2004 User Predictions - Discussion

[Lunar]

Read most of the latter part of the thread, and here are my predictions:



Dem - 275
Rep  - 263

Close ones being:



Dem- 231
Rep - 189
Tos  - 118

I think there will be a couple surprises,  so I made them CO and LA.  I'm expecting trends to continue, and unless Bush can bring up his dismal right-track and economics numbers, he's in for a close race.

I view a least one upset as a certainty, so I'm trying to guess where they will occur.

Anyway:

West

I can assure you all that California is in no danger of going Republican.  If anything, it's been getting more Democratic.   People don't necessarily credit any of Arnold's successes with a Republican success.

I have kept Oregon and Washington Democratic.  The population centers such as around Seattle are Democratic strongholds and I think that'll outweigh the rural vote.

Southwest

I think Bush will be dumping his campaign war chest in the Southwest, making it very difficult for Kerry to progress.  However, I think Colorado will be slightly ignored and Kerry will push hard with the Hispanic vote here.  We'll have to see.  I know most people can't see Colorado switching with New Mexico staying blue, but I suspect a surprise.

Midwest

I have Iowa switching to the GOP, but maybe I'll be wrong since it had a lot of attention from the Dems in the primaries.  I think Bush will focus here and make it swing over.

Minnesota stays Democratic, I don't see it switching in this election.

Ohio goes Republican.  I can't see Kerry winning this state for some reason.  Another one that will simply be overwhelmed by money, combined with an edge to the GOP over social issues.

Northeast

Both Maine and New Hampshire will go Kerry.  He's from the area and Bush's popularity in New England has been dropping.

Pennsylvania goes Democratic.  I think this will be one of the main focuses of the Dems and from reading other posts in the thread, Philidelphia is strongly Democratic and it's unlikely for the rural areas to overcome this.  I don't think social issues are as big of a deal here.

South

West Virginia goes Democratic.  A large number of lower-class and unionized voters will turn this state back to its old owners.  

I suspect Missouri and Arkansas will stay GOP.   Too much for the Dems to overcome.

Florida will stay Republican simply because of the huge amount of attention it's getting.  There is a large grass-roots movement for the GOP forming as well.

I chose Louisiana as my second upset.  With some Democratic trends in local elections (for Southerners, not Kerry-types I'll admit), and with a large Catholic population, I can see this switching by November.  

[Lunar]

Kerry might be able to "steal" a couple of Southern states with Edwards on the ticket.  I could see South Carolina putting Kerry over the top with this scenario, even though Kerry has minimal chances in the South.

I doubt South Carolina would put the Democrats over the top with Edwards on the top of the ticket, let alone the bottom.  I'd be surprised if Kerry chose him, mostly because everything Edwards has going for him (populist, charisma, Southern) mostly does nothing if he's only a VP.  

Kerry would do best by choosing a VP from either the Southwest or Midwest, as those regions are most likely to switch over with a small boost from a VP from the region.

This dicussion of likely VP candidates seems pretty cool:
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/pres_veep2.htm
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/pres_veep2-table.htm

I disagree with them about Wes Clark and Max Cleland (opposite views on both), but still interesting.

[Lunar]

I think Kerry was born in Colorado. If I had to pick a state that almost everyone thinks is safe, and put it in the other column, I would pick Colorado too.

Just checked and that's correct.  Not quite Bush's situation in his birthplace (Connecticut) so he might be able to push that in Colorado if he does it right.

[Lunar]

I know, I know.  But I think it will give him a few votes if he can appear to be more regional than Bush.

[Lunar]

Yeah I'm not sure about LA either, but I think there is a reasonable chance and I want to take a gamble, heh.  All depends on how Kerry plays the cards he has at the moment.

[Lunar]

Probably because you have Bush winning every swing state and then some (except West Virginia).  The election is going to be closer than that.

[Lunar]

I'm predicting some things will change between now and November, including some trends.

[Lunar]

[Lunar]

Kerry will never win in Colorado.

I think it has a chance to be up for grabs depending on how the next 8 months go, you don't.  We differ!

[Lunar]

Updated my prediction to include New Mexico under Kerry.  I think he'll manage to keep hold of it.

[Lunar]

I don't necessarily see Bush being stronger areas like Michigan just because Richardson is on the ticket.  You make it seem like there would be a backlash or something.  If Kerry by himself can take a state then I think he's still probably safe with Richardson.

[Lunar]

FL could go either way but I'm guessing GOP and I don't think Richardson makes a difference there.

I don't know why you can say that Richardson would make a difference with Hispanics in the Southwest but not in Florida.

[Lunar]

Bush is going to win by a landslide, and their is nother you democrates can do about it.

Nothing like good, rational arguments!  Even the GOP is preparing for a close race.  Unless some miracle happens, like discovering Kerry has some skeletons in his closet, or war starting with China, that's very unlikely based on all of the polling trends.  I've heard that Bush's polls are the lowest of any incumbant who's been reelected in history at that point in time (a month ago).

Believing that Bush's sweat is holy and that Kerry is a cross between Stalin and Satan, which is perfectly ok, doesn't force you to somehow believe that it'll be 70-30 in the end results.

[Lunar]

California?  California has been getting MORE liberal, not less.  Arnold isn't even campaigning for Bush (because Bush refuses to give us any money, or at least the same amount as  before, I think).  The hands-off approach of the federal government towards Enron, both while they were butchering our economy and the relaxed approach towards the prosecution doesn't help.

You sure you don't want to give Vermont and DC to him as well as Illinois and California?

[Lunar]

So, maybe something like this, if Kerry's LUCKY?!



I think you're out of touch.  You automatically (and falsely) assume everyone will adopt your view of Kerry (even though your view is probably right).

[Lunar]

Bush getting 500+ EV's is more likely than Kerry getting 500+.

That doesn't make that or a 400+ scenario LIKELY.

[Lunar]

Looking at the recent ones:

****
http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/GENERAL/CAMPAIGN/2004/pred04.php?action=indpred&id=2736

Kerry with 80+ in Oklahoma and North Dakota, and picks up Kentucky, but loses California, Maryland, and Vermont.  Among other things..

****
http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/GENERAL/CAMPAIGN/2004/pred04.php?action=indpred&id=2737

Kerry picks up ALL of the Deep South, but loses Oregon.  Picks up Ohio, but loses Pensylvania and Wisconsin.

****
http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/GENERAL/CAMPAIGN/2004/pred04.php?action=indpred&id=2732

Hey, another serious person having the Dems pick up Louisiana, and CO as a toss woohah.  But he has Oklahoma, Indiana, and Montana as toss-ups, err...

****

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/GENERAL/CAMPAIGN/2004/pred04.php?action=indpred&id=2730

A Frenchman posted this, saying he'd like this scenario and referring to Americans as "a band of morons" and has Kerry picking up the ENTIRE Deep South.

[Lunar]

Interesting.  I think a Rustbelt guy is more likely for the VP, since a Democratic Ohio would be the most direct way for victory.  However, Richardson is still a likely possibility.

I question how many of those guys were going to default on the Democratic party if it's a  White vs White race though.  Also, since Richardson is only half-Mexican, will hopefully never visit the state if he's chosen, and will only be at the bottom of the ticket, this effect in the article might not exist.

[Lunar]

I can't see Kerry picking up West Virginia if Bush stomps him in Washington, New Hampshire, the entire Midwest, and two other battleground steel states (Ohio and Pen).  And do you have Maryland at 40%?  

[Lunar]

Only one new recent of note:

****

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/GENERAL/CAMPAIGN/2004/pred04.php?action=indpred&id=2768

Not even sure what the hell this is.  Kerry wins from Texas to Maryland, sweeping the South, and Bush getting everything else?  On top of that, every state except 8 are tossups (those 8 including New Hampshire, Ohio, and West Virginia).

****

[Lunar]

But every state a Toss?  Ok.

[Lunar]

I wanted an unusual scenario and it's easier to find reasons why Kerry would have a chance with them than some of the other predicted "solid" states.  It all depends on how Kerry plays his cards.

I don't actually view this as the most "likely" of scenarios, but I believe it could be one.

Analysis of Colorado:
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/election/article/0,1299,DRMN_36_2783338,00.html

I don't view the South as solid as many people do.  While Gore lost the entire thing, Clinton picked up from Louisiana up through Missouri and Kentucky both times.  While Kerry isn't a Southerner, he is Catholic and Catholic Louisiana might be Democratic enough to toss him a bit over the top.  


Of course, you can find a reason in any state why George Bush or Kerry will surely pick it up, but I think there is a possibility here this far back (will change as we get closer).  Everything is as solid as apple sauce at this point and it's more fun than a scenario that has Kerry picking up New Hampshire but losing Iowa, heh.

[Lunar]

****
http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/GENERAL/CAMPAIGN/2004/pred04.php?action=indpred&id=2794

Interesting, Bush gets New Jersey, Pensylvania, & California but Kerry gets Colorado, Ohio, Louisiana and Tennessee.

Version 3 of his map is the coolest:



269 - 269, hah.  Version 4 has Kerry losing New York and chunks of New England but gaining the South and the Heartland.


****

[Lunar]

Boss Tweed, I still question why WV is Democratic on your map.  It seems if Bush can take Pennsylvania and hold onto New Hampshire and Ohio and then surge enough to take Michigan and the Midwest, he'd be high enough to hold onto West Virginia.

[Lunar]

It has a very strong Republican edge.  This means that if Kerry spends here, Bush will counter that and make Kerry's spending almost useless.

 I think at the point where Kerry picks up TN he has the rest of the battleground states already in the bag, so there will be very little reason for him to focus there.  And because he's not focusing there, it goes Bush.  Hah.