missouri 2008

[WalterMitty]

am i the only one surprised it went gop?

who would of thought missouri would be more republican than nc?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Missouri has been trending this way for a while.  I can't remember the last time it was less GOP than the national average; I think it was 1988?  Obama spent a lot more time in NC, and NC is trending in the opposite direction of MO.

[WalterMitty]

Missouri has been trending this way for a while.  I can't remember the last time it was less GOP than the national average; I think it was 1988?  Obama spent a lot more time in NC, and NC is trending in the opposite direction of MO.

'trending' is the most overused word on this forum.

trend can be useful in studying past performance.  but they in no way predict future voting, contrary to popular belief.

[memphis]

Yeah, it was pretty weird seeing Indiana go dem but not Missouri. It was super close, though. The bootheel really sticks out on the swing map.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

In 2008 Missouri was GOP +7.4.  In 2004, it was GOP +4.7; in 2000, it was GOP +3.9; in 1996, it was GOP +2.2; in 1992, that number was Dem +5.  Not since 1992 was MO more Democratic than the national average; we have seen the State shift slowly to the GOP in the last 16 years, so we shouldn't be surprised to see it this year.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Missouri has been trending this way for a while.  I can't remember the last time it was less GOP than the national average; I think it was 1988?  Obama spent a lot more time in NC, and NC is trending in the opposite direction of MO.

'trending' is the most overused word on this forum.

trend can be useful in studying past performance.  but they in no way predict future voting, contrary to popular belief.

Missouri is going to lose one seat after the 2010 census.
North Carolina is going to gain one.
The Obama campaign prefered to target the latter because it's a growing state and it will be more beneficial for the Democrats in the long run if they bring it to their side.

[Antonio the Sixth]

In 2008 Missouri was GOP +7.4.  In 2004, it was GOP +4.7; in 2000, it was GOP +3.9; in 1996, it was GOP +2.2; in 1992, that number was Dem +5.  Not since 1992 was MO more Democratic than the national average; we have seen the State shift slowly to the GOP in the last 16 years, so we shouldn't be surprised to see it this year.

Yeah, I agree.

Missouri is trending Republican since years. The reason is that it can be considered as a part of an "outer South" composed by states like Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia. Whereas the democrats lost the deep South first in 1964, then definitely in 1980, this region kept being one of the most democrat, permitting the victory of Clinton in 1992 and 1996 ( and inside the Democratic party, the victory of southerner moderates ).
But this time ended in the beginning of the 2000's. The 2000 election, with Gore failing to carry West Virginia, who had been a democratic stronghold for 40 years, was the beginning of a long and strong trend of these states toward the democrats. That was worse in 2004, and even worse in 2008. Today, the democratic "outer South" today is dead : democrats don't need it to get a solid victory, and it doesn't more want democrats ( West Virginia is also even more significative, being 20 points more republican than the average after having been 15 points more democrat in 1988 ). One of the consequences of that change is that the democratic party could become more progressive. This movement toward the left has maybe yet begun with your president...

[tmthforu94]

Going into election night, I thought McCain would win Missouri. I also thought we would win enough states to = 270, but he didn't.

After Obama had been chosen, I figured Missouri would go Democrat. It's strange, that it didn't, since it was the only real "swing state" that didn't go Democrat. If Obama has an approval rating about 45% on Election Day 2012, Missouri will vote for Obama.

[Daniel Z]

On election night I thought MO would stay Republican, but I also had NC and IN staying Republican.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Going into election night, I thought McCain would win Missouri. I also thought we would win enough states to = 270, but he didn't.

[Tender Branson]

After Obama had been chosen, I figured Missouri would go Democrat. It's strange, that it didn't, since it was the only real "swing state" that didn't go Democrat. If Obama has an approval rating about 45% 55% on Election Day 2012, Missouri will vote for Obama.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I had Obama narrowly winning MO, while losing IN, NC, and NE-02.

[Nym90]

Going into election night, I thought McCain would win Missouri. I also thought we would win enough states to = 270, but he didn't.

After Obama had been chosen, I figured Missouri would go Democrat. It's strange, that it didn't, since it was the only real "swing state" that didn't go Democrat. If Obama has an approval rating about 45% on Election Day 2012, Missouri will vote for Obama.

Going into election night you thought McCain would win? I guess you don't believe in this recent fad called "polls".

Not really a big shock that MO went GOP. Historically, yes, since it used to be the premier bellwhether state. The rural areas have gone GOP faster than the urban areas have gone Dem, however.

[You kip if you want to...]

MO kept swinging back and forth in my predictions throughout the campaign. But my final map on November 4th had it going for McCain.

[Tender Branson]

In Mid-October it looked like Obama was ahead in MO by a couple of points, but then it tightened up ahead of the election. On Election Night I thought Obama would win it barely as evidenced in my official prediction.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=87095.0

Probably MO didn't go to Obama because of 4 reasons: It already trended Republican in previous elections, there was no early voting and the fact that this MO Catholic Bishop urged voters not to support the abortionist Obama a few days earlier as well as slight racism.

[pbrower2a]

I thought that Indiana and NE-02 would go to Obama but expected North Carolina to go for McCain and Missouri to go to Obama. (I live in Michigan and I could see the GOP neglecting Indiana through unwarranted complacency), and greater Omaha has to be much like Des Moines or the Quad Cities -- or Kansas City, Missouri, which were going for Obama). 

Third-party candidate  Bob Barr probably took away enough votes from McCain to throw North Carolina to Obama and Ralph Nader took away enough votes from Obama to throw the state to McCain. That shows how close Missouri and North Carolina were.

I have suggested that in 2012, Missouri and North Carolina would probably flip in their support if Obama were as popular in 2012 as in 2008. An Obama gain of Arizona would probably do little more than offset the shift of electoral votes to states more likely to vote for the Republican in 2012.

But that is practically a definition of sameness in support from one year to the next as measured in electoral votes.

[Smash255]

I thought that Indiana and NE-02 would go to Obama but expected North Carolina to go for McCain and Missouri to go to Obama. (I live in Michigan and I could see the GOP neglecting Indiana through unwarranted complacency), and greater Omaha has to be much like Des Moines or the Quad Cities -- or Kansas City, Missouri, which were going for Obama). 

Third-party candidate  Bob Barr probably took away enough votes from McCain to throw North Carolina to Obama and Ralph Nader took away enough votes from Obama to throw the state to McCain. That shows how close Missouri and North Carolina were.

I have suggested that in 2012, Missouri and North Carolina would probably flip in their support if Obama were as popular in 2012 as in 2008. An Obama gain of Arizona would probably do little more than offset the shift of electoral votes to states more likely to vote for the Republican in 2012.

But that is practically a definition of sameness in support from one year to the next as measured in electoral votes.

I doubt that.  If 2012 wound up setting up in a similar margin as Obama's 2008 victory, I think he takes NC by a bit more,  due to migration of people from the northeast down to NC, you don't see that in Missouri.  The areas in NC which have seen the biggest move in the Democrats direction are also the fastest growing areas of the state.   Your simply not seeing nearly that level of growth in Missouri than you are seeing in NC, and those that are going to MO are certainly not the same group which is moving into NC and help swinging NC leftward.

[Husker]

I thought that Indiana and NE-02 would go to Obama but expected North Carolina to go for McCain and Missouri to go to Obama. (I live in Michigan and I could see the GOP neglecting Indiana through unwarranted complacency), and greater Omaha has to be much like Des Moines or the Quad Cities -- or Kansas City, Missouri, which were going for Obama). 

Third-party candidate  Bob Barr probably took away enough votes from McCain to throw North Carolina to Obama and Ralph Nader took away enough votes from Obama to throw the state to McCain. That shows how close Missouri and North Carolina were.

I have suggested that in 2012, Missouri and North Carolina would probably flip in their support if Obama were as popular in 2012 as in 2008. An Obama gain of Arizona would probably do little more than offset the shift of electoral votes to states more likely to vote for the Republican in 2012.

But that is practically a definition of sameness in support from one year to the next as measured in electoral votes.

I could definitely see IN staying in Obama's column in 2012 if his popularity is still strong. I think NE-2 will stay in his pocket, if the area isn't completely redistricted. It might be, but then again our legislature didn't attempt to repeal the split votes, so perhaps they will be more fair.

MO may get into Obama's column next election but I would say that the demographics of NC would lead to more Obama support than MO. Northern MO, in particular, seems to be trending more republican over the past several elections. Sixteen to twenty years ago northern MO was far more democratic than eastern NE and now they are almost identical. For example NE-1 and MO-6 were about the same spread in '08 but MO-6 was 14 points more democratic just 8 years ago.

[HAnnA MArin County]

In response to the previous poster, I think Northern Missouri is trending Republican because it is the least populated part of the state. You'd think that its close proximity to Iowa, a state that is trending blue, would make it more favorable to Democrats but that's not the case. Save for Adair County in Northeast Missouri, which is home of Truman State University-Kirksville, and Nodaway County in Northwest Missouri, home to Maryville, pretty much the entire region north of the Missouri River is sparsely populated.

I do think that the presence of third-party candidates like Bob Barr and Ralph Nader did lead to a narrow victory for McCain in Missouri, who didn't even get 50 percent of the vote here. Now it's a question of why such a significant proportion of voters went third party in Missouri. My guess, knowing the state, would be dissatisfaction among conservatives with both candidates. Missouri, like the nation as a whole, is a center-right state (unfortunately). Most Republicans in Missouri are very conservative and I'm sure they were less than ecstatic having the "maverick" as their candidate, despite the fact that he shared a ticket with the neoconservative beauty queen who can see Russia from her front porch. Missouri Democrats tend to be center-left (myself excluded) and I think some more conservative Democrats/Dixiecrats, especially in the more rural parts of the state, were either a) anxious about voting for an African American or b) still a little disgruntled from the primary that Hillary wasn't the nominee and so they opted third party. I'm not just saying this because I am a Hillary fanatic, but I live in a rural region of the state and I heard talk like this from Republicans and Democrats alike regarding their dissatisfaction with McCain and Obama as the nominee. Call it whatever you like.

I think the largest part why McCain narrowly won was turnout. If you go to the Secretary of State's website, you'll see that turnout was a tad bit higher in the GOP strongholds of St. Charles County and Greene County (Springfield) than St. Louis City, where Obama scored his biggest victory in the state. Obama did what he had to do in Missouri - he held the four Kerry counties (St. Louis City, St. Louis County, Jackson County/KC, and Ste. Genevieve County). He also picked up Jefferson County, which consists of the southern St. Louis suburbs like Arnold, Festus, Herculaneum, Pevely, etc. He also received above 40 percent in Greene County, probably due to the high youth turnout with the presence of Missouri State University in Springfield, and he even picked up a couple of rural counties in Southeast Missouri (Iron and Washington in the Lead Belt region of the state which are heavily Democratic at the local levels), but almost every county in Missouri swung Democratic save for the Bootheel which I'm sure racism had a lot to do with for the GOP swing down there.

Basically, I think it was ultimately the third party factor and turnout that lost the state for Obama. If things keep going well for Obama, you can expect Missouri will flip into the blue column in 2012. Just my opinion, though.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Probably MO didn't go to Obama because of 4 reasons: It already trended Republican in previous elections, there was no early voting and the fact that this MO Catholic Bishop urged voters not to support the abortionist Obama a few days earlier as well as slight racism.

How the Church is allowed to maintain its tax-exempt status is a mystery to me.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

I cannot honestly believe that Indiana, with it's racist history, voted for Obama and Missouri did not. I know the numbers weren't even a point apart, but the end result is unbelievable.

I also don't understand why people continue to say that McCain was the perfect Republican for MO. I'm no expert on the state's politics, but I've heard that half of the state claims to be evangelical, so McCain's mildly moderate perception shouldn't have played all that well there.