Minnesota!

[ilikeverin]

Woot.

51% to 48% Kerry, so I'm quite happy   Not only that, but the MN House is now closer (not saying much)!

So, yeah, Minnesota is seeming to be safe lean DFL country

[opebo]

Minnesota held up - still one of the good states. 

[AuH2O]

Not for long, my friend. Not for long at all.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

DFL won Minnesota the old fashioned way. Good to see it :-)

[WalterMitty]

minnesota is still trending republican.  but i always thought it was the least likely of the upper-midwest states to switch to bush.

too much anti-war fervor in mn.

[jacob_101]

Good showing for Kerry here.  I really thought both candidates would be under 50%.

I think it's almost safe to say that MN is becoming a swing state from now on though.

[ATFFL]

DFL won Minnesota the old fashioned way. Good to see it :-)

Massive voter fraud?





(Kidding!)

[Nym90]

minnesota is still trending republican.  but i always thought it was the least likely of the upper-midwest states to switch to bush.

too much anti-war fervor in mn.

I don't see evidence that it's trending GOP. Kerry actually did a little better in Minnesota than Gore did, despite doing worse nationally. Unless this result was a fluke, it's trending back to the Dems now.

[dazzleman]

minnesota is still trending republican.  but i always thought it was the least likely of the upper-midwest states to switch to bush.

too much anti-war fervor in mn.

I don't see evidence that it's trending GOP. Kerry actually did a little better in Minnesota than Gore did, despite doing worse nationally. Unless this result was a fluke, it's trending back to the Dems now.

Not sure I agree.  Nader was a relatively significantly factor in Minnesota in 2000, and without Nader, Gore may have done better than Kerry did this year.

The state has definitely become more conservative and friendly to the Republicans than it was in the past.  If you compare today's results with, say, 1980, Minnesota was one of only six states that went for Jimmy Carter, while states that were firmly in Kerry's column this year (such as New York, New Jersey, Connecticut) all went to Ronald Reagan in 1980, with Reagan getting an absolute majority in New Jersey.  So Minnesota has gone from being one of those states that will almost never go Republican to a quasi-swing state.

[MN-Troy]

I had Senator Kerry winning Minnesota so I wasn't totally shocked that he didn't carry the state.

President Bush lost this state because he didn't repeat Norm Coleman type numbers in the outside twin cities suburbs, although Bush  did somewhat better than in 2000 in said suburbs.


If the GOP keeps nominating southern conservatives to run for President, the Democrats will get the automatic 10 votes in this state.

[Nym90]

minnesota is still trending republican.  but i always thought it was the least likely of the upper-midwest states to switch to bush.

too much anti-war fervor in mn.

I don't see evidence that it's trending GOP. Kerry actually did a little better in Minnesota than Gore did, despite doing worse nationally. Unless this result was a fluke, it's trending back to the Dems now.

Not sure I agree.  Nader was a relatively significantly factor in Minnesota in 2000, and without Nader, Gore may have done better than Kerry did this year.

The state has definitely become more conservative and friendly to the Republicans than it was in the past.  If you compare today's results with, say, 1980, Minnesota was one of only six states that went for Jimmy Carter, while states that were firmly in Kerry's column this year (such as New York, New Jersey, Connecticut) all went to Ronald Reagan in 1980, with Reagan getting an absolute majority in New Jersey.  So Minnesota has gone from being one of those states that will almost never go Republican to a quasi-swing state.

True, Nader was a factor in 2000.

I agree that Minnesota has been trending GOP for 20-25 years, but it woud seem that has slowed a bit, or perhaps even stopped. It has now settled out to a Democratic leaning state, much like Wisconsin and Michigan.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

If the GOP keeps nominating southern conservatives to run for President, the Democrats will get the automatic 10 votes in this state.

I think this sums it up pretty well.

[MN-Troy]

minnesota is still trending republican.  but i always thought it was the least likely of the upper-midwest states to switch to bush.

too much anti-war fervor in mn.

I don't see evidence that it's trending GOP. Kerry actually did a little better in Minnesota than Gore did, despite doing worse nationally. Unless this result was a fluke, it's trending back to the Dems now.

Not sure I agree.  Nader was a relatively significantly factor in Minnesota in 2000, and without Nader, Gore may have done better than Kerry did this year.

The state has definitely become more conservative and friendly to the Republicans than it was in the past.  If you compare today's results with, say, 1980, Minnesota was one of only six states that went for Jimmy Carter, while states that were firmly in Kerry's column this year (such as New York, New Jersey, Connecticut) all went to Ronald Reagan in 1980, with Reagan getting an absolute majority in New Jersey.  So Minnesota has gone from being one of those states that will almost never go Republican to a quasi-swing state.

True, Nader was a factor in 2000.

I agree that Minnesota has been trending GOP for 20-25 years, but it woud seem that has slowed a bit, or perhaps even stopped. It has now settled out to a Democratic leaning state, much like Wisconsin and Michigan.

In Minnesota most of the population growth has been in the suburbs and President Bush and the Republicans did fairly better in those area than in 2000.

But I agree that the Republican momentum has slowed a bit in Minnesota.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Bush improved in Wright, Carver, Sherburne and Scott counties and topped 60% in all, he also improved somewhat in Anoka. He did about the same in Washington and Dakota. However he did much worse in Hennepin and Ramsey.

It'll be interesting to see if this is due to the Twin Cities racking up even larger margins for Kerry, or the suburban parts of those counties shifting.

[pieman]

Turnout was huge in Minnesota. I did not think that turnout could be increased to such an extent in the high turnout state of MN. 
Something like 77% of Voting age adults and 95% of registered voters (based on those registered at 7am on election day). I have not seen election day registration numbers yet, but I would expect something on the order of 20%. 

I was an election judge in an eastern Ramsey county inner suburb of St. Paul which typically leans about 5% DEM. We had about 20% same day registrations. The DEMS were very effective at getting the vote out of the local apartment complexes that normally do not vote at all. Coleman barely lost our precinct 2 years ago. Bush got creamed. 

Presidential years are typically about 70% turnout or less in MN. I believe that Kerry probably got 2/3 of the vote that exceeded the expected 70% presidential turn out. The additional 2/3 of the additional 7% would give Kerry  2-3% margin that he won by in MN.

The high turnout also affected the MN state house races with significant losses of GOP house candidates.

Clearly, the DEMs clearly had a good ground game that produced significant numbers of same day registration  DEM voters.     

[Rococo4]

We are getting closer there.  I think in 2004 we wrre just one cycle short of winning it.  This is definetly no longer a state the Dems can count on.  It will be even closer in 2008 I suspect.

[Sam Spade]

The Republicans ran bad state-wide last night there.

Like Virginia, its trending an in an obvious direction.  Last night was just a little detour.

[minionofmidas]

We are getting closer there.  I think in 2004 we wrre just one cycle short of winning it.  This is definetly no longer a state the Dems can count on.  It will be even closer in 2008 I suspect.

Yes, it's trending Rep right now. Yes, it's close. Yes, the Dems are still a good bit ahead (though not by as much as the Reps are in Virginia).

[Rococo4]

I would agree...but 2012 or 2016 I would say MN and VA will be in control of the party who doesnt have it  now.  Though MN more likely.  Kerry really didnt do well last night in Virginia, but the state is going Dem very slowly

[minionofmidas]

Of course, a trend continues until it doesn't, and these are both pretty incremental movements, so maybe they'll take off the other way again and in fifty years, when they'll be the states that haven't voted for the same candidate for the longest time (since 1972), people will be surprised they were so close to each other in 2004. .)

[freewayticket]

Bush as far as I know won 5 of the 7 counties that represent the Twin Cites Metro area.  It was Hennepin county and Ramsey county where Kerry won heavily. Minneapolis and St.Paul reside in these counties and they both went overwhelmingly for Kerry. This ended up being the determining factor in Kerry's win in Minnesota. The 5 other counties just couldn't offset Hennepin or Ramsey counties. That combined with same day registration(which I have always disliked) and a big voter turnout helped Kerry in the state. However, I would say with each passing election Republicans get closer and closer and the Dems will have to work harder and harder for it. The one argument against the state trending more Republican might be to look at last nights results concerning the races for state legisture. The Repubs had and overwhelming majority in the MN house with a 81-53 lead going in. Last night the Dems won 13 of the those seats and almost took control of the MN house. That hardly looks like a state trending Republican. But we'll have to wait for the analysis of it I guess. I would stop short of saying the state is trending more republican and say it is becoming more competitive and it is no longer a "giveme" state for the Dems. I think the upper midwest states of Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and I would now add Michigan to this list will form a regional block in future elections because of the regional proximity of each other and similar voting trends. It will in my opinion be a new regional battleground in future presidential elections. I think these 4 states will hold the same importance as the 3 states comprising of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida in the sense that one needs them or a majority of these 4 states to have any hope of winning. Just my opinion but these 4 states if you look at the final vote are very close in their voting percentages and have been for several elections now at the presidential level.

[No more McShame]

We will find out in 2006 if 2002 was an aberration in Minnesota.

Gov. Pawlenty will be up for reelection and it will look to be a two-man race with Ventura's party pretty much dead.

Sen. Dayton will be targeted as vulnerable by national Republicans due to questions about his mental state and will draw a strong GOP opponent.

If Pawlenty is defeated and Dayton is reelected I will join the Dems on the board as saying it's fairly safe DFL territory.  If the opposite happens, this year will be more of a personal rejection of Pres Bush than of the GOP.  If one happens and the other doesn't, then I'll be confused :-).