Gaming the States: South Carolina

[JSojourner]

Well, New England and New York were pretty boring.  Now we're into boring on the other side of the spectrum

South Carolina hasn't voted for a Democrat since 1976.  Though surprisingly, 1980 was a lot closer than I would've expected.

I can't imagine Clinton, Obama or Edwards being competetive here in November.  Not even if Giuliani is the nominee and the religious right stays home.  Any thoughts?

(If there is a major screw up or scandal in the GOP before November, and if Iraq is much worse than it is now, perhaps this would be a state where Democrats could force the GOP to spend some money they really don't have.  But other than that, I think the Palmetto state is a write-off for Democrats.)

Anyone?

[auburntiger]

South Carolina was close in 1980 because of fellow southerner Jimmy Carter. Had Anderson not run, Carter probably would have won the state again. But to answer your question, Yes, they should write SC off. This is a core GOP state. That one poll showing Dems up by 1 is 100% bogus. Just like the one that showed McCain up by 2 against Hillary in DARK BLUE Maryland.

[CPT MikeyMike]

It will stay Republican regardless of who the Democrats nominate. The best chance for the Democrats in SC,  is Obama and his best here would be 45% tops.

What are the chances that McCain selects Lindsey Graham as his running mate? If so, McCain could break 60% here.

McCain: 57%
Clinton: 42%

Updated map

Clinton: 110
McCain: 45

[auburntiger]

It will stay Republican regardless of who the Democrats nominate. The best chance for the Democrats in SC,  is Obama and his best here would be 45% tops.

What are the chances that McCain selects Lindsey Graham as his running mate? If so, McCain could break 60% here.

McCain: 57%
Clinton: 42%

Updated map

Clinton: 110
McCain: 45

Why do you have NH Republican on your map? From the likes of 2008, it looks like we're done there

[JSojourner]

It will stay Republican regardless of who the Democrats nominate. The best chance for the Democrats in SC,  is Obama and his best here would be 45% tops.

What are the chances that McCain selects Lindsey Graham as his running mate? If so, McCain could break 60% here.

McCain: 57%
Clinton: 42%

Updated map

Clinton: 110
McCain: 45

Why do you have NH Republican on your map? From the likes of 2008, it looks like we're done there

I suspect Mikey is presuming McCain wins the nomination.  If he were basing his map on Huckabee or Romney, he might change it.  I agree, though.  New Hampshire is trending Democratic.  Who knows?  Maybe Governor Lynch will be someone's running mate!

[CPT MikeyMike]

Correct - this has been a Clinton v. McCain matchup

Until something happens, I'm sticking to this match-up. I'll mention Obama here and there.

And see the NH post on my take on NH.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Clinton v. Romney: Romney 53-46
Clinton v. Giuliani: Giuliani 52-47
Clinton v. Huckabee: Huckabee 62-37
Clinton v. McCain: McCain 57-42

Obama v. Romney: Romney 51-48
Obama v. Giuliani: Giuliani 50-49
Obama v. Huckabee: Huckabee 57-42
Obama v. McCain: McCain 60-39

[phk]

Democrats range from 38% to 45%.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

57-42 Republican. The Deep South (Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina) is pretty much unwinnable for the Democrats for the next generation or three.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I'd be nervous if Romney was the nominee, but other than that, no way SC goes Democratic in 2008.

[© tweed]

Clinton v. Romney: Romney 53-46
Clinton v. Giuliani: Giuliani 52-47
Clinton v. Huckabee: Huckabee 62-37
Clinton v. McCain: McCain 57-42

Obama v. Romney: Romney 51-48
Obama v. Giuliani: Giuliani 50-49
Obama v. Huckabee: Huckabee 57-42
Obama v. McCain: McCain 60-39

Bush v Kerry represents the worst a Democrat can do in SC.  Huckabee isn't pulling anywhere close to 62%.

[Stranger in a strange land]

If Romney is the nominee and he craters, then it might be in play. Actually, even then, probably not.

[bullmoose88]

Clinton v. Romney: Romney 53-46
Clinton v. Giuliani: Giuliani 52-47
Clinton v. Huckabee: Huckabee 62-37
Clinton v. McCain: McCain 57-42

Obama v. Romney: Romney 51-48
Obama v. Giuliani: Giuliani 50-49
Obama v. Huckabee: Huckabee 57-42
Obama v. McCain: McCain 60-39

Bush v Kerry represents the worst a Democrat can do in SC.  Huckabee isn't pulling anywhere close to 62%.

Not necessarily, Edwards may have given Kerry a floor.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

62% for a Republican is just not possible in South Carolina as long as blacks can vote.

[bullmoose88]

62% for a Republican is just not possible in South Carolina as long as blacks can vote.

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=1988&fips=45&f=1&off=0&elect=0

seems like Bush Sr would disagree...

[bullmoose88]

As would Nixon (1972), anad Reagan (1984), but 1988 wasn't a landslide election really.

[CPT MikeyMike]

62% for a Republican is just not possible in South Carolina as long as blacks can vote.

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=1988&fips=45&f=1&off=0&elect=0

seems like Bush Sr would disagree...

Bush 41 had huge support from Carroll Campbell. Campbell was nearly (and should have been) Bush's choice for VP.

[JSojourner]

57-42 Republican. The Deep South (Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina) is pretty much unwinnable for the Democrats for the next generation or three.

LBJ predicted it, didn't he?

I'm glad he still did the right thing.