Reasonable 2008 maps?

[opebo]

It seems unlikely that Santorum would carry Pennsylvania in a presidential election.

[TeePee4Prez]

It seems unlikely that Santorum would carry Pennsylvania in a presidential election.

Especially against Bayh.  Against Hillary Clinton, yes, but surely not Bayh.

[Keystone Phil]

In keeping with the spirit of the thread, something like this:

Santorum 270
Bayh 268



My guess would be more like this:

Bayh 326
Santorum 212

1) Santorum is likely to carry PA in a Presidential election. Against Evan Bayh - probably not. Against most others - yes. I strongly advise people not to follow someone like Flyers' opinion on this matter. He is convinced that Santorum is despised in this state and that is not the case at all.
2) Bayh vs. Santorum would look a lot like your map except I think Santorum would keep Missouri and Bayh would probably win PA.
3) To address Joe Republic's point, in such a heavily conservative Catholic state like WI, Santorum would be more welcomed and accepted. If Bush can make it that close, Santorum can tip it to the GOP.

[Speed of Sound]

Hillary vs. Santorum




Santorum - 307
Hillary - 231

Feingold vs. Santorum



Santorum - 281
Feingold - 257


Just two hypothetical matchups for 2008. I think both Clinton and Feingold have great shots at the Democratic nomination and if Santorum is re-elected, he has a decent chance at winning the GOP nomination. The reason why I ask if these maps are reasonable is to see why some can't possibly see Santorum winning the Presidency.

i gotta tell you, keystone, i just dont think Santorum would do quite this good in a national election against either of these candidates. These look like Santorum vs. Rendell maps to me.

[Keystone Phil]

i gotta tell you, keystone, i just dont think Santorum would do quite this good in a national election against either of these candidates. These look like Santorum vs. Rendell maps to me.

Santorum wouldn't do well against Clinton or Feingold but he would do well against Rendell?

[No more McShame]

1) Santorum is likely to carry PA in a Presidential election. Against Evan Bayh - probably not. Against most others - yes. I strongly advise people not to follow someone like Flyers' opinion on this matter. He is convinced that Santorum is despised in this state and that is not the case at all.
2) Bayh vs. Santorum would look a lot like your map except I think Santorum would keep Missouri and Bayh would probably win PA.
3) To address Joe Republic's point, in such a heavily conservative Catholic state like WI, Santorum would be more welcomed and accepted. If Bush can make it that close, Santorum can tip it to the GOP.

You may be right.  You know a hell of a lot more about the political climate in PA, but home turf advantage is hard to overcome.  Only a handful of nominees have lost their homestate in a presidential election.  Obviously if Santorum was despised as much as Flyers says he is, he would have been tossed out of office by now.

[Rob]

Obviously if Santorum was despised as much as Flyers says he is, he would have been tossed out of office by now.

Santorum has only been elected to a single Senate term. The real test of his popularity will be next year, when he's up for reelection.

[Keystone Phil]

Obviously if Santorum was despised as much as Flyers says he is, he would have been tossed out of office by now.

Santorum has only been elected to a single Senate term. The real test of his popularity will be next year, when he's up for reelection.

Santorum was elected in 1994 and re-elected in 2000.

[Rob]

Obviously if Santorum was despised as much as Flyers says he is, he would have been tossed out of office by now.

Santorum has only been elected to a single Senate term. The real test of his popularity will be next year, when he's up for reelection.

Santorum was elected in 1994 and re-elected in 2000.

Whoops, forgot about the Wofford election. In that case, I absolutely agree with FuturePrez's point.

[TeePee4Prez]

Obviously if Santorum was despised as much as Flyers says he is, he would have been tossed out of office by now.

Santorum has only been elected to a single Senate term. The real test of his popularity will be next year, when he's up for reelection.

Santorum was elected in 1994 and re-elected in 2000.

I will also add the candidates were very weak and Santorum came off as a moderate.  Not true this time around.

[Keystone Phil]

Obviously if Santorum was despised as much as Flyers says he is, he would have been tossed out of office by now.

Santorum has only been elected to a single Senate term. The real test of his popularity will be next year, when he's up for reelection.

Santorum was elected in 1994 and re-elected in 2000.

I will also add the candidates were very weak and Santorum came off as a moderate.  Not true this time around.

The only thing that's different this time is that Santorum is running against the absolute best candidate the Dems had to offer. Against anyone else, he would have won and by a pretty good margin. Stop denying the fact that Santorum is well-liked in PA.

[TeePee4Prez]

39% is not a good approval rating.  Also, most Pennsylvanians oppose Bush's SS privatization plan by a 3-1 margin.  I think Hoeffel or Hafer would have gained ground on him quite rapidly.

[Keystone Phil]

39% is not a good approval rating.  Also, most Pennsylvanians oppose Bush's SS privatization plan by a 3-1 margin.  I think Hoeffel or Hafer would have gained ground on him quite rapidly.

39% approval? You brought this up before and it still makes no sense. What numbers are you looking at, Flyers? Quinnipiac had him at 48% last time (his lowest in quite some time. He's usually in the mid 50s).

Hoeffel or Hafer would have lost to Santorum by about six points.

[opebo]

1) Santorum is likely to carry PA in a Presidential election. Against Evan Bayh - probably not. Against most others - yes. I strongly advise people not to follow someone like Flyers' opinion on this matter. He is convinced that Santorum is despised in this state and that is not the case at all.

It seems reasonable to assume that Santorum is despised by about half of Pennsylvania, given the evenly divided nature of the state.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wisconsin is no a heavily conservative state, obviously, or it would never have gone to Kerry over Bush.  You are quite wrong about Santorum making anything closer than Bush - Bush was the high water mark of the fake-patriotism/'war on terror'/religious mania tide.  Santorum is basically a slightly creepy nobody by comparison.

[Keystone Phil]

It seems reasonable to assume that Santorum is despised by about half of Pennsylvania, given the evenly divided nature of the state.

Not when his approval ratings are usually in the mid 50s.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[opebo]

It seems reasonable to assume that Santorum is despised by about half of Pennsylvania, given the evenly divided nature of the state.

Not when his approval ratings are usually in the mid 50s.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Surely you cannot deny that Bush's appeal, gravitas, national standing, etc, in 2004 are enormously greater than Santorum's would be in 2008.[/quote]

[Keystone Phil]

It seems reasonable to assume that Santorum is despised by about half of Pennsylvania, given the evenly divided nature of the state.

Not when his approval ratings are usually in the mid 50s.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Surely you cannot deny that Bush's appeal, gravitas, national standing, etc, in 2004 are enormously greater than Santorum's would be in 2008.

[/quote]

1) You believe wrong. They are usually between 52-56%.
2) Kerry won WI last year on the jobs issue. That probably won't be as big of an issue in '08. A social conservative like Santorum can take the state.

[No more McShame]

Plus being Catholic will help him in Wisconsin. 

[opebo]

2) Kerry won WI last year on the jobs issue. That probably won't be as big of an issue in '08. A social conservative like Santorum can take the state.

Why would the growing dearth of jobs and the falling pay of those that do exist matter less in 2008?  It is a continuing trend. 

Though I do agree with you in the sense that I believe that once middle-class jobs are a distant memory rather than an immediate sense of loss the GOP economy will be less of an issue - West Virginia is the perfect example of this:  the state keeps getting poorer, but it also votes more self-destructively. 

[No more McShame]

Opebo, if you think the economy will still be a problem in 2008, you really have no idea how economics work in the real world.  Economies go up and down, it's a fact of life and no macroeconomic policy will ever change that.  Barring another 9-11 style attack, the economy will be much stronger in 2008 than it was in 2004.  It's just the way things go.  Maybe one of your Thai hookers could give you a lesson because I'm sure they feel the effects of a down economy