In what part of America did John Kerry seriously underpeform expectations?

[Calthrina950]

Kerry improved on Gore's numbers in several large, traditionally Republican suburban counties that ultimately went Democratic in 2008 (Loudoun, Chester, DuPage, Wake, Jefferson/Arapahoe, CO). Keep in mind that in a time of war, one might expect the incumbent President to improve on his performance in these strongholds. So in that sense, I wouldn't say he underperformed in those places.

I would say that Kerry most underperformed expectations in some of the Clinton/Bush states that weren't seen as totally gone in 2004 like AR, TN, WV, MO. The latter two states in particular because Kerry did contest them on a small scale.

In both of these ways then, the 2004 election was effectively a continuation of the trends, beginning in the late 1980s, that have brought us to the stage where we are now. As we know, in 1988, Dukakis came within 3% of winning states like Vermont, Maryland, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and California, and flipped Washington, Oregon, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Hawaii permanently into the Democratic column. However, Bush did better than his national averages throughout the old Confederate states.

Through 1992 and 1996, as we know, Clinton flipped all of the Bush 3% or less states-and all except Pennsylvania came permanently into the Democratic column. He also made Delaware, Connecticut, and New Jersey Safe Democratic, Maine as well (up until 2012), and turned New Hampshire and Florida into tossup states. At the same time, however, Clinton slipped in the rural South and was unable to carry a majority of Southern states. Then of course, 2000 saw a major rural breakthrough for Bush, while Gore made yet more progress in urban and suburban areas. Both these trends continued in 2004.

You forgot to mention that Kerry did flip Fairfax County, Virginia, into the Democratic column, and Fairfax County has been a vital component of the Democratic ascendancy in that state.

[Calthrina950]

I mean he "only" won California by 9

Kerry underperformed in many solid blue states (compared to the Clintons, Gore, and Obama), which is really how Dubya won the popular vote.

It is astounding the number of solidly Democratic states where Bush came within single digits in 2004. Bush lost Oregon by 4%, New Jersey and Washington by 7%, Delaware by 8%, Hawaii by 9%, and California by slightly under 10%. He "only" lost Illinois and Maryland by around 10-12%, and managed to reach the 40% mark in New York, the last Republican to do so. And of course, Bush was within single digits in Michigan, Minnesota, Maine, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania as well, in addition to the other swing states that year.

[Calthrina950]

I mean he "only" won California by 9

Kerry underperformed in many solid blue states (compared to the Clintons, Gore, and Obama), which is really how Dubya won the popular vote.

It is astounding the number of solidly Democratic states where Bush came within single digits in 2004. Bush lost Oregon by 4%, New Jersey and Washington by 7%, Delaware by 8%, Hawaii by 9%, and California by slightly under 10%. He "only" lost Illinois and Maryland by around 10-12%, and managed to reach the 40% mark in New York, the last Republican to do so. And of course, Bush was within single digits in Michigan, Minnesota, Maine, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania as well, in addition to the other swing states that year.

Kerry really didnt underform by much in many of those states

OR PVI in 2004: Dem +6.6
OR PVI in 2016: Dem +8.9

NJ PVI in 2004: Dem +9.1
NJ PVI in 2016: Dem +12

DE PVI in 2004: Dem +10
DE PVI in 2016: Dem +9.3

Clinton and Gore had won New Jersey and Delaware by double digits in 1996/2000. You do have a point about Oregon, considering that it was very close in 2000 (because of Nader), and that Kerry won it by a wider margin than Gore had (4% as compared to 0.4%).