My Electoral College predictions for 2004 as of today - take a look!

[Loyal]

Before I go into which states I think we will win in 2004, let me say, first of all, that this is simply an analysis for THIS point in time. My analysis is not perfect, I'm not a political scientist, I just did this for fun. Keep that in mind, please :).

The key to our electoral victory is the South. Clinton won a fair amount of Southern states during his two campaigns: like Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri(not really a Southern state, but I'll count it as one), Georgia, West Virginia, Arkansas, and Louisiana. Clinton also performed respectably in the deep south states like Mississippi and Alabama. I believe that if our candidate performs well in the 2004 campaign, we have the opportunity to pick up most if not all of the Southern states that Clinton won in 1992 and 1996. I sense a revolution coming, one that some Southern states will come along for. The key to victory in states like Mississippi is a GIGANTIC, and I do mean GIGANTIC, GOTV effort. I know we've done GOTV drives before in the deep southern states, but we really have to push them hard so that we can show the Repukes that we have come to play. Let's force Bush to spend his money in states like Mississippi and Alabama, states that he has taken for granted. Let's make him spend some money in his home state of Texas, and organize huge GOTV efforts there to get minorities to the polls like we never have before!

That said, let me just list again the states that Gore won in 2000, and the states that Bush won in 2000.

EV stands for electoral votes.

States that Gore won in 2000:

California - 54 EVs
Connecticut - 8 EVs
Delaware - 3 EVs
District of Columbia - 3 EVs
Hawaii - 4 EVs
Illinois - 22 EVs
Iowa - 7 EVs
Maine - 4 EVs
Massachusetts - 12 EVs
Maryland - 10 EVs
Michigan - 18 EVs
Minnesota - 10 EVs
New Jersey - 15 EVs
New Mexico - 5 EVs
New York - 33 EVs
Oregon - 7 EVs
Pennsylvania - 23 EVs
Rhode Island - 4 EVs
Vermont - 3 EVs
Washington - 11 EVs
Wisconsin - 11 EVs

Total EVs won by Gore - 267 EVs

States that Bush won in 2000:

Alabama - 9 EVs
Alaska - 3 EVs
Arizona - 8 EVs
Arkansas - 6 EVs
Colorado - 8 EVs
Florida* - 25 EVs
Georgia - 13 EVs
Idaho - 4 EVs
Indiana - 12 EVs
Kansas - 6 EVs
Kentucky - 8 EVs
Louisiana - 9 EVs
Mississippi - 7 EVs
Missouri - 11 EVs
Montana - 3 EVs
Nebraska - 5 EVs
Nevada - 4 EVs
New Hampshire - 4 EVs
North Carolina - 14 EVs
North Dakota - 3 EVs
Ohio - 21 EVs
Oklahoma - 8 EVs
South Carolina - 8 EVs
South Dakota - 3 EVs
Tennessee - 11 EVs
Texas - 32 EVs
Utah - 5 EVs
Virginia - 13 EVs
West Virginia - 5 EVs
Wyoming - 3 EVs

Total EVs won by Bush - 267 EVs

*We all know who really won Florida.

I think that our best pick-up chance among the states is West Virginia. This perennially Democratic state was one of the biggest surprises of the night, and I think that we can put this safely in our 2004 column, especially if the immensely popular Senator Byrd stumps for our candidate.

That said, as of October 3rd, 2003, here's who I think will win each state. I'm pitting Bush against an unnamed Democrat, since we don't know who the nominee will be yet. I've declined to make more than two categories, so I won't have any leans Dem or leans Repub categories - I will simply have two: Those states I think that our candidate will win, and those states that I think Bush will win. Here we go:

Note: All the electoral votes have been changed since 2000, so each state will reflect the 2000 census data and subsequent redistricting, addition, and elimination of certain seats.

States that the Democratic nominee will most likely win in 2004, in my opinion:

Arizona - 10 EVs
Arkansas - 6 EVs
California - 55 EVs
Connecticut - 7 EVs
Delaware - 3 EVs
District of Columbia - 3 EVs
Florida, once again - 27 EVs
Hawaii - 4 EVs
Illinois - 21 EVs
Iowa - 7 EVs
Maine - 4 EVs
Massachusetts - 12 EVs
Maryland - 10 EVs
Michigan - 17 EVs
Minnesota - 10 EVs
Nevada - 5 EVs
New Hampshire - 4 EVs
New Jersey - 15 EVs
New Mexico - 5 EVs
New York - 31 EVs
Ohio - 20 EVs
Oregon - 7 EVs
Pennsylvania - 21 EVs
Rhode Island - 4 EVs
Vermont - 3 EVs
Washington - 11 EVs
West Virginia - 5 EVs
Wisconsin - 10 EVs

Total EVs that will be won by the Dem nominee - 337 EVs

States that Bush will most likely win in 2004, in my opinion:

Alabama - 9 EVs
Alaska - 3 EVs
Colorado - 9 EVs
Georgia - 15 EVs
Idaho - 4 EVs
Indiana - 11 EVs
Kansas - 6 EVs
Kentucky - 8 EVs
Louisiana - 9 EVs
Mississippi - 6 EVs
Missouri - 11 EVs
Montana - 3 EVs
Nebraska - 5 EVs
North Carolina - 15 EVs
North Dakota - 3 EVs
Oklahoma - 7 EVs
South Carolina - 8 EVs
South Dakota - 3 EVs
Tennessee - 11 EVs
Texas - 34 EVs
Utah - 5 EVs
Virginia - 13 EVs
Wyoming - 3 EVs

Total EVs that will be won by Bush - 201 EVs

These are just my predictions as of today. So, what do you folks think? :)

[Loyal]

1. Kick

:kick:

[wryter2000]

2. Kick

Thanks for that anlysis. I've been wondering myself.

My home state -- CA -- will go to the dem. We have enough dems and enough disgruntled republicans for that. Sounds like NY is a hopeless cause for Whistle Ass. I'd be extremely interested in others' opinions of how their states might go.

[Loyal]

3. Yeah

I'm from NY, and, trust me, it is NOT going for Bush. I think that we will pick up WV, OH, AR, NV, AZ, NH, and win Florida again. :)

[ferg]

4. yes, but that's not the South

The only Southern state you gave to the Dems was Arkansas. (Florida is its own thing.) That analysis really shows that the South is not the critical region for Democrats in 2004.

Key states to pick up: OH, AZ, WV, NH.

Secondary: FL, AR, NV.

Blowout: CO, LA, VA, AK.

[Loyal]

6. You're correct

But I was tired of typing, and didn't want to explain the Southern strategy. I do happen to think that we have a shot at TN, KY, etc., if Bush continues to suck really bad.

[OKNancy]

10. I know Arkansas, Arkansas is a friend of mine

and there is no way in hell that Arkansas will go Democratic unless it is Clark, or maybe Edwards.

[NewJerseyDem]

17. Bush only got 51.3% in 2000

So, the Democrats should be able to win in Arkansas if the democratic canididate picks up a few percentage points nationwide. Gore was probably a better candidate in some southern states than someone like Kerry would be but I think that it is a state we have a chance at in a close election.

[OKNancy]

19. Gore got points because of his association with Clinton

and being from Tenn. Arkansans won't reject a sitting President for a yankee.

[bookman]

5. Work to do

Ohio and NH will be tough ones. Despite the lousy employment numbers.

Florida will need much work (and policing)

I'm in Texas. It will go Bush, but I think some noise must be made here. You never know. And it will draw off resources.

[Loyal]

7. I agree

It is important to make Bush waste some money there.

[budmo]

8. Well let's see

I think your right but I also think that it will depend on the Dem Ticket. We could pick up even more southern states if Clark can make it through this process. A Dean/ Clark ticket is regionally a great ticket. Deans been already planting his seeds in notoriously Repub states and getting really good response so with Clark ( or someone else from the south like even Edwards) he may do better than your predictions.
Same for a Kerry/ southerner ticket (though I'm partial to Dean and happen to think he would stir the fires of the undecided a lot more than that insider Kerry would).
We are going to need the undecideds to win by a margin big enough to not fall into recounts and computer glitches (via: DIEBOLD)-(go to buzzflash and look into archives about the computer train wreck that's about to happen come election 2004).

Thanks,

Budmo!:argh:

[PAMod]

9. Very good Loyal, though I fear we may actually lose Florida this time.

One thing is certain, we have to run hard EVERYWHERE. And to do that we will need a ton of money.

Your electoral map is definitely doable.

[msanger]

11. empowerment is the key to winning

As a Virginian who is committed to having the state go BLUE for the first time since LBJ, I have to say that the Dean campaign seems to have the right idea.

In the recent past Dem presidental campaigns have written off Va, and probably alot of other states. That has left us democratic footsoldiers in the 'red' states with nothing to do.

The Dean campaign has encouraged us to organize locally (via meetups and the internet.) The assumption is that if "we" want to win Virginia, "we" have to work for it. The Dean campaign has empowered its people to do whatever they can, wherever they can.

Whoever the Dem nominee turns out to be, if they empower the people, they will have people working hard for them everywhere.

I vote for a solid blue map in 2004.

[Loyal]

12. Agreed

Solid blue, if only to make Hannity shut the fuck up about how popular Bush is. I bet he forget that Bush LOST the popular vote. HOW CAN SOMEONE BE POPULAR IF THEY LOST THE POPULAR VOTE???? DUMBASSES. :mad:

[budmo]

13. I'm so with you on that!

Your so right...If I've realized nothing else these past few months...I've realized that with the passion, will, information, "Shoe leather" and internet...we can really come out this darkness of Bush and win back the White House. I'm for Dean too. But I'll work my butt off for who ever the nominee is because we really don't have a choice. It's get him out or ...disaster...pure and simple.
I just hope if it's not Dean then who ever it is finds the same passion Dean has and runs with it. Oh God ...does this mean I have to work for Lieberman too?........If I have to I have to.

Go Gov!!!....Please!!!

[dolstein]

14. Why do DU'ers assume that the Dem nominee will win every state Gore won?

I think DU'ers are making a mistake by assuming that every state that voted for Gore in 2000 will remain in the Democratic column in 2004. Gore had some bad breaks in states like Florida and New Hampshire. But he also caught a lot of breaks in states like New Mexico, Oregon, Wisconsin and Iowa, not to mention Pennsylvania and Michigan, and in several of these states, Nader simply wasn't a factor.

[jiacinto]

18. You overstimate GOP strength in PA and in MI

I think both of those states are going to stay Democratic mainly because the suburbs of both Detroit and Philadelphia have been supporting the Republicans less. Throughout the 1990s the GOP lost ground in the suburbs of Philadelphia and Michigan. In the Philadelphia area Clinton and Gore carried Bucks, Delaware, and Montgomery County three times. In Michigan, while they lost Oakland and Macob counties in 1992, Clinton and Gore won them both in 1996 and in 2000. In the Philadelphia area Chester County, which held out against Gore and Clinton in vain, supported Ed Rendell. In the 2002 Governor'ss race, while losing Macomb County, Jennifer Granholm carried Oakland County.

Thus I say that if the Democrats can fare as well as they did in those suburbs as they did in 1992, 1996, and 2000, they carry those states. Bush would have to poll around 60% in both Macob and Oakland County, as GOP nominees did in the 1970s and in the 1980s, if he hopes to win MI. Same for those counties in PA.

If those states are to vote Republican they must do as well as Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush I did in 1998 to carry those states. I don't see them doing that.

[dolstein]

26. But what makes you think

that anybody the Democrats nominate will be able to replicate Rendell's performance in Pennsylvania or Granholm's performance in Michigan? For that matter, do you think Rendell and Graholm would do as well as they did in 2002 if they were on the ballot in 2004?

Do you think a liberal Democratic nominee would fare just as well in the Pennsylvania and Michigan suburbs as a more moderate candidate?

In short, do you think that who the Democrats nominate in 2004 is completely irrelevant?

Frankly, I think a lot of people are selling Gore short when they assume that whoever the Democrats nominate in 2004 will carry the same states Gore carried in 2000.

[jiacinto]

35. I am looking at more than 2002

Over the last ten years the counties I mentioned have been becoming more hosipitable to the Democrats. Again you don't take that fact into account and overestimate GOP strength there. For those two states to go to the GOP they will need to swing back all those voters who have been steadily gravitating toward the Democrats. From 1992 to 2000 the Democrats carried all the suburban PA counties except for Chester, each time doing the same or even better than they did four years before. Same for Macomb and Oakland County.

If you compare the 1988 results to the 2000 results in many of those counties you see complete GOP erosion. I've been researching that and for the GOP to win those states they are going to need to bring those voters back en masse.

So I am not just thinking about Granholm and Rendell. Now as to who gets the nomination that is a valid point. Sharpton, Kuchinich, Gephardt, and CMB would be miserable candidates. They would not do well there. Lieberman, Dean, Kerry, Clark, and Graham could hold their own there.

But, as I said, if a competent Dem nominee is on the ballot, he or she should be able to win those states.

[PAMod]

22. Gore won PA because of organized labor shoe leather.

It should stay in the Democratic fold in '04 if we work hard and if Governor Rendell can keep up the amazing Philadelphia turnout that he enjoyed in '02.

[jiacinto]

23. Philadelphia Suburbs

They have become more friendly toward the Democrats.

[goobergunch]

25. Chester County is still pretty Repuke

It voted for Rendell in 2002 mainly due to his tremedous popularity in the Philly area. If you look at the House and Presidential data, Chesco is still fairly Repuke...although not as much as it once was.

[jiacinto]

27. Yes I didn't say it wasn't Republican

But over the last ten years Democrats have been faring much better there. It is much less Republican than it used to be. I do think that over the next ten years or so Democrat should become more competetive there.

What will keep it Republican leaning is the influence of the Amish in the Lancaster area. However, as it becomes more like the inner suburbs, it will become less Republican.

[The Left Preacher]

29. Bush might take PA. this time

Be careful in PA. Earlier last year the Bush administration put a 30% tarrif on steel from South Korea. This was to attract the votes of the steel workers in PA.

[Eurobabe]

31. it gave me great pleasure

to phone those last few days for Gore in 2000, in Repuke suburbs of PA. Now I will do the same here in VA in 2004!! But to the Nth degree for ALL democratic candidates, and the eventual nominee.

[GOPBasher]

30. I agree

If the economy picks back up and Iraq gets settled, I think Bush will win Pennsylvania and maybe Michigan, to name the big two. Also, as you said, Oregon, New Mexico, Wisconsin and Iowa were razor-thin margins, even IF you add Gore AND Nader's vote totals. In short, I think we'll have to work really hard to win all the Gore states. If we do that, winning the whole thing will be easy. We'd only need 10 EV's, based on the new EV totals. Of course, if you count Florida as a Gore state as it really was, then we ONLY have to defend Gore states.

[David__77]

15. Ohio will probably go to Bush.

I can't see a Democrat winning Ohio unless he crashed in the popular vote, which I now think unlikely. I believe that the southwest (AZ and NM) and NH are very important. Arkansas and WV are important and possible pickups. We still have to defend some others, especially MN, WI and PA.

[rock]

16. Good analysis, but you may be in for a very pleasant surprise

It's just my gut mind you, but it says bush*sucks is gonna go down in flames: less than 50 electorial votes. Just an opinion (of my gut).

[jiacinto]

20. I disagree on Ohio

OH's Democratic Party is in horrible disarray. If they were even remotely competent then I would see the state being a Dem lean. But because of that it starts out as a tossup, maybe even a slight GOP lean.

[molly]

33. I grew up in Ohio - I call that mid-state area

"the land that time forgot". I get emails from some of my old high school classmates from time-to-time. The only progressives are the ones that moved away. I think Ohio is very iffy. They still think it's 1950's - a woman's goal should be to get married, have kids, and have no career. They love Rush. I think the ONLY way these people will vote DEM is if something this administration has done affects their lives personally. They follow blindly.

[genius]

21. Gore won Florida

The recall proved that Gore won Florida six out of six ways of counting all the votes.

[Padraig18]

24. I'd say 'spot on'

:thumbsup:

[burr]

28. this is completely off-base IMHO...

Al Gore ran on an all southern, "more conservative-than Clinton" Democratic strategy...and he didn't even win his home state! A successful southern strategy would only be possible with a third-party candidate..like another Perot running.

Otherwise, the most logical strategy is to build support in the same states Gore won. Then the ticket should focus on close states like Florida and New Hampshire. With a powerful message and the right candidates we could also win in states like West Virginia, Ohio, Missouri, and even Nevada. Having a southerner on the ticket might bring in a state or two, Clark could bring in Arkansas or Edwards could bring in North Carolina..but I wouldn't base an entire campaign strategy on one region!

[GreenInNC]

32. watch out for North Carolina

I know this may sound far fetched and it will be a big pull if the Dems put some time and money here but NC could be taken by Dems.

We have a Dem. Governor, Dem State Senate and our house is 50/50. North Carolina has lost more jobs (% wise) than any other state and we are becoming very tired of seeing our service men and women dying in Iraq and Afganistan.

We have more and more people moving here from other parts of the country. At our Labor Day parade here in Charlotte (largest in the south), the Republican candidates got booed. In the past the Repubs knew they wouldn't get the labor vote but this is the first time I have heard them booed.

[mndemocrat_29]

34. I think you're basically right

Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin will all go for Democrats by much higher margins in 2004. I think that we have a very good shot at picking up New Hampshire, Arkansas, West Virginia, and Missouri. However, I think that we'll really have to work to take Nevada and Ohio. Not to say it can't be done, just to say it will be hard.