Missouri---Did Nader Do It Again?

[Badger]

I just realized that Nader's 2008 MO total of about 17K was several times that of McCain's approx. 4k margin. Factor all the wouldn't have turned out/fundimentally anti-Obama voters among that lot, and it's still difficult to see how Obama loses MO without Nader on the ballot.

Thoughts? Anyone disagree?

Actually , Nader's statewide total was more than McCain's margin AND the Libertarian statewide vote combined. Fwiw.

[Sumner 1868]

Yes, Obama would probably have won Missouri without Nader on the ballot.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

No.  Missouri is a somewhat more conservative state, so I doubt he was the only factor.

[Sumner 1868]

No.  Missouri is a somewhat more conservative state, so I doubt he was the only factor.

Of course he wasn't the only factor. But no Nader on the ballot means that Obama scraps out a thin victory, although he still loses the state in 2012.

Oh, and Happy Birthday!

[SingingAnalyst]

No.  Missouri is a somewhat more conservative state, so I doubt he was the only factor.

Of course he wasn't the only factor. But no Nader on the ballot means that Obama scraps out a thin victory, although he still loses the state in 2012.

Oh, and Happy Birthday!

Agreed, and of course MO 2008 doesn't get much attention because unlike FL-NH-WI-IA-NM-OR 2000 the national result wasn't at stake.

[MIKESOWELL]

Yes, he would have won in 2008 with no Ralph Nader on the ballot...probably by a margin between 5,000 to 7,000 votes I believe.

[P123]

It appears so LOL.

[Sasquatch]

Did Bob Barr cost John McCain Indiana and North Carolina?

[/]

Did Bob Barr cost John McCain Indiana and North Carolina?

lelel

[Badger]

Did Bob Barr cost John McCain Indiana and North Carolina?

Indiana, no way. This would've required literally over 96% of Barr voters to both turn out and vote for McCain. Not going to happen. Heck, there were probably a few percent of Barr's voters who would've voted for Obama if Barr weren't on the ballot (hard-core McCain/neo-con haters, capital L libertarians who emphasize liberal social views, etc.). Not many among that crowd to be sure, but probably enough that every other Barr voter in the state couldn't have even theoretically swung IN to McCain.

NC? Maaayyybe. Again adding at least a couple percent of Barr's vote to Obama's total--a slim share, but present nonetheless--over 60% of Barr's voters would've had to a) turn up; b) vote in the presidential race instead of just downballot races; and c) pulled the lever for McCain. Doable, but hardly a given the way MO clearly would've been for Obama without Nader.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Why are people assuming that if Candidate X wasn't on the ballot, they'd have to vote for somebody else?  Even if they do, both Missouri and North Carolina allow for write-in votes for President, so compulsive voters there are never faced with having to vote for the lesser of two weevils.

[Alave1987]

Did Bob Barr cost John McCain Indiana and North Carolina?

Indiana, no way. This would've required literally over 96% of Barr voters to both turn out and vote for McCain. Not going to happen. Heck, there were probably a few percent of Barr's voters who would've voted for Obama if Barr weren't on the ballot (hard-core McCain/neo-con haters, capital L libertarians who emphasize liberal social views, etc.). Not many among that crowd to be sure, but probably enough that every other Barr voter in the state couldn't have even theoretically swung IN to McCain.

NC? Maaayyybe. Again adding at least a couple percent of Barr's vote to Obama's total--a slim share, but present nonetheless--over 60% of Barr's voters would've had to a) turn up; b) vote in the presidential race instead of just downballot races; and c) pulled the lever for McCain. Doable, but hardly a given the way MO clearly would've been for Obama without Nader.

NC? Maaayyybe. Again adding at least a couple percent of Barr's vote to Obama's total--a slim share, but present nonetheless--over 60% of Barr's voters would've had to a) turn up; b) vote in the presidential race instead of just downballot races; and c) pulled the lever for McCain. Doable, but hardly a given the way MO clearly would've been for Obama without Nader.

[Alave1987]

Did Bob Barr cost John McCain Indiana and North Carolina?

Indiana, no way. This would've required literally over 96% of Barr voters to both turn out and vote for McCain. Not going to happen. Heck, there were probably a few percent of Barr's voters who would've voted for Obama if Barr weren't on the ballot (hard-core McCain/neo-con haters, capital L libertarians who emphasize liberal social views, etc.). Not many among that crowd to be sure, but probably enough that every other Barr voter in the state couldn't have even theoretically swung IN to McCain.


NC? Maaayyybe. Again adding at least a couple percent of Barr's vote to Obama's total--a slim share, but present nonetheless--over 60% of Barr's voters would've had to a) turn up; b) vote in the presidential race instead of just downballot races; and c) pulled the lever for McCain. Doable, but hardly a given the way MO clearly would've been for Obama without Nader.

NC? Maaayyybe. Again adding at least a couple percent of Barr's vote to Obama's total--a slim share, but present nonetheless--over 60% of Barr's voters would've had to a) turn up; b) vote in the presidential race instead of just downballot races; and c) pulled the lever for McCain. Doable, but hardly a given the way MO clearly would've been for Obama without Nader.