November - McCain vs Obama

[Gustaf]

Then this all pretty much my current prediction, too (although again I think Obama will make several solid GOP states west of the Mississippi closer, but not close).

For purposes of predicting a winner this doesn't really matter much though, since none of those are really close enough to be interesting.

[Gustaf]

Also, Obama can match McCain in terms of how many indies and moderate GOPPers he can take....Obama will probably do as well with some rural midwesterners and westerners as McCain does with hispanics. Look at this map, for example-



In rural SW Illy, Obama did quite well...

Kerry didn't-

alan keyes

[Gustaf]

Yeah, but I am comparing SO Ill.'s contrast with the overall state result. Obama was able to get some of these counties within 5%, while Kerry did 10-15% worse than he did overall in the state.

yeah, but...ALAN KEYES






(he's black, you know...)

[Gustaf]

My point is that Barack appeals to some people that would otherwise vote conservative. Reagan won over many who would have voted for a Liberal, so just because you are ideologically strong doesn't make you ideologically limited...in some cases.

No...it's more a case of Keyes not appealing to some people who would otherwise vote conservative. It's like using 1964 to show how LBJ had tremendous appeal to conservatives in the north. Or even as an example of how popular GOldwater was in the South.

As for Reagan, he mostly managed to utilize an existing conservative majority to his advantage.

[Gustaf]

My point is that Barack appeals to some people that would otherwise vote conservative. Reagan won over many who would have voted for a Liberal, so just because you are ideologically strong doesn't make you ideologically limited...in some cases.

No...it's more a case of Keyes not appealing to some people who would otherwise vote conservative. It's like using 1964 to show how LBJ had tremendous appeal to conservatives in the north. Or even as an example of how popular GOldwater was in the South.

As for Reagan, he mostly managed to utilize an existing conservative majority to his advantage.

...how did that 60% supermajority come and go?

I'm not sure what you are referring to here, but I'm guessing it may be Reagan's almost 59% in 1984. I would say that there were in some respects a much more conservative electorate back then. There is a case to be made that there is a more liberal electorate now than in previous years but I'm not convinced that there is to the same degree. When Reagan came along the Republicans had a traditional strong base dominating the West and stretching through the Midwest into New England. He was able to add the entire South to that coalition. By that point the Democrats were really pretty screwed. If you look at 1988 you get an idea of what kind of results Democrats could get in those days, without Reagan on the ballot. Things changed after that, of course.

[Gustaf]

My point is that Barack appeals to some people that would otherwise vote conservative. Reagan won over many who would have voted for a Liberal, so just because you are ideologically strong doesn't make you ideologically limited...in some cases.

No...it's more a case of Keyes not appealing to some people who would otherwise vote conservative. It's like using 1964 to show how LBJ had tremendous appeal to conservatives in the north. Or even as an example of how popular GOldwater was in the South.

As for Reagan, he mostly managed to utilize an existing conservative majority to his advantage.

...how did that 60% supermajority come and go?

I'm not sure what you are referring to here, but I'm guessing it may be Reagan's almost 59% in 1984. I would say that there were in some respects a much more conservative electorate back then. There is a case to be made that there is a more liberal electorate now than in previous years but I'm not convinced that there is to the same degree. When Reagan came along the Republicans had a traditional strong base dominating the West and stretching through the Midwest into New England. He was able to add the entire South to that coalition. By that point the Democrats were really pretty screwed. If you look at 1988 you get an idea of what kind of results Democrats could get in those days, without Reagan on the ballot. Things changed after that, of course.

Are we really any more liberal?

The South definitely is. I'd say California is as well.

[Gustaf]

I doubt the south is more liberal. Maybe California is.

I think giving Goldwater 87% of the vote is more conservative than today. Even giving Nixon 70% ís more conservative today. The South did give 40% of their votes to Kerry.

[Gustaf]

But, if you just look at the white vote, the south gives 70-90% of their votes to Bush.

Depends on what state you're looking at. I don't think there are many places where he got 90%. In fact, that's sort of my point. But if you want to believe that the South has not changed in the last 3 to 5 decades, go ahead. It's a bit too deluded for me to want to argue the point. I'll just point out that blacks can actually hold office in those states now.