2008 Election, who would win....

[Democratic Hawk]

I know this scenario is unlikely - but would the electoral map of the US be any radically different from that of 2004?

Dave

[jokerman]

Option 1 in a landslide.  Americans are looking for populism.  They want it.  They haven't found it yet in big name policitians, that's one reason they consider so many policitians as "out of touch." 

[skybridge]

This really is a good question because the outcome would prove what voters care for the most.

[MaC]

Option 1 in a landslide.  Americans are looking for populism.  They want it.  They haven't found it yet in big name policitians, that's one reason they consider so many policitians as "out of touch." 

I don't think it would necessarily be a landslide.  It would be a clear victory for option 1, but there are enough "older conservatives" and "social liberals" who would vote option 2.




This map would imply that party labels don't tie down states

[A18]

Talk about two terrible choices. I'd have to hold my nose and vote for the affirmative action, gun control, abortion, and discrimination law supporting economic conservative.

[Colin]

Option 1 in a landslide.  Americans are looking for populism.  They want it.  They haven't found it yet in big name policitians, that's one reason they consider so many policitians as "out of touch." 

I don't think it would necessarily be a landslide.  It would be a clear victory for option 1, but there are enough "older conservatives" and "social liberals" who would vote option 2.




This map would imply that party labels don't tie down states

In that map I would switch Connecticut, Illinois, Florida, Pennsylvania, and possibly Maryland and Virginia.

[Jake]

Blacks would vote populist keeping MD and IL solidly with them. VA is possible, Florida would be blue, CT would blue, PA would be red, and WI might also be red.

[skybridge]

Option 1 in a landslide.  Americans are looking for populism.  They want it.  They haven't found it yet in big name policitians, that's one reason they consider so many policitians as "out of touch." 

I don't think it would necessarily be a landslide.  It would be a clear victory for option 1, but there are enough "older conservatives" and "social liberals" who would vote option 2.




This map would imply that party labels don't tie down states

It could almost be 2004 in reverse.

[Colin]

Option 1 in a landslide.  Americans are looking for populism.  They want it.  They haven't found it yet in big name policitians, that's one reason they consider so many policitians as "out of touch." 

I don't think it would necessarily be a landslide.  It would be a clear victory for option 1, but there are enough "older conservatives" and "social liberals" who would vote option 2.




This map would imply that party labels don't tie down states

It could almost be 2004 in reverse.

No almost certainly not due to the libertarianism of the Rocky Mountain states and the populism of Midwestern and some Northeastern states.

[MaC]

Option 1 in a landslide.  Americans are looking for populism.  They want it.  They haven't found it yet in big name policitians, that's one reason they consider so many policitians as "out of touch." 

I don't think it would necessarily be a landslide.  It would be a clear victory for option 1, but there are enough "older conservatives" and "social liberals" who would vote option 2.




This map would imply that party labels don't tie down states

In that map I would switch Connecticut, Illinois, Florida, Pennsylvania, and possibly Maryland and Virginia.

Connecticut, I figure red for electing people like Joe Lieberman (although it is an unfair generalization).  Florida, is pretty socially conservative.  Pennsylvainia is too diverse of a state to really tell much either way.  Maryland, Virginia, Illinois, I really wouldn't know.

[Colin]

Option 1 in a landslide.  Americans are looking for populism.  They want it.  They haven't found it yet in big name policitians, that's one reason they consider so many policitians as "out of touch." 

I don't think it would necessarily be a landslide.  It would be a clear victory for option 1, but there are enough "older conservatives" and "social liberals" who would vote option 2.




This map would imply that party labels don't tie down states

In that map I would switch Connecticut, Illinois, Florida, Pennsylvania, and possibly Maryland and Virginia.

Connecticut, I figure red for electing people like Joe Lieberman (although it is an unfair generalization).  Florida, is pretty socially conservative.  Pennsylvainia is too diverse of a state to really tell much either way.  Maryland, Virginia, Illinois, I really wouldn't know.

Connecticut is now mostly made up of weathly suburbanites, late-liberals, Rockefeller Republicans and moderate libertarians.

[Rob]

Option 2!

[skybridge]

Option 1 in a landslide.  Americans are looking for populism.  They want it.  They haven't found it yet in big name policitians, that's one reason they consider so many policitians as "out of touch." 

I don't think it would necessarily be a landslide.  It would be a clear victory for option 1, but there are enough "older conservatives" and "social liberals" who would vote option 2.




This map would imply that party labels don't tie down states

It could almost be 2004 in reverse.

No almost certainly not due to the libertarianism of the Rocky Mountain states and the populism of Midwestern and some Northeastern states.

Yeah, I take that one back, but for different reasons.

[Ebowed]

Switch Minnesota, Indiana, & Connecticut

Talk about two terrible choices. I'd have to hold my nose and vote for the affirmative action, gun control, abortion, and discrimination law supporting economic conservative.

What's your definition of economic conservative?  I'm interested because you seem to think Bush is one.

[jokerman]

[A18]

Talk about two terrible choices. I'd have to hold my nose and vote for the affirmative action, gun control, abortion, and discrimination law supporting economic conservative.

What's your definition of economic conservative?  I'm interested because you seem to think Bush is one.

Social Security reform, tax reform, abolishing the estate tax, repealing the AMT, etc. all count as economic conservatism. He spends too much, though.

[Colin]

Preston switch Montana, Nebraska, Maine, Wisconsin, Florida, and Hawaii.

[Hitchabrut]

Op 1

[The Dowager Mod]

I would vote for the republican.

[Beet]

I might actually vote Republican in this one. But the Democrat would probably win.

[MHS2002]

A socially liberal Republican? Unsure as to who I'd vote for.

A socially libertarian Republican? I'd vote Republican.

As far as who wins? Probably the populist.

[A18]

A socially liberal Republican? Unsure as to who I'd vote for.

A socially libertarian Republican? I'd vote Republican.

My thinking exactly.

[Democratic Hawk]

A socially liberal Republican? Unsure as to who I'd vote for.

A socially libertarian Republican? I'd vote Republican.

My thinking exactly.

Inspired, by that, if I altered the ideologies, would the result be any different if it were:

Economically liberal/socially POPULIST Democrat vs Economically conservative/socially LIBERTARIAN Republican

Dave