.  People will bring up the amorphous 'nader factor' but remember local girl winona laduke may have helped Nader, and in any case, the best estimates (38/26/36) nationwide suggests the 'nader factor' is overblown by bitter gore supporters.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/vote2000/cbc/map.htm

a map proves nothing. It doesn't show the population density of the counties and in this case the margin of victory. Therefore doesn't show that over 1.6 million out of the state's 5 million residents live in Hennepin and Ramsey counties which went heavily for Gore, and that Bush only won several of the suburban counties that when added in probably make up over half the state by only a few points, usually with the Nader vote taking up over twice the margin of victory.

And I still don't see how Coleman means anything when about half the state (basically everyone who didn't vote for him) absolutely hates him.

If anyone would just drive through Minneapolis, you can just tell how much people hate Bush there. There was a joke earlier that city law required all houses on the corner of the block to have an anti-war sign up. Bush is so hated there you'd be lucky to not get a rude honk or flipped the bird several times if you had a Bush/Cheney bumper sticker.

I don't see how anyone could possibly think Bush could win California just because of Arnold. Arnold is probably closer to Kerry ideoogical than Bush. The fact that people voted for him on the backdrop of a very unpopular Democratic governor proves nothing aside from that he's a moderate big movie star and Gray Davis was hated.

Please Bush, keep wasting your money in California.

those are both Democratic cities, especially Duluth. It usually votes over 2/3 Democratic.

how the hell is Coleman going to help Bush at all? He didn't even get 50%. In fact, NO Republican statewide office holder has gotten over 50% of the vote, the only statewide office holder to do so is Democratic Attorney General Mike Hatch.

In my little corner of southern Minnesota anti-Bush bumper stickers outnumber pro-ones at least 3:1 and if you go to the metro area it's more like 20:1 and you'd have a tough time finding someone LESS popular than Bush in the Twin Cities. 41% for an incumbent is very poor, especially when the poll was taking early and before Kerry campaigned here. I do not see Bush winning Minnesota, but sadly he'll try and I'll have to deal with his worthless lies and load of crap ads.

edit: originally said "more popular than Bush" which is about as untrue as you can get.

CT is hardly the most partisan. It has 3 Republican representatives to 2 Democrats, yet Gore carried every district in CT, and by a fairly wide margin at that.

California may actually be the most partisan state, since there isn't a single district Gore won that's held by a Republican, or a single district Bush won that's held by a Democrat. Arnold was an exception for fairly obvious reasons.

Any poll that gives Nader 7% I take with a grain of salt. There is no way Nader is getting more than what he got last time, much less almost three times that.

I don't know about Vietnamese Americans. Minnesota has a large Hmong population (the largest outside of Asia) and I believe the Hmong are from Vietnam, and they mostly vote Democratic. The State Senate Majority Whip is a Hmong-American. Most of the Hmong I know are VERY liberal, but I go to a very liberal university for the most part anyway.

Like Native Americans, Asians are a diverse bunch in voting. I heard that Japanese Americans trend Republican, due to the fact that they often are rather wealthy, while Chinese Americans trend Democratic.

undecideds usually break 2:1 against the incumbent, so even a narrow lead at this case is good. With Bush's assault on worker's rights I definately can't see him carrying either state. And the gay marriage issue won't amount to much since both Michigan and Pennsylvania elected governors with the exactly same stance as Kerry.

I don't think so. Both states elected very liberal governors in 2002 coming right off the administrations of popular Republican incumbents, so they've been turning to the left recentely. Also the new regulations Bush passed which strips many workers of their overtime pay will NOT play well in those states. Bush can try but he'll come within 3 points at most.

NJ was way different in '88 and '92. Over the 90s it moved swiftly the left, as the suburbs became more Democratic because of social issues, and people from NYC moved there. The same is happening in Long Island and the northern suburbs of NYC, once Republican strongholds, now becoming heavily Democratic.

whatever the case, there is no way someone like Bush, an American Taliban on social issues, could win in New Jersey.

it may not be as dependable as NY or MA, but I can't see the Democrats losing the state except in a massive blowout. I would at least put it as safe as Illinois.

most of the people who i know who voted for Nader did so because they didn't expect Minnesota to be so close. I think the happened in Oregon.

Anyway, he'll be lucky to break 2%, or even 1.5%

I live in Minnesota and have seen no sort of turn toward Bush, rather against him. But the polls here show pretty standard to the nation as a whole, so I say it'll be a bellweather, if the Dem wins he'll win Minnesota, easily. Although if the Dems are that high up in Wisconsin it even improves the chances here.

and people are making too much of a big deal out of the 2002 elections. The only reason the Republicans did so well was because they had high turnout due to being pissed off at the Wellstone memorial which the media definately made a mountain out of a molehill of. Plus not a single Republican statewide office holder got over 50%. And now people act like we've become Utah. geez.

I actually think the 2002 elections will work against bush because they made the Democrats here really mad and thus they'll be working overtime this year.

I think Herseth will win this one. She did very well against Janklow who at the time was extremely popular, plus Dems will have a high turnout since they'll be mad that Janklow got off with a slap on the wrist. Plus she's really attractive and should get a large portion of the young male vote. :p

as for NJ, I believe the Democrats controlled redistricting. Rush Holt barely won the 12th district in 2000, but easily won in 2002 because his seat was made more safe.

The reason so many Republicans hold on is they're long time incumbents representing districts that were traditionally Republican but have now shifted Democratic, and they only hold on due to being entrenched incumbents. once they start to retire the Democrats will take those seats. the 5th, 11th and 7th are the only truly Republican leaning seats left.

Florida, no contest. a 50/50 state where more than 2/3 of the delegation are Republicans.

according to the analysis, Nader came in second in no counties. He did in a few cities though, most notably in Amherst, Massachussetts he got 25% to Bush's 13%. He beat Bush in quite a few precincts in liberal college towns.

That he did best in Bush states isn't really a suprise since leftists in those states knew Gore wouldn't win them anyway and were more willing to vote for Nader.

whenever I complete my maps and try to submit them, I get an error that shuts my IE down.

you all are really underestimating Dean. He's hardly some ultra-liberal, and is really much more like Clinton than anything else. He's even to the right of Kerry and probably even Clark. What type of ultraliberal has an A rating from the NRA? Calling him an Al-qaeda sympathizer is just ridiculous, and incredibly immature.

anyway, I don't think Minnesota will go to Bush. Whle Gore did win it by only about 2%, Nader took around 5%. He won't get that much this time. If he runs again, he'll make very little of an impact due to the far left just wanting Bush out. I'd say his run would be more comparable to Buchanan's last year.

anyway, the breakdown of Minnesota. First you have the Twin Cities. These are solidly Democratic and Bush doesn't have a prayer of making it anywhere in here. However Nader got 10% in Minneapolis. Like I said before, that won't happen this time. So it means more solidly Democratic votes. Then there's the northwest. While this area is fairly socially conservative, it is still one of the most solidly Democratic regions of the country. Gore got over 60% in Duluth and even did well in the outer surrounding parts of it. This is actually the most solidly Democratic part of the state, since Humphrey won it over Jesse Ventura, while Ventura won the Twin Cities. If it comes close to a Republican, it's due to gun issues, since it's a big hunting region. A pro-gun Democrat like Dean is unbeatable here. He'll get at least 55% here, and over 60% in the Twin Cities.

Then there's the south where I live. This is a pretty diverse region. Some towns like Albert Lea are traditionally Democratic and remain it. Others like Rochester are pretty Republican. There are lots of college towns here (including where I live and go to school). The district here narrowly went to Bush due to the large influence of the western part and Rochester, but it can be won. Neutralizing the gun issue will also help big time.

The Twin Cities suburbs range from how inward they are, the innermost being very Democratic to the outer ones being solidly Republican. However the ones where the majority of the population lives are a socially liberal/fiscally conservative bunch. Bush won most of these places by narrow margins, but with his far right social record to attack him on, and a fiscally conservative Democrat like Dean against him, it could tilt Democratic.

Then there's the west. While not as solidly Republican as the Dakotas, it is still pretty Republican. Bush will still do fine here. However I don't think it'll be enough. As for Minnesota having a Republican governor, that won't help. He's pretty unpopular, and isn't liked by anyone besides the Republican base, the 44% who elected.

And Pennsylvania will also stay Democratic. After all Rendell won in a landslide and he was the mayor of an ultra liberal city following a popular Republican governor. If he can do it, a governor of a rural state like Dean sure can.

I'm trying to put up my map, but my comp keeps screwing up when I submit it. I'll keep trying though.