Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

To: JNB
and also, this caused black turn out to surge to record levels in 2000 as well

It showed in Detroit, Southfield, Flint, Saginaw, Lansing.

the Bush DUI revelations had in the last days before the election. This in itself probably shifted at least 1% of the vote nationally, and the impact in the MidWest was probably 2-3% in some areas

The DUI probably heavily hit with the Soccer Moms AND the Macomb types. Bush did poorly in Canton(52% win - should be 55-60) and lost Macomb, the Reagan Dem county. Lost Suburban Oakland as well(Soutfield mainly)

8 posted on 06/27/2003 8:18:11 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan ("Say Hey! Hey! Damn Yankee!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: Dan from Michigan
I think the DUI story mattered. Am I the only one who noticed that that story broke and hour or so before Perot was on Larry King endorsing Bush? Perot had staunchly refused to say in advance who he would endorse, the interview with King was being hyped to heaven. I know Perot's creds have gone way down since '92, but I think he does (or did) still have people who listened to him. I think as the day wore on and Gore & Co. got no advance notice of an endorsement, they decided it was time to pull the trigger on the DUI thing, to drawn Perot out.

Another thing that happened was that the Green Party vote imploded over that last weekend. The polls were showing Nader has making a significant different right up until the election day, and then it all evaporated. I think a lot of tree huggers got into the voting booth, and just couldn't bring themselves to vote for Nader, because they knew it would help Bush.

Finally, there was Buchanan. People talk a lot about how Nader cost Gore the election, but no one mentions that in a number of those states Gore won by 1% or less, Buchanan's votes would have made the difference, if they had been cast for Bush. Now of course, not ALL of them would have been, if Buchanan hadn't run -- some would have stayed home. But the same is true of Nader. At the moment, I don't see any likelihood of an independent conservative candidate as strong (relatively speaking) as Buchanan, and that could tip some of the 1% states back to Bush.

And there's always incumbency. Figure it to be good for 1% to 5%, depending on the state and the circumstances in the country and the world on election day. I think right now Bush has to be the favorite, but it will still be close, and we could lose if we don't get out there and fight.

9 posted on 06/28/2003 1:16:12 AM PDT by Brandon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson