Washington a swing state?

[Shira]

Can someone explain why WA is considered by the pundits to be a swing state?

[Reignman]

Because Gore only won it by about 5%, but I don't think it's a vulnerable state.

[Shira]

Gore  + Nader got 54.27%

Bush + Buchanan got 44.87%

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Washington for Kerry = Louisiana for Bush

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Can someone explain why WA is considered by the pundits to be a swing state?

Because the pundits don't know what they're talking about.

[bgwah]

As long as Seattle exists, Washington is a dem state.

[World Order]

Washington will go Republican when Louisiana goes Democrat.

[AuH2O]

This will be a fun one to dredge up when Bush wins Washington in November...

[MODU]

hahaha . . . always a possibility.  As "Jesus" stated though, the hurdle will be the Seattle region.  If the Bush campaign can get enough votes from the big city, then yes, there is a chance it would go for Bush.  It will be a tough sell.  Similar in Oregon.  It's just the big city competition which will decide who wins those states.

[nomorelies]

MODU you "Bill O`Reilly Republcian"

 $5,000  that Kerry gets a higher percentage of the vote in Virginia than Bush gets in Washington.

[MODU]

Anyone else here beginning to think that Nomo and Crackpot might be the same person???  

[English]

WA is safe for Kerry. +7% I reckon.

[Josh/Devilman88]

I think WA will go REP when WI goes REP.  I think bush has a good chance in NOV in WA

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Bush wont win there, Seattle is too demcratic.  It's not a swing state.  

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Can someone explain why WA is considered by the pundits to be a swing state?

Because the polls are very, very close, with Bush even winning a few of them.

All of the Dukakis Five (WV, WI, IA, OR, WA) are vulnerable.

[John]

I hope it goes to bush

[bgwah]

hahaha . . . always a possibility.  As "Jesus" stated though, the hurdle will be the Seattle region.  If the Bush campaign can get enough votes from the big city, then yes, there is a chance it would go for Bush.  It will be a tough sell.  Similar in Oregon.  It's just the big city competition which will decide who wins those states.

The city itself is extremely democrat. Republicans don't even run in the local races there, and if they do they get about 10%. The real battle will be the suburbs. They went for Gore last time. Even the rich white ones (the 8th CD).

[AuH2O]

It will be interesting, because my personal theory is that Gore was somewhat underrated even in post-election analysis (or Clinton's legacy was underrated, one or the other).

Kerry is really in uncharted waters to some degree, and I think some districts are going to come out differently both ways in '04.

[millwx]

Can someone explain why WA is considered by the pundits to be a swing state?

I always preface my poll averages with two points... 1) Polls are both imperfect and merely a snapshot of NOW, not a prediction... 2) My poll averages are 100% objective and may include some polls that are generally considered unreliable (in these averages I refuse to subjectively judge things).

That said, the month-long poll average (fair warning - I do need to update this for some states, but in WA most of the polls are in here) for Washington is Kerry +6.8%.  As far as I'm concerned, that's "close" (less than 10%), but it is not a battleground (less than 5%).

As to why pundits continue to call it that... I don't know.  Self-survival maybe?  The closer they play this election to be, the more viewers they'll get.  But that's somewhat conspiracy theory... something I don't buy into.  For example, as much as I dislike Bush, I strongly disagree with this criticism that the recent terror warnings were politically motivated.  Whether they were useful/wise/etc, I have no idea... I'll leave that to our intelligence folks.  As poorly as they did with Iraqi WMD, they still know a hell of a lot more than any of us here do.  I digress, but my point is, I doubt the pundits are trying to be "clever" to gain attention.  I simply guess they're looking at the 2000 results, where Gore won by only 5% (rounded... it was actually a bit over 5%)... thus, it's within 5%, so they call it a battleground.  Wrong, but simple and objective.

[classical liberal]

WA:Kerry::CO:Bush

[ATFFL]

The problem with Washington is a lack of decent polling.  The last decent poll was Survey USA 2 months ago.

[millwx]

The problem with Washington is a lack of decent polling.  The last decent poll was Survey USA 2 months ago.

Since the SUSA we've had: A POS, a Mason-Dixon, two Moores, and a Fairbank-Maslin-Maullin.  Granted, most of these were just after the SUSA, and I'm not sure how "decent" Moore or Fairbank-Maslin-Maullin are, but...

An average of just the POS and Mason-Dixon yields Kerry +5.0%.
An average of all of the above yields Kerry +3.8%.
An average of everything since SUSA (including Rasmussen and Zogby's) yields Kerry +6.0%

BTW, in case you're concerned about any partisan biases, just FYI... of the above listed firms, Fairbank-Maslin-Maullin is a Dem firm, Moore is a Rep firm (is POS as well?).  FYI, there are some indication of partisan bias... Fairbank's one poll has Kerry +8%,  Moore's two average at Kerry +1%.

[ATFFL]

The problem with Washington is a lack of decent polling.  The last decent poll was Survey USA 2 months ago.

Since the SUSA we've had: A POS, a Mason-Dixon, two Moores, and a Fairbank-Maslin-Maullin.  Granted, most of these were just after the SUSA, and I'm not sure how "decent" Moore or Fairbank-Maslin-Maullin are, but...

An average of just the POS and Mason-Dixon yields Kerry +5.0%.
An average of all of the above yields Kerry +3.8%.
An average of everything since SUSA (including Rasmussen and Zogby's) yields Kerry +6.0%

BTW, in case you're concerned about any partisan biases, just FYI... of the above listed firms, Fairbank-Maslin-Maullin is a Dem firm, Moore is a Rep firm (is POS as well?).  FYI, there are some indication of partisan bias... Fairbank's one poll has Kerry +8%,  Moore's two average at Kerry +1%.

POS did a poll?  Not that I am aware of.  Link, please.  I am also unfamiliar with the Fairbank-Maslin-Maullin poll.

The Mason Dixon was one they did for a client, which means teh client wrote it.  Still probably a good poll, but unlikely to be up to the usual MD standards.

Moore is not a good firm, they let their bias get in the way of good polling.  POS is a Republican firm, but they (generally) don't let partisanship get in teh way of putting out a good poll and getting a good reputation.

The only polls I am familiar with are the Rasmussen, Zogby and the Moore polls.  None of which I consider reliable.

[Shira]

The problem with Washington is a lack of decent polling.  The last decent poll was Survey USA 2 months ago.

Do you really believe that this is the problem?
Do you think that Bush would be able to close an almost 10 points gap?

[millwx]

The problem with Washington is a lack of decent polling.  The last decent poll was Survey USA 2 months ago.

Since the SUSA we've had: A POS, a Mason-Dixon, two Moores, and a Fairbank-Maslin-Maullin.  Granted, most of these were just after the SUSA, and I'm not sure how "decent" Moore or Fairbank-Maslin-Maullin are, but...

An average of just the POS and Mason-Dixon yields Kerry +5.0%.
An average of all of the above yields Kerry +3.8%.
An average of everything since SUSA (including Rasmussen and Zogby's) yields Kerry +6.0%

BTW, in case you're concerned about any partisan biases, just FYI... of the above listed firms, Fairbank-Maslin-Maullin is a Dem firm, Moore is a Rep firm (is POS as well?).  FYI, there are some indication of partisan bias... Fairbank's one poll has Kerry +8%,  Moore's two average at Kerry +1%.

POS did a poll?  Not that I am aware of.  Link, please.  I am also unfamiliar with the Fairbank-Maslin-Maullin poll.

The Mason Dixon was one they did for a client, which means teh client wrote it.  Still probably a good poll, but unlikely to be up to the usual MD standards.

Moore is not a good firm, they let their bias get in the way of good polling.  POS is a Republican firm, but they (generally) don't let partisanship get in teh way of putting out a good poll and getting a good reputation.

The only polls I am familiar with are the Rasmussen, Zogby and the Moore polls.  None of which I consider reliable.

Tredrick, I've got the POS poll from the PollingReport subscription service, so I can't give you link that'll work.  No matter... new SUSA poll just out (see the other thread).  Kerry +8%.  Assuming a bit of a "bounce", this validates the other polls with +5%.  Simply put... Washington is not a battleground.  As I said... "close"?  Yes.  "Battleground"?  No.