[GraniteStateConservative]

A place with such a strong urban presence as Michigan makes it a long-shot. Bush could be competitive in ME and WA if the Dems nominate someone who doesn't get environment-voters all excited-- Bob Graham for example.

[JohnnyZ]

A place with such a strong urban presence as Michigan makes it a long-shot. Bush could be competitive in ME and WA if the Dems nominate someone who doesn't get environment-voters all excited-- Bob Graham for example

Bush was competitive in 2000 when he didn't have 60+% popularity against a strong environmentalist in Maine and Washington. I fail to see how he will Not be competitive this go-around, as you suggest. And I don't think Michigan will become much more urban by 2004 than it was in 2000, when Bush lost by 4% on the strength of labor GOTV dwarfing ours. That's a long-shot??

Maybe this is all semantics, but I think y'all are being much too tentative. Bush is going for a landslide, which even if he doesn't get it will force the Rat to be on the defensive, spending all their $$ on the Left Coast, the Mid-West, NE and Florida and conceeding the rest of the country.

[crasher]

The thing is MI, ME, and WA were about as good to Bush in 2000 as PA was. I don't understand why it will be different in 2004. If Bush wins the popular vote by more than 5 points in 2004, he will probably win all 4 states.

[crasher]

The thing is MI, ME, and WA were about as good to Bush in 2000 as PA was. I don't understand why it will be different in 2004. If Bush wins the popular vote by more than 5 points in 2004, he will probably win all 4 states.

[crasher]

The thing is MI, ME, and WA were about as good to Bush in 2000 as PA was. I don't understand why it will be different in 2004. If Bush wins the popular vote by more than 5 points in 2004, he will probably win all 4 states.