You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #22: I don't think either one has all that much chance to take Montana actually. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
FlyingSquirrel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #4
22. I don't think either one has all that much chance to take Montana actually.
Edited on Thu Mar-06-08 12:48 AM by FlyingSquirrel
It's the reddest-leaning of the red-leaners, followed closely by GA. Still, they both voted for Clinton in '92 so I wouldn't count them out completely.

I don't see why we can't hold all the blue states - none of them went red any time since 1988 and things have gotten so bad in the last 7 years I can't imagine why they would. So I don't really get the question of "which blue states can either one hold and why".

But if you want to go down that road, the blue states that were closest in 2000 and 2004 were:

Michigan, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Oregon, Wisconsin

Obama wasn't on the ballot in Michigan. PA and OR haven't voted. Obama won both Minnesota and Wisconsin by large margins.

The best chance we might have to flip a red state would be Virginia. Obama won that 54 delegates to 29.

As stated before, Iowa, New Hampshire and New Mexico were essentially tied between the two candidates. These are blue-leaning swing states.

As also stated before, Edwards took a lot of support from Obama in Florida - this could have been a near-tie as well without Edwards in the mix. Colorado's the next best chance among red-leaning swing states and Obama won, 32 delegates to 13.

Among the remaining swing states, they're pretty much all possible except maybe Kentucky. As stated above once again, Clinton has the advantage in Tennessee and that's pretty much it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC