What states would Kerry pick up that Gore lost

[9119495]

As a Dean supporter, I was disappointed with last night's results, but whatever happens, I want this thing to be over by March to concentrate on the big one. I do still hope Dean wins but...

One of the things I like about Kerry that seems to be a huge advantage over Edwards is his declining to accept matching funds as we will need the money against Bush.

One of the reasons I'm with Dean is because I think he can lock up liberal states and still get some of the ones with poor masses that have been hurt by Bush but still vote for him due to guns and stuff.

I see Kerry's position on guns similar to Gore's and I think he lost in large measure due to this issue (and other things). Even with a Southerner like John Edwards on the ticket, I don't think a single Southerner will switch from another "Southerner" Bush to vote for a Southern VP.

So convince me, where do you honestly think Kerry can pick up electoral votes?

And please don't dismiss this as a smear on Kerry. I really need to have some answers to this question.

[Blaukraut]

1. Definitely New Hampshire

I'd think they'd go Dem for him.

[David Dunham]

2. west virginia. new hampshire, and ohio

[9119495]

4. Those alone would more than do it

I think we'll give up Missouri, but Iowa (my state) is a lock for Kerry if he is the nominee. But if Ohio goes Bush...oh boy.

[blm]

59. Nevada and Colorado, too, imo.

Colorado - he'll have Hart and Wirth campaigning for him and they are very popular pols from there.

Nevada - Bush lied to them on Yucca Mt. and Kerry voted against Bush on it.

[Merlin]

3. Let's start with the obvious: Tennessee. n/t

.

[mlawson]

34. Tennessee????

I lived there for years, and I can safely say that the fundies pretty much own East TN, which has been repuke since the Civil War. Our nominee would have to heavily win Middle and West TN to counter the East. I can't see Kerry doing that.

[PAMod]

5. Maybe Kerry can generate an uncorruptible pluralty in Florida.

Besides that, I don't see any other Bush state coming over, all else being equal.

Why, for example, would West Virginia vote Kerry when they wouldn't vote Gore? If Kerry were pro-gun, he might be able to pick up some of these close rural states, but I can't see it otherwise.

Kerry might steal New Hampshire, but that's not enough to put us over the top.

Really folks, we have to be looking at this a bit differently. If we are going to play to not lose, in other words, not give up any of our states & maybe pick up a Bush state, we are in big trouble.

Our strategy has to be national - to demonize Bush and offer our candidate and his vision as the positive alternative.

It's going to be hard, but it is possible.

[9119495]

7. That's just the thing

I liked Dean for his ideas, but I saw a strong organization, appeal to some independents, appeal to NEW VOTERS, endless supply of cash (thanks to opting out of matching funds), and neutralizing a key wedge issue.

So who is left? I noted my concern with Kerry above.

Edwards won't have the cash and might not pick up any Bush states (Bush leads him in North Carolina last I heard--although that is subject to change)

Clark has cash limits and sounded bad last night.

What should we do?

[spooky3]

49. Everything's changed since Monday night--so I believe

we don't know yet who will have what $ and poll results really don't tell much right now.

[SaveElmer]

6. New Hampshire Only I think

His New England roots may help him there. I honestly don't see where he picks up anything else. Possibly West Virginia might come back home if Kerry doesn't play up the gun issue too much, but that is iffy. Clark would probably stand a better chance of picking up more than a couple states

[dolstein]

56. Tell that to Michael Dukakis

It isn't a concidence that Bill Clinton, a Southern Democrat, carried New Hampshire, while Michael Dukakis, from neighboring Massachusettes, could not.

[SadEagle]

8. WV? Ohio?

For WV, how are Kerry's relations with Sen. Byrd?
For Ohio, the steel thing is important.

Note: I think any Democrat can pick them up.

[MercutioATC]

10. Not Ohio.

We seem to be really dense here. We need something really inspiring to swing this state.

I think Dean could do it, but i don't think it's guaranteed. I WILL guarantee that no other candidate, given their current campaigns, could take Ohio.

[molly]

21. I grew up in Ohio - it is a really conservative

state. However, I think any DEM candidate would do well with labor there. They've lost a lot of jobs.

[spooky3]

48. I lived in OH 17 years. I think Edwards could do it.

He would need to do exactly what he did in Iowa.

Gore nearly won Ohio, even though he had written it off. Clinton won it twice, I believe.

The only midwestern state that is beyond the reach of Democrats is Indiana. Only one major urban area outside of the Chicago area.

[BGrier]

52. Out Of Reach

You mentioned that Indiana is the only midwestern state "beyond the reach of the Democrats". As a Nebraskan, I can tell you there's no chance a Democrat can win here. That's probably why Clinton never visited this state until the final days of his administration. It's tough living here, let me tell you.

[BobbyJay]

9. New Hampshire, Ohio, possibly AZ and NV.

[DoctorBombay]

11. Colorado?

He was born there...Clinton carried it twice, I think.

Nevada is another possibility, along with New Hampshire.

[JI7]

12. west virginia, new hampshire, nevada ,arizona for sure

and possibly colorado, louisiana,arkansas.

[isbister]

13. The VP choice won't win the race

but it could be a factor, should Kerry be the nominee.

I've heard talk of Clark, Edwards and Graham as possible running mates. Who knows who else would be in the mix?

[Adjoran]

14. There is one VP who could help any ticket

Bill Richardson.

Yeah, I know he said he wouldn't accept it. Everybody says that.

[greendog]

15. That's exactly what I've been thinking...

...with massive new voter registration in NM, AZ, NV, and CO.

[9119495]

17. But will Kerry pull new voters?

If so, from where? Could he get some of the Dean converts?

[isbister]

29. Could he get some of the Dean converts?

It appears as if he already has.

I think bush will pull more voters to the Democratic ticket than George Washington himself would.

[9119495]

31. One would help.

[Jerseycoa]

23. Not won't, can't

He's chairing the convention and he can't be on the ticket.

[IndianaGreen]

16. None!

The gun issue will defeat Kerry in the unlikely event he becomes the nominee.

[NNN0LHI]

19. What differences are there between Kerry and Gore on the gun issue? n/t

[Cuban_Liberal]

18. None, frankly.

I just don't see Sen. Kerry winning any states that Gore did not. he's an attractive candidate on many levels, but in terms of turning red states into blue states, I don't see it happeneing.

[Lexingtonian]

20. so-

How do you explain Gore losing Ohio and West Virginia, nevermind Tennessee or Arkansas, but winning Florida?

Because it's not actually highly dependent on the particular candidate.

Arizona should easily shift by 3%-4% compared to 2000 and ought to possibly be a narrow Democratic win. Nevada will probably shift half that- LV's growth has slowed a lot during the Bush recession- and be very close. Florida I don't think anyone really knows yet- the white population has trended Republican, but Hispanic and black and Caribbean people have probably grown in numbers sufficiently to counter- if almost all of them can be convinced to participate actively. Ohio can be won, but it's also a hard call- it's a bit peculiar culturally, and I don't see any of the candidates having the particular tone and style of appeal that works there figured out yet. West Virginia will trail what Pennsylvania does by a few points. I don't have much hope for New Hampshire yet, or Colorado, Missouri, Arkansas, or Louisiana. NH is frustratingly flaky- 6% third party voting last time around, curiously slow to clue in on national trends, and rational group behavior among its Democrats seems occasional at best (from this side of its southern border, I admit).

Our side is most vulnerable in Minnesota and Pennsylvania, and perhaps less so but still in some significant trouble in Iowa and Wisconsin. That will mean a lot of hard work by local politicians and grassroots groups. The Pubbies are going to put hugh effort and dough into organizing there- as in all swing states, of course.

[Cuban_Liberal]

22. That italicized quote isn't mine.

Maybe you meant to ask someone else?:shrug:

[Lexingtonian]

25. No, it was just for emphasis

They're my words. If bad, my bad!

[Cuban_Liberal]

30. Not a prob.

:hi:

[blm]

24. South is very pro-VETERAN. Vets and their families are not so happy.

Kerry was endorsed down here in SC by Gen. Cheney, who was the commander of Parris Island Marine Base here.

Once the campaign gets going, many more military men, veterans and their families will learn the real differences between Kerry and Bush.

Don't underestimate the power of the Fire Fighters, either. Especially post 9-11. They are the most powerful union out there, cache-wise. They were underestimated in Iowa and look how that turned out.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

26. But even I honestly don't think he can win any of the south

I think Boston brahmin and the old south do not mix well. Kind of like fire and water. The cultural divide and prejudices are just too great.
But I do think John can definitely win Ohio, WV, and New Hampshire- (which is all we need for the win) and maybe Arizona and Nevada.

[blm]

27. Wait till the word comes out Bush deserted during Vietnam.

Most people have no idea about that. I think it's going to DEVASTATE Bush.

It will matter.

I agree about NH and Ohio and I also believe Colorado will be Dem, too.

[mlawson]

33. ??? Don't they already know???

Did they care in 2000??? Apparently not, even with the DUI story. Will our 2004 nominee use the story??? I bet not.

Now were he a Dem, that would be different.

[blm]

47. They really don't know. They didn't hear it in 2000.

The veterans are just hearing about it. Max Cleland makes sure to mention it in his speeches to them on the road.

[PAMod]

28. Teddy Kennedy was great in Iowa...

& he is pure magic in West Virginia.

Kennedy practically living in WV is the only way John Kerry is picking up that state.

Ohio is in big economic trouble, so maybe - New Hampshire is next door, so maybe.

OK, NYfM, I'm sold.

I wonder how Kerry/Edwards would do down in the southland.

[mot78]

32. Border states (WV, OH) doubt if he can get southern states

But he still needs to campaign down there, or risk having * spend his money in blue states we need. NH and possibly southwest could also go Dem if we get Kerry.

[hellhathnofury]

35. NH, that's it.

Kerry has all Gore's faults and none of Dean's redemption's.

[sangha]

41. Thank God!

Kerry has all Gore's faults and none of Dean's redemption's.

[hellhathnofury]

44. Wooden, reeks of Washington.

[sangha]

36. Oregon, without a doubt

The economy there is terrible, and I don't think they appreciate Bush*'s telling them how great the economy is doing.

And it was a very tight race there in 2000.

[9119495]

38. Oregon went for Gore right?

[sangha]

42. No sure, but I thought it went Bush*

I could be wrong. Either way, it was very close, and I don't think the recounting was done until AFTER Fla's.

[hellhathnofury]

45. Oregon went Gore, strong Green vote.

Ha.

[freetempe]

37. NONE

Except maybe New Hampshire. But he will lose states like Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin and New Mexico.


Folks, Kerry is a taller version of Dukakis. If he's the nominee, watch out.

[9119495]

39. I'm for Dean but I think Kerry would get IA and MN

Iowa is quite democratic "in" the state--just not its house delegation.

[hellhathnofury]

46. Gore won IA and MN.

[NavajoRug]

43. Hey there FreeTempe -- I should have checked this first . . .

. . . before I posted #40 below!

You and I are on the exact same page re: states that Gore won in 2000 that Kerry might lose in 2004.

:-)

[NavajoRug]

40. Excellent post. Here's my take on this . . .

In order of likelihood, the states most likely to switch from GOP (200) to Democrat (2004) are the following:

1. West Virginia
2. New Hampshire
3. Tennessee
4. North Carolina

This may sound like good news, but we are going to have trouble even if all of them go to the Democratic Party candidate. Because the following (in order of likelihood) have a good chance of going the other way:

1. New Mexico
2. Minnesota
3. Iowa
4. Wisconsin

[wuushew]

51. I disagree

States we might get to convert

260 +

NV(5)
WV(5)
NH(4)
CO(9)
LA(9)


Why would we get TN when Gore could not even win it?

North Carolina maybe, but is Edward's even popular there?

[NavajoRug]

53. Good points. I didn't even think of Louisiana . . .

I included both Tennessee because Gore would have won that state if not for his own political blunders (alienating workers in the coal industry with his attacks against fossil fuels).

North Carolina is a possibility because of the recent troubles in the textile industry. Besides, it is getting more liberal over time, too. They come from the same political party, but believe me -- a state that replaces Jesse Helms with Elizabeth Dole has really moved to the left on the political spectrum.

[rbrussell]

50. The Thing is...

That it's utterly foolish for us to base our campaign calculations on the states that Gore won in 2000. Assuming that we're going to hold on to all those states is dangerous.

I've talked to more than a few Democrats who are convinced that we need to simply pour resources into Ohio, Florida, or some other state, and then we'll win. If we focus our vision on "swing states" we run the risk of getting our asses kicked in states we should hold.

What I fear is this. A Democratic nominee spends way too much time in Florida and, while spending millions and millions, manages to narrowly take it, but then loses Pennsylvania and Michigan or something.

We should also not, as some seem to do, base our political calcuations on what people tell us. A lot of people I know, who are Bush supporters, will seem to agree with someone who hates him, just to avoid a violent arguement.

Aside from the Freepers, most Republicans are fairly calm and mild people. My best friend, for example votes the straight Republican ticket every year, but his wife thinks that he's a Democrat. He lives in a very liberal area (Madison, WI) and works in academia. He keeps his beliefs, but generally doesn't say anything (or pretends to agree) simply for the sake of comity.

On DU we run the risk of developing tunnel-vision. Among people I know, for every one that has turned against the GOP in the past two years, there are two that plan on voting for Bush because he can "keep us safe." I don't agree with that, but I don't get angry about it either. This lets me have franker conversations than, really, I think many of you have.

When we go about screaming about 'Bush*' or 'Bu$h' or 'the Chimp' or whaetver else, we make it easier for Republicans to attack us and convince people that we're nuts.

Frankly, I don't think we're going to win until there's a sea-change in American thought which isn't going to come until the present circumstances burn themselves out. That's why I've been for Dean- it isn't about Howard Dean, it's about building a new progressive movement. A real progressive movement, not a corporate one which uses real progressives as its street-walkers much like the corporate Republicans use the Freepers and the rest.

[9119495]

54. I don't think we'll hold the Gore states

But though I like Kerry more and more, I think he could be an electoral disaster. I know many who think my guy Dean would be too, but I think he brings in new voters and captures maverick states like NH, NV, WV, etc. I desperately need a Dem to win but I fear we can't do it with Kerry--Not a smear. I'll pull mightily for him.

[poopyjr]

55. If you think Kerry is bad, Dean would be ten times worse.

Dean couldn't even bring in new voters to vote for him in the caucuses. They voted for Kerry and Edwards. Dean created a huge backlash against himself.

[9119495]

57. Um...Dean did not create the backlash. The media did

and just you wait.

For your information, Dean did bring in new voters as 9 of the 20 in my caucus group were new voters. Kerry's victory looked huge because Gephardt's people (who were at odds with Dean the whole campaign) went to Kerry in the nine precincts I sampled. Where is your evidence Dean would do worse?

Now as for Kerry: I like him. Thought his speech was great. Will vote and likely work for him if he is the nominee. I just look at the map and see Kerry's appeal about the same as Gore. Dean has the chance to excite new voters and sway independents (perhaps Kerry can too). See my posts above for some kind words about Kerry.

[styersc]

58. Kerry will do well wherever there are large numbers of vets..

as they are falling away from Bush in droves. Also, since Dean has promised to work for the candidate (assuming it is Kerry), then Dean will help him win wherever Dean was strong- assuming he wasn't lying when he raised his hand and took that oath.