Electoral College Breakdown 2004, March 31st Update

ECB2004 ^

[Dales]

Thanks, got it up already.

[Clintonfatigued]

New York: New York can be divided into three regions. They are New York City, Long Island, and Upstate. Gore's 60% to 35% victory over Bush was a watershed. In history, only two Republicans have done worse than Bush (Goldwater in 1964 and Dole in 1996), and even then not by much. Gore won NYC by an amazing 77% to 18%, and won Long Island by 55% to 40%. But in upstate New York, Gore's victory was only 52% to 44%. Furthermore, upstate New York shows a tendency to support incumbents in Presidential elections. If Bush is to be competitive here, he must win big upstate. He shows no sign of trying to at this point.

[Clintonfatigued]

In Maryland, the 1988 election doesn't really count. Bush the elder's victory over Michael Dukakis was a fluke. Does anyone remember Willie Horton, the Massachusetts murderer/rapist who was allowed a furlough despite serving a life sentence? The people Horton brutalized while on furlough lived in suburban Baltimore, and lots of normally-'Rat voters swung to Bush because of that.

[Future Useless Eater]

impressive post.

Now, as for the VP choice, I think it is said that statistically the only real help a VP brings is an average of 1% additional popular votes in the VP's own HOME STATE.

So that suggests Kerry would prefer to pick a VP from one of those borderline battleground states that would just put him over the top.

Adding up the columns in the chart in post#1, up to but NOT including the TOSSUP column gives Kerry 254 electorals. (short of the needed 269)

But if he could win the tossup state MICHIGAN, with 17 electorals, he'd be over the top.

Which Michigander Dem is available and would boost the Kerry ticket the most?

[Clintonfatigued]

"(in 1916) While Wilson won North Dakota by less than 2%, the rest of the states decided by small margins went to (Charles Evans) Hughs."

Not entirely. That year, Hew Hampshire went to Wilson by only 56 votes. New Mexico supported Wilson by 2,375 votes and California, which decided the election, went for Wilson by 3,773 votes.

[MNJohnnie]

Um, I would only point out that Minnesota has a large MAJOIRTY Republican House and a Democratic Senate by only 1 seat, not an even split as suggested in the analysis. It also has a VERY popular REPUBLICAN Governor in Tim Pawlenty who balanced an almost $4 billion deficit WITHOUT raising taxes. Norm Coleman, a Republican Senator, won the state in 2002 by about 40,000 votes. In addition the State DFL leadership is from the kooky Moveon.org portion of the modern Democrat party which may not play well with the average working class voters in traditional Democrat strong hold of Northeastern Minnesota. I admit it is an uphill fight to carry a state for Bush that has not gone Republican since 1972 but consider this. Minnesota's unemployment rate is currently around 4.5% one of the lowest in the nation. The Minnesota Bush Campaign has all ready organized over 6000 precinct volunteers and has an organization in ever Minnesota country. I think Minnesota is in play this year.

[Dan from Michigan]

I mean Democrat as in partisan democrat. I doubt 94%(Actual number) of even San Francisco voted for Gore. Maybe 75%(about the same as Ann Arbor).

Although there isn't much of a Chomsky or "Barney Frank" wing of the dems in Detroit, it's all the union wing, Zogby Wing, and the Jesse Jackson wing there.

[jack gillis]

Even if you toss CT, I think the analysis still holds.

Massachusetts was hit hard. Not as hard as Jersey and NY, but hard. Let's say a straight 8% swing (4% of voters just flat switch votes). Doesn't dent the lead.

And I'm agreeing with your idea. But even a 15% swing in NJ and NY (and that's a big swing), won't switch those states.

What I'm suggesting is that the effect you identify may be real ... and exploitable by the GOP, but all it may do is change the popular outcome.

New Jersey might be closer, but close only counts in horseshoes.

[spokeshave]

Arnie delivered Prop 57 and 58 in California...squeezed $2.0B out of the teachers and looks like finessing the state unemployment benefits fiasco and getting some billions out of the gambling tribes..

And all Without Raising Taxes.

Could be Arnie can deliver CA also....but there needs to be some increased GOP spending on ads.

[TomEwall]

New registrations have been more Rep. The state is doing very well economically. Lieberman isn't on the ticket. Bush has been very pro-Israel. The hispanics, a group which is likely growing, is Republican. Kerry isn't a Southerner. The Rep grass roots organization, wary of what happened in 2000, is making a more conerted effort to get out the vote.

I don't think Kerry is expecting to much from Florida. Everything is pointing Bush's way there. His strategy, I think, is to take all the Gore states plus Ohio.

[TomEwall]

The polls are taken by different organizations with different methodologies on different dates. There are quite a few more Penn polls, and they are more recent. I think they can be believed a bit more than the Ohio polls, which I think will start showing Bush ahead. Gallop has shown a 7 point shift in Bush's favor nationally, and those results should start to be seen as more state polls come out.

[TomEwall]

I think that's unlikely, assuming it were that close. The following states were very close last time: Oregon, New Mexico, Florida, Iowa, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Minnesota. All of these states went for Gore except Florida and New Hampshire. If Bush does better this time around in the popular vote, one would think that some the 5 states which went for Gore would go Bush's way.

[jack gillis]

Forget it.

First of all, Schwarzenegger took the immediate pressure off with a $15 billion bond issue that conservatives would have CRUCIFIED any Dem for proposing.

Second, on cultural issues, Arnold is further away from Bush than many Democrats.

Third of all, Arnold just today floated a trial balloon on tax hikes anyway, which were always inevitable.

Fourth, have you forgotten who Arnold is married too?

[jack gillis]

True.

But remember Dales' hypothesis: Proximity to Ground Zero is a hidden factor. ALL of those states you mention are far from Ground Zero and are currently polling the same or better for Kerry now as compared to Gore in 2000, except NH, which is the closest to Ground Zero (and there were numerous New Hampshiries on the ill-fated flights from Boston). (RealClearPolitics has those spreads in their state-by-state table).

If Bush does better only in the "Ground Zero" states, with maybe a little boost in a few Red states, he gains no EVs no matter how many more popular votes he wins.

[Political Junkie Too]

The states most directly and personally affected by 9/11 are Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, the District of Columbia and Virginia.

Don't forget Pennsylvania, where Flight 93 crashed. Dales just shifted Pennsylvania one category towards Bush.

-PJ

[jack gillis]

Yeah. We're pondering how PA fits in.

It didn't have the level of casualties the other states did, but it was involved and it was the one state race where a moderate Bush shift would change the outcome.

[Dales]

But even a 15% swing in NJ and NY (and that's a big swing), won't switch those states.

Gore only won Jersey by 16%.

And this time, fellow tri-stater Joe Lieberman won't be on the ticket.

I do think you are right, that this effect is likely to only manifest itself in the popular vote, since most of the involved states are too far gone.

But the more I am looking at things, the more I am starting to think New Jersey could be winnable. Just to pull a number out of my hat, maybe a 15% chance, if they spend the money to advertise and invest in a GOTV organization. That's a big if, and I am not sure where the break-even point is.

PS- any 9/11 effect on Massachusetts would probably be offset by it being Kerry's home state.

[Dales]

I stand corrected.

[Dales]

I would only point out that Minnesota has a large MAJOIRTY Republican House and a Democratic Senate by only 1 seat, not an even split as suggested in the analysis.

Here is what I wrote: "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."

I suppose it is less clear than I wanted, but when I said it's legislative seats are split down the middle, I am talking about it's US Congress legislative seats, not the state legislature. The only thing I said about the state legislature is that each party controls one chamber.

In the US Senate, there is Coleman and Dayton. In the US House, the Dems have McCollum, Sabo, Peterson and Oberstar to offset the Republican quartet of Gutnecht, Kline, Ramstad, and Kennedy.

Apologies for any lack of clarity.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Maryland:

Electoral Votes: 10

2000 Result:

Gore 57%

Bush 40%

Since the 1960 election, the only Republicans to carry Maryland were Nixon for his re-elect, Reagan for his re-elect, and George H. W. Bush during his first campaign. Clinton did not need Perot to win here either time. This is a Democrat state.

In Maryland, the 1988 election doesn't really count. Bush the elder's victory over Michael Dukakis was a fluke. Does anyone remember Willie Horton, the Massachusetts murderer/rapist who was allowed a furlough despite serving a life sentence? The people Horton brutalized while on furlough lived in suburban Baltimore, and lots of normally-'Rat voters swung to Bush because of that.

In other words, a single (if horrific) crime produced such terrible PR for Michael Dukakis in that specific state that the state went against its otherwise reliable party tendency.

Which goes to show that what national politics would be like if "objective" journalism were actually objective!