Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 17, 2020, 06:02:38 pm
News: 2020 U.S. Senate Predictions are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 User Predictions - Discussion
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28 29 30 ... 99 Print
Author Topic: 2004 User Predictions - Discussion  (Read 824720 times)
DarthKosh
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 902


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #600 on: January 13, 2004, 01:44:44 pm »

Bush couldn't win New York...he would only beat sharpton here by 8-10% and might lose to Kucinich, so dean would win it by over 15% easily.

We shall see.
Bush lost NY 60-35% in 2000.  A 25% swing to bush is unrealistic.
12.5%
You know what I mean.
Or the can be a strong third party on the left that could make that number less.  Smiley
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #601 on: January 13, 2004, 01:46:43 pm »

Bush couldn't win New York...he would only beat sharpton here by 8-10% and might lose to Kucinich, so dean would win it by over 15% easily.

We shall see.
Bush lost NY 60-35% in 2000.  A 25% swing to bush is unrealistic.
12.5%
You know what I mean.
Or the can be a strong third party on the left that could make that number less.  Smiley
Nader polled 3.7% here.
Logged
Mort from NewYawk
MortfromNewYawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 399


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #602 on: January 13, 2004, 01:49:43 pm »

Bush couldn't win New York...he would only beat sharpton here by 8-10% and might lose to Kucinich, so dean would win it by over 15% easily.

We shall see.
Bush lost NY 60-35% in 2000.  A 25% swing to bush is unrealistic.
True, Bush lost badly to Gore in NY, but take a look at the last two times the Democrats nominated a liberal:

            National                    New York
1988    GOP by 8%               Dems by 4%
1984    GOP by 18%             GOP by 8%

So the GOP would need a 10-12% margin over a Dean nationwide to run a dead heat in NY.
Logged
DarthKosh
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 902


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #603 on: January 13, 2004, 01:49:51 pm »

Bush couldn't win New York...he would only beat sharpton here by 8-10% and might lose to Kucinich, so dean would win it by over 15% easily.

We shall see.
Bush lost NY 60-35% in 2000.  A 25% swing to bush is unrealistic.
12.5%
You know what I mean.
Or the can be a strong third party on the left that could make that number less.  Smiley
Nader polled 3.7% here.
He may poll better this year.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #604 on: January 13, 2004, 01:56:43 pm »

Bush couldn't win New York...he would only beat sharpton here by 8-10% and might lose to Kucinich, so dean would win it by over 15% easily.

We shall see.
Bush lost NY 60-35% in 2000.  A 25% swing to bush is unrealistic.
True, Bush lost badly to Gore in NY, but take a look at the last two times the Democrats nominated a liberal:

            National                    New York
1988    GOP by 8%               Dems by 4%
1984    GOP by 18%             GOP by 8%

So the GOP would need a 10-12% margin over a Dean nationwide to run a dead heat in NY.
But in both of those years cited, Reagan was a major influence and the state had gone Republican in the previous Presidential election.
Logged
DarthKosh
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 902


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #605 on: January 13, 2004, 02:00:07 pm »

Bush couldn't win New York...he would only beat sharpton here by 8-10% and might lose to Kucinich, so dean would win it by over 15% easily.

We shall see.
Bush lost NY 60-35% in 2000.  A 25% swing to bush is unrealistic.
True, Bush lost badly to Gore in NY, but take a look at the last two times the Democrats nominated a liberal:

            National                    New York
1988    GOP by 8%               Dems by 4%
1984    GOP by 18%             GOP by 8%

So the GOP would need a 10-12% margin over a Dean nationwide to run a dead heat in NY.
But in both of those years cited, Reagan was a major influence and the state had gone Republican in the previous Presidential election.
If Dean pisses the middle off New York may come into play.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #606 on: January 13, 2004, 02:10:15 pm »

Bush couldn't win New York...he would only beat sharpton here by 8-10% and might lose to Kucinich, so dean would win it by over 15% easily.

We shall see.
Bush lost NY 60-35% in 2000.  A 25% swing to bush is unrealistic.
True, Bush lost badly to Gore in NY, but take a look at the last two times the Democrats nominated a liberal:

            National                    New York
1988    GOP by 8%               Dems by 4%
1984    GOP by 18%             GOP by 8%

So the GOP would need a 10-12% margin over a Dean nationwide to run a dead heat in NY.
But in both of those years cited, Reagan was a major influence and the state had gone Republican in the previous Presidential election.
If Dean pisses the middle off New York may come into play.
I wouldn't count on it.
Logged
DarthKosh
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 902


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #607 on: January 13, 2004, 02:12:12 pm »

Bush couldn't win New York...he would only beat sharpton here by 8-10% and might lose to Kucinich, so dean would win it by over 15% easily.

We shall see.
Bush lost NY 60-35% in 2000.  A 25% swing to bush is unrealistic.
True, Bush lost badly to Gore in NY, but take a look at the last two times the Democrats nominated a liberal:

            National                    New York
1988    GOP by 8%               Dems by 4%
1984    GOP by 18%             GOP by 8%

So the GOP would need a 10-12% margin over a Dean nationwide to run a dead heat in NY.
But in both of those years cited, Reagan was a major influence and the state had gone Republican in the previous Presidential election.
If Dean pisses the middle off New York may come into play.
I wouldn't count on it.
You never know politcs can be unpredictable.
Logged
Mort from NewYawk
MortfromNewYawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 399


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #608 on: January 13, 2004, 02:12:24 pm »

Dean is already alienating hordes of moderate Democrats, and the Bush campaign is showing it's strategy of winning them over in NY, NJ, and CT (see today's NY Times op-ed piece by Christie Whitman, "The Vital Republican Center").
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #609 on: January 13, 2004, 02:14:39 pm »

Bush couldn't win New York...he would only beat sharpton here by 8-10% and might lose to Kucinich, so dean would win it by over 15% easily.

We shall see.
Bush lost NY 60-35% in 2000.  A 25% swing to bush is unrealistic.
True, Bush lost badly to Gore in NY, but take a look at the last two times the Democrats nominated a liberal:

            National                    New York
1988    GOP by 8%               Dems by 4%
1984    GOP by 18%             GOP by 8%

So the GOP would need a 10-12% margin over a Dean nationwide to run a dead heat in NY.
But in both of those years cited, Reagan was a major influence and the state had gone Republican in the previous Presidential election.
If Dean pisses the middle off New York may come into play.
I wouldn't count on it.
You never know politcs can be unpredictable.
but it CAN be predicted accurately.
Logged
DarthKosh
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 902


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #610 on: January 13, 2004, 02:15:04 pm »

Bush couldn't win New York...he would only beat sharpton here by 8-10% and might lose to Kucinich, so dean would win it by over 15% easily.

We shall see.
Bush lost NY 60-35% in 2000.  A 25% swing to bush is unrealistic.
True, Bush lost badly to Gore in NY, but take a look at the last two times the Democrats nominated a liberal:

            National                    New York
1988    GOP by 8%               Dems by 4%
1984    GOP by 18%             GOP by 8%

So the GOP would need a 10-12% margin over a Dean nationwide to run a dead heat in NY.
But in both of those years cited, Reagan was a major influence and the state had gone Republican in the previous Presidential election.
If Dean pisses the middle off New York may come into play.
I wouldn't count on it.
You never know politcs can be unpredictable.
but it CAN be predicted accurately.
Depends on the race.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,936
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #611 on: January 13, 2004, 03:00:48 pm »

NY was stronger for Gore than TX was for Bush.
You lot really need to learn how to read polls; based on those numbers the Dem would get 55-60%, with Bush on 35-40%

By all means target CT and NJ, but NY is a no-no.
Logged
nclib
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,928
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #612 on: January 13, 2004, 03:31:16 pm »

Bush couldn't win New York...he would only beat sharpton here by 8-10% and might lose to Kucinich, so dean would win it by over 15% easily.

We shall see.
Bush lost NY 60-35% in 2000.  A 25% swing to bush is unrealistic.
True, Bush lost badly to Gore in NY, but take a look at the last two times the Democrats nominated a liberal:

            National                    New York
1988    GOP by 8%               Dems by 4%
1984    GOP by 18%             GOP by 8%

So the GOP would need a 10-12% margin over a Dean nationwide to run a dead heat in NY.

In 1984 and 1988 social issues were of less importance than they are now. When economic issues are the focus, NY leans Dem but is competitive. With the focus on social issues, NY is strongly Dem. Dean would only lose NY in a McGovern/Mondale landslide.
Logged
Mort from NewYawk
MortfromNewYawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 399


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #613 on: January 13, 2004, 04:34:30 pm »

Bush couldn't win New York...he would only beat sharpton here by 8-10% and might lose to Kucinich, so dean would win it by over 15% easily.

We shall see.
Bush lost NY 60-35% in 2000.  A 25% swing to bush is unrealistic.
True, Bush lost badly to Gore in NY, but take a look at the last two times the Democrats nominated a liberal:

            National                    New York
1988    GOP by 8%               Dems by 4%
1984    GOP by 18%             GOP by 8%

So the GOP would need a 10-12% margin over a Dean nationwide to run a dead heat in NY.

In 1984 and 1988 social issues were of less importance than they are now. When economic issues are the focus, NY leans Dem but is competitive. With the focus on social issues, NY is strongly Dem. Dean would only lose NY in a McGovern/Mondale landslide.
In 2004, response to 9/11 is the new prominent issue.

A lot of otherwise liberal NY City voters can't support a Dean, who has already staked out an anti-war stance. Lieberman is polling second here, and many of his supporters are not going over to Dean.

On a related issue, Israel supporters here were listening when Dean said we "shouldn't take sides in the Middle East".

I agree that Dean would lose NY only if the Dems go down big, but I think that just a little worse than Dukakis would do it.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #614 on: January 13, 2004, 04:47:04 pm »

<<On a related issue, Israel supporters here were listening when Dean said we "shouldn't take sides in the Middle East".>>
I'm Jewish, and I am not offended by the remark and do not know anyone who is.  I'm sure some people are though.
Logged
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #615 on: January 13, 2004, 05:51:23 pm »

Dean does have that problem with Jewish voters.  Also with Jewish voters, one would imagine theey always want a President that is Strong on the defense of Israel or at least protectionist of them.  Does Dean fit that bill?  He was againbst getting rid of Saddam, which did make ISrael safer.  No more Scuds coming there way or tyrannt paying for suicide bombers.  Also Bush has been taken the game right at the enemies of Israel and would definately be seen as strong.  

Not sure about NY, but I'm sure this will help him among Jewish voters.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #616 on: January 13, 2004, 06:09:11 pm »

Dean does have that problem with Jewish voters.  Also with Jewish voters, one would imagine theey always want a President that is Strong on the defense of Israel or at least protectionist of them.  Does Dean fit that bill?  He was againbst getting rid of Saddam, which did make ISrael safer.  No more Scuds coming there way or tyrannt paying for suicide bombers.  Also Bush has been taken the game right at the enemies of Israel and would definately be seen as strong.  

Not sure about NY, but I'm sure this will help him among Jewish voters.
I think The Jewish voting population is distributed this way:

25%: Vote exlcusively on Israeli issues.
25%: Vote somewhat on Israeli Issues.
50%: Vote mostly on American Issues.

So dean would probably win the Jewish vote 60-35% or so.
Logged
NHPolitico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #617 on: January 13, 2004, 09:25:47 pm »

Dean does have that problem with Jewish voters.  Also with Jewish voters, one would imagine theey always want a President that is Strong on the defense of Israel or at least protectionist of them.  Does Dean fit that bill?  He was againbst getting rid of Saddam, which did make ISrael safer.  No more Scuds coming there way or tyrannt paying for suicide bombers.  Also Bush has been taken the game right at the enemies of Israel and would definately be seen as strong.  

Not sure about NY, but I'm sure this will help him among Jewish voters.

Like Lieberman said, "If Dean had his way, Saddam would be in power, not in prison."
Logged
NHPolitico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #618 on: January 13, 2004, 09:32:10 pm »

Dean does have that problem with Jewish voters.  Also with Jewish voters, one would imagine theey always want a President that is Strong on the defense of Israel or at least protectionist of them.  Does Dean fit that bill?  He was againbst getting rid of Saddam, which did make ISrael safer.  No more Scuds coming there way or tyrannt paying for suicide bombers.  Also Bush has been taken the game right at the enemies of Israel and would definately be seen as strong.  

Not sure about NY, but I'm sure this will help him among Jewish voters.
I think The Jewish voting population is distributed this way:

25%: Vote exlcusively on Israeli issues.
25%: Vote somewhat on Israeli Issues.
50%: Vote mostly on American Issues.

So dean would probably win the Jewish vote 60-35% or so.

Sadly, I think you're lowballing it. I'd put Bush's support among Jewish voters at about 25%.  Still, that's better than in 2000, if I recall.
Logged
NHPolitico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #619 on: January 13, 2004, 09:33:17 pm »

<<On a related issue, Israel supporters here were listening when Dean said we "shouldn't take sides in the Middle East".>>
I'm Jewish, and I am not offended by the remark and do not know anyone who is.  I'm sure some people are though.


How about calling members of Hamas "soldiers"?
Logged
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #620 on: January 13, 2004, 09:37:47 pm »

Disgraceful-- I have a few other names for them, like murderous terrostic thugs to be nice!


<<On a related issue, Israel supporters here were listening when Dean said we "shouldn't take sides in the Middle East".>>
I'm Jewish, and I am not offended by the remark and do not know anyone who is.  I'm sure some people are though.


How about calling members of Hamas "soldiers"?
Logged
Mort from NewYawk
MortfromNewYawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 399


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #621 on: January 13, 2004, 11:16:44 pm »

<<On a related issue, Israel supporters here were listening when Dean said we "shouldn't take sides in the Middle East".>>
I'm Jewish, and I am not offended by the remark and do not know anyone who is.  I'm sure some people are though.

Miami, I can't see why anyone would take offense, particularly because I wasn't "codifying" all Jews as Israel supporters, which they are not. Perhaps I should clarify by saying that I'm a Jew who turned off to Dean as soon as I heard the Middle East remark.
Logged
Mort from NewYawk
MortfromNewYawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 399


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #622 on: January 13, 2004, 11:45:21 pm »

Dean does have that problem with Jewish voters.  Also with Jewish voters, one would imagine theey always want a President that is Strong on the defense of Israel or at least protectionist of them.  Does Dean fit that bill?  He was againbst getting rid of Saddam, which did make ISrael safer.  No more Scuds coming there way or tyrannt paying for suicide bombers.  Also Bush has been taken the game right at the enemies of Israel and would definately be seen as strong.  

Not sure about NY, but I'm sure this will help him among Jewish voters.
There's no question that if the contest is Bush-Dean, there will never be a starker contrast between two candidates on the issue of support for Israel.

The rise in anti-Semitism on the European left is another reason that more Jews are feeling uncomfortable with Euro-American multilateralism on matters regarding the Middle East.

I'd say that if the Democrat is anti-war or has a muddy position, we're going to see an accelerated erosion of the Democratic Jewish vote. With two million Jews in New York City, that's gotta matter.
Logged
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #623 on: January 13, 2004, 11:47:34 pm »

Also in FL, which seems to be getting better all the time for President Bush.


Dean does have that problem with Jewish voters.  Also with Jewish voters, one would imagine theey always want a President that is Strong on the defense of Israel or at least protectionist of them.  Does Dean fit that bill?  He was againbst getting rid of Saddam, which did make ISrael safer.  No more Scuds coming there way or tyrannt paying for suicide bombers.  Also Bush has been taken the game right at the enemies of Israel and would definately be seen as strong.  

Not sure about NY, but I'm sure this will help him among Jewish voters.
There's no question that if the contest is Bush-Dean, there will never be a starker contrast between two candidates on the issue of support for Israel.

The rise in anti-Semitism on the European left is another reason that more Jews are feeling uncomfortable with Euro-American multilateralism on matters regarding the Middle East.

I'd say that if the Democrat is anti-war or has a muddy position, we're going to see an accelerated erosion of the Democratic Jewish vote. With two million Jews in New York City, that's gotta matter.
Logged
japple
Newbie
*
Posts: 1


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #624 on: January 14, 2004, 12:30:34 am »
« Edited: January 14, 2004, 01:02:23 am by japple »

This early in the process, I can only look at past results. States that voted Republican 4 out of the past 5 elections are worth 207 electoral votes. I'm calling this Bush's base. States he carried in 2000 are currently worth 278 - a razor thin victory. Add states that he lost by less than 5% brings him to 338. That's what I think he'll need to be considered a solid victory. States he lost in '00 where I think he's got the best shot are MN, IA, PA and NM.

My home state of MN hasn't voted Republican in a long time, but in every case there was a Minnesotan on the ballot or there was a strong Democratic
candidate. It was VERY close in '84 and '00. A solid effort by Bush - and his volunteers - in '04 will give him the state. Republicans regularily win state-wide elections here, but it's usually close - Senate and Governor in 2002.

With no Senate or Governor race, and no competative House races this year, Minnesota is going to be all about turn-out.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28 29 30 ... 99 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC