What red states can Hillary flip?

[ButterflyBlood]

In what red states does she have any appeal? I don't see any.

[Dr Fate]

1. They love her in Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina and Texas.

You should hear the way they gush over her at the Barbershops, neighborhood bars and BBQ joints.

[Bombtrack]

10. do you do regional tours of Barbershops, neighborhood bars, and BBQ joints for a living ?

what a crock of shit. Maybe you heard one positive conversation about Hillary at one of those places one time and like, extrapolated. But of the few political conversations I've ever overhead in a public establishment like those I've never heard anyone talking about Hillary, positively or negatively, and I'm from Massachusetts.

[Ninja Jordan]

11. It's called sarcasm.

[Dr Fate]

15. As a matter of fact I AM a Barber, Bartender and BBQ master.

Sarcasm is but just one of my many talents.

But seriously- I've spent a lot of time in all 3, in red states.

I am very much a practitioner of what I call "Barber Shop" or "Grocery Line" politics. I talk about Democratic politics to everyone who will let me.

I know the regular old Red-State moderate that you might find in the above mention hang-outs don't gush over Hillary too much.

Oh yeah- I do make some mean Southern-style pork-ribs- really! ;)

[zulchzulu]

34. Montana, Idaho, Arizona...

Yeah, they LOVE her there...

[Carolina]

53. LOL

Love the sarcasm.

I'm in SC, a stupidly republican state. No flippin' will happen here no matter who is nominated.

Mere mention of Hilary's name makes otherwise normal (appearing) people turn bilious green and spew all manner of invective.

[mrgorth]

2. Zero.

.

[Hav]

3. .

Purple states are enough.
The question is whether she could win Ohio in a fair election and keep all Kerry states. I think it's not impossible but it's very tough when almost half of the people would never vote for her, at least at this point of time.
I heard though that certain Repubs would be quite good in states that Kerry won (like PA) and that is worrying.

[Clark2008]

48. She won't win those, either.

Hell, she's polling lower than Guiliani in BLUE Pennsylvania!!

[Telly Savalas]

55. Is this the same blue Pennsylvania that elected Santorum to the Senate twice?

If so, then it might be more precise to say Penn is purplish.

Moreover, if polls taken this early have any weight, then why didn't Sen. Lieberman win the Democratic nomination back in 2004? He was ahead in those polls.

Clinton probably has the least crossover appeal of the Big 3, but the poll results aren't really an indicator of this.

[Learn2Swim]

4. the question to ask is...

what blue states would flip red because of Hillary. If she were to come out, and happened to be up against Rudy, I think it's going to be a runaway.

I found this study interesting. Keep in mind, it is from July, so it would look a little different currently, but it is interesting, nonetheless.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneblog/archives/070223/newt_vs_hillary.htm

"National upshot: Rudy's electoral vote position against Hillary is much stronger than Bush's against Kerry. Rudy puts almost the whole East into play and is significantly stronger in several target states in the Midwest and West. Hillary puts some states into play in the South but with many fewer electoral votes than Rudy does elsewhere. Even if you assume that Hillary is stronger against Rudy today than she was in July, the pairing does place the Republicans in a stronger position than Bush was in '04."

[rinsd]

25. You really think Rudy is gonna make it out of the primaries alive?

[Learn2Swim]

26. Take a look at the polls.

You tell me. Pubs are obviously going to line up for Rudy. They realize he's their only chance for maintaining executive power.

You honestly think he won't? I know, I know, religious right won't vote for him, not conservative enough, used to be a dem, RINO, blah, blah, blah. The Right LOVES this guy, social stances and the wife train be damned.

[rinsd]

33. I am all over the polls.

The RR is the engine that drives the GOP. They are the base, they are the ones getting buses and doing GOTV.

So he's lukewarm with his base and he also pisses off OUR base to the point people will vote against him(hmmm sounds familiar).

How do you think the minority vote will break against Rudy?

Also McCain is no pushover. He ran against one of the most wellfunded and dirty machines in poltiical history and he came up a few states short.

[Learn2Swim]

58. just saw this, thought you might like it...

"Other Senate Republicans dodged the question. Sen. John E. Sununu of New Hampshire said last week that he is not a good person to ask about the party's prospects next year. Sen. John W. Warner of Virginia, who has endorsed McCain, waved away a question about 2008.

"It's going to be bad," a senior aide to a Senate Republican said, "but maybe we've maxed out, and the only place to go now is up."

That sense of foreboding has helped propel several of the campaigns, particularly that of former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who in another season might not have stood a chance among Republican voters. Now, fearing they may lose, some Republicans have said they would be willing to consider someone more moderate if that is their only chance of retaining control of the White House.

"I think there's concern because the president's numbers are down and we just came off a bad election," said Warren Tompkins, a prominent Republican operative in South Carolina who supports former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. "People are still a little down and a little shell-shocked from what happened in the last cycle."

One force who could revive the party is Clinton, Tompkins said, if she wins the Democratic nomination. "She will awaken us and get the party out of the doldrums, especially in my world," Tompkins said, referring to the South.
--
--
--
Polls give that theory credence, and they also suggest that either McCain or Giuliani would have greater luck drawing away independents and Democrats in a general election than the Democratic front-runners, Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), would have in attracting Republicans.

A recent Washington Post-ABC News poll showed Republicans having much more negative views of the Democratic contenders, particularly Clinton, than Democrats have of the Republican candidates."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/02/AR2007030201636_2.html

Sounds like they may be giving him more consideration than they would, due to for lack of a better term, this 'unique' set of circumstances they find themselves with.

But wtf knows>?

[rinsd]

59. I can certainly see the Republicans going for a perceived winner

Especially if there are national heat polls showing only Rudy as winning but there's some time to go though.

Let's see who wins the 1st fundraising contest for this 1st Q.

[Learn2Swim]

60. I hear you..

Here's hoping Rudy doesn't make their ticket.

[fishwax]

57. of course, Clinton got more electoral votes against Rudy in those polls than any other

democratic candidate. Barack Obama won only Illinois against Rudy. Edwards won only 100 electoral votes. So by that logic, should we even bother fielding a nominee if Rudy's in the game? I don't see the analysis of a conservative pundit like Michael Barone as anything remotely near conclusive, especially using data from two years out from the election.

Plenty has changed since last July--rudy has gotten plenty of pub, for one thing, particularly with the religious right crowd. What will change between now and November '08? Even more, I'm sure. July 2006 means nothing.

[SaveElmer]

5. Several...

Ohio, Iowa, Arkansas, New Mexico, Nevada...

[PresidentObama]

7. What about Colorado? I think she could.

Possibly Florida as well.

Definitely not Missouri. Our GOP Governor, Matt Blunt is up for re-election in 2008 which will benefit the Democratic candidate in 2008 but I just don't think she or anyone can win in Missouri. The voters of Missouri don't confuse Presidential and state races. I remember Clark McCaskill for Governor signs in yards alongside Bush/Cheney signs here and there. It was strange.

[The Magistrate]

6. Ohio Will Be Ours, Sir, Regardless Of Who The Nominee Is

[pnwmom]

20. Exactly. She can flip Ohio now that Ken Blackwell and

his gang of election thieves are gone.

[Bombtrack]

8. none

sorry I can't jump on the delusion bandwagon

[job777]

9. Probably none.

The question is how many of our blue states will she also loose?

[PresidentObama]

13. Can you justify that? n/t

[Learn2Swim]

18. you might

want to take a look at the link in my post above... just an example

It is a state-by-state breakdown, all of em. I know that was in July, but come on. How much has really changed?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

12. Zero

And against Giuliani should we lose some key purple states and even a blue state like New Jersey.

[PresidentObama]

14. We've got enough on Rudy, I doubt thats true.

Just because the MSM calls him America's mayor doesn't make it so!!

[Learn2Swim]

19. I don't think we do...

Rudy is going to be a force to be reckoned with if he makes it by the primaries. And at this point, it looks nearly certain he will. jmo

His skeletons are well-known, and are out there, all over the place. And his lead still steadily builds.

[PresidentObama]

24. We still have quite a bit of time before these poll numbers matter.

Don't you think?

[Learn2Swim]

28. we have some time before they count...

but believe me, they matter. The GOP seeing Rudy owning in the general matters.

Don't think they don't matter. They aren't the end-all be-all of political forecasting, but they matter.

[PresidentObama]

30. I doubt the GOP will nominate Rudy. National opinion polls a year out don't tell me shit. n/t

[Learn2Swim]

31. Oh trust me...

I hope you're right my friend. :) *Crossing fingers*

[AshevilleGuy]

27. Swing voters don't care

Rudy is the type who can get certain white males to vore for him, the ones who can't name their own senators or governor. I can just hear them now: "WoooHooo, he saved us from 9-11!!! He's da man!!!!"

And with Thompson on that ticket, even more so.

[Learn2Swim]

29. good point.

hadn't thought about that

[xkenx]

16. Not one; here's why.

2008 is all about flipping red states. Assume she holds all blue states (want to bet about NH, PA, WI?) Red states, by definition have more Rs than Ds, so a Dem. must get a significant majority of Is in the red states to win. Gore and Kerry couldn't do it (male Vietnam vets with lots of experience), so what on earth is going to help Hillary win a red state, given their political makeup and her negatives. She is $100M of free advertising for the Rethugs to get out their base, and our base is barely lukewarm to her. Take time off work to vote for her?; go out in the rain or snow to vote for her? Positive passion gets out the vote, and we need it desperately. No wonder the Rethugs tout her candidacy so much; they are salivating at the opportunity to run against her.

[pnwmom]

21. Red states in the 2004 election also included "swing states."

She will flip Ohio and others in the midwest that went to Bush last time.

[rinsd]

23. Not quite right

"Red states, by definition have more Rs than Ds, so a Dem. must get a significant majority of Is in the red states to win"

Red states are states in which the electoral votes went to a Republican in the last election. They can be swing states that have close demographics.

"our base is barely lukewarm to her"

When you consider the base to be Kos and DU, yes. When you realize

"Take time off work to vote for her?; go out in the rain or snow to vote for her? Positive passion gets out the vote, and we need it desperately."

So who is this miracle candidate that will bring forth the reluctant voter?

Because if you think Democrats will not bother to vote and let a Republican win again you are out of your mind.

[xkenx]

36. I repeat--true passion gets out the extra vote--that which puts us over the top.

If lack of passion only loses a few percent, that dooms us. As you admit, a lot of the base is barely lukewarm to Hillary. That is all it takes in swing states to lose. Hillary already has strong negatives of 46%. Losing that much vote before starting is an insurmountable hurdle. You are entitled to support hillary all you want, but you delude yourself to think she can flip the states that Gore and Kerry couldn't.
As you can tell from the avatar, my candidate is Wes Clark. Because of his American hero story, former general, etc., he will get that chunk of Independent votes, even w/o Rethug. votes.

[rinsd]

39. As I admit?

I stated if you consider DU and Kos the base her support is lukewarm. But Kos and DU are not the base merely a slice of it.

Look at her approval rating in the demographic subsets of Democrats and Liberals. They are outstanding. Look at her numbers with other traditional base members; minorities and pro-choicers


http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollTrack.aspx?g=77ca4b7e-ec24-4213-a4d6-f5053467ebf4

"You are entitled to support hillary all you want, but you delude yourself to think she can flip the states that Gore and Kerry couldn't."

Not sure who I support yet. I liked Edwards in 04. But both Clinton and Obama are appealing for various reasons. This will be 2008 not 2004 or 2000.

"As you can tell from the avatar, my candidate is Wes Clark. Because of his American hero story, former general, etc., he will get that chunk of Independent votes, even w/o Rethug. votes."

He has never been elected to any office. He has few connections within the party, is not a particulary skilled fundraiser and even after running for President his name recognition is on par with Kucinich. He should run for Senator.

[Clark2008]

49. Hmmm... I guess raising more than Howard Dean the first

quarter Clark was in the race makes him not a "particularly skilled fundraiser."

:eyes:

Buy into the corporate media spin (or in Clark's case, lack of reportage, at all) much?

[rinsd]

51. Clark raised more than Dean? When?

I suspect you mean he outraised other candidates accepting fed matching dollars in the 4th Q of 2003.

However, I was surprised at how much he initially raised.

I still stand by my suggestion that he run for Senate.

[truebrit71]

17. None. She would guarantee another rethuglican 'win' in '08.

Damaged, poisoned goods.

Shit never mind getting the Red states to vote for her, she's going to have a difficuly time getting the BLUE states to vote for her..

Hillary '08?

No thanks!

[mmonk]

22. You can't be serious.

[AJH032]

32. Better question: How many red states can the Republicans keep?

The Republicans will be so weak in 2008 that any political geographical comparison between 2000/2004 and 2008 is almost worthless.

[xkenx]

35. Only Bush is weak, and Bush ain't running.

A Republican like a Chuck Hagel can run as the anti-Bush, promising to return the Republican Party to its' true conservative roots. That Republican will hold Republicans, and we are back to "why will a distinct majority of Is vote for Hillary?"

[rinsd]

43. You make grand assumptions

"A Republican like a Chuck Hagel can run as the anti-Bush, promising to return the Republican Party to its' true conservative roots.

"That Republican will hold Republicans, and we are back to "why will a distinct majority of Is vote for Hillary?""

So why would they vote for Hagel, a fervent anti-abortion, anti-education, anti-environment pol?

Why would a Republican party now dominanted by Bush loyalists suddenly go whole hog with a guy campaigning as a basic repudation of them?

[Clark2008]

50. And if Fred Thompson gets into it and wins the primary - it's over.

If we put up ANY of the three front runners, Thompson will kick their asses.

I live in a red state with purple leanings, trust me. Thompson will CARRY the white male vote we so desparately need.

[elizm]

37. I live in South Carolina....

...one of THE biggest RED states. I know of ONE person who is only lukewarm to her. Anybody who thinks she can flip any RED states is delusional.

[SaveElmer]

38. Anyone who thinks she can't flip red states...

Is ignoring the evidence...

There is no rational reason to believe she cannot other than an internalization of the conventional wisdom that says she cannot...

[elizm]

40. And your evidence that she CAN is??????

[SaveElmer]

41. Numerous polls...

In states such as Ohio, Arkansas, Iowa, and Florida, among others that have either showed her leading, within the margin of error, or a couple points behind...

No guarantee of victory of course, but shows she is most definitely competitive in all of these places...

[Orangepeel]

45. No one we nominate is going to win South Carolina

I'm leaning toward Bill Richardson or John Edwards myself, but neither of them are going to win South Carolina either.

Clinton could win Ohio, now that the voting will be more fair. She'd probably win Arkansas, if the polls are any indication. Depending on her VP pick, she could win New Mexico or Nevada.

Would she win the election? I don't know. I think Richardson or Edwards would have a better shot, which is why I'm leaning toward them. If you don't like her, it is sensible for you not to vote for her. But to conclude that she can't win because you and the people you know don't like her isn't, so much.

[Alamom]

46. I live in Alabama and I know many who will vote for her.....many are

former conservatives. :applause:

[Carolina]

54. Hey elizm

I'm in Columbia, where are you?

Totally agree with your comments, except I know of no one who is lukewarm. The usual reaction is pure foam at the mouth loathing!

[AtomicKitten]

42. Let's check.

[Dr Fate]

44. LOL! For some reason that makes me laugh too. n/t

n/t

[skipos]

47. Maybe Arkansas and that is it. She shouldn't be our nominee. nt

[Geek_Girl]

52. Maybe Ohio, FL, AZ and some of the midwest

I don't think she'll pick up the south. Though I did see a Hillary bumper sticker the other day. I live in TN

[ooga booga]

56. I don't see Hillary having ANY influence in Red States

The question at the beginning of this thread hints at an extremely important point regarding the 2008 presidential race. Namely, that the Republican will have to turn some Blue states to win, and the Democrat will have to turn some Red States to win. The tipping point of the whole deal hinges on THAT point -- in my view. One will succeed and the other will fail. The gains in 2006 and the continuing mess in Iraq will not insure that the Democrat will be POTUS #44. I think that the GOP has a pretty good chance of retaining the White House. Democrats had better nominate a candidate that has broad appeal who can put the Republican on the defensive and force him to play catch up. Kinda of like getting a couple of touchdowns ahead in a football game. Get a lead and hang on to it. Let the other side fight the opposition on the field AND the clock. I just don't see Hillary having the appeal to snare those 270 electoral votes. I also have profound doubts about every other Democrat in the race so far.

Read George Will's latest column. I think he frames it very well.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17662245/site/newsweek/