Warner/Lincoln v. Allen/Sanford (Revisited)

[tarheel-leftist85]

Sorry for my absence (Though, I'm sure many of you were pleased!).  Organic Chem. has been keeping me a little busy.
Anyway, let's re-examine this hypothetical election.  Maps and analysis are encouraged!


Third party makes a difference in OR, NH, CO, WV, and TN.  NC is just a dead heat with slightest of advantages to Allen (but a recount will ensue).  Third party candidates garner 3-4% of the PV in the Northeast.  LA breaks 60+% for Allen b/c African-Americans have been displaced and absorbed into Texas.  A Warner-Lincoln performs well overall in the South:
VA: 52.0-47.0
AR: 51.0-47.5
FL:  51.0-48.0
(MO: 49.6-49.4);
NC:  Warner loses 49.8-49.9
WV:  Warner loses 49.2-49.3
TN:  Warner loses 49.3-49.7
KY:  Warner loses 44-55
TX:  Warner loses 43-56
OK, MS, SC:  Warner loses 42-57
LA, GA: Warner loses 39-60
AL:  Warner loses 34-65
The northern interior West falls in love with Allen and Sanford.
Dems. increase their margins in PA, MN, and MI to 5pts., IA and WI to 3pts. and carry OH by a similar margin. 
A strong Dem. tkt. has enough power to make the Senate 50:50 with Blanche Lincoln able to cast the tie vote.
Three key demographics will contribute to the Democratic swing:  White, suburbanmothers; evangelical blacks; and rural, white men.
Your turn!

[MAS117]

Welcome back Krusty! I always miss a pro-Mark Warner for President guy at the forum!

[Moooooo]

I  think you got your colors backward.

[Speed of Sound]

Ralph Nader shows big numbers on the West Coast and The NE, causing Warner to lose MA and VT to Allen and CA to Nader. Even without them, Warner still slip through with 271. In the end, 12% ends up going to 3rd party causes and Warner wins the PV handily, but fails miserably at winning the majority of PV.

Warner: 46%
Allen: 42%
Nader: 9%
Other: 3%

[tarheel-leftist85]

I  think you got your colors backward.

Whoops!  I'll get those fixed shortly.

[Ben.]

Close contest, but Warner probably holds down the Kerry states pretty easily while making a play for states like MO, WV, AR perhaps even VA its self and at the same time helps the democrats in traditional swing states... it'd be close though.

[© tweed]

Everyone's forgetting, Warner is a ONE TERM governor, he isn't a good 2008 candidate.  He'd lose to Allen decisively.



That 286-252, but it likely would be a bigger Allen victory.  PA possibly flips.

[Ben.]

Everyone's forgetting, Warner is a ONE TERM governor, he isn't a good 2008 candidate.  He'd lose to Allen decisively.



That 286-252, but it likely would be a bigger Allen victory.  PA possibly flips.

I agree that that is Warner's big weakness, though Lincoln helps to address that.

Also he makes Ohio at least as competative as Kerry did and would certianly make more of a play for states such as MO, AR and WV... of those three i think that both AR and WV would go for a Warner/ Lincoln ticket. 

[CheeseWhiz]

I’d vote for Allen in hopes of getting Sanford in 2016.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Ralph Nader shows big numbers on the West Coast and The NE, causing Warner to lose MA and VT to Allen and CA to Nader. Even without them, Warner still slip through with 271. In the end, 12% ends up going to 3rd party causes and Warner wins the PV handily, but fails miserably at winning the majority of PV.

Warner: 46%
Allen: 42%
Nader: 9%
Other: 3%

While you are the only one (so far) to address the impact of a left wing candidacy in the proposed contest (for which you deserve considerable credit), I believe you misunderstand such a candidacy in several aspects.

First, Nader will NOT be the candidate.

Second, the left wing candidate (perhaps Boxer) will NOT carry any state.

Third, except when there was a right leaning candidate (Perot) and the Republican nominee had antagonized the Republican base (Bush in 1992 and Dole in 1996) no Republican Presidential nominee has received less than 47% of the popular vote.

Fourth, the states where such a candidacy could have a critical impact are:

Connecticut
Hawaii
Maine
Michigan
Minnesota
New Hampshire
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Washington
Wisconsin

[© tweed]

Everyone's forgetting, Warner is a ONE TERM governor, he isn't a good 2008 candidate.  He'd lose to Allen decisively.



That 286-252, but it likely would be a bigger Allen victory.  PA possibly flips.

I agree that that is Warner's big weakness, though Lincoln helps to address that.

Also he makes Ohio at least as competative as Kerry did and would certianly make more of a play for states such as MO, AR and WV... of those three i think that both AR and WV would go for a Warner/ Lincoln ticket. 

I think WV is a lost cause for the Democrats...it's been trending towards the GOP now, everyone was shocked when Gore lost it in 2000 (hell it went for Dukakis!) and Bush pulled off a blowout in 2004.  I really don't think even a populist/moderate southerner such as Warner can pull it off against a conservative, if the GOP nominee is Giuliani it's a different story.

As for Ohio, I think it would be close, but Bush still won it by 120k last time despite a Democratic "perfect storm" as I called it -- that is, Bush repealed steel tariffs, Taft and the state GOP were unpopular, and there were other things but I can't remember all of them right now.  Things should be better in 2008, Allen will be more popular than Bush is/was, so despite Warner being a better candidate than Kerry, Allen should win it by 100,000 votes.

Arkansas I view the same way as WV, pretty much.  Clinton won it twice because he's from there, and before that it hadn't gone Dem since 1976.  (But not many states had gone Dem from 1980-1988).  Bush won it by 12% or so last time going from memory, that's a pretty strong showing, so even with the Lincoln factor (which is nowhere near the Clinton factor) Allen would win it fairly comforably.

[MasterJedi]

I'd vote for Allen/Sanford though I'd prefer a much better VP candidate.

[tarheel-leftist85]

Lincoln would have considerable clout to carry Arkansas for the tkt.:
--She won a MAJORITY of white women.
--She won 40% of Evangelicals (twice as much as Kerry did).
--She won 96% of African-Americans.
--She won by margin 1.5 times larger than Bush.
Third parties have less clout in PA than just about any state in the Northeast.  The state is one of the most socially moderate of blue states (which is why Kerry barely won it).  PA is trending older (not to be used as a pejorative, in fact, I really admire older people), and will continue to trend to the right on social issues.  I don't see a third party making a difference here.
To say that Ohio's voting behavior will remain virtually static in a period of four years of extraoridinary circumstances (incl. the broken promise of changing the Supreme Court, and economy that leaves Ohio behind) with different candidates, is a bit overreaching IMHO.  GA had 4pt.  (54-58)swing to Bush, so why can't Ohio have a 2pt. swing to a Dem. (49-51)?
There is one assertion I would make before closing:  If we are to be a viable party on the national level, we MUST win Florida--making it close, winning Ohio or the southwest-U doesn't cut it.  I'm convinced Warner/Lincoln can do it.
A word about Bayh (who seems to be Warner's greatest competitor against Hillary):  I'm afraid he's doing the reverse of what HRC is doing, namely trying to appease the liberal base with a few votes here and there.  If he gets the nomination, this will hurt him, and he will not be able to break 300 in the EC.
If Feingold could win PA and OH (as is often presumed in his hypothetical victories), why couldn't Warner carry these states whose collective social politics are considerably farther to the right of left-leaning Senators?
I do agree about West Virginia:  The only way a Democrat could win it is in the impossible event that Reps. nominate Guliani or Romney.

[George W. Hobbes]

You're forgetting that the net gain for VP candidates in their home state is around 1%.  Favorite sonning is more of a myth...people vote for the top of the ticket.

[Moooooo]

You're forgetting that the net gain for VP candidates in their home state is around 1%.  Favorite sonning is more of a myth...people vote for the top of the ticket.

Which is great in this scenario because Warner would be a hit in Arkansas.