Skip to comments.Electoral College Breakdown, Installment One
Posted on 02/19/2004 8:45:25 AM PST by DalesEdited on 02/19/2004 10:36:05 AM PST by Lead Moderator. [history]
Due to popular demand, I am going to revive my poll tracking and analysis that I did during the 2000 election season. I will be starting things a bit differently this year. Instead of starting off with a comprehensive overview of the entire nation, I am going to start by looking at five states at a time. For the first installment, the random state generator presented me with North Dakota, Maine, Alabama, New Mexico, and Vermont.
|Electoral Votes: 3|
Background: North Dakota is always a problematic state for my poll tracking, in that it is so rarely, if ever, polled. There are good reasons for this. It is a very small state, with only three electoral votes. It also is rarely competitive. The last time the Democrats won in North Dakota was when Lyndon Johnson trounced Barry Goldwater in 1964. Since then, Republican candidates have carried North Dakota by margins from a low of 7 points (Bob Dole against Bill Clinton) to a high of 38 points (Reagan against Carter). Obviously, George W. Bush had little problem with Al Gore last election cycle.
Polling Data: None available.
Punditry: There is zero chance that North Dakota will be a factor in this election. If the election is close nationwide, North Dakota will not be, and if North Dakota is then the nationwide election won't be. Safe Bush
|Electoral Votes: 4|
Background: Despite having only a single more electoral vote than tiny North Dakota, Maine gets a bit more attention due to its proximity to the media hotbeds in New England. However, it is rarely listed as a swing state for the coming election, which is a mistake. Bush lost to Gore by only 5 points last time, and over the past 10 elections it has split evenly between the parties. The best way to describe Maine is streaky, as those elections have been Democrats for two straight, Republicans for five straight, and now Democrats for the last three. Perhaps it is because Nader picked up 5% that people assume that Maine will be less competitive this time.
|3/03||Critical Insights||Link||600 RV||4.0||Bush||47%||Unnamed Democrat||36%|
|9/12-26/03||Critical Insights||Link||600 RV||4.0||Bush||36%||Unnamed Democrat||45%|
Punditry: Maine has been tracking the nationwide polls regarding Bush for quite some time now, generally with him lagging by a point or two here. If the election is close nationwide, expect this state to stay close, particularly if Kerry is the nominee. Despite being a New England state, Maine tends to vote for Democrats who are centrist and reject those who are perceived to be liberal. Slight Advantage Democrat.
|Electoral Votes: 9|
Background: Alabama has been a reliable GOP state, only straying twice since 1960; both times it went for a southerner. Jimmy Carter carried the state, as did George Wallace.
|4/27/03||USA Polling Group||Link||RV||5%||Bush||60%||Unnamed Democrat||30|
Punditry: This is another state, like North Dakota, which falls into the category of "if this one is close, the election is not". Bush will carry Alabama comfortably. Safe Bush.
|Electoral Votes: 5|
Background: No state, not even Florida, was closer in the last election than New Mexico. Prior to Clinton breaking through, the Republicans had carried the state for 6 consecutive elections, often by significant margins. Both times that Clinton carried New Mexico, the Perot vote played a significant factor. The strong showing Perot made here suggests that this is a state concerned with Mexico, both from an immigration perspective and from a jobs perspective.
|9/12/03||Research and Polling Inc. of Albuquerque||Link||400 RV||Bush||40%||Unnamed Democrat||43%|
Punditry: Simply on the basis of the close election results in 2000, New Mexico is going to be a state to keep an eye on, and the poll from last September indicates that it will still be a battle. I sense, however, that this state will be less friendly to the President this time around due to NAFTA, his immigration proposal, and the popularity of Democrat governor Bill Richardson. Slight Advantage Democrat.
|Electoral Votes: 3|
Background: Vermont went for Lyndon Johnson, then not for another Democrat until Bill Clinton. It has gone Democrat the last three elections (by 16, 22, and 10 points). Third party candidates are a factor in Vermont, even if they do not generally swing the state.
|10/02||Research 2000||Link||400 LV||5%||Bush||38%||Dean||50%|
|10/28/03||Research 2000||Link||600 LV||4%||Bush||46%||Dean||34%
Punditry: Vermont has changed dramatically since the days when Ronald Reagan had been carrying the state. The Republican voters there are loyal, but they are simply outnumbered. Safe Democrat.
|ND (3)||-||-||-||-||NM (5)||-||-||VT (3)|
|AL (9)||-||-||-||-||ME (4)||-||-||-|
|Undesignated electoral votes: 514|
Next installment: Colorado, Georgia, North Carolina, Montana, Massachusetts
Historical election data and graphics are located at Dave Leip's invaluable website.
I like seeing the individual states because that is how you have to plan the campaign...not on total nationwide vote.
In the last of those, posted 11/6, I had it as 227 electoral votes for Bush, with 178 for Gore and the rest tossups. When I factored in the tossups, I had Bush getting 276 electoral votes, Gore getting 239, with 23 electoral votes unassigned. In the one before that, posted 11/3, I had it as 209 apiece, with when I factored in the tossups it being 265 for Gore, 262 for Bush, with 11 completely unassigned.
It seems like only yesterday.
I am very much looking forward to your work.
If you have a ping list, put me on it.
This is going to be a nail biter!
The electors will make the difference again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.