Is it more important to beat Bush in Blue states (as Dean does) or to be

[papau]

close nationally?

What should be the goal - a respectable but losing result in the south as you lose a few blue but come close overall, or a trouncing in the south as you win blue and election?

January 8, 2004--In a hypothetical match-up between President George W. Bush and a generic Democrat, 45% of Americans say they would vote for the Democrat while 44% would vote for President Bush .

However, the latest Rasmussen Reports' survey also shows that in a race between President Bush and former Vermont Governor Howard Dean, Bush leads 49% to 40%. The President leads other Democratic contenders by an even wider margin.

<snip>

In a match-up with Governor Dean, Bush leads 56% to 34% in the states he carried last time. However, in the Blue States carried by Gore, Dean leads the President narrowly, 47% to 42%.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm

[cspiguy]

1. See Clinton 92, 96 and compare Gore 2000

n/t

[Hoosier Democrat]

2. We just need to WIN

My idea would be to write off the "hard core" red states like Mississippi, Texas, Alabama, Wyoming, and my own Indiana.

We need to focus on the blue states that were close and try to pick up one or two new states to win the electoral college. Possible states for pick-up would be Nevada, Arizona, West Virginia, or Missouri.

I view Florida as being unwinable as long as Jeb is there to steal the election again.

Ohio could be in play, too. Lots of steelworkers in Ohio are upset with Dumb-ya and the new immigration proposal will go over with the suburbanites there like a turd in a punch bowl.

[9119495]

4. I agree with you wholeheartedly

1. Just win
2. in the event we just get the EV and not the pop vote, watch the conservatives wretch as they choke on their own hypocrisy arguing that Bush should still be president.

[adamrsilva]

3. We just need the Gore states, plus one of either OH, FL, or MO

No way in hell any Democrat wins in the South or midwest, I don't care who you are...

[On the Road]

5. Gore + 1 Wins!

Even without Florida. The tiniest electoral state -- NH, WV, NV, or AR -- swings the election.

And if Bush does NOT win Florida, there's no way he can win the election.

And I don't know what you're classifying as the midwest, but OH and MO are often placed there along with a lot of Dem-leaning states like IL.

[Pilot]

7. True, but....

Do you really think Dean can take every state that Gore won?

[On the Road]

10. Which Gore States Do You Think Dean Will Lose?

I agree that Dems can't take every blue state from 2000 for granted. But a winning strategy to me is to win all those states plus at least one extra. Any state, no matter how tiny, will do it.

Too many Democrats are into this "landslide for Bush" scenario. I can't see it under any circumstances. the Dem candidate needs to concentrate on a positive winnable scenario which will put Bush on the defensive. That's what Gore did, and he won every important swing state.

Bush does not do well on the defensive. His natural reaction is to cast blame, thrash, pander, and spend public money. I don't think that behavior will win the general election.

[DemDogs]

15. New Mexico, Iowa, Wisconsin most at risk

These are the closest Gore victories, and GWB has been visiting them regularly. And what happens in California?

[icbydass]

14. I don't think Dean will win as many states as Gore did.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

8. I wouldn't say that...

I would highly disagree if Bush pushes his immigration package. There is nothing, NOTHING the people of Arizona hate more than the illegal Mexicans that jump the border. Many will assuredly either stay home or vote for someone else (particularly if someone like Clark gets the nod.)

[CMT]

6. so nationally Dean is nine-points behind Bush

while this poll shows that Clark is 19-points behind, Kerry 20-points behind. He is running better than any of them.

[papau]

12. yes - it is too early for polls to mean anything - but Fean does well

:-)

[HereSince1628]

9. Would it be wrong to interpret unnamed Dem wins but Dean loses

as a consequence that the shift in support is a consequence of supporters of candidates other than Dean?

At this point I think its unreasonable to ask or expect all supporters to abandon their candidate. Consequently, once a candidate is named their performance in the poll erodes because their are a percentage of staunch supporters.

Bottom line is that hypotheticals are just that and answers to polls aren't votes.

[papau]

11. No - head to head with "Dean", Bush loses blue states & loses election if

FL not only votes blue like in 2000, but is allowed to be called Blue by the Courts.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tedoll78]

16. I like the Gore + 1 strategy.

In fact, I think we should make Ohio more of a focus than Florida:

- Ohio has lost TONS of jobs.
- There's a strong union presence.
- We were far from our GOTV potential in 2000; imagine if we were to pour money into such an effort.
- Gore lost it by 4%, despite the fact that he didn't campaign there one bit for the final 3 weeks of the campaign.
- Nader pulled 2% there.
- Guns hurt Gore badly there.

With Ohio in our column, we can fake a campaign in the South (Bush is already pledging to spend tons of time and money in Florida alone) and spend much time in the midwest, where the campaign will once again be decided.

[AP]

17. If it doesn't cost money to run the Dem in a state, but it costs

Republicans to SPEND in the state, it means their time and resources will have to be spread out, which gives the Dems a chance.

For example, if the nominee is Clark or Edwards, it means the Republicans will have to go to every state from VA to NC down to GA and over to Ark and spend money, even if Clark or Edwards ignored those states.

If the Republicans don't have to do that, they'll have 200 million and six months to fly back and forth between NY and CA and they could possible win one of those two states in addition to every Southern and mountain west state. Yikes.