west va?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Here's one I prepared earlier:

well, maybe WV, but I'll give the floor to Al on that one.

In brief:

1. Kerry seems to have led in WV early on
2. For some insane reason, Kerry's "strategists" decided to silently pull resources out of WV. Although some went to OH, they mostly went to VA. This started almost as soon as they got to WV (ie: early spring. Yes. That early)
3. Because there were less resources in WV the local Party Bosses got angry with the Kerry campaign.
4. Kerry's numbers started to drop because there were less resources/local party bosses pissed off. Result: more resources pulled out, visits cancelled, party bosses even more pissed off. You get the idea. By November State and Federal Parties weren't talking to each other (note that Manchin won the Gubernatorial race in a landslide)
5. Some party bosses began to covertly aid the Bush campaign.
6. Someone (almost certainly a pissed off local boss) began to circulate some evil little leaflets claiming (amoungst other things) that Kerry "wanted to ban the Bible". As a result Evangelical turnout soared.
7. Kerry's campaign failed to seize on the fact that Bush intends to reduce safety regulations in mines. Result? Coalfield turnout more-or-less the same as 2000 (up about 3% on average. Actually down in some areas). Only a solid campaign by the UMW stopped the WV result from turning into a KY like result.
8. Etc, etc, etc

I found out most of this from a (very) reliable source three days ago.

The Greatest Cock Up in History

[Filuwaúrdjan]

That reliable source is being hopeful.  I think that after the RNC in September, which was when Kerry pulled his resources, he was probably behind by a solid 5 points.

He's pretty sure that things were being covertly pulled out in the Spring. Very slowly. So that no one would really notice. But he noticed less people week after week.

After the RNC Bush seems to have lead WV by about 5 points (this is true) but that's about the national figure.
Things got weirder and weirder after the RNC... if the National Kerry campaign wanted to lose WV, they couldn't have done a better job.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Don't forget those evil leaflets ("...wants to ban the Bible...") How to get Evangelical turnout soaring with minimal advirtising costs.

The dark art of black propaganda at it's very finest

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True. Very, very true. Petty grudges and Local Politicians go together like nothing else.
----
As to the initial question: it depends on the candidates (like most states) and whether or not the DNC v WV Dems feud kicks off again.
The one cultural issue that hurts the Dems in WV (most of the others don't sway many voters) is Guns. The Dems need to make a clear distinction between gun control in Inner City Ghettos and Gun Rights in rural areas.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Al, would you also agree that the coal vote is no longer as large, unified and important as it used to be.

Depopulation has reduced it's importance (not as severe as in Kentucky though), but this has been seriously exaggerated by low turnouts in the Coalfields two Presidential elections in a row.
The frustrating thing is that this time around there was a real chance that it could have soared... all Kerry had to do was make a big fuss over Bush supporting cutting safety regulations in Mines.

Talk about missing an open goal... almost any other candidate would have seized on that.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

  I will say this, if the Dems find the issues to win in WVA, they will win the presidency. I can understand petty issues such as the Swift Boat ^(*^& would swing 1-2% of the vote and would delviver WVA in close election, but Kerry losing by 13%, worse then what Mondale lost to Reagan by and only a few percentage points less than what Nixon won by in 72 speaks volumes of the issues the Democratic party is facing with areas such as these.

   The Democratic party needs to go to places like WVA, Ross county in Ohio(Chilicothe), and other economically "hard luck" areas and figure out what went wrong.

One of the mistakes Kerry made this year, was to do with Iraq; what he should have done was make a point of not making a point of it, and when pressed on it should have gone on about having no intention to play politics with all those personal tradegies.
You get the idea. Focus everything on the Administration, and when they try to make political capital out of it, go on about "playing politics" etc, etc, etc

Oh and make sure not be associated in any way whatsoever with the Anti-War movement.

Extremely cynical, but a vote winner in the sort of places where soldiers get recruited from (it might not look like one to political obsessives, but that sort of stuff has actually worked before)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I have no problem that the state with the highest incest and domestic violence rates voted for Bush.

But seriously, have you ever driven to some of those isolated towns in rural West Virginia? It's downright scary and looks like it's out of a horror movie, I'm not kidding.

Exactly the type of thinking that leads to the democrats getting slaughtered in rural areas.

I love rural areas....just not West Virginia's.

Seriously, take a drive through some of the dying small towns in northern West Virginia. You will be shocked. It is such a different world. It's actually quite amazing. I helped a good friend of mine (conservative) move into to a house down there. Full size home, built in the 50's....renting it for $100 a month.

It's not their fault that they are poor. Quit sounding like a Thatcherite. 

Besides Northern WV is nowt on parts of the Southern Coalfield for poverty. Go to McDowell county, one of the poorest in the entire U.S... the health care system is worse there than in many third world countries.
Oh and it voted 60% for Kerry. Have you got a problem with that? Damn those poor buggers soiling the number of votes for the candidate you voted for.

Immature insults are the last thing WV needs now

[Filuwaúrdjan]

American doctors, according to him, wouldn't move there - no chance to make a decent living as too many of your customers will be unable to pay.

Another reason why the U.S needs an NHS

[Filuwaúrdjan]

American doctors, according to him, wouldn't move there - no chance to make a decent living as too many of your customers will be unable to pay.

Another reason why the U.S needs an NHS

Yeah great idea. It's worked so well in Canada.

Glad you agree, although the British model is better for making living conditions bearable in Mining areas

[Filuwaúrdjan]

[/sarcasm] It is bankrupting canada

Y'know I think the ridiculous and OTT subisidies of Quebec and Atlantic Canada's economic woes might be a bigger drain on Canada

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Doubt it

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What's "Euro/Metro style Communism(socialism)"?
Besides healthcare wasn't a big issue this year. Should have been, but wasn't.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

America rejected European Socialism

What's "European Socialism"? The PES is really just a loose voting bloc in the European Parliament (took out that fascist nut though. Be proud) and is only the second largest bloc in the EP.
All the different parties in the PES have more factions and ideological differences than you can shake a (big) stick at.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I wasn't aware that the rest of the World dicated anything

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most don't (a small group very prominent in the media does though. Some of the recent headlines have been upsetting).
BTW the population of the U.K is 59 and a half Million

[Filuwaúrdjan]

UK NHS is not very good I think (it's the picture that we have in Belgium). I believe that the best system is the Belgium/French system: it's not socialist, it's not liberal, it's conventional medecine: you can be a liberal doctor and you can fix your fees. But you can be a conventional doctor too and it's the gov who determines tariffs (the majority of doctors are conv). If your doctor is conv, you pay only 25% of the ticket (the rest is for your mutual) . This system, very good, not in deficit (behalve in hard times), but has the disvantage to be expensive, has financed by contributions taken on the wages.

Hence this system is the best in the world (UK must send some patients in France and Belgium because her etatic medecine sucks).

The NHS was designed so that the Working Class actually had decent healthcare. It's not showy, but it's effiecient, costs less than most other systems, employs a hellofalot of people and on the whole does it's job well.
Some patients waiting for *minor* operations in the South East are *allowed* to go across the channel to cut down the waiting list.
But it's only been a handful waiting for hip replacements etc. that have gone so far.
The NHS gets a bad press from evil right wing journos, but most people like it, and opposing it is electoral suicide.
Besides, despite Private Hospitals not being allowed to treat people with heart attacks etc, death rates in NHS hospitals are lower than the few private ones.

Free at the point of use, is something that large sections of the U.S could really do with.