Is Ohio 2004's top prize? Could be key to White House.

[°Leprechaun]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-02-26-ohio-battleground_x.htm

Interesting excerpt from the article:

"Four years ago, with a healthier Ohio economy, Democratic nominee Al Gore abandoned the state shortly before the election to shift money to Florida. Ohio Democrats still bristle over the decision, noting that Gore lost by less than 4 percentage points. "

[opebo]

Ohio isn't in that bad a shape, and most of the unemployment is concentrated in the Democrat areas anyway.  Central and southwestern OH are doing fine.  In addition the cultural war and gay marriage thing are going to sink Kerry there.

[opebo]

Ohio isn't in that bad a shape, and most of the unemployment is concentrated in the Democrat areas anyway.  Central and southwestern OH are doing fine.  In addition the cultural war and gay marriage thing are going to sink Kerry there.

Most Americans do not want to see the Constitutional amendment ,proposed by Bush, pass.
It is a shameful thing to amend the Constitution as a vehicle of exclusion, intolerance and discrimination.
It is an obvious indication of Bush's desperation.

I personally don't care much about this issue, but am happy to say most Americans are with Bush on this one.

[opebo]

No I meant they generally dislike gay marriage, and thinking about it makes them more likely to vote for Bush and less likely to vote for Kerry.

[Mort from NewYawk]

Ohio is most certainly the key. I would say that it's highly unlikely that either party will win without it.

If FL and MO are considered in the GOP column, then where else do the Dems go to get enough EVs? Trying to put together a string of smaller and disparate states like NH and NV and WV while holding IA and WS is a stretch.

On the other hand, if the GOP loses OH, and let’s say, NH, they would have to hold NV and gain IA AND WS to just eke out a 271 to 267 EV win – possible, but not where they want to be, since a state like WS is going to be an uphill climb as it is, with a 3.6% Nader vote in 2000.

[Nym90]

The difference between Bush and Kerry on the Amendment is irrelevant, since the President plays no role in the process of amending the Constitution.

Since both candidates have the exact same position on gay marriage for everything except the Amendment, it's a non-issue. Kerry would not support a bill that would legalize gay marriage nationwide, not that there would be any chance of that being proposed or approved by Congress anyway, and Bush would not support a bill banning civil unions nationwide.

[classical liberal]

Roy Moore is against the Amendment too.

[John]

The People in Ohio will Chose who they want in November
I Am going to make this my First Predction
Ohio on Election Night
Kerry: 49%
Bush: 48%
That's Close

[Mort from NewYawk]

The difference between Bush and Kerry on the Amendment is irrelevant, since the President plays no role in the process of amending the Constitution.

Since both candidates have the exact same position on gay marriage for everything except the Amendment, it's a non-issue. Kerry would not support a bill that would legalize gay marriage nationwide, not that there would be any chance of that being proposed or approved by Congress anyway, and Bush would not support a bill banning civil unions nationwide.

I would say that the issue is not going away. It will stay prominently in the news, as more and more city halls perform gay marriages. The right will continue to panic that the social fabric is shredding beyond repair, the left will become more caught up in the fervor of what seems like the next phase of the civil rights movement.

In this atmosphere, the issue will enter significantly into the mix of election issues, regardless of how close the candidates may actually be in their stands.

Small issues can become big election issues. For instance, MA has a proposed state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages. Does Kerry support it? If not, the Republicans can claim that he's de facto supporting gay marriage, since MA has no law explicitly banning gay marriage.

[classical liberal]

Are there any head to head polls from Ohio published recently?

[© tweed]

Most americans are personally opposed to gay marraige, and are split down the middle on the amendment.  I think economic issues will play out to be more important in this election than social issues.

[minionofmidas]

Since both candidates have the exact same position on gay marriage for everything except the Amendment, it's a non-issue.

As witness its constant recurrence on this thread.

Chances of Kerry taking Ohio and the presidency = just a sliver under 50%
Chances of Bush taking Ohio and the presidency = 48,5%
Chances of Kerry taking Ohio, but not the presidency = 1,5%
Chances of Bush taking Ohio, but not the presidency = that abovementioned sliver
Chances of Edwards, Kucinich, or Sharpton being the Dem. candidate = 0

[angus]

The difference between Bush and Kerry on the Amendment is irrelevant, since the President plays no role in the process of amending the Constitution.

Since both candidates have the exact same position on gay marriage for everything except the Amendment, it's a non-issue. Kerry would not support a bill that would legalize gay marriage nationwide, not that there would be any chance of that being proposed or approved by Congress anyway, and Bush would not support a bill banning civil unions nationwide.

yeah, I have been thinking along those lines too.  So, the "liberal media" is overhyping the whole thing.  Dean:  "The media never got my message out."  Clark's son:  "The media's job is to sell advertising."

[opebo]

The difference between Bush and Kerry on the Amendment is irrelevant, since the President plays no role in the process of amending the Constitution.

Since both candidates have the exact same position on gay marriage for everything except the Amendment, it's a non-issue. Kerry would not support a bill that would legalize gay marriage nationwide, not that there would be any chance of that being proposed or approved by Congress anyway, and Bush would not support a bill banning civil unions nationwide.

It doesn't matter whether Kerry claims to be against gay marriage - most Americans correctly percieve him as for it.  The reason is that the people who are pushing for it are all left-wing Democrats, so the party is perceieved as the party of gay marriage and pro-gayness in general.  Anyone who has any problem with that will vote for Bush, who is correctly percieved as being from the party that is anti-gay marriage.  In issues like these its more about reading between the lines to discover the hidden extremism of the candidate - obviously Kerry is much more pro-gay marriage than Bush, even if he denies it due to political expediency.  

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Opebo... are you dyslexic?

[opebo]

Opebo... are you dyslexic?

I don't get your meaning.

[minionofmidas]

Opebo... are you dyslexic?

Actually, I didn't either. I had an interpretation of what it might mean...
Al, go to the Progressive Convention and make some comments please, it feels so lonely over there right now.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What you wrote seemed a little disjointed... until I re-read it and realised that it's just illogical.

[opebo]

What you wrote seemed a little disjointed... until I re-read it and realised that it's just illogical.

It boils down to this - for wary, cynical voters, a candidate's stated position on an issue is less believable than what his past actions, associations, etc, would imply his position to be.  Come on, Democrats have been accusing Republicans of being racist for decades, and R's never actually state that they're racist.  Same with Kerry - claims not to be into gay marriage, but clearly runs with that pack (from Massachusetts, Democrat, leftist elitist, etc.).  Certainly if opposing gay marriage matters at all to a voter, he'll choose Bush - despite any rather dubious protestations on the part of Kerry.

I read about some polling by Bill McInturff that suggests a Bush lead of 15% if gay marriage becomes a major issue in the election.  McInturff has Bush ahead by 4% nationally now, so probably just a little biased - but still, that's a big swing on one issue.   Unfortunately this polling was mentioned only in a Weekly Standard article - I don't think its available for free online.  I certainly find a 5-10% boost for Bush likely from this issue.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

That is bigoted.
"Kerry is a Democrat from Massachusetts so he supports Gay Marriage"
Wake up pleeeease...

[minionofmidas]

I've seen some rather incongruous poll findings on the issue.
67% of likely votes are opposed to gay marriage, incl. 45% who feel strongly about it and are opposed. Almost nobody is in favor but feelsstrongly about it.
40% are not ready to vote for a candidate who isn't of their opinion on this question - that's more than on abortion or gun control
However, almost all of these very many people have voted Republican last time around anyway.

On the other hand, when asked to rank 22 current problems, a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage ranked 21st among - among the very same people polled.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It was the same over here in the '60's.
About 66% of people "agreed" with Enoch Powell's "Rivers of Blood" speech and about 66% of people "agreed" with Wilson's anti-racism legislation.

[opebo]

That is bigoted.
"Kerry is a Democrat from Massachusetts so he supports Gay Marriage"
Wake up pleeeease...

Bigoted?  I don't agree.  Besides, my point is about how this issue will effect the outcome of the election, not about whether or not Kerry actually supports gay marriage.

Whatever the candidates' public statements, voters can feel sure that deep down Bush is revolted by the spectacle of gay marriage - just like most of them are.  They can also feel fairly sure that Kerry is a heck of a lot more comfortable with this brand of wedded bliss than Bush, however much he may claim otherwise.  Who do you think is going to gain votes out of this issue?

[opebo]

Nobody, in all likelihood. It will be good for some Rep against Dem venom in the campaign though, and the amendment issue for some Rep against Rep venom.

Bush alone has votes to gain from this one, and even if they're not numerous, they'll be excellently located from an electoral perspective - in Midwestern swing states like Ohio, Iowa, Missouri, West Virginia..  heck it would even gain a few votes in places like Wisconsin, Minnesota, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico.