The Dakotas

[JG]

It might be a dumb question but why did the Obama campaign decide to contest the Dakotas in the 2008 campaign? I understand they wanted to expand the map, but I always felt it was an odd choice considering how strongly republican they are on the presidential level. Is it because of their openness to vote for democrats downballot?

[TML]

Obama came within 9% in both Dakotas. I think it may have had to do with how close the polls were in the final days.

[Mr. Smith]

Dukakis nearly won South Dakota, Clinton was within 5 both times. This suggests an elasticity in the area, and given how strong Obama '08 was running.

That he couldn't get closer is only proof of how strong McCain turned out to be with the circumstances given.

[Hydera]

If only he made more of an effort in Missouri. Despite being very conservative now, Missouri was soooooo close to being won in 2008.

[Sumner 1868]

Energy. In 2008, as gas prices were rising steadily, there was more concern over this issue then at any time since the 1970s oil crisis. Obama as a candidate made it quite clear he envisioned the Plains as a key location for his green energy plan, and that got a very positive response in the Dakotas and Montana. The region's traditional isolationist sentiment clearly helped as well given Iraq.

[NCJeff]

It might be a dumb question but why did the Obama campaign decide to contest the Dakotas in the 2008 campaign? I understand they wanted to expand the map, but I always felt it was an odd choice considering how strongly republican they are on the presidential level. Is it because of their openness to vote for democrats downballot?

They had virtually unlimited resources and there were several early polls showing ND as competitive.

Obama had paid staff in the state but pulled them out at some point during the campaign.

[Adam Griffin]

^^^ Yeah, given the Obama campaigns' immense resources by the time the general election rolled around, it made sense for them to play in certain states.

There was a tendency for the campaign to remain active (including with paid staff) in states that might not conventionally be competitive, but where they generated large numbers of volunteers and/or support during the primaries and caucuses. Places like IN and the Upper Plains were examples of this. I'm not saying that explains why these states were so relatively close, but the fact that the campaign stayed on the ground in these generally elastic states for a year or more before the election definitely played a role (especially since McCain couldn't afford to counter the efforts in these places).

In June 2008:

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

North Dakota makes some sense.



Eastern North Dakota is pretty similar to rural areas of Western Minnesota - rural, more progressive Scandanavians. IIRC Socialism was pretty popular here in the early 1900s. They even had a similar state-level party to the Minnesota DFL in the form of their Democratic Nonpartisan League. You can see from his map that Obama actually won some of the areas around Fargo and Grand Forks. In 2008 North Dakota had two highly popular Democratic Senators. The reason the state has shifted so far right in the last decade is the Bakken boom has not only brought in lots of oil workers from outside the state but also made a lot of the entire state economy heavily dependent on oil.

South Dakota in 2008 has some similarities - similar demographics in the Eastern part of the state (but not as strong), Democratic Senator and only four years removed from being removed by Tom Daschle, lots of votes on the table in the reservations.