Electoral College Breakdown, Installment Seven

various

[ClintonBeGone]

Make no mistake, we are very sensitive to this...even more than being called incestuous

Worse than the incest jokes has to be the state that keeps electing Robert Byrd :)

[Neets]

Here ya go Ping!

[Museum Twenty]

Great job on these -- thank you! And quick, too!!

I notice that, if one adds the "slight" groups to each side, the electoral count is dead even, 183 to 183, with 12 tossups.

Things may seem a little bleak now, but really only one side has been running for several months, so I hope we will see the pendulum swing back towards the President before too long.

IMHO, the success the US has had thus far in preventing any major terrorist incidents on our soil is what allows the Dems the chance to make this election about jobs, overseas outsourcing, and the economy.

God forbid that any terror-related events happen, but it is only the sense of security we now enjoy that allows this to be a contest at all. If the War on Terror were to dominate public debate, I think the President could win in a landslide.

[On Tim Russert's cable show this weekend (not Meet the Press), he hosted David Broder and two other journalists. Even these folk, when discussing the outsourcing of jobs to India, admitted that none of the Dems had any idea of how to reverse the trend.]

Regarding the states, I fear Michigan is lost -- as a midwesterner, I hear a lot about the growth of Radical Islam in that state. I fear there will be many new voters there, sympathetic to the cause of terror. I hear Saginaw and Detroit mentioned as having growing numbers in that category.

If the anti-US Islamists turn out to vote in our presidential election (isn't that an odd and ironic twist), which I strongly suspect did not occur in 2000, that could be more than the good folks in the rest of the state can overcome. Any comments, Michigan folk?

On the oher hand, I am optimistic about Pennsylvania. If the turnout in the most urban areas can be kept low (a blizzard in Philadelphia, maybe?), I think that state can be picked up. Any comments from Pennsylvanians?

Of course, this is all based on a Bush-Kerry (or Edwards) election. If the Dems broker the nomination to Hillary, it would become the most polarizing presidential election I can recall.

[Dan from Michigan]

County - Gore Votes - Bush Votes - Nader Votes - Total Votes - Gore % - Bush %

Multnomah (Portland) 188441 83677 21048 295574 64% 28%
Lincoln 10861 8446 1435 20926 52% 40%
Lane (Eugene) 78583 61578 10245 151266 52% 41%
Benton (Corvallis) 19444 15825 2463 38049 51% 42% Clatsop 8296 6950 939 16388 51% 42%
Columbia (St Helens) 10331 9369 970 21061 49% 44%
Hood River 4072 3721 645 8527 48% 44% Washington (W. Portand) 90662 86091 6985 185508 49% 46%
Tillamook 5762 5775 613 12302 47% 47%
Clackamas (SE Portand?) 76421 77359 6357 161661 47% 48%
Marion (Salem) 49430 57443 4679 112786 44% 51%

[AntiGuv]

Quiz time. What other part of the country (not a whole state actually), is known for its pro incumbent bias?

The suspense is killing me! Where's the answer?

[Torie]

Upstate New York. Odd I know.

[Tall_Texan]

Here's my first real disagreement. I think Oregon belongs in the Dem column. As long as they have mail balloting, they are ripe for vote fraud. They'll always find just enough to vote in the Democrat. I don't hold any hope for Oregon and if Bush goes late into the night needing Oregon to pull him out, he won't get it. I don't see much difference between them and commielib Washington to the north and commielib Northern California to the south.

[Kuksool]

West VA is going to entertaining. There is an open seat for Governor and Shelly Moore-Capito's House seat is going to be seriously challenged.

[Kuksool]

Installment Seven is here.

[AntiGuv]

Cool deal. Thanks! For some unknown reason (I guess vague instinct) I was torn between Upstate New York and the Gold Coast of Louisiana, but I wasn't confident enough in either to venture a guess.

[Teacher317]

Breaking up the middle numbers to where they slightly lean, it's 183-183-12.

So what you're saying is, it's gonna be close AGAIN! ;^)

[Teacher317]

Ya beat me to it! ;^)

The good news is that CA and NY are tabulated already, but TX is not.

[ambrose]

Hmmm.. I'm stumped..

[Torie]

Keep scrolling. :)

[ambrose]

If you're thinking of anywhere except the Deep South, you've lost about 110 points of IQ since last we exchanged posts.

The Deep South isn't pro-incumbent. They didn't vote for Johnson in '64, Carter in '80 or Clinton in '96.

[Torie]

Statistics just isn't everybody's bag. I am largely given up educating on the subject. It is simply too much work. :)

[AuH2ORepublican]

"Hawaii was close in 1976...

In addition to being Democratic, Hawaii also has a habit of voting for incumbents..."

---

I was about to make this point as well. Hawaiians (especially those of Japanese decent) have a hard time voting against the Commander in Chief, and had Perot not been on the ballot in 1992, it is possible that George H.W. Bush might have pulled off the upset. I would say "strong advantage for the Dems," though, since if Hawaii is in play it would mean OR is safely in the GOP column, WA is leaning GOP and CA is in play.

[AuH2ORepublican]

I would say WA leans to the Dems, but not that they have a strong advantage. Everything went right for Gore in WA in 2000, including the early call of FL to Gore. I don't think Kerry will carry the suburban vote as easily as Gore did.