Can Kentucky be won by a Democrat in 2020? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 02:33:18 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2020 U.S. Presidential Election (Moderators: Likely Voter, YE)
  Can Kentucky be won by a Democrat in 2020? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Can Kentucky be won by a Democrat in 2020?  (Read 2744 times)
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,520
United States


« on: June 23, 2017, 07:13:20 PM »

Don't see it happening at a Presidential level in 2020, unless there is a hypothetical scenario a la Watergate, where it takes several years to fully uncover malfeasance by the President, and the dam doesn't break until late September of 2020....

I certainly don't pretend to be an expert on Kentucky politics and demographics, and I'm sure you have much more local and extensive knowledge than myself on that subject, but outside of the two cities mentioned, even you were to throw in massive swings back to the Dems in 2020 in SE KY, the reality is that most of the population of the state live in small town and rural areas elsewhere, and even if the Dems were to pivot hard on economic issues, downplay the "Culture War" items, I still don't see enough "swing" there to make it close.

At the Gubernatorial, and even potentially at the US Senate level, I could see KY being fiercely contested at some point in the near future, but not at the Presidential level.
Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,520
United States


« Reply #1 on: June 23, 2017, 07:18:52 PM »

Bernie would be the right candidate. He could run up 70-30 in urban centers and win up to 25 coal counties. Especially with a Sanders/Beshear

What would that county map look like?

Also, there are no Union Coal Mining jobs left at all in Kentucky, since the operators busted the UMW/UMWA for good back in '93, and the bosses would do their usual BS about how "Bernie is going to shut down Coal"....

I mean, yeah absolutely Bernie would likely outperform most of the recent Dem Pres candidates in Kentucky, but still don't see how the math would work to get close to a win... maybe a 10 point Pub victory or something, but there is that old saying about horseshoes and politics...
Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,520
United States


« Reply #2 on: June 25, 2017, 08:47:08 PM »

Doubtful. Republicans seem to have convinced eastern Kentucky that coal isn't going away, when all they're doing is prolonging its demise.

I can see Democrats closing the margin a bit with the right candidate, but outright winning it in a presidential election could be decades away.

Did my old man eyes deceive me, or did your avatar shift from Green to Red? Maybe I'm going color blind these days, and slightly OT, but anyways....

Sure, I totally agree with Dems closing the margins with the right candidate at a Pres level, and could well see a Dem Gov pickup in KY in the very near future.

That being said, Coal is more of symbolic item these days within the traditional heartlands of Coal Country in Appalachia....

Much of domestic Coal Production has been shifted to Coal Mines out West in Montana, Wyoming, etc....

The problem with the Democratic brand in traditional Coal Country in SE-KY, Southern WV, Western VA, and even deep into PA runs much deeper.

There has been a widespread perception in Appalachian Coal Country that goes back many decades that the National Democratic Party, including various Presidents and Presidential Candidates don't give an eff about the Coal Miner, and Coal Mining communities....

Democratic Presidents over decades have supported the deployment of National Guard troops against striking Coal Miners (Harry Truman), invoked the infamous Taft-Hartley clause (Jimmy Carter), and stood idly by while the bosses hammered the final nail into the coffin (Bill Clinton), of what was a proud and independent Union that even split with the CIO under FDR to protect the interest of Coal Miners, regardless of administration in power.

https://www.wyzant.com/resources/answers/11285/how_did_president_truman_deal_with_strikers_in_the_steel_and_mining_indusries

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bituminous_coal_strike_of_1977%E2%80%9378

https://www.csmonitor.com/1993/0907/07021.html

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=46213

There are multiple generations of Coal Miners, including 3rd Generation Coal Miners that I worked with during the strike of '93, that have no faith that the Democratic Party is still the party of workers rights, and although the actual number of jobs associated with Coal in Appalachia is a pale shadow of it's former glory, it is still a symbolic entity when you look at the sheer number of retired Coal Miners, Families, dependents, etc, and although I've seen various Republican Pres candidates over the past few cycles (McCain/Romney/Trump) trot out Coal Miners for photo ops, I haven't seen a Democratic Candidate address these issues directly (Other than Bernie Sanders in the '16 Dem Primaries as well as a Town Hall after).

So now the vast majority of US Coal is produced in Open-Pit Mines in the West, various administrations of both political parties did nothing to stop that trend, and additionally, starting with Bush Sr, then Bill Clinton, later George W., successive Presidents did nothing to stop the importation of Coal to the US from elsewhere in the World....

Now, although one can surely make an argument that Coal as an energy source is decreasing rapidly within the United States, there are still a number of downstream sectors, including Steel, where US manufactured Coal is still the primary precursor raw material, even without talking about domestic energy production and role of Coal-Fired Power Plants....

Various Democratic Presidential Candidates from Gore through HRC have done an extremely poor job of talking about changes within the industry, and how although Coal is declining overall as an energy source it is still and will continue to be relevant for several decades to come.

We are not even talking about the rhetorical and condescending manner in which Democrats have frequently talked about Coal, let alone detailed plans to fund an economic recovery program in traditional Coal Country of Appalachia.

As someone who grew up in a Natural Resource dependent State, I personally find it insulting the way in which Democrat and Republican Presidential nominees alike, have treated Coal Mining communities in Appalachia....
Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,520
United States


« Reply #3 on: June 30, 2017, 11:10:32 PM »

Can Indiana be won by a Democrat in 2008?

Obama thought Indiana important in the primaries and kept his campaign operating there. As Michigan solidified for him, Barack Obama's campaign had to decide to cut advertising for Michigan. The campaign found that ads in South Bend directed at southwestern Michigan were winning people over in northwestern Indiana and the ads from Fort Wayne directed at northwestern Indiana were working  in Fort Wayne. So move ad money from Detroit, Lansing, and Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo to Indianapolis, Terre Haute, and Evansville...

Indiana has voted for Democratic Governors and Senators.

Indiana closes its polls early, which favors the Republican-leaning rural vote against such urban  centers as Gary, South Bend, and Indianapolis. Indiana has low participation by voters. It is not that different in culture from Ohio. If Indiana had mail-in voting, it would be a swing state in most years. 

@ pbrower2a

Awesome to see you back my man, and as always you bat the ball way out to the outfield....

Your brief but detailed synopsis in just a few paragraphs helped explain some of the mystery of Indiana GE Pres results in '08....

So, from all I can read of your post it appears to be a metaphor (?) that compares Indiana in '08 to Kentucky in '20.

If I can infer your lessons from '08 in Indiana, it appears that if a Democratic candidate is well over-performing in Ohio or Indiana (For example), shift some funding and resources across state-lines could potentially cause an unexpected upset in a place that the opposing Party considers to be a "safe state". Am I wrong in where you're going with this?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.038 seconds with 13 queries.