Bush Predicted To Take Only 2 States

[Kong]

Alaska and North Carolina.

This is my prediction. You can make your own.

[rooboy]

1. He won't take Alaska. n/t

[Bandit]

26. I'm afraid he very well may

Alaska is a retarded state. It is filled with natural resources so that makes it a huge prize for the GOP. They can't wait to rape and pillage and have Alaskans thinking that is in their best interest. It is sad.

[kentuck]

30. Some people try to lower expectations....

in hopes of increasing turnout for the candidate of their choice.

[Ready4Change]

2. Not Florida?

.

[Kong]

4. Nope

Not Wyoming or Colorado either.

[SCDem]

3. What about Texas?

Isn't that his stronghold....

[Kong]

5. Nope

And not Lousiana or New Mexico either.

[SCDem]

6. well it would be wildest dream come true if that were to be the

case.... so i hope you are right

What makes you think North Carolina would go Bush but South Carolina go Kerry?

[Kong]

7. Easy

Because the people of South Carolina have more sense. Pretty simple.

[comsymp]

14. LMAO- a West Virginian slamming North Carolinians... priceless!

As one of the many North Carolinians on this board, I'd like to be the first to say that your pronouncements are garbage. A recent statewide poll puts a Kerry-Edwards ticket DEAD EVEN with Bush-Cheney... and that's with Kerry's current *total ignoring* of the state.

EVERYONE here in NC who watches statewide politics believes that Kerry could take NC if he bothered stopping by to say "hi" once or twice before November. It's entirely up to him to decide whether he wants our 15 in his column or not.

ON EDIT: But seriously, folks- how do you figure Kerry's gonna overcome *'s current 10%+ lead in these states:

Alabama (9)
Idaho (4)
Kansas (6)
Mississippi (6)
Montana (3)
Nebraska (5)
North Dakota (3)
Oklahoma (7)
South Dakota (3)
Texas (34)
Utah (5)
Wyoming (3)

or these 5-10 point * leads:

Indiana (11) - 9.77
South Carolina (8) - 9.29
Kentucky (8) - 9.13
Georgia (15) - 5.33


*omitted AK (>10point) and NC (6point) due to your contention that they will stay in the * column

[niceypoo]

28. Kerry hasnt picked Edwards

And NC a red state, usually. I sure hope your right..........then Shrubby will only take AK

[comsymp]

33. Well, the recent Mason-Dixon poll had some interesting results

http://www.mason-dixon.com/news_text.cfm?news_id=193

48-41 Bush, 2-Nader and 7% undecided.

With Edwards as VP, it's a statistical tie *with the same Nader & Undecided numbers*, meaning that Edwards would theoretically pull about 4% of Bush supporters... and since undecideds tend to break for the challenger, the state is definitely in play under the right circumstances. Worst case, it would still cause * to devote resources to a state on which he expected to have a lock. And, again, these numbers are pretty good considering Kerry hasn't shown his face down here-

Granted, Edwards isn't the presumptive nominee~ but this was a statewide poll and his numbers were reportedly the best of the suggested VP contenders used for polling purposes. IIRC, a couple other nominees gave Kerry a slight bump, too, though only a point or 2.

EDIT: And you're right about NC usually going red in presidential races- Carter was the last Dem to take NC... however, that doesn't mean the R's have a lock here- in every election, most statewide offices go D and our Congressional delegation stays close to 50-50.

[Alerter_]

37. he won't win South Carolina

I have serious doubts about NC too.

[Gman]

11. Texas will be a lot closer than it was in '00

My prediction is something like 52% to 48%. I don't know one Republican that voted for him in '00 that will vote for him this year, and I know a lot of Republicans. They all make a point of telling me how they can't vote for him this time around. Its like they're going to confession or something and cleansing their souls by telling me, a staunch Democrat. Kinda like they're following their conscience, for once.

[terrya]

8. John Kerry isn't going to take Alabama or Mississippi.

That's just not going to happen. It would be the political upset of the century if Kerry won in those states.

[Kong]

9. Prepare for the Upset Then

Bush is unelectable, that should be clear to everyone by now.

[chelsea0011]

10. You mean states of "denial" and "confusion"

[NewJeffCT]

12. I see Kerry doing well in a few areas

New England, NY, NJ and California. Other than that, I expect Diebold and an August Surprise, a September Surprise and an October Surprise to push Bush ahead in the polls.

[niceypoo]

32. They are too incompetent to "Surprise" anybody any more

Everyone is onto them. Americans are dying daily. Nothing but a stream of bad news coming from the whitehouse for months and months. Torture, war crimes, arogance and blame. Bushes support has been wittled down to his freeper core.

[theboss]

13. I want what you are taking

Optimism is a good thing...but....wow.

[Killarney]

24. Me too

I'd also like some delusion.

[Stuckinthebush]

15. You haven't been to Alabama lately, have you?

While I believe Kerry will do very well in Alabama and Mississippi, he will never win these states. The ignorance grows deep here.

I will say this...I have yet to receive one disparaging comment about my Kerry bumper sticker. That's huge.

But...no dice on Bush losing these states. Nice sentiment, though.

[doni_georgia]

44. My husband and I have both been flippeed off for our Kerry stickers

I think Kerry will do well in GA, but no well enough to take it. Can't tell you how many people down here think it is "unpatriotic" to vote against a standing president during times of war. I got an ear full from someone at the gas station the other day for this very thing - how I was being unpatriotic and unAmerican for having a Kerry sticker on my car while we're at war. I told the guy that Bush is the reason we ARE at war.

[Proud 2B A Peacenik]

16. Indiana

I'm sad to admit that unless Evan Bayh is Kerry's veep, Indiana will almost definately vote Bush. Sad but true.

[meatloaf]

17. * will take UT.

Sorry but Utah really is that delusional.

[Ripley]

18. Most ill-informed post. Ever.

Kerry doesn't have a chance in hell of getting South Carolina or Alabama, or Idaho or Montana or Texas.

However, there's a good chance he'll get North Carolina, especially if he chose Edwards as his veep.

[Kazak]

29. Talk is cheap...

Want to make your own prediction? Make one then. :shrug:

[JohnLocke]

19. If Bush is only going to take two, it'll be Utah and Wyoming.

[recidivist]

20. That's a lovely thought, but I would love to place a very, very big wager

... with you. Especially if you're rich. Let's start the bidding at a million ....:)

[GOPBasher]

21. Whoa, that's a bit too optimistic.

Sorry, but Bush will most certainly take Indiana, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Kentucky, Louisianna, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah and Alaska. He will most likely take Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Colorado and Arizona. The following are battlegrounds: New Hampshire, Delaware, Pennsylvania, West Virgina, Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnisota, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, New Mexico, Nevada, Washington and Oregon.

[comsymp]

22. Remember who creates and disseminates the CW you're referring to

Frankly, the Battleground States are designated as such only because "they" say so. You don't find it interesting that not one Southern state is included? And no, FL is *not* a Southern state.

As has been pointed out in a couple posts above, NC is definitely in play, as just one example. And it's possible that, Cathy Cox willing, GA could even be put into play as the polling suggests that * may only enjoy a 5-6pt advantage...

And frankly, IMO, Kerry's campaign should reflect the fact that he isn't running for President of the Swing States... it might prove to be of surprising benefit if he'd show some gumption and take the fight to the red states, but that's just my opinion~

[GOPBasher]

34. Yeah, you may be right.

But there are still a handful of states -- especially in the South, great plains and rocky mountain states -- that are safely Republican, mainly because of the "culture war" issues.

[kentuck]

23. Just from looking at turnout in SD election last night.....

I would say that Bush will do better than just 2 states. It appears it will be another close election. However, if the Repub turnout decreases by 1% across all the states, that should put a few more states in the Democratic column - enough to win the popular vote and the electoral vote by comfortable margins. At least, that is my hope.

[libcurious]

25. I fear Missouri isn't going to be that close

Bush will probably take MO. with about 65% of the vote, and that is only because of KC and St. Louis. I've been called everything for my Kerry views. I sadly think Bush will win with about 60% of the total vote this Nov. Either with Diebold help or some other way.
I am not giving up on informing people of his doings though, all the way up to Nov.

[Kazak]

27. Oklahoma?

You don't know how happy I'd be.

[Terran]

31. Just wondering what the source of all this optimism is...

Why would would you make such a patently unrealistic prediction? On what do you base your statements?

[JHBowden]

35. Bush will at least get 150 EVs

Bush will most certainly pick up Alabamastan, Utahstan, Kansastan, and so forth.

[LiberalHawg]

36. >>>

I've met so many sensible Republicans, and winger Republicans, that have said no chance in hell they are voting for Bush, some will vote for Kerry, some won't vote at all. I think simply put, all we have to do is get all of our people to vote.

[West Coast Democrat]

38. If he only won 2 states....

they would be Utah and Alabama

[Lex]

39. Prediction makes no sense to me.

North Carolina is far from the most conservative of the "red states."

And if Kerry chooses Edwards as VP, he may well take NC and SC.

[lanparty]

40. Mississippi

How could it NOT be the most regressive state in the Union. It HAS to vote for Bush.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

41. Oh come on! Not Texas????

Now granted, I agree with whomever above said they believe TX will be a lot closer than it was in 2000. I can just about GUARAN-damn-TEE that at this point. Seriously. Look for Texas to be a beautiful shade of light pink this time around. Think watered-down Pepto-Bismol.

But it won't be blue. Yet. Give us a few more years, we're working on it.

[Jane Eyre]

42. Um, why North Carolina?

North Carolina was targeted by the Clinton campaign in 1992 and came within less than 1000 votes statewide of being a blue state. True, it was the only state targeted by Clinton that did not fall into his column, but the demographics have changed significantly since then. More Yankees, more Latinos, etc. Plus we have Erskine Bowles running a good campaign this time (after his "starter" campaign in 2002), and he has an excellent chance of winning.

Did you know that here in the largest county in North Carolina that people voting a straight party ticket must also vote seperately for the president? A really good voter education campaign should be good for several more points toward the Democratic side.

If it is going to be two states only on Bush's side, I would go with Texas and Mississippi, with Utah and South Carolina runners-up.

[doni_georgia]

43. Nah, he'll get more than that

I predict Kerry will definitely win the following:

All of New England, NY, NJ, PA, MD, DE, WV, OH, IL, MI, WI, MN, AZ, NV, WA, OR, AR, HI, IA, DC, SD, NE, and of course CA

Think we can pretty much write off GA, AL, MS, SC, AK, WY, Ok, UT, IN, and MO

My prediction is that TX, LA, FL, TN, KY, CO and NC are up for grabs depending on the running mate Kerry chooses.

Don't know about ND, MT, ID, KS, NM

[Pegleg Thd]

45. With all the military bases here

in Oklahoma if Kerry should pick Clark he has it locked over bushit.