what makes a "swing state"?

[MaC]

I've been pondering this for quite some time now.  I think it's BS that since the 1970s Michigan and California have voted the same way, (Ford, Reagan, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Kerry) and yet my state, for as long as it's been voting the way it has been is still considered a swing state, yet not California.  I'm not even talking the percentage so much as that Michigan hasn't had any signifigant amount to possibly change in the last two elections.  California is a "liberal democrat" state.  Michigan is a "swing state".  Discuss.

[Gabu]

"Swing states" are typically defined election-by-election, and simply mean "a state that could go either way in a general election".  While Michigan historically was quite similar to California in voting patterns, in the 2004 presidential election, Michigan's status was much more in question than California's was.  A Bush victory in California would have been a major upset and was something that no sane person ever predicted.  It would have been equivalent to a Kerry victory in Arkansas.  Conversely, a Bush victory in Michigan would not have been as unlikely.

Describing a state as a "swing state" with regards to more than one election at a time is utterly meaningless.

[Gustaf]

A swing state has to be fairly close, and Michigan was within 3% last time. Still, it's only 2nd-tier swing.

[jacob_101]

I've been wondering the same thing about Minnesota.  How can it be considered a swing state when it's voted Democratic for 30 years straight.

I say it can't become a swing state until a Republican wins at least one Presidential election.

[bullmoose88]

Minnesota is a swing state in the same way Virginia is a swing state, obviously not a PA or an OH...but close, though one party definitely has an edge.