Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 10/13/2004 10:16:12 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/13/2004 10:18:13 AM EST by The_Macallan]

THE SIX MOST CRITICAL STATES:

Every vote in every state is gonna be important and since most states are leaning towards the same side they did in 2000, it's gonna be a VERY close election again.

These crucial states were VERY close (<2% difference) in 2000 and still are today OR are actually in danger of switching sides:

* IOWA
* WISCONSIN
* NEW MEXICO
* OHIO
* NEW HAMPSHIRE
* FLORIDA


Kerry is holding Iowa by 1% (ended '00 at Gore 0.3%) and is tied in Wisconsin (ended '00 at Gore 0.2%) and New Mexico (ended '00 at Gore (0.06%)

Bush is behind by 2% in Ohio (ended '00 at Bush 3.5%) and behind by 1% in New Hampshire (ended '00 at Bush 1.3%) but ahead by 3.5% in Florida (ended '00 at Bush 0.1%)

BOTTOMLINE:
Bush is having more trouble "keeping" his states he won in 2000. Kerry is holding steady at where Gore was in 2000 and has two of Bush's states now leaning towards Kerry.

If you live in any these states -

GET OUT THE VOTE!!!

Mobilize, canvas your area, click the links above, donate time to the phone banks, (btw... phone banks are known to be one of the most effective "get out the vote" techniques) and hit hard on election day to make sure EVERY Republican shows up to the polls!

This election will be won or lost based on TURNOUT!

EVERY VOTE IN EVERY STATE IS IMPORTANT - IF WE LOSE EVEN ONE STATE FROM 2000, WE LOSE IT ALL!





Link Posted: 10/13/2004 10:20:26 AM EST
Add Penn & Michigan to that list
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 10:21:51 AM EST
The last poll I saw had Bush ahead in Ohio 50% to 45%.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 10:22:40 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/13/2004 10:24:57 AM EST by AR15fan]

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
...since most states are leaning towards the same side they did in 2000...



Wow, who would have thunk it? Only four years later with half the canidates being the same, the trend is for a repeat of 2000. That's the fundemental flaw of most polsters and election prediction models, they ignore past results.


Link Posted: 10/13/2004 10:22:47 AM EST
its scary we could have kerry.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 10:22:55 AM EST
I have personally discussed politics one-on-one with several fence-sitters (leaning left) in MS, AL, and TN lately.......sorry I can't help w/ the other states.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 10:24:30 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 10:29:07 AM EST

Originally Posted By AR15fan:
Add Penn & Michigan to that list


Kerry's been very steadily holding Michigan at between 5-10%, Gore won it with 5% and he's been running at around 3-4% in Pennsylvania too.

But no matter what, if you live in those states, get out the vote!



Link Posted: 10/13/2004 10:34:54 AM EST

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
Srry Mac, every analysis I have read has the exact opposite, that Bush is having an easier time holding his states from 2000 than Kerry is having holding Gore's states. Furthermore, do to population shifts and reapportionment, I believe the Bush states picked up seven electoral votes.


GWBush is certainly gaining in MOST of his states, but if he wins South Carolina by 20% instead of by 16%, it doesn't affect the outcome.

It's those states I listed (especially Ohio & New Hampshire) that GWBush is not holding as well as he took them in 2000.


Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
But I absolutelt concur, we need to fight like there is no tomorrow. This IS do or die!



Amen!


Link Posted: 10/13/2004 10:41:38 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 10:48:13 AM EST
Hiram Ranger and I must be reading the same analysis as the ones I've read look grim for Kerry. However, there is an important point to this... all of these analyses are based on the current polls and in many states the separation between candidates is less than 5%.

For comparison, here is a list of polling accuracy from 2000:

Zogby underestimated Bush by 2, had Gore accurate.
Washington Post had Bush accurate, Gore underestimated by 3.
Pew underestimated Bush by 2; underestimated Gore by 5.
Newsweek underestimated Bush by 3; underestimated Gore by 5.
NBC/Wall Street Journal underestimated Bush by 1; underestimated Gore by 4.
Marist overestimated Bush by 1, underestimated Gore by 4.
Harris underestimated both Bush and Gore by one point.
Gallup had Bush accurate, Gore underestimated by 2.
Fox News underestimated both Bush and Gore by 5 percentage points each.
CBS News underestimated Bush by 4, Gore by 3.
Battleground overestimated Bush by 2, underestimated Gore by 3.

In short, the spread on the polls could be as much as 5 points. If this is the case, then there are a LOT more states up for grabs than The MacAllan's analysis shows and definitely more than the ones that I've read.

I would add Pennsylvania to the list simply because the race is very close there and the only way Kerry can win without Pennsylvania is to capture Florida away from Bush.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 11:07:12 AM EST
I talked with two people from critical states yesterday.

The first was a lady in pennsylvania, I was calling on business, and I asked her who would win she thought it was too close to call but wished that it was over. She said that she was tired of the mudslinging and thought that Bushes adds were laced with lies. She was sincere in her opinion and I identified myself as a Bush fan and asked her if she thought the same of Kerry's mudslinging she said it was mostly Bush that she found offensive. I know she will vote Kerry but it was like the coon hunter that went up the tree to get the raccoon and ran in to the Bobcat, he yelled down to the boys at the base of the tree 'shoot up amongst us one of us got to have some relief'.

The second boy came in my shop and needed a part and he thought that Wisconsin was going Bush but he was a rabid democrat and started talkin about how George Sr had personally screwed him over and how hillary had tried to help but that that was about the time that vince foster got killed. Either he was telling the truth or he is a pathological liar an insane, I am going with the second.

I have a recomendation, every one should start throwing an extra prayer out on this daily.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 1:34:11 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/13/2004 1:38:22 PM EST by The_Macallan]

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
Mac, the point being that with the pick up of seven electoral votes due to reapoortionment, it is possible not to carry say NH and still win the 270 needed. I'm not counting my chickens yet, but the trends are favorable, but they need to be exploited... not taken for granted.


I understand. And I'm not counting GWBush out by a long shot either.

What say you about this:

STATE (Electoral Votes), current avg. polls (2000 result)........ (previous four election winners)

1) Massachussettes (12EV) Kerry +25% (Gore +27%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Dukakis '88;)
2) New York (31EV), Kerry +20% (Gore +24%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Dukakis '88;)
3) Minnesota (10EV), Kerry +4% (Gore +2.4%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Dukakis '88;)
4) Hawaii (4EV), Kerry +10% (Gore +18%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Dukakis '88;)
5) Iowa (7EV), Kerry +1% (Gore +0.3%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Dukakis '88;)
6) Wisconsin (10EV), TIED (Gore +0.2%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Dukakis '88;)
7) Washington (11EV), Kerry +10% (Gore +5.6%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Dukakis '88;)
8) Oregon (7EV), Kerry +7% (Gore +0.5%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Dukakis '88;)
9) California (55EV), Kerry +9% (Gore +12.8%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Bush '88)
10) Illinois (21EV), Kerry +13% (Gore +12%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Bush '88)
11) Michigan (17EV), Kerry +5% (Gore +5.2%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Bush '88)
12) Pennsylvania (21EV), Kerry +4% (Gore +4.2%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Bush '88)

BTW... that's 209 Electoral votes right there (counting the always-Democratic District of Columbia (3EV) too).

61 more and there's your winner. If you add Florida (Bush +4%), Ohio (Kerry +2%) and New Jersey (Kerry +6%) to that list that's 271.


All I'm saying is that this is going to come down to the wire and that, ESPECIALLY in those "Critical Six" states they need to MOBILIZE AND GET OUT THE VOTE!!!

Link Posted: 10/13/2004 2:17:09 PM EST
I'm in Ohio & I really don't believe the election is all that close. I think I can say that objectively even though I'm voting for Bush. I think Bush will win Ohio by about the same amount as he did in 2000.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 2:21:40 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 2:25:59 PM EST
Florida is goin to be a mess this election , I guarantee it. With these Hurricanes,etc. No matter who wins (itll be BUSH) the other person will bitch and want recounts down here. Mark my words.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 2:28:34 PM EST
I would disregard New Hampshire and New Mexico, and add Pennsylvania.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 2:31:40 PM EST
How come Bush has more states' support (practically all of the south and the middle) but isn't still ahead of Kerry by far margin? I mean Kerry only has several western states and New England, and a few in the middle. How come OH/PA etc have so many EVs while states like AL, etc only have 10 give or take a few EVs? Is this based on the population?

I'm an immigrant, so please excuse my ignorance with the U.S electoral system.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 2:31:43 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 2:33:03 PM EST
We are doing our best here in OH.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 2:34:18 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 2:34:36 PM EST

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:

Originally Posted By die-tryin:
Florida is goin to be a mess this election , I guarantee it. With these Hurricanes,etc. No matter who wins (itll be BUSH) the other person will bitch and want recounts down here. Mark my words.



I agree with you, but I think the Hurricanes help Bush big time! People saw him a lot including before the first disasterous debate. He could have been prepping, he was with them instead, and liberals sneared that he was wasting time handing out ice... bet if you needed ice it didn't seem like a waste of time. Also, 76% of active duty military personnel are backing Bush. Florida is still a bastion of military folks and veterans isn't it? Eglin, MacDill, Jacksonville, Mayport, Tyndall...



True...But there are alot of rich old money here aka Democraps.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 2:36:19 PM EST

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:

Originally Posted By MaverickMkii:
How come Bush has more states' support (practically all of the south and the middle) but isn't still ahead of Kerry by far margin? I mean Kerry only has several western states and New England, and a few in the middle. How come OH/PA etc have so many EVs while states like AL, etc only have 10 give or take a few EVs? Is this based on the population?

I'm an immigrant, so please excuse my ignorance with the U.S electoral system.



Yes, your electoral votes for each state are based upon the number of senators and congressman each state has. Every state has two senators no matter the population, for a total of 100 senators... There are 435 congressmen divided up to the states based upon their percentage of the national populations. Thus, every state has a minimum of 3 elecotral votes (2 senators and 1 congressman). The more electoral votes a state has, the higher its population. The numbers are adjusted every ten years when the new census is done.



Thank you for the explanation.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 2:46:01 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/13/2004 2:46:29 PM EST by spm681]
New Mexico might go Bush but I doubt it. We have a strong military presence here and a ton of retired vets. This helps Bush. We also have something like 13 Indian Reservations, Santa Fe, Taos, Rio Arriba county and Espanola and 1/3 of the population on welfare.. This bodes well for Kerry.

We might go Bush but in reality we will propably go Kerry.

Not to dampen spirits but the latest Washington Post poll has Kerry pulling ahead. Bush was up by 5 or 6 a few days ago.
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 3:23:11 PM EST

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
My opinion is Florida and Ohio will go Bush.

I hope you're right.


Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
I'm curious to know where you pulled that spread from and when those numbers were released?


RealClearPolitics

Only taking the most recent two weeks into account.

Link Posted: 10/13/2004 3:27:53 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 3:39:39 PM EST
Thank god Michigan isnt one of them. There is a bunch of fucking liberal Union Sheep here.

Fuckers
Link Posted: 10/13/2004 3:51:54 PM EST
Myself and Miz Reno will be depositing two GWB votes in Florida.
Link Posted: 10/14/2004 4:25:02 AM EST

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:

STATE (Electoral Votes), current avg. polls (2000 result)........ (previous four election winners)

3) Minnesota (10EV), Kerry +4% (Gore +2.4%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Dukakis '88;)

5) Iowa (7EV), Kerry +1% (Gore +0.3%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Dukakis '88;)

6) Wisconsin (10EV), TIED (Gore +0.2%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Dukakis '88;)

12) Pennsylvania (21EV), Kerry +4% (Gore +4.2%)........ (Gore '00; Clinton '96; Clinton '92; Bush '88)



That is four states and 48 electoral votes where Kerry's margin is less than the statistical margin of error in the polls. It will definitely be close and it will be all about the turnout; but this election is winnable, just like the semi-auto ban was defeatable.

Top Top