West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Train of Thought => Topic started by: Trauma-san on July 24, 2004, 07:22:06 PM
-
As I've said for months, John Kerry will not win this fall He will be soundly beaten by George W. Bush. Despite the media's attempts to portray Kerry as a strong candidate, he is in fact a weak candidate, and here's a story that shows exactly what I'm talking about.
Despite positive tone, Kerry faces deficit
Democrat trails President Bush in Electoral College calculationsMSNBC staff and news service reports
As John Kerry heads toward what looks to be a harmonious, feel-good Democratic convention in Boston, his campaign strategists are facing the hard, cold math of an Electoral College map that continues to favor President Bush.
On Saturday, courting voters in Sioux City, Iowa, Kerry discarded his usual criticism of President Bush to promote a more positive message. The Massachusetts senator said the campaign "is about listening and learning from Americans who believe in their hearts that tomorrow can be better than today."
Kerry said he and running mate John Edwards value good-paying jobs, affordable health care, independence from Mideast oil, a strong military and good relations abroad. "We’re taking this trip with the hope that we can begin a new conversation in this country," he said.
Despite the optimistic tone, Kerry trails Bush in the battle for the 270 electoral votes needed to win the White House, as he makes his case at the Democratic National Convention next week to topple the Republican incumbent.
Tall hurdles remain in his path, including Electoral College math that favors Bush.
"It’s a tough, tough map. I think it’s going to be a close race," said Democratic strategist Tad Devine, who helped plot Al Gore’s state-by-state strategy in 2000 and plays the same role for Kerry.
"But looking back four years, we’re much stronger now. I think we’re going into this convention in great shape," he said.
After Kerry rolls into Boston to accept the nomination on Thursday night, following four days of positive media attention drawn by luminaries of the Democratic Party from Bill Clinton to Jimmy Carter, three months will remain in the volatile campaign.
As they start, Kerry has 14 states and the District of Columbia in his column for 193 electoral vote while Bush has 25 states for 217 votes, according to an Associated Press analysis of state polls as well as interviews with strategists across the country.
Both candidates are short of the magic 270 electoral votes. The margin of victory will come from:
Tossups: Bush and Kerry are running even in 11 states with a combined 128 electoral votes. Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Wisconsin, Michigan and West Virginia are the toughest battlegrounds. Two other tossups, Pennsylvania and Oregon, could soon move to Kerry’s column.
Leaning to Kerry: Maine, Minnesota and Washington (a combined 25 electoral votes) favor Kerry over Bush by a few percentage points. Gore carried them in 2000.
Leaning to Bush: North Carolina, Colorado, Louisiana, Arizona, Virginia, Arkansas and Missouri (a combined 73 electoral votes) give Bush modest leads. He won all seven in 2000.Al total, 21 states are in play. Some will bounce between "lean" to "tossup" throughout the campaign.
The Democrats will get down to the business of wooing voters in those states as soon as the convention ends. On July 30, the day after Kerry gives his acceptance speech in Boston, he and Edwards will leave on a two-week coast-to-coast tour via bus, train and boat. In the first days, stops will include Miami, Orlando and Jacksonville, Fla.; Dearborn, Flint and Grand Rapids, Mich.; Newburgh, N.Y.; Zanesville and Bowling Green, Ohio; Scranton, Harrisburg and Greensburg, Pa.; Wheeling, W.Va.; and Milwaukee, Wis.
Four years ago, Bush won 30 states and their 271 electoral votes — one more than needed. Gore, who won the popular vote, claimed 20 states plus the District of Columbia for 267 electoral votes.
Since then, reapportionment added electoral votes to states with population gains and took them from states losing people. The result: Bush’s states are now worth 278 electoral votes and Gore’s are worth just 260.
Needed: Gore's states and votes
Even if Kerry consolidates Gore’s states, no easy task, the Democrat must take 10 electoral votes from Bush’s column to close the electoral vote gap.
Kerry’s best prospects may be in the five tossup states won by Bush in 2000: Ohio, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire and West Virginia.
Winning either Ohio’s 20 electoral votes or Florida’s 27 would do the trick.
Bush easily won Ohio in 2000, but its lagging economy puts the state in play. Kerry must still reduce Bush’s advantages among conservative, rural voters. Florida should favor Bush a bit more than in 2000, partly because of its relatively strong economy, but the war in Iraq has helped keep the race close.
Nevada and West Virginia have a combined 10 electoral votes, enough to close the gap. New Hampshire, which neighbors Kerry’s home state of Massachusetts, has four.
West Virginia voted Democratic for decades until Bush made values an issue in 2000; Kerry is stressing the theme this year. In Nevada, an influx of Hispanics and the administration’s push to use Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste site make the state tougher for Bush than in 2000.
Six of the 11 tossup states were won by Gore: Pennsylvania, Oregon, Michigan, Iowa, New Mexico and Wisconsin. But the margin of victory was just a few thousand votes in Iowa, New Mexico and Wisconsin — meaning Kerry has his work cut out to keep them.
Of the three, Bush likes his chances best in Wisconsin, where he is targeting rural voters in a bid to widen the electoral gap by 10 votes.
Flush with money and leading a united party, Kerry increased his odds by expanding the playing field into a handful of GOP states that Bush easily won in 2000, including Arkansas, Louisiana, Arizona, Virginia and Colorado. Results have been mixed.
After testing the waters, Kerry pulled his ads from Arkansas and Louisiana, and downgraded his focus on Virginia and Arizona. Hispanic voters make Colorado a prime target, but Democrats acknowledge it’s a tough state to win.
"The race is still fundamentally tied, and the Electoral College map reflects that," said Bush strategist Matthew Dowd. "But there is beginning to be a slight tilt toward us with Arkansas, Tennessee, Missouri and Arizona no longer being seriously contested."
Kerry added another Republican-leaning state to his target list when he chose Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina as his running mate. Aides are divided over whether North Carolina will remain a battleground through November, but its 15 electoral votes are too tempting to ignore.
Battleground Missouri
Missouri, a traditional battleground, recently moved to the Bush-leaning category and is being written off by some Democrats. The Kerry campaign reduced its ad campaign in the state after polls showed him consistently 4 to 6 percentage points behind Bush, with little room for improvement.
Republican advantages in rural Missouri and the fast-growing exurbs make the state tough for Democrats, but Kerry will likely keep it on the table through November in case the political winds shift. Besides, abandoning a traditional battleground would be embarrassing.
The four-term Massachusetts senator has begun to gather strength in traditionally Democratic states such as Maine, Minnesota and Washington. All were tossups in the spring, but now lean toward Kerry. A good convention could push Pennsylvania and Oregon into the lean-Kerry category.
Recent polls give Kerry an edge in both states, but strategists for Kerry and Bush say the races are still tossup.
'Angry feeling' over Iraq
"There is an angry feeling toward the incumbent because of Iraq," said David Sweet, who managed Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell’s 2000 campaign. "I think Kerry will win in the end, but that’s partly based on an assumption of things to come. It’s close."
Of the states won by Gore, Pennsylvania is by far Bush’s top target. The president has spent millions of dollars in the state on commercials and has visited it more than any other contested state — 30 trips since his inauguration.
For Kerry, losing Pennsylvania would create a virtually insurmountable electoral vote gap.
© 2004 MSNBC Interactive
-
i definetly agree. While many people (lots here) hate bush, and believe that he is gonna loose by alot, the fact is he most likely will win. John kerry wasnt a very good choice for the democratic party. One reason i think he's behind is because hes not getting his opinions out to the public. He's getting a lot of critizism for not speaking out on his views and being to indesicive.
You guys may not like to admit it, but bush has a very high chance of getting re-elected. I'm glad though, because i dont like kerry.
-
Bush is gunna win by a landslide. I guarenty it. Alot of people arent gunna vote this election or there gunna vote for nader which will then favor a higher chance of bush winnning.
-
Let's put it like this, from the articles I've read, and what you've post, the electoral college is very close with Bush in a slight lead. It's all good, elections are usually like that, incumbant has a lead and the challenger has to show why he can do a better job. Kerry has the popular vote, but Bush is leading in the electoral college, and Florida is one of the swing states that can go either way. Sound familar, and Jeb Bush is still in office as Governor of Florida. Lets see if history repeats it's self, an if so, you can be certain that there will be a electoral college backlash. We shall see what the future holds in store.
-
Bush is gunna win by a landslide. I guarenty it.
Well, it looks like we'll just have to take your word for it.
-
Let's put it like this, from the articles I've read, and what you've post, the electoral college is very close with Bush in a slight lead. It's all good, elections are usually like that, incumbant has a lead and the challenger has to show why he can do a better job. Kerry has the popular vote, but Bush is leading in the electoral college, and Florida is one of the swing states that can go either way. Sound familar, and Jeb Bush is still in office as Governor of Florida. Lets see if history repeats it's self, an if so, you can be certain that there will be a electoral college backlash. We shall see what the future holds in store.
Lemme get this straight. You say Kerry has the popular vote (he doesn't), then you go ahead and tell us that if Kerry DOES lose, you're gonna bitch about Jeb Bush being gov. of Florida, and act like Bush stole the election again. Gotcha... it's just nice to know where you liberals are heading with your train of thought.
-
Alot can change in the next couple of months. Especially if Iraq suffers more soldier casualties.
-
Let's put it like this, from the articles I've read, and what you've post, the electoral college is very close with Bush in a slight lead. It's all good, elections are usually like that, incumbant has a lead and the challenger has to show why he can do a better job. Kerry has the popular vote, but Bush is leading in the electoral college, and Florida is one of the swing states that can go either way. Sound familar, and Jeb Bush is still in office as Governor of Florida. Lets see if history repeats it's self, an if so, you can be certain that there will be a electoral college backlash. We shall see what the future holds in store.
Lemme get this straight. You say Kerry has the popular vote (he doesn't), then you go ahead and tell us that if Kerry DOES lose, you're gonna bitch about Jeb Bush being gov. of Florida, and act like Bush stole the election again. Gotcha... it's just nice to know where you liberals are heading with your train of thought.
Kerry is leading in the popular polls, not by much, about as much as Bush is leading in the electoral college polls. Also, I said, we shall see what the future holds in store. It's along ways from election date. In 1992, no one knew who was going to run for the Democrats, and before the Convention, people had a low opinion of Bill Clinton and his ablity to run the country, after the Convention, people thought he was the best man for the job. On the flip side, after the 2000 Convention, Al Gore did not look too good, and eventually, by hook or by crook, lost the election. So we will see what will happen. There's a lot of room, and Bush has an approval rating of under 50%, you forgot to mention that, and not since Harry Truman has a president with an approval rating under 50% in May ever won re-election.
-
^ So ultimately, then, Bush is about to make history, lol.
-
i dont know about a landslide, but bush will win.
-
Bush is gunna win by a landslide. I guarenty it.
Well, it looks like we'll just have to take your word for it.
LMMFAO
-
Bush is gunna win by a landslide. I guarenty it.
Well, it looks like we'll just have to take your word for it.
(http://www.alcofielen.com/pics/forumpics/peopleSUCK/notfunny/sofunny2.jpg)
-
Bush is gunna win by a landslide. I guarenty it.
Well, it looks like we'll just have to take your word for it.
(http://www.alcofielen.com/pics/forumpics/peopleSUCK/notfunny/sofunny2.jpg)
I didn't expect your illiterate ass to understand or laugh anyways.
-
I favor Bush for this election...but I could give a fuck less about this election. I'm worried about the 2008 election, because everyone knows who will be running...
HILARY CLINTON
In the year 2008, God save America!! Anyone but that fucking cunt!
-
She'll never win; she'll be the sacrificial first woman to get a chance at it, and then get beaten badly. Who would vote for her? Half the country is conservative and would never vote for her, and half the liberals wouldn't vote for her either because she's a woman. She'll get beaten in 2008, but it'll pave the way for a female president 10 years or so down the road.
-
A female will probably never win an election in the US for the next 100 years.
-
I think Hilary has a great chance of winning. Her husband won even though he lost the majority of the male voters in both elections. It's just that women voted for him in huge numbers, and Hilary could break Al Gore's record by surpassing the 91% black vote, and Latinos will vote in huge numbers. And who will run against Hilary?
-
Hmm; well, let's examine that. I've broken this down before.
As I said, Hillary is a very polar politican. *NO... and I mean, *NO conservative, or republican, would ever vote for her in a million years. That's half your population of the United States, right there.
From there, you can break it down further. Southerners, who are traditionally democratic and therefore necessary to elect a democrat like Hillary Clinton, are very traditional and old-fashioned, and any of them over the age of 50 or so would never vote for a woman. This is men, AND women, they just feel that way and don't like strong, opinionated women. I'm not saying it's right, or wrong, I'm just saying that's how it is. So there's another sliver of voters gone.
Latinos, and I know you are one (or you say you're indian, or whatever minority you feel like relating to that week)... anyways, Latinos are a very, very patriarchial ethic group, and personally I don't see many Latino men voting a woman into office, either. On top of that, the vast majority of Latino's are catholic, and catholics won't even have female priests, much less a female president.
So in the end, perhaps Hillary WOULD get a vast majority of the black vote; who else's would she get? She'd get young, white democratic votes, and she'd get some latino votes, but in my opinion, not very many. Since young, white males and latinos traditionally DON'T VOTE, I don't think she has a prayer in the world of even coming close to getting elected.
-
Bush is gunna win by a landslide. I guarenty it.
Well, it looks like we'll just have to take your word for it.
<Is really laughing out loud.
*Wipes tears from his eyes.
-
Bush is gunna win by a landslide. I guarenty it.
Well, it looks like we'll just have to take your word for it.
<Is really laughing out loud.
*Wipes tears from his eyes.
;D
-
seriously trauma, I guess 95% of women will vote her, and since women are quite half of your population, and democrats will vote her too, I dont see how it's impossible for her to win. women are very easy to get. and nothing gets them easier than another woman for president.
-
Find any woman who's a republican, and ask her if she would vote for Hillary Clinton. You folks are underestimating the mind of a woman. They're not gonna be that easily swayed to vote for someone with an entirely different set of political goals. As I said, she's extremely polarizing, there's n chance someone who identifies themself as a conservative would vote or relate to anything this woman says or does.
-
I'd say about 90% of republican women wouldnt vote for her.
-
About Latinos, unless you live in Texas or Florida, Latino's don't trust Republicans. We don't like their stands on immigration. Hilary would be just fine, and as for Catholic, Latinos aren't traditional Catholics, and most Latino Catholic churches teaches very liberal teachings, I was raised to be a liberal Catholic, and so was most every Latino outside of Texas and Florida. And honestly, it doesn't matter if she has a dick, a pussy, both, neither, it doesn't matter about anything, Hilary has to be the favorite if John Kerry loses the next election, because Hilary is popular, and you forget that the south is heavily Republican since 1968, and Democrats since 1976, when Jimmy Carter got swept out the south, Democrats have made campaigns to go around the south, and some people like Bill Clinton can still pick up a couple of southern states like Florida and other outer southern states. Hilary will not win any deep south states, hell John Edwards couldn't win the Carolina's, even if he was the main person on the ticket. Democrats don't expect to win the south, but Hilary could carry the outer southern states that Bill carried, and Hilary already has those 56 electoral college votes of California that no Republican not named Ronald Reagon or Richard Nixon can get. Too bad we are stuck with the Electoral College though, because that makes a California vote mean less than a southern vote. So much for equal votes in a presidental election.
As for who I am, I personally identify with Latino/Chicano, whatever you want to say. I happen to be 25% Native American, enough to legally be Native and live in a reservation, and collect Indian casino money if my family ever goes to tribe and prove our bloodlines, but I'm still 75% Mexican, and that's more than enough to be a Chicano. I know both cultures, because my sister and I grew up in a Mexican-American community and we lived with our Native grandma, so we know both. My sister prefers to be Native since she doesn't speak much Spanish, I prefer Mexican because I didn't grow up in a reservation, I grew up around other Mexicans. So there you go.
-
As for who I am, I personally identify with Latino/Chicano, whatever you want to say. I happen to be 25% Native American, enough to legally be Native and live in a reservation, and collect Indian casino money if my family ever goes to tribe and prove our bloodlines, but I'm still 75% Mexican, and that's more than enough to be a Chicano. I know both cultures, because my sister and I grew up in a Mexican-American community and we lived with our Native grandma, so we know both. My sister prefers to be Native since she doesn't speak much Spanish, I prefer Mexican because I didn't grow up in a reservation, I grew up around other Mexicans. So there you go.
Whatever your mom is thats what you are.
-
Whatever your mom is thats what you are.
mom... Native/Mexican mix... lol... dad... Native/Mexican mix
Shit, it doesn't matter, in everyone eyes, I'm brown, and I am broke. Dad is more so Native than my mom, and I don't count my mom's Native blood, because my grandpa was adopted, and is suppose to be an Apache Indian, but he is sure light so I know his mixed with Spanish. My mom's mom is from Mexico, dark. But I don't believe in that what you moms is, you are, I don't look anything like my mom's mom, I look like my dad's dad, who is also from Mexico.
-
Oh yeah.... according to the L.A. Times, Kerry has clinched more electoral college points than Bush, taking large states like California and New York, well Bush has clinched many smaller states like like Utah, worth 3 points a piece, and some southern state to go with Texas as his big state. Well Bush holds a lead in most of the states, Kerry is not very far behind, and most people are actually undecided. Polls this early are not reliable. Come to me in October and that'll be a better measurement of who will win the elections.
-
bush will win
then kick all those illegal aliens (mexicans) out
-
bush will win
then kick all those illegal aliens (mexicans) out
He likes them though. He has good relations with Vicente Fox and proposed a program to help illegals find work here. I'm not sure how far the proposal went though.
-
First up, I don't understand Trauma's post, because he acted like it was going to be bad for Kerry, but in fact the article was saying they were neck and neck.
Second, Kerry will win, I said it 1 year ago, the only person on this website who predicted Kerry. You were all still on Howard Dean/George Bush's nuts back then.
http://www.dubcnn.com/connect/index.php?board=3;action=display;threadid=37414
Bush is an unpopular president (under 50% approval ratings) who took the nation into an unpopular war, while giving the rich tax cuts which failed to stimulate a struggling economy. While job creation is going up, statistically, these are the lowest paid jobs with poor job security. Also 80% of manual production wages are falling. He takes from the poor and gives to the rich. Read my lips: HE WILL LOSE.
And on the Hillary Clinton situation: 1) She can only run if Kerry loses - which won't happen. 2) With the electoral scene polarised, it is not about convincing undecideds any more as much as it is mobilising your base. The left loves Hillary. I think she could win buuuuuuuut 3) John Edwards would be tough to beat in the Primaries aaand 4) The Republicans may end up having Condoleeza Rice run. So Hillary would be fucked because not only is she running against another woman it would be a black one at that.
-
Would anybody like to bet money on this? I'd be willing to take small bets on George Bush winning in November.
-
Yeah £10 - about $6 - If we ever see each other (99.9999999999999999999999% certain we won't) you can pay me.
And I'd love to bet any money with Sikotic that there will be a female President in the next 100 years
-
All bets will be done via Paypal, and will be due immediately upon Bush's win Novermber 2nd? (Is that when the elections are?). No "I'll pay you when I see you". If I get booted from the board by then (which I might, because I'm sick of the bullshit), then all bets are off.
-
Yeah £10 - about $6 - If we ever see each other (99.9999999999999999999999% certain we won't) you can pay me.
And I'd love to bet any money with Sikotic that there will be a female President in the next 100 years
Let's make a bet then. I dunno if we'll both be around in a century, but who knows lol
And a white woman would have a better chance winning the presidency waaaaaaaaaaay before a black woman. America is a very chauvinistic society still. Many women would not even vote for a female.
-
So Trauma are we doing this bet then?