To: Dales
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 TO me this is the most tellng statement in your entire analysis. In 2000 the Battleground states were all states that BUsh won, now they are almost all safely Bush.
The states that are shaping up to be Battlegrounds states this election are all areas won by Gore. This is very important.
The Dems are not fighting to win Bush states, they are having to spend money and fight to keep states they won in 2000. This is very telling, and bodes very well for Bush.
Kerry cannot win unless he can take states from Bush, if his whole campaign is playing defense and protecting states Gore won -- then Bush has already won.
30 posted on
02/23/2004 5:39:53 AM PST by
commish
(Freedom Tastes Sweetest to Those Who Have Fought to Preserve It)
To: commish
I see your point, but at this moment in the campaign the main domestic issue may well be the chronic loss of manufacturing jobs. And if Kerry chooses Rendell as running mate, that will be campaign issue # 1; and it will put these states won by Bush in 2000 in play: Ohio, WV, Kentucky, Tennessee, perhaps others. Plus it would solidify Penn, Mich, NJ, Missouri in the Dem camp, leaving them to spend money in (for them!) less secure states. Of all the potential VPs out there, Rendell is the one who offers the most benefit to a Kerry campaign.
32 posted on
02/23/2004 5:48:33 AM PST by
Remole
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson