?
Case #1: Popular Vote Means Nothing
?
The electoral vote count is going to be quite difficult to predict this year. Some are calling for a landslide in Kerry or Bush's favor, or too close to call. I'm believe that is might be somewhere in between. Let post a sliver of the most recent Fox News Poll and the glaringly obvious reason why the "national race"; the popular vote is too close to call. Half of America trusts Bush more on fighting the war on terror, and the other half believe that John Kerry would do more for the job and pay situation for the average worker. The question is are there more people who fear terrorism, or are there more people who want better jobs, that's what this electoral projecting is all about.
?
|
Issue |
Bush |
Kerry |
Both |
Neither |
Not Sure |
|
The war on terror |
50 |
34 |
4 |
5 |
7 |
|
National Crisis |
48 |
35 |
4 |
4 |
9 |
|
Improving Intel |
45 |
37 |
3 |
5 |
10 |
|
Iraq |
45 |
40 |
2 |
5 |
8 |
|
Supreme Ct. |
41 |
40 |
3 |
3 |
13 |
|
The Economy |
40 |
46 |
1 |
4 |
9 |
|
Gay marriage |
33 |
39 |
2 |
9 |
17 |
|
Gas prices |
31 |
42 |
2 |
13 |
12 |
|
Social Security |
34 |
47 |
2 |
6 |
1 |
|
Protecting U.S. jobs |
35 |
50 |
2 |
5 |
8 |
?
*Fox News. 26 August 04
Polling was conducted by telephone August 24-25, 2004 in the evenings. The
total sample is 1000 likely voters (LV) nationwide, with a margin of error of
?3 percentage points.
?
Once we understand that Bush proves that the national vote does not count in this country, but electors we are more able to understand exactly what the national #s even mean. Bush can win the popular vote, and at the same Kerry can win the electoral vote big time. I hope it does not happen that way, but none the less, the electoral college in the end is the one that decides who becomes President.
?
What we see in America is a dichotomy. But I do not believe it is an electoral vote dichotomy, but a sort of a malaise dichotomy. Yes it is true, that Democrat Celinda Lake of the bipartisan Battleground Poll points out that half of the voters once again do not think George Bush should be re-elected. This is a nation of split personalities, but we vote for President state by state. The presidential election might be held on a single day, but it is still not a national election. Its an election of 50 states, battleground states, Kerry states and Bush states, breaking regional strongholds of states or making inroads. Its all about who wants that 270 the most. Will it be John Kerry or will it be George Bush?
?
?
Case # 2: Ohio The Lonely Industrial
?
Let's take a look at some of those so much desired battleground states. The first question is why are they battleground states? The answer is, is that these states went for Bush or Gore barely. The battlegrounds are Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, Missouri, Tennessee, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Colorado, Arizona, and Nevada. They comprise 141 electoral votes, and its 26% of the Electoral College. This is the biggest grab bag outside each candidates base Kerry with the North East and Pacific, Bush with the Deep South and Plains and Northern Mountains. Everything else is up for grabs. The state by state polls tell us that these twelve battle ground states are very close or tie. Well lest start with a region that usually goes half and half, the Midwest.
?
Ohio and Missouri are the battlegrounds of the Midwest. It would make sense to say that the word jobs would mean something to these people. With Ohio taking the big brunt of the recession, and as a state it is still in recession with no job growth only job loses. Bush is polling under his 49.99% win in 2000 by about 2 to 3 points. This should tell us something. The other half that are more concerned about jobs live in places like Ohio. All of these August polls polling the people of Ohio say the same thing; Bush is in far worse shape in Ohio than the national polls indicate.
?
?????? Ohio: Bush 49%, Kerry 46% (Strategic Vision)
?????? Ohio: Kerry 48%, Bush 46% (University of Cincinnati)
?????? Ohio: Bush 49%, Kerry 44% (LA Times)?
?????? Ohio: Kerry 50%, Bush 41% (Gallup, registered voters)
?????? Ohio: Kerry 48%, Bush 46% (Gallup, likely voters)
?????? Ohio: Kerry 48%, Bush 45% (American Research Group)
?????? Ohio: Kerry 46%, Bush 45% (Rasmussen)
?????? Ohio: Bush 47%, Kerry 44% (Columbus Dispatch)
?????? Ohio: Bush 49%, Kerry 45% (Strategic Vision)
Bush's average is 46.3%, and Kerry's average is 46.5%, with 7.2% of public undecided about who they are going to choose in a state that is doing worse economically since Bush took office. People who believe Kerry might have an answer to their problems would most likely people who believe that he would do better on jobs, as the Fox poll indicates. What likely voters are saying in Ohio is that they do not like Bush as 49.99% much as they did in 2000. They like Kerry better by a hair, as I've heard, undecided break for against the incumbent 2 to1. We could project that Kerry could win Ohio with 51.3% of the vote depending on the weather, and whether people decide to turnout no matter what.
?
?
?
Case # 3: Capital of the Old Confederacy Going South for Bush
?
Bush's once thought of strong hold the South is now the Deep South. The old Confederacy is in question this year when states like Florida essentially tie and states like Virginia where Bush is polling below his 52% win in 2000.
?
?????? Virginia: Bush 49%, Kerry 45% (Survey USA)
?????? Virginia: Bush 49%, Kerry 46% (Rasmussen)
?????? Virginia: Bush 48%, Kerry 45% (Rasmussen)
?????? Virginia: Bush 48%, Kerry 45% (Rasmussen)
?????? Virginia: Bush 50%, Kerry 45% (Survey USA)
?????? Virginia: Bush 47% Kerry 45% (Rasmussen)
?
Bush's average since June according to these polls is 49.2%, below even what he did in 2000 in Ohio. Kerry has room to move up, assuming undecided are going his way Virginia might not be called for days. Kerry can win in Virginia also and snatch 13 electors combined with Ohio makes 33 enough to give Kerry 293 and the Presidency.
?
Case # 4: Montana Dreaming Landslide in the Making???
?
There is something interesting happening in the Mountains; it seems that states like Colorado and Nevada are up for grabs. But what I would like to talk about is a state that might indicate whether Bush is in for a huge defeat or a slim win. The state I'm talking about is Montana. Let get a little history about Montana. A poll done by Montana State University has some interesting things to say about the 2004 race, way back when John Kerry was just announcing that he was running for President. His approval rating was 59% but his reelect numbers would fill with glee the hearts of many who want to see a landslide. Try 46.4% for Bush, 42.4% for Unnamed with 11% undecided. But let's consider another snapshot, the popular vote total for Montana in 1988.
?
|
State |
Total Votes |
Bush |
Dukakis |
|||||
|
365,674 |
190,412 |
52.07% |
168,936 |
46.20% |
||||
| ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ||
?
Bush even though he had a 59% approval ratting in early 2003 he was polling less than Dukakis was in 1988. I'm a firm believer that Montana is a turn on a dime state; remember how they rejected Bush Sr. in 1992 with barely over 35%. That's right folks 65% of Montanans voted against Bush Sr.
?
The silver lining I believe for the Democrats and Kerry rest with two very important things. First: The economy everywhere has been hit by unemployment, stagnant wages and a shrinking middleclass job base. Second: Bush has lost Afghanistan, and has done a terrible job with Iraq. This election could turn on a dime in a landslide against Bush if we would quit ignoring half the states, or be lured into believing soccer moms in the so sought for battleground states were the answer. The Presidents foreign policy approval rating in that Montana University poll was only at 50%. That's terrible for an incumbent to have in a so called red state like Montana. People in Montana know when they have been had. I wonder if they polled the same exact people again, what would be the outcome. After Iraq, the economy, the corruption, and the arrogance if we do not win in a landslide it would be because Kerry would have failed to convince the public as in Montana's case in 1992 along with the rest of America that they really never have liked Bush or his economic and foreign policy in the first place.
?
?
?
