Will Dean go quietly into the night....

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

I don't think that even nuclear waste would make Nevada voters choose Howard Dean.

His bubble is going to burst whether I do it or not.

You do have a pint there....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course Bush's election is not certain.  Nothing in politics ever is.  That's why most of us on this board enjoy the game of presidential politics like we do.  Lots of twists and turns.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, I estimate Bush reelection chances at something like 70-80%. I think that the most likely thing to happen is that a few states, which were either very close the last time or have other reasons for changing hand, change hands, like West Virginia, New Hampshire and Nevada for the Reps and Iowa, Wisconsin, New Mexico and Oregon for the Dems.

Bush isn't going to carry Nevada. They're still pissed about nuclear waste being buried there.

[Deltabgjim]

Delta, I hate to burst your bubble, but no northern Democrat has carried a Southern state in the last 40 years.  (Exception being LBJ's Texas in 68 in a three way split with Wallace).  But don't take my word for it.  Look it up.  Check out what happened to McGovern, Mondale, and Dukakis in the South.  Zell doesn't seem out of touch in the least with the current state of the national party in the South.

There's a big difference in winning a local election and selling the National Democratic Party in the South.  Apples and oranges.  Molly probably didn't get around to mentioning that.

However, I admire your passion and enthusiasm.  It is no more passionate than that which exists on this side.  In both cases, it is very healthy and good for the political system.

I only mention the nonpartisan local election as an example of how when Southerners vote for issues and not parties, the progressive-populist impulse wins out. Notice how many Southern state governments are still controlled by the D's?
Incidentally, northern Dems Michael Dukakis and Hubert Humphrey won West Virginia in 88 and Texas in 68. I'd hardly call Texas in 68 a three-way split with Wallace, who only got 18.97% of the vote (hey, you're on the bleedin' Presidential Elections Atlas website!)

A strong ticket from the D's, such as Dean-Clark, Dean-Edwards, or v.v. could really give Bush-Cheney a run for their money, esp. if the economy stays in a "jobless recovery" and American troops continue to be killed in Iraq.

The only way to defeat Bush in 04 is a strong platform willing to stand up for principle, and not with the "Bush Lite" platform of the DLC in 2002. Southerners respect politicians who fight with conviction for the common man. This is how Zell got elected to the governorship here in the first place.

[Nym90]

The main reason that Humphrey carried Texas was the fact that he was Johnson's Vice President, and thus there was some home-state pride in the sittting President. Also, Wallace probably took more votes from Nixon than from Humphrey (although a lot of Wallace's voters would have stayed home in a two way race, especially in the South, since Nixon was at least nominally if not forcefully pro-civil rights)

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

 Conservatives can be in a echo chamber as much asd liberals are, and yes, there are many conservatives who do little more than parrot what Limbaugh says and what the WSJ editorial pages print. Their conservatism is quite loud, but at the same time, very shallow and often clueless.

   People need to take a few steps back when they try to talk about elections and predictions. In 96, it was clear to most clear thinking conservatives that once Dole got the nomination, it was all over for the GOP. Lamar Alexander may have been able to take on Clinton, but Dole was by in large the worst canidate the GOP had ran since Goldwater, and even Goldwater had more of a core base of support than Dole did.

  Unlike Dole, Dean does have grassroots support, and will galvanise the 35% of the electofrate that hates president Bush, but 35% is far less than 50%.

Since 35% is far less than is needed to win the election,  Who do you think would be able to win the election?

[© tweed]

 Conservatives can be in a echo chamber as much asd liberals are, and yes, there are many conservatives who do little more than parrot what Limbaugh says and what the WSJ editorial pages print. Their conservatism is quite loud, but at the same time, very shallow and often clueless.

   People need to take a few steps back when they try to talk about elections and predictions. In 96, it was clear to most clear thinking conservatives that once Dole got the nomination, it was all over for the GOP. Lamar Alexander may have been able to take on Clinton, but Dole was by in large the worst canidate the GOP had ran since Goldwater, and even Goldwater had more of a core base of support than Dole did.

  Unlike Dole, Dean does have grassroots support, and will galvanise the 35% of the electofrate that hates president Bush, but 35% is far less than 50%.

Since 35% is far less than is needed to win the election,  Who do you think would be able to win the election?

35% can win an election in a 3-man race.  In Idaho in 1912, the winner had 32%, with 4 candidates taking 10% or more.

[agcatter]

Delta, I know something about Texas politics and trust me, Humphrey would not have come close to carrying Texas without help from Wallace.  Humphrey carried the state by a mere 39,000 votes.  Exit polls in that election indicated that as high as 70% of Wallace's 584,000 Texas votes would have gone to the more conservative Nixon in a two man race.

As far as West Virginia goes, I don't consider that part of the 11 state conferderacy.  It broke apart from Virginia in 1863 to side with the North.  Call it a border state if you care to.

As far as the national Democrats standing on principle in the South and not being "Bush lite", well McGovern tried that in the South in 72.  He lost every Southern state by anywhere from 33 to 51 points.  Principle is fine, but it doesn't wash with Southern voters when it comes to going against their beliefs.  Dean with anyone on the ticket will be buried in the South.  You have to be realistic.  I'd love to believe that my side will be competitive in Massachusetts or Rhode Island but it just aint gonna happen.

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

I don't think that even nuclear waste would make Nevada voters choose Howard Dean.

His bubble is going to burst whether I do it or not.

You do have a pint there....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course Bush's election is not certain.  Nothing in politics ever is.  That's why most of us on this board enjoy the game of presidential politics like we do.  Lots of twists and turns.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, I estimate Bush reelection chances at something like 70-80%. I think that the most likely thing to happen is that a few states, which were either very close the last time or have other reasons for changing hand, change hands, like West Virginia, New Hampshire and Nevada for the Reps and Iowa, Wisconsin, New Mexico and Oregon for the Dems.

Bush isn't going to carry Nevada. They're still pissed about nuclear waste being buried there.

yeah, it would. But definitely for another candidate.

[Gustaf]

Delta, I know something about Texas politics and trust me, Humphrey would not have come close to carrying Texas without help from Wallace.  Humphrey carried the state by a mere 39,000 votes.  Exit polls in that election indicated that as high as 70% of Wallace's 584,000 Texas votes would have gone to the more conservative Nixon in a two man race.

As far as West Virginia goes, I don't consider that part of the 11 state conferderacy.  It broke apart from Virginia in 1863 to side with the North.  Call it a border state if you care to.

As far as the national Democrats standing on principle in the South and not being "Bush lite", well McGovern tried that in the South in 72.  He lost every Southern state by anywhere from 33 to 51 points.  Principle is fine, but it doesn't wash with Southern voters when it comes to going against their beliefs.  Dean with anyone on the ticket will be buried in the South.  You have to be realistic.  I'd love to believe that my side will be competitive in Massachusetts or Rhode Island but it just aint gonna happen.

Btw, I have a little stupid question. You are using a lot of geographical terms (Midwest, Southwest, Northeast, etc) and though I have been trying hard I have been unable to find a clear definition of them. Is there a universally accepted definition of these regions at all? Especially the Midwest seem to vary a lot. Could anyone help me out here?

[agcatter]

Not a stupid question at all.  There are some states that just don't fit neatly into categories - W. Virginia is one of those states.  For example, I've seen states like W Virginia and Kentucky classified as the "South".  Usually, W. Virginia, Kentucky, Maryland, and Mo. are considered "border states".  Fact is, these states share characteristics that set them apart from the South - smaller black populations, the fact that none were part of the confederacy during the Civil War etc.

For purposes of presidential politics, I prefer the following region labels:

Northeast - includes Pa
Border states - 4 states named above
South - 11 states of old Confederacy
Plains states (or farm states)
Midwest - includes Mich, Ohio,
Southwest - NM, Arizona, Nev
Mountain states
West Coast - all three west coast states

I guess where we get into trouble is due to the fact that there is no universal view of what exact states actually constitute a given region.  We all know generally, but some states on the outer reaches of a given region just don't fit neatly.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

There is no official standard, different agencies and entities use these terms to describe regions that fit whatever their needs are -- including or excluding states to equalize population, adding additional sub-regions, etc.  There are also several states that share the geographic and cultural characteristics of two or more regions.  What region something is in usually depends on how many ways you want to divide the country.

If you want to divide the country into two regions, you could do so by splitting the country east and west of the Mississippi river.  Three regions will usually get you North of the Ohio River, South of the Ohio River and West of the Mississippi river.  

Four regions looks something like this - which is the Republican National Committee's states associations:



You'll generally cover all your bases with around nine regions -- which I would define as:



There are plenty of things to disagree over and of course several states could easily be changed from one to the other.

[© tweed]

I disagree with that map.

Florida is not the deep south-most of Florida's residents are originally from another area.  Florida's the south.
West Virginia is the midwest.
Missouri is the midwest.
Alaska is the northwest, Hawaii the southwest.
And I guess the list goes on and on.

How do you post images at this forum?

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Florida probably is more south than deep south but I think that Missouri could definately fit in either and there is certainly a north/south split in the state.  West Virginia could also be in both.

(BTW, I did have Alaska as NW and Hawaii as SW and they have the appropriate colors, but I'm using Dave's map so they are in the same place they are on all the other maps)

You post images by using img in-between brackets at the beginning of the image URL and a /img in-between brackets at the end.  See the "help" at the top of the page and click on posting for instructions.  Of course you would need access to a web server in order to post your own images.

[© tweed]

Okay, thanks.

[Gustaf]

Well, thank you agcat and Don, though it only took three posters to disagree...

The Midwest seem to vary rather a lot.

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

Florida probably is more south than deep south but I think that Missouri could definately fit in either and there is certainly a north/south split in the state.  West Virginia could also be in both.

(BTW, I did have Alaska as NW and Hawaii as SW and they have the appropriate colors, but I'm using Dave's map so they are in the same place they are on all the other maps)

You post images by using img in-between brackets at the beginning of the image URL and a /img in-between brackets at the end.  See the "help" at the top of the page and click on posting for instructions.  Of course you would need access to a web server in order to post your own images.

When continuing a thread, how can I quote only a portion of someone's post/thread to elaborate only on the point(s) I want to?

[© tweed]

Well, when you choose to quote somebody, you can edit their posts.  Look in between the quote and /quote to find their post.

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

Well, when you choose to quote somebody, you can edit their posts.  Look in between the quote and /quote to find their post.

Thanks

[© tweed]

I surprised that you understood what I wrote.  

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

I surprised that you understood what I wrote.  

And what do you mean by that?

[© tweed]

I worded what I said strangley, I thought it might be hard to interpret.

[Demrepdan]

Dean should win the nomination

You've said that like a HUNDRED times in a bunch of other threads!!

Why don't you just put it in your ing signature, that way EVERYONE knows you're a Dean supporter, and you don't have to clutter the boards with your redundant "I like Dean, Dean is good, Dean is cool, Dean should win" posts, like a 10 year old!

[© tweed]

How do you know he isn't a 10 year old?

[jravnsbo]

West Virginia would not be in the South in normal talk nowadays.  Most obvious one I think.  

[Mr. Fresh]

Dean should win the nomination

You've said that like a HUNDRED times in a bunch of other threads!!

Why don't you just put it in your ing signature, that way EVERYONE knows you're a Dean supporter, and you don't have to clutter the boards with your redundant "I like Dean, Dean is good, Dean is cool, Dean should win" posts, like a 10 year old!

Don't encourage him, he just might put it in his sig, then keep doing it, he's done it twice already since you said that!

[jravnsbo]

mr pres, doesn't have ANY SUBSTANCE to back up his blanket support.  

I don't vcare if you are GOP, Dem , Green or whatever, but be able to back it up will gain you respect at least.