Electoral College Breakdown, Installment Eleven (The Battlegrounds)

various

[Dales]

Since I began the rundown of the states, California had a new poll released.

---

California

Electoral Votes: 55

2000 Result

Gore 53%

Bush 42%

Polling Data:

Date	Polling Company	Link	Type	MOE	Republican		Democrat
8/16/03	Field	NA	RV	4%	Bush	42%	Unnamed Democrat	47%
8/16/03	Public Policy Institute	NA	LV	3%	Bush	40%	Unnamed Democrat	45%
1/3/04	Public Policy Institute	Link	LV	3%	Bush	45%	Unnamed Democrat	45%
1/13/04	Field	NA	RV	3.4%	Bush	46%	Unnamed Democrat	47%
1/18/04	Rasmussen	NA	LV	4%	Bush	41%	Unnamed Democrat	46%
2/13/04	Knowledge Networks	Link	RV	4.1%	Bush	38%	Kerry	42%
2/16/04	Public Policy Institute	Link	1,103 LV	3%	Bush	37%	Kerry	54%

Punditry: With this poll, I am downgrading California to Strong for the Democrats.

---

Summary Table
	Bush					Democrat
	Safe	Strong	Lean	Slight	Tossup	Slight	Lean	Strong	Safe
	ND (3)	CO (9)	GA (15)	NV (5)	OR (7)	NM (5)	WI (10)	NY (31)	VT (3)
	AL (9)	SC (8)	NC (15)	FL (27)	WV (5)	ME (4)	-	DE (3)	MA (12)
	MT (3)	KY (8)	MO (11)	NJ (15)	-	MI (17)	-	MD (10)	DC (3)
	WY (3)	KS (6)	VA (13)	NH (4)	-	PA (21)	-	WA (11)	RI (4)
	UT (5)	MS (6)	OH (20)	-	-	IA (7)	-	CT (7)	HI (4)
	ID (4)	SD (3)	IN (11)	-	-	MN (10)	-	IL (21)	-
	AK (3)	LA (9)	AZ (10)	-	-	-	-	CA (55)	-
	NE (5)	-	AR (6)	-	-	-	-	-	-
	OK (7)	-	TN (11)	-	-	-	-	-	-
	TX (34)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Designation Total:	76	49	112	51	12	64	10	138	26
Candidate Total:	237			127			174

Please, no comments on the colors regarding who is red and who is blue. The map was made for me by SC Swamp Fox using a tool online, and they chose the colors for him. I'll eventually be doing my own map. Also, please note that although I call some states as having a slight advantage one way or another, it would be a mistake to count them for either candidate. They are well within the margin of error, and should be considered anyone's game.

---

The battleground states will be those which make up the toss-ups and those with a slight advantage for either side. Over time as new polls come out, different states may move into or out of the battleground. The movement of states into, and out of, the battleground will be an important metric to trace, as it will indicate which side is successfully bringing the fight to the other at that point. If, for example, Ohio and Missouri become battleground states, then that is a sign that Kerry has been making progress while Bush has been regressing.

As of this moment, with the Democrat nomination almost sealed up, the general lay of the land favors the President, with 234 of the required 270 electoral votes leaning his way (or more). Kerry is going to have to continue to ride the wave of favorable coverage he is getting for longer to pull into an equitable position.

It is clear that at this point, President Bush has a much better standing as the incumbent than Gore had as the pseudo-incumbent in 2000. At this point in 2000, Gore was significantly behind in the national polls, while most polls have Bush and Kerry within the margin of error with each other nationwide. At the time of my first ECB (Electoral College Breakdown) in 2000, Gore had about 40 more electoral votes in his columns than Kerry has now. On the other hand, Bush is running about 9 electoral votes behind where he was. That first ECB was done about 6 weeks later, so it would only make sense that more electoral votes would be leaning one way or another by then.

Last year, the initial states designated as battleground states were Florida, Arkansas, Wisconsin, Iowa, Maine, Georgia, North Carolina, New Hampshire, West Virginia, and Washington. Florida, West Virginia, Iowa, New Hampshire, Maine repeat as initial battleground states this year. Arkansas, Georgia, and North Carolina have all moved towards Bush as leaners as the south has solidified. Wisconsin (lean) and Washington (strong) have moved towards the Democrats. New battleground states initially are Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Michigan, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania.

---

Florida

In the first ECB of 2000, Florida was listed as a battleground with a slight advantage to Gore. This time around, it is starting with a slight advantage for Bush. Florida has 6 Democrat Representatives and 18 Republicans. Both chambers of the state legislature are controlled by the Republicans. Republicans control most of the executive branch. However, both Senate seats are held by Democrats. As of Dec. 1, 2003, the state registration was 41.9% Democrat and 38.6% Republican. Dales' Prediction: Florida will remain close, but not as close as 2000, and will remain in the Bush column.

West Virginia

In the first ECB of 2000, West Virginia was rated as a battleground state with a slight advantage to Bush. This time around, it is starting as a complete tossup. Two of West Virginia's three Representatives are Democrats. Democrats control everything else: both Senate seats, both chambers of the state legislature, and the top executive branch offices. It is easy to see why, when 60% of the registered voters are Democrats and just 29% Republican. Dales' Prediction: Bush holds West Virginia

Iowa

Iowa rated a slight advantage to Bush in the first ECB of 2000. This time, it rates a slight advantage to the Democrats. Other positions in Iowa are mixed. The Republicans hold 4 of the 5 House seats, and the Senate seats are split. The Republicans control both chambers of the state legislature, but the Democrats hold all major executive offices except for Auditor. Republicans hold a 32% to 29% advantage in registration. Dales' Prediction: While I've been told that Iowans love incumbents, they do not like war. I see the Democrats holding Iowa.

New Hampshire

Both last time and this time, New Hampshire started as a slight advantage for Bush. When looking at the other offices, it is hard to understand just why this is not more firmly in his control. The Republicans hold all the House seats, both Senate seats, control both chambers of the state legislature, and hold all major executive branch offices, while having a 37%-26% registration advantage. The consensus on these threads that I have seen is that Bush will have difficulty securing New Hampshire. I don't buy it for a second. Bush wins..

Maine

Maine is currently a slight advantage for Democrats, which is a change from ECB 2000 where it started as a slight Bush advantage. While the Republicans hold both Senate seats, everything else is in the hands of the Democrats, who enjoy a 31%-29% registration lead. Dales' Prediction: Bush plucks off one of the electoral votes here and the Democrats hold the rest.

Nevada

Nevada was leaning Bush in the first 2000 ECB, and this year rates a slight advantage for Bush. Legislatively, the state is split. Two of the three Representatives are Republicans. The two Senate seats are split. The Democrats control the state Assembly while the Republicans control the state Senate. The Republicans hold most executive branch offices. The registration race is close, with Republicans holding a one point advantage (41%-40%). Dales' Prediction: Nevada will hold.

New Jersey

If New Jersey remains tight enough to stay in the battleground, it is a case of back to the future. ECB2000 started with it leaning Gore's way. The Democrats have 7 of 13 Representatives and both Senate seats, control both chambers of the state legislature, hold all of the important executive offices, and have a 25%-19% advantage in voter registration. Dales' Prediction: It would take a perfect storm for New Jersey to go for Bush. There will not be one.

Oregon

In early 2000, Oregon was polling strongly for Bush. The left coast influence eventually took hold and turned it into a very even state, and it starts this year as a tossup. Democrats hold 4 out of 5 Representative seats, while the Senate seats are divided, just as control of the state legislative chambers is split. The Democrats hold most of the executive branch positions. Democrats hold a 3% lead in registration, 39%-36%. Dales' Prediction: as another state with an antiwar bias, the Democrats will win here.

Michigan

Michigan has gone from leaning Bush to having a slight advantage for the Democrats. Republicans have 9 of 15 Representatives, Democrats hold both Senate seats, while Republicans hold both houses of the state legislature. The state executive is split; Democrats hold the Governor and Lt. Governor positions while Republicans have the Secretary of State and Attorney General slots. Dales' Prediction: I would love to see Bush carry Michigan, but I do not see it happening.

Minnesota

The slight advantage for the Democrats is a step up from the leaning Gore position at the start of ECB 2000. Minnesota's legislative seats are split right down the middle. Half of the Representatives, half of the Senate seats, and one of the state legislative chambers are held by each party. Most of the important executive branch offices are held by Republicans with the exception of Attorney General. Dales' Prediction: Minnesota is changing rapidly, and Bush will capture the state.

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania started as leaning Bush last time, but has drifted to where it has a slight advantage for the Democrats. Republicans hold a 12-7 advantage in the numbers of Representatives, and hold both Senate seats. They also hold both chambers of the state legislature. The Democrats hold the major executive branch positions except for Attorney General, and have a significant registration advantage (48%-42%). Dales' Prediction: I fear the Rendell machine. I think the Democrats hold Pennsylvania

Add up all of the predictions and factor them into the already designated states, and my early prediction is for Bush to be re-elected with 289 electoral votes.

---

The battleground states last election were mainly in the south. Bush won them, and as such won the election. This time, the battleground states are predominantly in the midwest and the east coast. Kerry will need to control these states and make some advances into others in order to win. He may look to Florida, but Bob Graham's pitiful run at the Democrat nomination may have destroyed his chance of being on the ticket. Besides, his appeal would not extend to other battleground states in any meaningful manner. It is unlikely that Kerry will look to New England for a running mate either; look for his selection to come from the midwest. The most natural fit for him would be Evan Bayh of Indiana. He could make Indiana, a state Kerry will otherwise have little chance in, competitive, would probably move Ohio into play, and would have appeal to most of the other battleground states. His position on abortion issues might even allow Kerry to appear more moderate than he is. On the downside, it is not clear that the NOW gang would permit Bayh to be on the ticket, and a ticket with two sitting Senators on it would have an awful long vote trail on which to prey. Another option for Kerry would be Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack. And should Kerry make peace with the Clintons, then we could very well see Ed Rendell. Rendell would play well in much of the rust belt, and his executive branch experience would work well as a balance to the Senatorial Kerry (who's executive experience was long ago, and under Mike Dukakis- hardly a selling point).

Given the current battleground, it is likely that Kerry will continue the populist, class warfare rhetoric adopted by Gore in 2000; it fits this battleground much more than it fit the 2000 one.

As for what Bush can do to firm up this region, the best he can do is to hope the economy gives him another selling point. A legitimate plan to counter outsourcing issues would be a big step in the right direction, especially in defusing the statement an aide made that outsourcing is good for the economy in the long term. Portions of this battleground have histories of being relatively antiwar, and as such the more Iraq calms down and the longer that goes between American casualties, the more likely it will be that the Bush message will resonate in the New England states, in Minnesota, in Nevada, and in Oregon. Despite the wishes of the Bush campaign for this election to be fought on national security, the battleground looks to be a referrendum on the economy and on Iraq.

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

Installment One
Installment Two
Installment Three
Installment Four
Installment Five
Installment Six
Installment Seven
Installment Eight
Installment Nine
Installment Ten

[JohnnyZ]

Pure speculation, but I wonder if these NJ numbers reflect any leftover anger/disgust with the whole Torricelli/Lautenburg election law violation?

Or their lovely governor, though his unpopularity didn't help Republicans in the 2003 state leg. elections.

[AntiGuv]

Sure there is. I actually think it is likely that we will come very close to doing just that [recovering everything that's been lost].

You think the economy will create more than 350,000 new jobs per month between now and November?

[Dane]

It always annoys me when people toss out personal anecdotes

Like you did in your reply #40.

As for your personal opinion about Nevada. Nevadans in 2002 struck down by a wide margin a gay marriage amendment in 2002. Also taxes and other social issues will be a major issues, which will also be in play in West Virginia. Add in Bush's more lax policies towards coal and West Virginia isn't the lost cause you think it is. Looking at the history of the state they voted overwhelmingly twice before for Republican incumbants.

Bush hasn't even started campaigning yet, but is ramping up right after super Tuesday, so your personal anecdotes withstanding, there is still a long way to November.

Hope you didn't take any offense.

[Coop]

Why would I take offense? My comments were quite clearly directed at my own "wealth" during the past year and the past three years.

Sorry you're so bothered about personal anecdotes. That's kind of how I feel about the use of selective data.

I don't give a hoot about the NASDAQ. I have one lousy tech stock. On Feb 14, 2000 the DJIA was under 10,500. This morning it is around 10,650.

No offense. :-)

[Dales]

Gee, every time I turn around people keep trying to up the number of jobs lost due to the Clinton recession and the attacks of 9/11. The commonly accepted number is 2.6 million. Do I think the economy is capable of adding 290,000 jobs per month? Sure do.

[AntiGuv]

When you understand the difference between a personal anecdote and a personal opinion then get back to me and I'll read your reply past the first sentence.

Have a g'day Dane.

[AntiGuv]

Personal anecdotes do not bother me at all; I frequently enjoy reading personal anecdotes from my fellow freepers, especially when they involve good news.

What bothers me is personal anecdotes on the economy as if they are representative of anything besides themselves, when there are perfectly good statistics available from which to draw conclusions of general applicability.

Generalizing from personal anecdotes tends to divorce one from a proper perception of wider reality, and usually in the direction of one's biases.

[Dane]

When you understand the difference between a personal anecdote and a personal opinion then get back to me and I'll read your reply past the first sentence.

Well I guess when I see you post again, my stating my anecdote about you being pompous and pointing people to your pompousity on this thread automatically disqualifies you from reading any opinions or points I may be making.

Whatever, people have a right to live with blinders on.

[chimera]

...there is still a long way to November.

Very very true and a good reminder. This is why the Bush team needs to get out there and start delivering some shots to the Rats rather than just taking them. It would be foolish to place all your bets on a post-convention bounce or a late surge. Bush 41 did that in '92 and got creamed, and we suffered through eight years of probably the most ruinous presidency in history, in terms of damage to the office and faith in the system and the moral fiber of the country (and other things as well). It's a mistake we can't afford to repeat. But we will if we get President Kerry and a Rat House and Senate come January.

[Coop]

I can't speak for you, but my 401K and other investments have done extremely well in the past year.

While you are of course entitled to your opinion, I think it's safe to say your argument really doesn't apply to my previous posts.

[AntiGuv]

The last employment report that will be reported before election day will be that of September 2004. The number I tracked down was 2.8 million lost jobs according to the Department of Labor as of January. Those 2.8 million jobs divided by 8 monthly employment reports gives you 350,000 new jobs a month that must be created to restore that which has been lost. If it's 2.6 million (which is fine by me) then the number is 325,000.

I didn't ask if you think the economy is capable of adding 290,000 or 325,000 jobs per month (what is it with people answering the question they want to see). This economy is easily capable of adding at least half a million jobs or more each month. What I did ask was if you think the economy will add 350,000 (or 325,000 or even 290,000 if you prefer) new jobs each month between now and the end of September.

[AntiGuv]

The Dow peaked (near 12,000) in January 2000 whereas the Nasdaq peaked in March, and so it is inaccurate to use the Dow of 2/23 2000 as a comparable barometer. Actually, it's inaccurate to use either, when what one should actually use is the all-time high set that winter for each index. I just didn't feel like looking them up.

[Coop]

I think Nevada will be near impossible for Bush unless he wins a national landslide anyhow.

Huh? I'll be surprised if Dubya loses NV. He won it in '00, and he's now a proven incumbent. Voter registration has favored the GOP since 2000 as well.

2000: GOP - 366.4K, Dems - 365.6K; +900 GOP
http://http://www.gp.org/documents/vote_reg.html

2004: GOP - 376K, Dems - 368K; +8,000 GOP
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/lv-gov/2004/jan/22/516219849.html

[Coop]

It's inaccurate because you say it is? Uh, no. Doesn't work that way. I chose a point three years ago this week, which coincides directly with my "over the past three years" comment. Fascinating, isn't it?

[dpa5923]

Please add me to the ping least.

[AntiGuv]

In 2000, George W. Bush stated that he would oppose approving the Yucca Mountain storage facility unless it met the stricter EPA standards advocated by Nevada (as opposed to those of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission), which it never did.

[dpa5923]

Please add me to the ping least list.

[Dales]

I stand by what I said earlier- I think it is likely that the economy will come close to replacing all the jobs. How close? We'll see, just like we will see if I am right at all.

[Dales]

You obviously feel that will be a major factor in Nevada. While I agree it will be a factor, I do not think it will be enough of one to override other factors in the state. But as with everything, we'll see!

[JohnnyZ]

2004: GOP - 376K, Dems - 368K; +8,000 GOP

New voter registration total just came out after Clark County updates the rolls and booted a bunch of people to 'inactive'.

The latest registration figures show Republicans outnumbering Democrats 352,730 to 339,503, the largest margin in years. Nonpartisans numbered 128,039.

State’s number of active registered voters declines