Latest PresidentElect 2004 Electoral Vote Analysis-- Bush 286, Kerry 252

PresidentElect.org ^ | 2/10/04 | WoodlandsTXFreeper

[not_apathetic_anymore]

won or lost in the Great Lakes states.

Or {{{{{shudder}}}}} FLA again. All it would take is for that leaning R state to go D. I"m not sure I could take a FLA repeat.

[swarthyguy]

The Democratic Base, (shall we refer to them as "alQaieda" from now on?) is perhaps as fired up as Republicans were in 2000, if not more, after the Clinton years.

And the case for W's triumphs need to be made in a far more coherent fashion - Libya, Khan/Pak, Iraq(kurdistan).

At the same time, some formulation that highlights the Democrat weakness in foreign policy, needs to be made.
A strategy for dealiing with wahhabi saudi fascism and the madrassas that have infected the world with their money needs to be made.

This is the stuff of Shakespearean drama; a President faced with a Gordian knot of business connections to prominent Saudi familes, a familial connection between the Bushes and binLadins, a long history of involvement between the two countries in the critical phases of the ColdWar, a long relationship encompassing defence, mutual investements and strategic interests with both parties thinking their outwitting the other.

But that's for me. To the country, the whole terror/proliferation issue is on the backburner. He needs to make it front and center.

Unless the predictions of job growths come true and we get 3-4 million new jobs by the end of the year as recently predicted.

The election will be tighter than a virgin Saudi princess.

Advocates of Bush who claim people's votes are wanted or needed may come to regret those sentiments.

[swarthyguy]

Advocates of Bush who claim people's votes are wanted or needed may come to regret those sentiments.

Advocates of Bush who claim people's votes are NOT wanted or needed may come to regret those sentiments.

[BlackRazor]

MN, WI, and OR? were the very close ones that went Gore's way

It's true that those states were very close, but they were also three of Nader's best states (he polled 5.2%, 3.6% and 5.0% in those states, respectively). If the Nader people in those states vote Dem in 2004, then Bush has to make up a bit more ground than the Gore-Bush differential might indicate.

[WhiteGuy]

Ohio............................

Ohioans are PO'd at the gop leadership in the state.

Taxes and fees have jumped and the state is run by the republicans.

In the state capital, Cowlumbus, the gop couldn't even field a candidate to run against a very liberal mayor.

Ohio will be a fight.

[mwl1]

If we carpetbomb OH, MI, PA, MN and WI, there is no way the RATS can win.

[WhiteGuy]

Hey give me a heads-up so I can leave..............

Thanks a bunch

[BlackRazor]

Ohio will be a fight.

I'm especially worried about Ohio. Bush only outpolled Gore/Nader by 1.0% there in 2000, and that's before all those other problematic items that you mentioned...

[NeoCaveman]

Good point about Nader. Without a spoiler those states will be tough nuts to crack.

Although MN has been trending Republican, but the Dems still do very good Get Out the Vote plus vote fraud.

[hchutch]

I agree. I see Bush also taking New Hampshire, plus Oregon and Wisconsin (he was within a few thousand votes in the latter two states). That's another 22 electoral votes for Bush (NH 4, OR 7, WI 11). Minnesota could also go to Bush for another 10 votes.

That gives Bush a 318 to 220 Electoral College win. That will probably be where I would call it, given that he will be more likely to focus on winning more seats in the House and Senate.

[Remole]

Great graphic. Makes me think that Kerry for VP will choose someone from Rust Belt or Great Lakes or Upper Midwest. My guess is Evan Bayh. Or the current governor of Pennsylvania.

[BlackRazor]

I see Bush also taking New Hampshire, plus Oregon and Wisconsin (he was within a few thousand votes in the latter two states). That's another 22 electoral votes for Bush (NH 4, OR 7, WI 11). Minnesota could also go to Bush for another 10 votes.

See my post #44 re: OR, WI and MN. I do believe that Bush can be competitive in those states, and has a realistic chance of winning them. But I think it will be more difficult than the 2000 numbers might indicate.

[GigaDittos]

Why is this map color-reversed from 2000? Someone trying to be tricky by making some think the Blue (Dem) states are for Kerry.

[NeoCaveman]

Why is this map color-reversed from 2000? Someone trying to be tricky by making some think the Blue (Dem) states are for Kerry.

I've heard that the incumbent is in Blue, and Gore was considered the incumbent as his party has the White House. Of course, I have seen maps of various years with the colors reversed from time to time.

[GigaDittos]

It seems almost unfair that California can have 54 electoral votes. It's maddening that the Lib state has that much power. If it weren't for California, the Dems wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell ever.

[GigaDittos]

I'm just being half-serious.

[woodyinscc]

I hope he picks Rendell, this man reeks of the smoky back room deals, like the Daly, Huey Long regimes

[Remole]

You may be right--I don't live in Pennsylvania. But he provides qualities missing in JFK's persona and resume. He's an executive; he's a great interview; he's very comfortable on TV; he smiles naturally; media types like him; he can deliver the union vote, a very important thing for Penn, Ohio and Mich.

[hchutch]

Senator Kerry may yet have a Green Party nominee to deal with. Howard Dean is reportedly considering either an independent OR a Green Party run - there was a thread earlier.

Plus, there is a good risk that to prevent Dean from breaking off, Kerry will move further to the left. That pushes moderate voters away as well.

[SamAdams76]

The "leaning Kerry" states are all winnable for Bush, especially NH, MI and PA. Need a good turnout in those states to offset Nashua, Detroit and Philly.