Battleground to safe and vice versa.

[Shira]

Assuming that the 2008 election outcome will be close.
A – Which of the battleground states do you think, will become safe states?
B – Which of the safe states do you think, will become battleground states?

My answer to A is OR and NH.
My answer to B is HI, NJ and VA.

Regardless whether or not AR & MO are considered battleground states in 2004,  in 2008 they will be.

[Umengus]

Very difficult to say:

-Problem is to know who will be the candidates

-Problem is to know if the dem party will change his platform after several failures.

If John edwards is the dem candidate (against a bush-like), I would say:

A) PA, ME, NM, MI, MN, WI, OH (ok I'm optimist)

B) WV, VA, NC, AR, AZ, MO

[Gabu]

Vermont and Connecticut are totally going to be battlegrounds in 2008.

[Shira]

Vermont and Connecticut are totally going to be battlegrounds in 2008.

Vermont is the least likely.
See the numbers

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=12600.0

[opebo]

A - MO, WV, OR, and NH
Also NJ and HI, though I don't think those two were ever battlegrounds.

B -  CO (or was CO a battle ground already?).  Thats it.  AZ and VA are headed there but not by 2008.

[Gabu]

Vermont and Connecticut are totally going to be battlegrounds in 2008.

Vermont is the least likely.
See the numbers

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=12600.0

I know; I was joking.

[English]

A- NH, ME, WV, MO

The northeast will trend away from the GOP because of the religious right. WV and MO are now safe GOP IMO.

B- CO, AZ, VA

CO & AZ because of immigration, VA because of migration.
NJ & HI are not swing states, 2004 was an aberration due to 9/11 and the war on terror.

[The Vorlon]

Simply using the margin of victory and an admittedly utterly arbitrary 5% victory cutoff, you get the following....

Safe GOP - 249 EVs

Utah   44.72%
Wyoming   39.85%
Idaho   38.13%
Nebraska   33.88%
Oklahoma   31.16%
North Dakota   27.37%
Alabama   25.63%
Kansas   25.71%
Alaska   26.74%
Texas   22.88%
Indiana   20.68%
South Dakota   21.47%
Mississippi   20.30%
Kentucky   19.87%
Montana   20.53%
Georgia   16.62%
South Carolina   17.12%
Tennessee   14.33%
Louisiana   14.52%
North Carolina   12.65%
West Virginia   12.81%
Arizona   11.37%
Arkansas   9.83%
Virginia   8.23%
Missouri   7.30%
Colorado   6.45%
Florida   5.02%

Weak GOP - 37 EVs

Ohio   2.49%
Nevada   2.65%
New Mexico   1.20%
Iowa   0.94%

Weak Dem - 69 EVs

Wisconsin    0.46%
New Hampshire   1.38%
Pennsylvania   2.29%
Michigan   3.16%
Minnesota   3.46%
Oregon   4.18%

Strong Dem - 187 EVs

New Jersey   6.17%
Washington   6.89%
Delaware   7.57%
Hawaii   8.74%
Maine   8.03%
Illinois   10.12%
California   9.94%
Connecticut   10.36%
Maryland   11.84%
New York   17.27%
Vermont   20.26%
Rhode Island   20.74%
Massachusetts   25.16%
D. C.   80.09%

The Following states were sometimes considered "Battlegrounds" in 2004, but were carried by 5% or more by Bush in 2004...

Tennessee   14.33%
Louisiana   14.52%
North Carolina   12.65%
West Virginia   12.81%
Arizona   11.37%
Arkansas   9.83%
Virginia   8.23%
Missouri   7.30%
Colorado   6.45%
Florida 5.02%

The Following states were sometimes considered "Battlegrounds" in 2004, but were carried by 5% or more by Kerry in 2004...

Washington

[Filuwaúrdjan]

About as useful as a chocolate kettle. George Bush is not running for re-election in 2008.

[NHPolitico]

About as useful as a chocolate kettle. George Bush is not running for re-election in 2008.

mmmmm.... chocolate kettles.

[Shira]

Simply using the margin of victory and an admittedly utterly arbitrary 5% victory cutoff, you get the following....

Safe GOP - 249 EVs

Utah   44.72%
Wyoming   39.85%
Idaho   38.13%
Nebraska   33.88%
Oklahoma   31.16%
North Dakota   27.37%
Alabama   25.63%
Kansas   25.71%
Alaska   26.74%
Texas   22.88%
Indiana   20.68%
South Dakota   21.47%
Mississippi   20.30%
Kentucky   19.87%
Montana   20.53%
Georgia   16.62%
South Carolina   17.12%
Tennessee   14.33%
Louisiana   14.52%
North Carolina   12.65%
West Virginia   12.81%
Arizona   11.37%
Arkansas   9.83%
Virginia   8.23%
Missouri   7.30%
Colorado   6.45%
Florida   5.02%

Weak GOP - 37 EVs

Ohio   2.49%
Nevada   2.65%
New Mexico   1.20%
Iowa   0.94%

Weak Dem - 69 EVs

Wisconsin    0.46%
New Hampshire   1.38%
Pennsylvania   2.29%
Michigan   3.16%
Minnesota   3.46%
Oregon   4.18%

Strong Dem - 187 EVs

New Jersey   6.17%
Washington   6.89%
Delaware   7.57%
Hawaii   8.74%
Maine   8.03%
Illinois   10.12%
California   9.94%
Connecticut   10.36%
Maryland   11.84%
New York   17.27%
Vermont   20.26%
Rhode Island   20.74%
Massachusetts   25.16%
D. C.   80.09%

The Following states were sometimes considered "Battlegrounds" in 2004, but were carried by 5% or more by Bush in 2004...

Tennessee   14.33%
Louisiana   14.52%
North Carolina   12.65%
West Virginia   12.81%
Arizona   11.37%
Arkansas   9.83%
Virginia   8.23%
Missouri   7.30%
Colorado   6.45%
Florida 5.02%

The Following states were sometimes considered "Battlegrounds" in 2004, but were carried by 5% or more by Kerry in 2004...

Washington

The Republicans had a 3% nationwide victory. You have to find the best way to eliminate the impact of it on the state number, if you want to assume balanced election in 2008.

The question is what would have been a state outcome, had the election been nationally balanced?  Theoretically, you have to subtract 1.5% of the Rep number in the state and move it to the Dems.

A safe GOP state should mean that the GOP will surely win the state, even if the election is nationally balanced.
According to this, KY is a safe state, while FL is a battleground state.

In non-balanced election the term "Battleground State" (or swing state) becomes meaningless.

[The Vorlon]

This is, again, utterly arbitrary, but if you simply reduce the Bush margin of victory by 2 or 3% in every state (or increase the Kerry margin by a few in states he won) The "Battlegrounds" in 2008 might look something like his:



This map is, more or less, what the Kerry folks were trying to make the Battlefield in say June and July this year

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This map is, more or less, what the Kerry folks were trying to make the Battlefield in say June and July this year

They had a plan? You sure about that?

[Gustaf]

Swing states in 2004 that won't be that in 2008: Arkansas, Missouri, West Virginia, states that will be solidly Republican and New Hampshire, Maine, Oregon and Washington that will be solidly Democratic.

I think we'll have 3 key groups of swing states in 2008: The Upper Midwest, not sure how to call these states though, the Southwest, including Nevada, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico and finally Florida. The rest will be more or less safe.

[A18]

What the hell? New Hampshire? Kerry didn't even get 51%.

Anyway, I hope I'm dead long before 2008.

[bgwah]

What the hell? New Hampshire? Kerry didn't even get 51%.

Anyway, I hope I'm dead long before 2008.

So do I.

[A18]

Good to hear there are other happy people here

[ATFFL]

Swing states in 2004 that won't be that in 2008: Arkansas, Missouri, West Virginia, states that will be solidly Republican and New Hampshire, Maine, Oregon and Washington that will be solidly Democratic.

I think we'll have 3 key groups of swing states in 2008: The Upper Midwest, not sure how to call these states though, the Southwest, including Nevada, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico and finally Florida. The rest will be more or less safe.

New Hampshire is a long way from being off the table.  I expect at least one more cycle of it being a swing state.

Maine is hard to tell because Kerry had a bit of a favorite son effect.  It will probably be a second tier battleground for a while, with Republicans having a shot at 1 EV from it.

Oregon and Washington are both unlikely to be swing states in the near future.  Oregon may stay a second tier battleground for a while though.

The southwest and upper midwest are the two  areas likely to be swing areas.  The Republicans can lock up the southwest if they keep making gains among hispanics.

[M]

N'hampsha is trending dem, will not be solid by 2008, otherwise, Good King Gus, a good analysis. But '08 could well be an exceptional election. All predictions are out the window if we get Schwarzenegger or Giuliani versus Bayh.

[A18]

If NH becomes Democratic, it'll have to change its state motto.

[Alcon]

The thing is that in states like West Virginia, I doubt there was that much trending through the year. Poll results were about as close at the start of everything as at the end - WV just polled wrong. States sometimes make huge jumps like WV did this year, but it's not necessarily a trend.

So, here's basically what I see of the battleground states:

Arizona
2004: Strong Republican
2008: Lean Republican
Trend: After this year, I believe it will begin drifting slightly Democrat.

Arkansas
2004: Lean-Strong Republican
2008: Strong Republican
Trend: Drifting Republican very slightly, but still theoretically in play. This is

Colorado
2004: Lean-Strong Republican
2008: Lean Republican
Trend: Moving Democrat, but not very fast.

Florida
2004: Weak Republican
2008: Tossup-Weak Republican
Trend: The result this year was slightly based on Bush's hurricane involvement. However, I think 2008 will start out with a slight Republican advantage. I believe it will remain here for a while.

Hawaii
2004: Strong Democrat
2008: Strong-Solid Democrat
Trend: I do not think Hawaii is trending. I just think that it is likely that it will go more for the Democrat in 2008, because it likes imcumbnents. By how much, I'm not sure. Either Strong-Solid or Solid.

Iowa
2004: Tossup
2008: Tossup-Weak Republican
Trend: The progressive midwest is disappearing, but not overnight. Iowa is moving faster than much of it, but the results were closer in 2004 than the polls had it out to be.

Louisiana
2004: Solid Republican
2008: Solid Republican
Trend: Crappy polling. Not a battleground.

Maine
2004: Strong Democrat
2008: Lean-Strong Democrat
Trend: Maine's result surprised me. I thought it would be cloer, honestly. But it says something that Bush won only two counties - the two smallest in the state. The youth vote is more Republican, though, so I believe there will be a bit of a drift.

Maryland
2004: Strong-Solid Democrat
2008: Strong-Solid Democrat
Trend: The Democrat's Louisiana, except a bit closer in both polling and final result.

Michigan
2004: Weak Democrat
2008: Tossup-Weak Democrat
Trend: In 2008, Michigan will be top-tier. I doubt it will drift over to a Republican advantage to start with any time soon.

Minnesota
2004: Weak Democrat
2008: Tossup-Weak Democrat
Trend: Minnesota is moving more slowly than Iowa and Wisconsin, I think, but it is moving. I think it will not become a true tossup until 2012, though.

Missouri
2004: Strong Republican
2008: Strong Republican
Trend: Maybe a slight Republican trend, but otherwise I think that this state is going to more or less stay the exact same.

Nevada
2004: Tossup-Weak Republican
2008: Tossup
Trend: Clark County, which contains Las Vegas, went Kerry by 7. I don't know exact statistics, but if Clark County's growth didn't exceed the growth of the rest of the state by leaps and bounds, I'd be surprised.

New Hampshire
2004: Tossup-Weak Democrat
2008: Weak Democrat
Trend: I think that New Hampshire will probably stall after 2008 with a small advantage for the Democrats.

New Jersey
2004: Lean Democrat
2008: Lean-Strong Democrat
Trend: Some argue that New Jersey is trending toward the GOP. I beg to disagree. I think that 9/11 moved many bedroom communities to Bush. I think this effect will weaken in 2008, but New Jersey will take a while to return to the pro-Democrat state it was in 2000.

New Mexico
2004: Tossup-Weak Republican
2008: Tossup
Trend: New Mexico, I believe, will continue trending very slowly Democrat for a while, but will all depend on the Hispanic vote. This may very well be the New Hampshire of 2008.

North Carolina
2004: Solid Republican
2008: Solid Republican
Trend: It would take a landslide to move North Carolina. Raleigh-Durham will go Democrat. The rest of the state probably won't. End of story.

Ohio
2004: Tossup-Weak Republican
2008: Weak Republican
Trend: Ohio will range from Tossup to Lean Republican, probably more specifically Tossup-Weak Republican to Weak-Lean Republican, based on unemployment. The only other major variable, I think, is how morals affect the 2000 campaign.

Oregon
2004: Weak-Lean Democrat
2008: Lean Democrat
Trend: The gay marriage ban certainly helped Bush's numbers in Oregon and, even with it, Kerry won by 4 more than Gore won by. I think it's fairly safe to say that Oregon is slowly trending Democrat.

Pennsylvania
2004: Tossup-Weak Democrat
2008: Tossup-Weak Democrat
Trend: The networks called PA early, but I think that it will remain a huge and underestimated swing state for years to come. I will make a big statement. If the Democrats lose Pennsylvania in 2008, they will lose the election decidedly.

Tennessee
2004: Solid Republican
2000: Solid Republican
Trend: Seriously, folks, Gore lost Tennessee by a pretty good margin. It isn't really trending. Why does anyone still list this as a battleground? It's became part of the solid south. Maybe not as solid as some other areas, but solid.

Virginia
2004: Strong Republican
2008: Strong Republican
Trend: Wow! The Democrats flipped Fairfax County! Progress!

Washington
2004: Lean Democrat
2008: Lean-Strong Democrat
Trend: It's pretty safe to say that Washington is no longer in play, and really wasn't in 2004 either.

West Virginia
2004: Solid Republican
2008: Solid Republican
Trend: It's going...going...gone!

Wisconsin
2004: Tossup
2008: Tossup-Weak Republican
Trend: It's going to be close in 2008 in Wisconsin, no matter who wins, unless it's a landslide. I think this is moving quicker than Minnesota and even Michigan, about along pace with Iowa. It's not as if it will be solid, though.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Iowa
2004: Tossup
2008: Tossup-Weak Republican
Trend: The progressive midwest is disappearing, but not overnight. Iowa is moving faster than much of it, but the results were closer in 2004 than the polls had it out to be.

Actually, Iowa trended Dem if you look at the national average, Bush won it by less than a point which is less than his national average, in 2000 Iowa actually voted Republican in comparison to the national average because Gore's margin of victory there was smaller than it was nationwide. I would put Iowa as slowly trending Dem, and while this might end soon, it won't be weak Republican in 2008, either a total tossup or possibly even weak Democrat.

As for Virginia, it is trending Dem still based on the results, just slower than originally expected. And flipping Fairfax county actually is major progress. But probably still at least one more cycle before it's a true swing state.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The thing is that in states like West Virginia, I doubt there was that much trending through the year. Poll results were about as close at the start of everything as at the end - WV just polled wrong

Not true. Kerry led in the Summer (although even this early, and for reasons beyond mere human understanding, stuff was pulling covertly transferred to VA and OH) and as late as just after the GOP convention it appears to have been in line with the national average.

The Kerry Campaign fecked up in WV in a way that has never (probably) been seen before and will (hopefully) never be seen again (I have written several rants on this. Go read 'em).

Besides... Bush gained about 4pts in WV from 2000. Nationally he gained about 3pts. I'm not great at Maths, but that doesn't seem like a huge difference to me.

[Gustaf]

Yah, WV doesn't seem to have moved much either way, but it remains about +6 for Bush meaning that's it's a long way to go for a Democratic candidate.

M, I'm not saying New Hampshire is strongly Dem, but I view it this way: if Kerry won a state any competitive Democrat can win it the next time. Sure, if it's something like Giuliani v Clinton in 2008, New Hampshire will go GOP but it won't matter. I just can't see a Democrat winning or even running close in 2008 without winning New Hampshire.

[M]

Fair enough. But I also wonder, was there any favorite son effect in NH, with all the Bostonians in Manchester? But certainly, the trend is dem.