and anywhere else where Conservative values are valued... http://www.massequality.org/ma.html If he thinks he can win without the South...Just ask Al Gore...
Well, he already thinks that. He's already on record as saying it's possible to win the White House without a single Southern state. It may be possible mathematically, but it's unrealistic to expect that. And this election is not the one to try to prove that theory. The 2000 redistricting took a few electoral votes from the states that voted for Gore, not many, but enough to to where Bush could lose another small state and still win. For the first time since the '80s, California and New York are considered in play for the GOP. If Kerry thinks he can bypass the South, he will have to win all the states Gore won, plus two additional states. The sad thing is, if the Dems had gone with Edwards, several Southern states (Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and even Louisiana) and all the Midwestern states would be contested. The only Southern state Kerry has a shot at is Florida, and if he goes down there ranting and raving about how the election was stolen, and how Florida electoral politics are corrupt, he won't win over any swing voters, he'll just be stoking the base. I'm not saying this election is in the bag. I certainly don't think a Bush/Kerry contest will be as bad as Reagan/Mondale or Nixon/McGovern. But if Kerry bypasses the South, it will not be close, at least not as far as the Electoral College is concerned. And if the Dems lose just one of their Big Two (California and New York) they are screwed.
Between that letter that he put pen to paper in support of, combined with his radical past after turning away from his proud military service, as well as his somewhat radical view of having American soldiers, "dispersed through the world at the direction of the United Nations," during his early youth is ridiculous... He has compared gay marriage to the fight for equal rights...Gimme a break... Between Botox, Hanoi Jane, gay rights, and his ignorance of the South, he will be annihalated...
If current trends hold till November (which they won't. Something will happen, and other issues will come into play, but let's pretend that the game basically stays the same) I see Kerry dominating the Northeast, losing only a couple of New England states, most likely Maine and New Hampshire (highly rural, more conservative than the rest of New England, and they LOATHE taxes). Kerry wins New York, but the margin is very close. Bush takes Pennsylvania. Kerry, who completely bypassed the South, now realizes he has no hope of victory without at least one electoral vote-heavy Southern state (Virginia, Georgia, or Florida) to make up for Pennsylvania. It doesn't happen. Bush sweeps the South, including Florida. Bush does well in the Midwest, taking Iowa and Michigan away from the Dems and losing only Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota. By the time the polls close out West, it's all over. Bush will be one small Mountain State from the magic number (270) and all will have been lost. Bush rides Arnold's support out in Cali to a victory, adding ultimate insult to grevious injury for a thoroughly trounced Democratic Party. This maps tells you what to look at for the next election. I tend to agree with it, with these exceptions: 1) Maine, New York, and New Jersey are actually in play for the GOP. I know it's a long shot, but Bush is gonna hammer home 9/11 and is gonna ask the voters in the NYC area who they honestly feel more secure with in the White House and whether or not they want a President who will hunt down terrorists without mercy. The Democrats better have a plan to counter that. 2) The map says Arkansas is competitive, but I disagree. I'd wager Louisiana and Tennessee are far more in-play for Kerry than Arkansas. 3) You can forget about Florida if Kerry goes down there screaming about stolen elections. Jeb Bush handily won re-election there as well. I'm not saying Florida isn't in play, but there will be no sympathy among the swing voters for Democratic whining. And the recession hasn't hit Florida as hard as it has other states. 4) Michigan is in play, but not Wisconsin. Bush carrying Michigan would not surprise me. Bush carrying Wisconsin would. 5) Same with Oregon and Washington. I can see Bush doing well in Washington, but not in The People's Republic of Oregon. 6) California is in play. Anyone who thinks otherwise has not taken a look at Arnold's approval ratings. And he will stump for Bush. Just like Blanco will have high approval ratings if she somehow manages to stop the bleeding on unemployment and she will also stump for Kerry, putting Louisiana in play for the Dems. Bush will win going away, but it won't be a blowout. Kerry will do well in liberal strongholds and on his home turf.
The Governator will be Pumping Political Iron overtime to deliver the land of fruits, nuts, flakes & Neverland to Bush but I can't see Louisiana going for a Massachussetts self styled Kennedyesque liberal.
I didn't say Kerry would carry Louisiana. But if he's smart, he'll fight for this state. We re-elected Mary Landrieu in 2002. Granted, she did not exactly blow her competition away, but she won. We elected a Democratic governor in 2003, again, not by a huge margin, but we did. Bush won Louisiana with only 53%, of the vote in 2000 compared to 45% for Gore. If Blanco has popularity, puts that popularity on the line for Kerry, plus if the Dems can find enough people Bush has PO'ed in addition to hard core Dems, and a third party rightist/Libertarian runs a dynamic campaign (Pat Buchanan?), Louisiana could go Dem. Keep in mind, Bill Clinton carried this state twice. That was before Monica, Pardon-gate, and the politicized wars in the Balkans though. Of course, Kerry may be too liberal or Blanco's popularity may be too shaky for her to risk her political career for him. And Kerry may be dead serious about bypassing the South completely. He may see Louisiana's paltry nine electoral votes as not worth an all-out campaign blitz here. But in a nation so polarized, nine electoral votes can mean the difference between victory and defeat. If I were Kerry's campaign manager, I would go after Louisiana. But that's just my opinion.
I stand by my belief that Louisiana will never go for a Northeast liberal Demo. Louisiana will elect a somewhat liberal Demo but it has to be a native Louisiana liberal Demo.
No doubt. And John Edwards would be a better Dem to run down here. I think many Louisianians would vote for Edwards before they would vote for Kerry. In the end, I think Bush will carry Louisiana regardless of who the Dems run (which looks more and more to be Kerry everyday). But I think it's sad that Kerry is just gonna concede a third of the country right off the bat. That says something about the mindset of the Democratic Party towards the South today, and just confirms what Zell Miller has said in his book "A National Party No More." FDR said of the South "I see one-third of our nation ill-housed, ill-clothed, ill-fed. This must change." Modern liberals see one-third of our nation, and tell us to go to Hell, and to take the Confederate flag and the Southern Baptist Convention with us. :dis:
Jetstorm, we know much can happen between now and November. I think too much emphasis will be put on who Kerry picks as VP especially since it will probably be Edwards and the spin will be that Edwards makes the ticket more competitive in the South, which I don't believe will be the case since Kerry, the Prince of Gay Marriages, will be too much of a drag even if the VP was Jefferson Davis to make the Dems competitive in the South. As far as your state-by-state analysis: No way the Republicans are competitive in NY and NJ. Maine is a possibility, but using football lines, the Republicans are a 10-point road dog. NY and NJ are Louisiana-Lafayette at LSU type lines.
