2004 Democratic Primary

[NorthernDog]

There are not many white Southern Democrats left, and I believe that is Z.Miller's point.  The Democrats are ignoring the situation at their own peril.  It's  difficult to attain 270 electoral votes while losing all southern states - possible but very difficult.  

[NorthernDog]

A Republican win in Kentucky would be significant since the Democrats have held the governer's office for 30+ years.  More evidence of re-alignment in the Border States.
In Mississippi, I've heard that Republicans are experimenting with their Get Out the Vote operation planned for '04.  We'll see if it works well enough to get Barbour over the 50% mark.
 

[NorthernDog]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/11/05/elec04.prez.GOP.gains.ap/index.html

Above web address describes PEW Poll results showing GOP making gains (sometimes substantial) since 2001.     There's a state by state breakdown available - can't find it right now. Republican gains were notably in MN, IA, MI, TX, and CA.   I think quite a few states that Gore carried narrowly (2% or lessmargin ) in '00 will fall into the Republican column this time.

[NorthernDog]

How in the world do the Dems win MS & SC, yet end up losing Penn?!

What many people overlook is that Gore did pick up extra white votes in the south in '00 because he was a Southerner. And he had 90-95% of the black vote.  However, it wasn't enough to win any states. But it did diminish the margin of Bush's wins in many southern states,compared to GOP wins in 1980,84,or 88, thus creating the impression that Democrats are within striking distance.   IMHO, Bush is a lock in every Southern and border state except MD (unless there's a big event).

[NorthernDog]

In addition, it is simplistic to say that Democratic economic policies will aid southerners, particularly the "poor" ones that Dean speaks about.  Maybe the southerners believe that lower taxes and greater economic freedom will lead to better job creation for them than higher taxes coupled with social programs.  

It's also worth noting that not everyone votes primarily on economic issues.  Michael Barone notes in "The Almanac of American Politics" that social values and depth of religious commitment are a bigger indicator of political preference than income.  Bush did poorly with secular voters in '00, but did well with highly observant Catholics and Protestants.  But I know that the pattern doesn't always hold true, because Reagan wasn't highly obseranvant yet crushed Southern Baptist Jimmy Carter in 1980. An exception to every rule.

[NorthernDog]

Georgia is nearly a mix between the deep south, and the "Greater Florida Region", if that's what you would want to call it. Florida and Georgia could very well vote Democratic. The states that you categorize as the deep south would most likely vote republican 9 out of 10 times. Thus, taking Georgia out of this category.

Georgia go Democrat? Have you ever heard of Zell Miller?  They can't even find a Democratic candidate to run for his seat next year, and he's voting for Bush himself.  

[NorthernDog]

NorthernDog - are you predicting the exact same map as 2000?  Notice you left the EV totals out.  BTW, what platform (OS, browser) did you use to upload?
Thanks,
Dave

Wow, I screwed it up - a Luddite at heart.
I'll try to fix it in a couple days.  Same as 2000?  That'd be fun.  Another Electoral College/Popular Vote criss-cross.

[NorthernDog]

It seems like the Democrats are broken into 3 main groups:
1.Urban Liberals and their interest groups
2.Blue Collar/Middle class moderates
3. Minorities/Civil Rights Activists
If this is true, which group is strongest?  I think the "Urban Liberals" because that's where the majority of activists are.  Blue Collar types go hunting and fishing in free time and minorities support w/ votes but less so with $.  This explains Dean's support so far too.  Anyone disagree ?

[NorthernDog]

Canada seems to be in the uniquely enviable position of having a progressive party completely dominant in national elections. The right in Canada really only consists of the CA, and that only 'wins' in Alberta. Even the old Canadian right, the Tories, are hardly what you would consider right wing in the US/UK sense as they are quite liberal on social isssues. It would be nice if all countries were in this position.

Many countries are in such a position - they are controlled by repressive left-wing governments that stamp out the opposition.   But when people dream of a better life they never move to Cuba, North Korea, or Zimbabwe. They move to the US.

[NorthernDog]

Canada seems to be in the uniquely enviable position of having a progressive party completely dominant in national elections. The right in Canada really only consists of the CA, and that only 'wins' in Alberta. Even the old Canadian right, the Tories, are hardly what you would consider right wing in the US/UK sense as they are quite liberal on social isssues. It would be nice if all countries were in this position.

Many countries are in such a position - they are controlled by repressive left-wing governments that stamp out the opposition.   But when people dream of a better life they never move to Cuba, North Korea, or Zimbabwe. They move to the US.

Cuba, North Korea and Zimbabwe are hardly progressive are they? Repressive more like.

I took your comment of "it would be nice..." as a reference to having 1 party dominating the national elections.  IMO this is never a good thing even of you like the policies.  It leads to corruption and abuse of power; the dominating party will eventually seek to eliminate any opposition.  Why shouldn't they? Who will stop them?  Germany was an educated, progressive country in the early 1900s and look what happened when the good times ended.

[NorthernDog]

I just read Al Gore's screed printed in USA TOday by Moveon.Org and he seems to have moved to the left (even more than 2000).  If Dean is nominated he will support him to ingratiate himself with Dean's supporters.  When Dean loses Gore will try to capture his supporters for his run in 2008.

[NorthernDog]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It may sound crazy that I put NJ in the Republican column, but consider this:

Democrats solidified their control of the state legislature in 2003, but only because of district gerrymandering.  Republicans actually won a majority of votes cast statewide.  

Republicans have also made significant gains there in party ID.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

NJ is where most of my family lives. Definitely favors Democrats, but is a high income state and repealing the Bush tax cuts, as Dean wants, would not be popular!

[NorthernDog]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Although Bush is unpopular in the more urban areas of Western Washington, he's not unpopular in general.  I can't say that Washington is going to be solid Bush country in '04, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised to see him win the state.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'd be interested in hearing about any polls coming out of Washington after the holidays.My impression is that Washington state had become more liberal since the mid 1990s and was out of reach for the GOP (unless there's a 1984 style landslide).