battleground states in 2020?

[jacob_101]

Here's what I think will be battleground states in 2020.  Let's say battleground meaning either party gets between 48-52%.

AZ, CO, FL, IA, ME, MI, MN, NV, OR, OH, VA, WI.

I agree with some of you that by 2020, PA will not be a battleground state.

[jacob_101]

That makes sense Jacob, though I'd remove Maine, Michigan and Oregon. There is no real sign of a GOP trend there. I would also remove Arizona - very Republican tradition and a lot of ground for Democrats to cover. I also don't think Pennsylvania will have ceased to be a battleground while Ohio still is. Either remove Ohio or bring in PA.

You may be right about MI, but I stand by ME and OR.  In 2000 and 2004
according to the exit polls, a higher percentage of young people voted for Bush than the rest of the population in ME.  It's a rural state which I think in 15 years will swing at least to a tied state.  I still believe that the SW including AZ will trend Democrat due to heavy immigration.  Bush got a good percentage of the hispanic vote, but he appealed to them and many were comfortable with Bush's persona.  I doubt that such a high percentage would vote for a Republican they couldn't identify with as a person.

About PA, I feel if Bush couldn't win it this year than no other conservative Republican will.  They are right next to the NE which is very liberal and after 9/11, if a Republican still can't win PA then I think it's over there, unless a liberal Republican runs.  OH will continue to be a split state, liberals in the north and conservatives in the South.  I don't see that changing anytime soon.

[jacob_101]

That makes sense Jacob, though I'd remove Maine, Michigan and Oregon. There is no real sign of a GOP trend there. I would also remove Arizona - very Republican tradition and a lot of ground for Democrats to cover. I also don't think Pennsylvania will have ceased to be a battleground while Ohio still is. Either remove Ohio or bring in PA.

You may be right about MI, but I stand by ME and OR.  In 2000 and 2004
according to the exit polls, a higher percentage of young people voted for Bush than the rest of the population in ME.  It's a rural state which I think in 15 years will swing at least to a tied state.  I still believe that the SW including AZ will trend Democrat due to heavy immigration.  Bush got a good percentage of the hispanic vote, but he appealed to them and many were comfortable with Bush's persona.  I doubt that such a high percentage would vote for a Republican they couldn't identify with as a person.

About PA, I feel if Bush couldn't win it this year than no other conservative Republican will.  They are right next to the NE which is very liberal and after 9/11, if a Republican still can't win PA then I think it's over there, unless a liberal Republican runs.  OH will continue to be a split state, liberals in the north and conservatives in the South.  I don't see that changing anytime soon.

If you say so...what I see is Maine turning from solid GOP to strongly leaning Dem. I don't see that trend reversing anytime soon.

On a related note, it's valuable to try and analyze Bush and Kerry as candidates. I don't think Bush is the generic Republican people make him out to be. He basically been a crazy liberal when it comes to fisal policy, taken a passive, centrist position on social issues, been a santa claus to immigrants and an ultra-hawk on foreign policy.

I see the GOP as held together mainly on foreign policy at the moment. Bush hasn't really done much to make America a more conservative place in terms of abortions, divorces, gay rights and so on. He's stalled liberal progress, which is a winning strategy, but that's it. If the GOP turns more conservative on social issues, they could start losing ground.

Moreover, Bush has been kind of populist, financing huge tax cuts for the poor and middle-class with loans. That is definitely not traditional Republican policy. If the GOP turns more conservative they might lose low-income voters. Finally, Bush is a Texan with lcose ties to Hispanics. A more waspy image in the future with a harsher view towards immigration might hurt the GOP there. All this could change the equation on future elections.

Kerry on the other hand was pretty generic, just a poor candidate.

Gustaf,

I agree Bush is not a fiscal conservative.  However, I have to strongly disagree with you on every other point.  Bush does have conservative views on abortion, divorce and gay marriage, he just can't do much about it.  He has stopped federal funding for abortions overseas, but what do you expect him to do past that?  The court decided abortion and gay marriage can be legal and the president has no power to stop that except to nominate conservative judges who interpret the law or a constitutional amendment(impossible).  Conservatives voted for him because of his beliefs, knowing full well that it's an uphill battle and won't necessarily change overnight.

I do agree with you on Bush and hispanics.  I hope the next Republican can keep around 40% of their vote again, but that is also going to be a struggle to maintain.

[jacob_101]

He probably isn't saying much about those issues because they are not government's primary role.  He probably is more concerned about terrorism, the war in Iraq and economic concerns.  Which is how it should be.  These social issues should be decided by the states and I wish the federal government and federal judges would quit making such things a federal issue.

Partial birth abortion ban.  10-15 states amending there constitutions to define marriage as two people of the opposite sex.  These are just a couple of examples of initiatives that descended from Bush's rhetoric and leadership, so he must be talking just enough about these issues.

And, I am interested to hear what you think about the Terri Shiavo case.  Bush has made his position clear, siding on the side of life.