Decision '08: McCain/Huckabee vs. Warner/Richardson

[CultureKing]

this is one election contest I would love to see happen. I would be happy if either ticket won, though I would probably vote for Warner. At the moment I think I would give McCain the advantage in the general, he is just too popular.

[Lincoln Republican]

MarkWarner08, re. Colorado.

Yes, Wisconsin and Colorado are similar, as you describe them.

As far as Colorado goes, though, I would say, honestly, if it were almost any other Republican than McCain, that Warner would be competitive in Colorado.  With McCain as the nominee, I believe the state is solid for McCain in the election.

[True Democrat]

300-238

[MarkWarner08]

300-238

Why do you have McCain winning one of Maine's electoral votes? Didn't that electoral vote give Kerry a bigger margin than Gore?

[Conan]

[Joe Biden 2020]

Just a question?  Not trying to step on anybody's toes, here?  But?

Why does everybody put Oklahoma as deep blood red?  We are not as deep red as, say, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, or Kansas.  We're more light red or normal red, not blood red.  We'll still probably go Republican, but we go for the more conservative candidate, not just the Republican candidate.  You have to take that from a guy who LIVES in Oklahoma and has lived in Oklahoma for almost 25 years and has been following politics at the presidential and state levels since 1988 and all levels since 1998.  I know all 77 counties went for Bush in 2004, but thats only because he's more conservative than John Kerry.  Several of our eastern counties went for Gore in 2000 because at the time he was more centrist than John Kerry.  Even more of our counties went Clinton in 1992 and 1996, partly because of a national landslide, but also because Clinton was a relatively moderate to conservative Democrat.

Remember, too, Oklahoma has more Democrats than Republicans, and the Democratic party is VERY strong in this state.  They are alive and well, and in some cases are slightly stronger than Oklahoma's Republican party.

In the Federal level, we are light to moderate Red, in the State level we are light blue to light pink, in the Local level we are a moderate blue.

Now, we do have liberals in this state.  They mainly reside in the eastern part of the state (Arkansas influence) while the western part of the state is more conservative (Kansas influence) and the I-35 corridor and 20 miles either side of I-35 is pretty moderate.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I've actually always wondered about OK.

[Rob]

Several of our eastern counties went for Gore in 2000 because at the time he was more centrist than John Kerry.

Dukakis also did very well in Little Dixie, and even Mondale carried a few counties. The 2004 result seems to have been a bit of an outlier... iirc, the Bush sweep resulted from abnormal evangelical turnout (the same thing happened in West Virginia). This kind of 77-county victory isn't going to be replicated in '08, and Warner would break 40 percent. 

In the Federal level, we are light to moderate Red

As I said above, I agree that 2004's result was unusual. But 66 percent Republican is not a result that's easily reversed; the Dems would carry Texas before they carried Oklahoma.

the State level we are light blue to light pink

That is probably the most disturbing election map I've ever seen. In 2004, Oklahomans rejected a sensible, moderate-populist Democrat in favor of a guy who wants the death penalty for doctors that perform abortions and complains of "rampant lesbianism" in Oklahoma public schools... and it wasn't even close. That, to me, speaks volumes of the political climate in the Sooner State, and bodes ill for the Democratic Party.

Of course, you do have a great Democratic Governor who seems to be cruising to reelection. But Oklahoma is up there with Utah and Idaho as one of the states most hostile to national Democrats.

[MarkWarner08]

Several of our eastern counties went for Gore in 2000 because at the time he was more centrist than John Kerry.

Dukakis also did very well in Little Dixie, and even Mondale carried a few counties. The 2004 result seems to have been a bit of an outlier... iirc, the Bush sweep resulted from abnormal evangelical turnout (the same thing happened in West Virginia). This kind of 77-county victory isn't going to be replicated in '08, and Warner would break 40 percent. 

In the Federal level, we are light to moderate Red

As I said above, I agree that 2004's result was unusual. But 66 percent Republican is not a result that's easily reversed; the Dems would carry Texas before they carried Oklahoma.

the State level we are light blue to light pink

That is probably the most disturbing election map I've ever seen. In 2004, Oklahomans rejected a sensible, moderate-populist Democrat in favor of a guy who wants the death penalty for doctors that perform abortions and complains of "rampant lesbianism" in Oklahoma public schools... and it wasn't even close. That, to me, speaks volumes of the political climate in the Sooner State, and bodes ill for the Democratic Party.

Of course, you do have a great Democratic Governor who seems to be cruising to reelection. But Oklahoma is up there with Utah and Idaho as one of the states most hostile to national Democrats.

I agree with Rob. Brad Carson was probably the best Senate candidate Democrats had in 2004 and he still lost by double digits. I'd say Montana and Arizona vote for a Democrat for President before Oklahoma does.

[Joe Biden 2020]

Although he's a bit too conservative for me, Tom Coburn actually has been a really good Senator for Oklahoma.

Arizona going Democrat before Oklahoma, probably
Montana going Democrat before Oklahoma, possibly
Oklahoma as deep red as Idaho and Utah, nope

We're actually just a little redder than South Dakota.  In fact, of the center-stripe states (North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas), South Dakota is the lightest shade of red, Oklahoma is second lightest, Texas third, Nebraska fourth, Kansas fifth, and North Dakota is the darkest red.

Auburntiger, I agree with you that Oklahoma is not generally in play, but we're not as rigid as our northern neighbor, Kansas, or the mountain west states (Utah, Idaho, Wyoming).  However, given the right set of cirucmstances, Oklahoma could go Democrat, especially in a national landslide (1984 type landslide reversed, not 92 or 96).  That being said, that is not diminishing the importance of our 7 Electoral Votes.  As I've said before, in a closely divided electorate EVERY Electoral Vote is VITAL.

[Rob]

We're actually just a little redder than South Dakota.  In fact, of the center-stripe states (North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas), South Dakota is the lightest shade of red, Oklahoma is second lightest, Texas third, Nebraska fourth, Kansas fifth, and North Dakota is the darkest red.

OK is the second-darkest shade of red in the central tier:

Nebraska: 65.9 percent for Bush
Oklahoma: 65.6 percent for Bush
North Dakota: 62.9 percent for Bush
Kansas: 62.0 percent for Bush
Texas: 61.1 percent for Bush
South Dakota: 59.9 percent for Bush

Oklahoma is just as competitive as Nebraska... which of course is to say that it isn't.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Warner/Richardson is probably the best ticket the Democrats can run.

[Moooooo]

Warner/Richardson is probably the best ticket the Democrats can run.

Would you vote for them over all possible Republican tickets?

[Conan]

Just a question?  Not trying to step on anybody's toes, here?  But?

Why does everybody put Oklahoma as deep blood red?  We are not as deep red as, say, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, or Kansas.  We're more light red or normal red, not blood red.  We'll still probably go Republican, but we go for the more conservative candidate, not just the Republican candidate.  You have to take that from a guy who LIVES in Oklahoma and has lived in Oklahoma for almost 25 years and has been following politics at the presidential and state levels since 1988 and all levels since 1998.  I know all 77 counties went for Bush in 2004, but thats only because he's more conservative than John Kerry.  Several of our eastern counties went for Gore in 2000 because at the time he was more centrist than John Kerry.  Even more of our counties went Clinton in 1992 and 1996, partly because of a national landslide, but also because Clinton was a relatively moderate to conservative Democrat.

Remember, too, Oklahoma has more Democrats than Republicans, and the Democratic party is VERY strong in this state.  They are alive and well, and in some cases are slightly stronger than Oklahoma's Republican party.

In the Federal level, we are light to moderate Red, in the State level we are light blue to light pink, in the Local level we are a moderate blue.

Now, we do have liberals in this state.  They mainly reside in the eastern part of the state (Arkansas influence) while the western part of the state is more conservative (Kansas influence) and the I-35 corridor and 20 miles either side of I-35 is pretty moderate.

Just coordinating by general color. I wasnt doing proportions.

[MarkWarner08]

Just a question?  Not trying to step on anybody's toes, here?  But?

Why does everybody put Oklahoma as deep blood red?  We are not as deep red as, say, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, or Kansas.  We're more light red or normal red, not blood red.  We'll still probably go Republican, but we go for the more conservative candidate, not just the Republican candidate.  You have to take that from a guy who LIVES in Oklahoma and has lived in Oklahoma for almost 25 years and has been following politics at the presidential and state levels since 1988 and all levels since 1998.  I know all 77 counties went for Bush in 2004, but thats only because he's more conservative than John Kerry.  Several of our eastern counties went for Gore in 2000 because at the time he was more centrist than John Kerry.  Even more of our counties went Clinton in 1992 and 1996, partly because of a national landslide, but also because Clinton was a relatively moderate to conservative Democrat.

Remember, too, Oklahoma has more Democrats than Republicans, and the Democratic party is VERY strong in this state.  They are alive and well, and in some cases are slightly stronger than Oklahoma's Republican party.

In the Federal level, we are light to moderate Red, in the State level we are light blue to light pink, in the Local level we are a moderate blue.

Now, we do have liberals in this state.  They mainly reside in the eastern part of the state (Arkansas influence) while the western part of the state is more conservative (Kansas influence) and the I-35 corridor and 20 miles either side of I-35 is pretty moderate.

Just coordinating by general color. I wasnt doing proportions.

Does Warner have a shot in Ohio? If it goes hard left in 2006, will it boomerang back to the GOP in 2008, or stay with the Democrats in 2008?

[True Democrat]

300-238

Why do you have McCain winning one of Maine's electoral votes? Didn't that electoral vote give Kerry a bigger margin than Gore?

It did, but overall Maine would trend to the GOP. Here are the results I see for Maine:

Overall: 49-48 (Warner-McCain)
CD1: 52-46 (Warner-McCain)
CD2: 51-48 (McCain-Warner)

[auburntiger]

That seems like a reasonable map although I'm a little skeptical about Michigan's chances going GOP. THey seem to be making some gains there, and teh governor's race will likely be a GOP pick-up, and the senate race will likely be very close as well. MI seems to be moving our way as it was alot closer in '04 than people thought. My guess is MI '08 could be the FL of 2000

[Bdub]

I would vote for McCain.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Warner/Richardson is probably the best ticket the Democrats can run.

Would you vote for them over all possible Republican tickets?

I cann't think of a better ticket the Republicans would be likely to nominate.

[Nym90]

That seems like a reasonable map although I'm a little skeptical about Michigan's chances going GOP. THey seem to be making some gains there, and teh governor's race will likely be a GOP pick-up, and the senate race will likely be very close as well. MI seems to be moving our way as it was alot closer in '04 than people thought. My guess is MI '08 could be the FL of 2000

Saying that the governor's race is likely to be a pickup is a bit of a stretch. It's no better than a 50/50 chance if that.

I don't see any evidence that Michigan is trending GOP. Yes, Bush did slightly better here than in 2000, but not much better, and that was probably about as close as any Republican is likely to come in Michigan unless they are very moderate.

[auburntiger]

like McCain. It's all about perception. He is seen as someone who's willing to cross party lines and vote with the Dems on some issues although his voting record is more conservative than he appears to be.

There was a poll out there last week or so saying that 44% of voters perceive McCain as moderate. Picking Huckabee would be the best choice ever, and he's my favorite too.

[Rob]

Warner 277-261.

[Joe Biden 2020]

Warner 277-261.

That looks like a good map.  I agree with your perception of Oklahoma going red, but not blood red.  It will take a heck of a Democrat to take Oklahoma, but it can be done, especially in about 2012 or later.  One change I would make to the map, though, is maybe color Washington and Oregon a hair lighter in color.  I think McCain could potentially make some inroads there.  They will likely still go Democrat, but they won't be as heavily on the Democrat side as, say, California.  Even California might be interesting, especially in the south near the Arizona border.  One has to believe with as many people as California has, that the election is not won or lost in the big cities of the I-5 corridor, including San Francisco.  San Diego is probably the most likely to go for McCain out of the "Big 4".

[MarkWarner08]

Warner 277-261.

That looks like a good map.  I agree with your perception of Oklahoma going red, but not blood red.  It will take a heck of a Democrat to take Oklahoma, but it can be done, especially in about 2012 or later.  One change I would make to the map, though, is maybe color Washington and Oregon a hair lighter in color.  I think McCain could potentially make some inroads there.  They will likely still go Democrat, but they won't be as heavily on the Democrat side as, say, California.  Even California might be interesting, especially in the south near the Arizona border.  One has to believe with as many people as California has, that the election is not won or lost in the big cities of the I-5 corridor, including San Francisco.  San Diego is probably the most likely to go for McCain out of the "Big 4".

How would Oklahoma go if the Democrats nominated Bill Richardson and the GOP nominated George Pataki?

[Joe Biden 2020]

Warner 277-261.

That looks like a good map.  I agree with your perception of Oklahoma going red, but not blood red.  It will take a heck of a Democrat to take Oklahoma, but it can be done, especially in about 2012 or later.  One change I would make to the map, though, is maybe color Washington and Oregon a hair lighter in color.  I think McCain could potentially make some inroads there.  They will likely still go Democrat, but they won't be as heavily on the Democrat side as, say, California.  Even California might be interesting, especially in the south near the Arizona border.  One has to believe with as many people as California has, that the election is not won or lost in the big cities of the I-5 corridor, including San Francisco.  San Diego is probably the most likely to go for McCain out of the "Big 4".

How would Oklahoma go if the Democrats nominated Bill Richardson and the GOP nominated George Pataki?

Hang on, a map is coming in a fresh post