Talk Elections

why do people automatically assume Bush will win these states just because they were close last time? There's really nothing that's happened to them that has made them more friendly to Bush. Iowa was actually one of the most anti-war states according to polls so I say Bush will have an even tougher time than he did in 2000, and New Mexico has been turning more Dem, more and more Hispanics are coming in and Richardson won in a landslide. Sure they're far from guaranteed for Kerry, but definately not guaranteed for Bush either.

I thikn they've just been described as the most likely pickups for Bush, which is true.  

Personally, I don't see Bush picking up any Gore states, he's going to have a hard time in all of them.  

I can only speak for myself, but my answer is NO.  As I have stated repeatedly, a different Democrat may very well have won my vote, or this Democrat, running for a different office may have won my vote.  (I have voted for JFKerry in the past, and may again, if the opportunity presents itself.)  You'll not find anyone who is more anti-Iraq war than I.  And that has a great deal to do with the fact that I will, after nearly 20 years of voting, vote for a Republican for President for the first time.  I suspect that I'm not the only logical thinker out there, but that may be optimistic.

The most likely pickup for Bush is probably Pennsylvania... :)

Iowa has Kerry with big leads ratehr consistently, and that makes me think it'll go for Kerry. New Mexico I don't know. That state together with the 3 steel states, Florida and New Hampshire are probably those who actually will change hands.

Bush has made inroads into Hispanics... and NM is too remote for Kerry to bother with anyways.

That's a good point, I would've thought that geography would matter some. Kerry wants a coherent group of states to campaign in.

He'll want to stick around the Atlantic and Great Lakes state's I'd guess.

yes, and this is why NM will be the most likely switch.  Everyone keeps asking, "what happened in the states?" or "are the voters more liberal or more conservative now than...?"  Did it occur to anyone that there are actually candidates campaigning?  And that the identity of these candidates matter?  That what they say matters?  Not to lifelong anti-Bush Democrats, or lifelong anti-Kerry Republicans.  But to that small fraction who actually decide elections, these things matter.  I stand by my original map of 4 months ago, polls be dammed, Bush will win everything he did last time plus NM, and not a single state more.

Sounds reasonable, but I think Bush might lose FL while gaining PA. He might also lose New Hampshire, but it wouldn't matter.

I'm not that worried about PA (or MN) at present... I am very worried about Oregon and New Mexico... and Wisconsin.

you've decided west virgina will come back to the Dems?

Ah Gustaf (spelled correctly !) - You read my thread on PA, and like magic a few days later a poll with Bush +6 magically appears..

And you are convinced that PA is in play......

You seem to believe Florida will change hands..

You are mistaken young Jedi...

I will soon enlighten you to the ways of the force as it fortells Florida...

(but not now... have work to do.....)

Who are you talking to there Angus? :)

I only know of one credible student of coal belt voting habits on this thread.  :)

Bush will win NM.  He lost by 400 some votes last time and was hurt big by the DUI there at the last minute.  He will also pick up at least 4-6% more of the Hispanic vote.  Kerry will play well in some states, but NM is not one.  (This is all assuming Bill Richardson is not the VP nominee)

However, Bush will probably lose Iowa.  Most people forget that votes cast the day of the election in 2000, Bush was ahead, but Gore killed him on absentee ballots.  I think the primaires did heavy damage to Bush, making it tougher for him to win in 04.  

well, two.  

OK, you were talking to Al then I guess. :)

Yes, but then I realized Vorlon was here too.  Al, you have an encyclopedic knowledge of that area and its social milieu and its voting proclivities.  How did you come by all that information, anyway?

Where's the proof Bush has made inroads with Hispanics? I hear about this as well as blacks, but haven't seen any polls or anything such proving so.

And since Kerry is targeting Nevada, Arizona and possibly Colorado, I do think he'll stop by New Mexico.

im encouraged by recent polls showing bush very competitive in pennsylvania.  i do, however, still believe that pa is a 'kerry lean'.  but there is no realistic way kerry wins the election without pa.

bush probably won new mexico in 2000.  i understand voter fraud is pretty rampant there.  

then hopefully you'll admit Gore won Florida.

numerous recounts show that gore lost florida.

but would he had it not have been had it not have been for all the blacks taken off the voting rolls by Katherine Harris who were not convicted felons but simply shared similar names.

sorry, but there's way more proof of vote fraud in Florida than New Mexico. Your theory about NM is just pure speculation.

youre right.  i am speculating on new mexico.

it's just a hunch i have.

 
…a state-wide recount would probably have given the state to Gore... and there is the little matter of voter disenfranchisement... but I'm sorry lets not start this whole subject all over again... it would get very ugly very quickly...

I for one was thinking that Kerry was likely to lose NM and IA… now I think that NM will still be lost to Bush however I think IA will be a Kerry win by anywhere from 2-7%...

PA, is very much in play however despite the polls I would still say Kerry should have an advantage there imho… steel workers in the west of the state and the dem leaning voters in Pittsburgh and the west and Philadelphia and the east should come out in large numbers for Kerry… these polls from PA just strengthen the case for Edwards as VP imho… about the polls who was polled likely or registered voters and what was the split between Dems and Reps…

OH, as with PA is very much in play and strengthens the case even further for Edwards as VP… a lot of job losses and the steel issue should help Kerry particularly with Edwards on the ticket… the same is true of WV where economic factors should help swing the state back to its traditionally democrat voting habits, and again Edwards helps a lot…  

Polls should be showing Bush pulling ahead in FL imo if they are showing a tight race in PA but then again the polls showed the same in PA in 2000… but the FL polls remain an anomaly, I would expect the next batch of polls out of FL to show a bush lead of say 3-6% …

But that’s just my take on where things stand….    

The thing about Florida is it is trending Democratic.
Here are the stats:
In 1988 Dukakis finished seven percentage points below his national average.

In 1992 Bush won Florida. Clinton was 4% points below his national average.

In 1996 Clinton was one point below his national average.

In 2000 Gore was a half-point above his national average.

The state's growing population has been trending Democratic. Kerry needs to work there.

He's a 'know-it-Al' :)

And Kerry can win without PA simply b/c it isn't as Dem as some people think. I see Kerry winning Florida before Pennsylkvania.

I thought people were predicting Iowa for Bush because of an increase in GOP vs. Dem registration there.. but I looked at the Gallup weekly report thing in the library (I don't think its fully available online?) and it said Iowa has not become more Republican.  Plenty of other states have, including NM, but not IA.  

Personally I think Bush will win both these states, though he's probably only ahead in NM right now.

2 polls have shown Kerry with a clear lead there, that's my main reason.

Yeah, I know.. I was trying to explain why so many people have assumed for a long time that Iowa was so likely to switch to Bush.  

I agree.

Could be...north-central NM has a VERY dubious reputation, and also the NM Dems are more known for things like sending a guy to vote in his own name, AND those of his dead parents (still on the rolls, thanks to the 1993 NVRA!). There have certainly been some highly suspicious elections won by Dems here. This doesn't mean the Reps are pure and innocent, it's that I haven't heard anything about them other than their clever (and legal) use of absentee ballots to lock in votes before Election Day - something the Dems should've copied (but instead, they pass laws to restrict absentee balloting...now that's being poor losers).

As for how NM will go...I posted a poll of sorts in another thread a week or so ago, which I'll summarize as saying:no one has a lead here...

Most coal mining areas are very similer. Southern WV is like the South Wales Valleys, but on a larger scale.
And I find out things from everywhere... and what I find scary is that I remember them...

I recognize that...good memory can be scary some times. :)