Electoral College Breakdown, Installment Four

Various

[Dales]

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 this fourth installment, the random state generator presented me with Wyoming, Delaware, Utah, Virginia, and New York.

---

Wyoming

Electoral Votes: 3

2000 Result

Bush 68%

Gore 28%

Background: Ross Perot took over a quarter of the vote during his first campaign, and Bush still carried the state. Ford almost got 60% here. This is about as Republican a state as you can get.

Polling Data: Finding polls for Wyoming is a challenge.

Punditry: Safe for Bush

---

Delaware

Electoral Votes: 3

2000 Result

Gore 55%

Bush 42%

Background: 2-2-1-3-3 is how Delaware has gone over the past 11 elections, with the Democrats currently having the upper hand. Gore's 54% was the highest by a Democrat here since Johnson took over 61%. The three years the Democrats have won here recently, the margins have been 14, 15, and 9. The three previous, the Republicans won by 13, 20, and 2 points, which is very comparable. Has the state changed, or have Democrats just taken advantage of circumstances?

Polling Data: None available.

Punditry: On the basis of the 12 point margin by which Gore won this state and the three election streak the Democrats are on, I am starting Delaware off in the Strong for Democrats category. If this state goes for Bush, it would be an early indication of an impending blowout.

---

Utah

Electoral Votes: 5

2000 Result

Bush 67%

Gore 26%

Background: You have to go back to Johnson to find a Democrat win here. Clinton came in third in his first election. This is Republican territory.

Polling Data: No polls available.

Punditry: Not too much to say. If Utah is of interest in this election, then Bush would have been Goldwatered. Safe for Bush.

---

Virginia

Electoral Votes: 13

2000 Result

Bush 52%

Gore 44%

Background: The Democrats have won here just once since Truman- when Johnson beat Goldwater. Despite the result dominance, the margins have been fairly competitive more times than not.

Polling Data:

Date	Polling Company	Link	Type	MOE	Republican		Democrat
12/3/03	Mason-Dixon	Link	LV	4	Bush	48%	Clark (top Dem in poll)	33%

Punditry: Virginia Leans for Bush, although it would not be surprising to see it move into the strong category over the course of the summer.

---

New York

Electoral Votes: 31

2000 Result

Gore 60%

Bush 35%

Background: From 1960 onward, Republicans have carried the Empire State only three times. Nixon beat McGovern, Reagan beat Carter, and Reagan beat Mondale. Even Dukakis won here.

Polling Data:

Date	Polling Company	Link	Type	MOE	Republican		Democrat
4/03	Marist	Link	RV	4%	Bush	32%	Unnamed Democrat	39%
9/23/03	Marist	Link	RV	4%	Bush	32%	Unnamed Democrat	48%
10/28/03	Quinnipiac	NA	RV	4%	Bush	42%	Kerry	50%
11/19/03	Zogby	Link	LV	4%	Bush	41%	Kerry	46%

Punditry: While I can see arguments for thinking California could be in play if things break the right way, I cannot see the same for New York. If New York is a consideration, then the Democrats have been McGoverened. That Zogby result reminds me of when he had Lazio up a point over Hillary the day before the election. Strong for Democrats.

---

Summary Table
	Bush					Democrat
	Safe	Strong	Lean	Slight	Tossup	Slight	Lean	Strong	Safe
	ND (3)	CO (9)	GA (15)	NV (5)	-	NM (5)	CA (55)	NY (31)	VT (3)
	AL (9)	SC (8)	NC (15)	FL (27)	-	ME (4)	-	DE (3)	MA (12)
	MT (3)	-	MO (11)	-	-	-	-	-	DC (3)
	WY (3)	-	VA (13)	-	-	-	-	-	-
	UT (5)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Designation Total:	23	17	54	32	-	9	55	34	18
Candidate Total:	99			41			107
Undesignated electoral votes: 291

---

Next installment: Kentucky, Michigan, Rhode Island, Idaho, and Alaska.

Historical election data are located at Dave Leip's invaluable website.

Installment One
Installment Two
Installment Three

[skip2myloo]

How can New York elect Schumer/Clinton and also 60% for Bush.

How can we explain South Dakota and Daschle ??

[Neets]

ECB Installment FOUR Ping.

[AntiGuv]

New York was 60% for Gore. That is a typo.

[Neets]

Ping

[not-alone]

great work

[rhombus]

New York was 60% for Gore. That is a typo.

I have a dream that it would go for Bush but alas, the Empire State is now firmly the Communist State.

[tphil913]

Knowing how NY determines its electoral votes, I'd have to say that your analysis of how New is going to go in the presidential election somewhat meaningless, unfortunately.

In New York, our electors are determined by our Assembly. They pick one elector for each district, and then the electors get together and cast their vote. The one who gets the majority of the votes gets the entire state.

Now here's the kicker: The electors do not have to vote based on the vote of their district. They can look at the results and follow the popular vote, but they can also vote ofr the best dressed, or the biggest ears as far as our election laws care.

IOW New Yorkers, your vote really doesn't mean anything when it comes to a Presidential election.

What would be much more interesting and useful in your analysis would be how each state picks it's electors, how they vote (Must follow their district, free for all, etc), and if the state is a "winner take all" state or not.

You might even be able to tell from that data whether a single large population center might unduly shift a state towards one candidate or not (Eg: NYC determines who New York goes to; Upstate NY is pretty much useless for determining political leanings).

[prisoner6]

Thanks Dales! I've been busy and missed the earlier installements so I have to go back and check 'em out. When I was putting a newscast together the other day I ran across information from DE that indicated a >slight< lean to W. I'll look backa nd see if I can dig up the atribution.

Then there was that redstates/bluestates thing the other day as well. I dodn't look closely but it seems to me flyover was pretty much W's with only the NE and NW for Kerry. I can't recal how they called DE but it seems to me it was a W state as well.

prisoner6

[The G Man]

Good stuff, Dales. Thanks for your efforts.

[Dales]

Did you know I am originally from New York?

Did you know that the electors have gone as would be indicated by the vote every single time going as far back as the days of the New Deal (and possibly further)?

[alisasny]

I wouldnt put NY for the rat just yet. The convention is going to do wonders to Bush popularity and NY hates to vote for losers ....

Also the timing of the convention will allow Bush to actually campaign in NY after the convention...he will have a lot of money to do so : ) with plenty of support from RUDY : ) right around the 911 anniversary : )


I think it will be very close : )

[commish]

Good work Dales. Don't listen to the perfectionists and what-ifers. This is a good starting point and will help indicate where we need to do the most work.

The cool thing is you have already shot the Dems biggest bullets and they still only lead by 5 with lots of Red states left to cover.

[Texas2step]

Excellent Dales, thanks for the work! As we say in Texas, 'preciate ya.

[ken5050]

Hey, guy...you da man..as always....please put me on you ping list....

[kayak]

Thanks for the ping. Please see #15.

[Neets]

A prettyplease to me will put you on the list.

How are ya toots?

Thanks Kay.

[Chances Are]

Is it just me, or is Delaware not on your summary table??? Just want to know...

CA....

[AuH2ORepublican]

Nice job, as usual, but I have one major complaint. NO WAY should Delaware be "Strong for Dems." Delaware moved towards the Dems in the 1990s, as did most suburban areas in the NE, because (i) national security was not deemed to be important anymore because the Cold War ended, (ii) after a decade of tax cuts by Republicans, taxes were low by historical standards and Democrats were running on keeping taxes about the same (and Clinton even promised a middle class tax cut), and (iii) the vacuum created by the absense of these two important issues from the national radar led to voters focusing on social issues such as abortion, guns and the environment, and in Delaware (at least in the heavily populated northern part, which are Philly suburbs) this moved voters to the Democrats. In 2004, national security is again a major issue, with the War on Terror being as prominent as the Cold War once was. John Kerry is promising to roll back the Bush tax cuts and, even more importantly, Bush is wisely framing the issue as "unless Congress makes the tax cuts permanent, your taxes will be raised automatically." And not only have the War on Terror and Kerry's promise to raise taxes made social issues less important in 2004 than they were in 1992, 1996 or 2000, but for once the prevailing social issue---gay marriage---is one where suburban voters in the NE agree with the GOP. So I would make Delaware "slight Democrat" for now, although I have a feeling that it may move into the "toss-up" category during the race.

[Naomi4]

You misread it. NY went for Gore by 60%