|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 02, 2020, 11:19:21 pm
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderators: Torie, ON Progressive)
  You were told in March 2004 Bush would win 12 million more votes than in 2000
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: You were told in March 2004 Bush would win 12 million more votes than in 2000  (Read 288 times)
538Electoral
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,470


P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 18, 2019, 12:53:10 am »

Inspired by OSR's thread. What do you think the map would've looked like?
Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,449


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 18, 2019, 04:35:54 am »
« Edited: November 18, 2019, 04:40:42 am by Old School Republican »



Bush/Cheney 384 54%
Kerry/Clark 154    45%


CA would be within 3 points and Kerry would spend many resources there to save himself from  being defeated worse than even Dukakis did
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,956


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 18, 2019, 12:39:30 pm »

Did people not expect a turnout boost? It seemed super polarized compared to 00?
Logged
Lemme tell you how Bernie can still win in 2016 & 2020
swamiG
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 694


Political Matrix
E: -2.06, S: 3.13


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 18, 2019, 05:38:08 pm »

Did people not expect a turnout boost? It seemed super polarized compared to 00?

This. I’m pretty sure everyone knew both parties were going to pick up votes after how relatively low turnout had been in the last several cycles and with a polarizing war raging on.

As energized as the right was in 2004, it couldn’t have been a landslide for Bush because the left would have been just as energized to make him a one-term President. As such, far fewer left-leaning voters would defect to Nader and Kerry would keep states like ME & OR safe for him. I would have also guessed that Kerry’s proximity to NH and Bush’s vulnerability in New England would allow him easier access to flip the 2nd closest Bush state in 2000. However, I still would have bet on a Bush victory in both the popular & electoral vote after knowing he netted that many extra votes.



Bush - 296 EV 50%
Kerry - 242 EV 49%
Logged
Arbitrage1980
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 693
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 18, 2019, 05:47:08 pm »

Bush 04 was the polar opposite of Trump 16: strong popular vote margin but they were distributed very inefficiently across the states. In 04 Bush won only 2 Gore states: Iowa and New Mexico, and his margins there were below 1%. He lost NH to Kerry by 1.2%.

Bush's 2.5% national margin was due to overpeforming in traditional GOP states such as AZ, CO, TX, IN, GA, NC, VA, and winning FL by a whopping 5%. In 2000 Bush's numbers were undermined by the October surprise of the Maine DUI story, resulting in several million evangelicals staying home. In 04, with the 9/11 effect, the conservative base came out in droves. He also got around 40% of Latinos. Bush also did better in the northeast and California (which he lost by "only" 10%) compared to 2000 but not enough to win those states. Ultimately, Bush's weakness with working class whites prevented him from getting more electoral votes.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines