May 28, 2004

[Hope And Change]

May 29, 2008
Categories: http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/category/Polls">Polls

May 28, 2004

A reader sends in this http://electoral-vote.com/evp2004/may/may28.html">electoral vote page from May 28, 2004.

Just a reminder, as Mark Blumenthal http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/mp_20080528_1737.php"> writes at length today, of the thinness of assumptions built on today's state-level polling. Polls are wrong, and close, and above all -- things change.


By Ben Smith 09:45 AM

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/May_28_2004.html#comments">Link

Just sayin.

[WeDidIt]

1. WOW, KERRY ACTUALLY WON!

The May polls said he did!

WOO HOO!! The past four years have just been a bad nightmare.

PINCH ME SO I CAN EXPERIENCE PRESIDENT KERRY!!!!

[blm]

14. Kerry DID win. RNC stole 2004 for Bush and Clintons' DNC made sure RNC had the room to do it.

Had McAuliffe's DNC spent its four years after 2000s theft assuring that Dem candidates and Dem voters had a secure election process, Kerry would be president today.

[gabeana]

2. Hi Hope and change I just posted this a few post down

Could you help me out, how were able to post the map, I tried doing it but all I got was the text, any help will be appreciated,
by the way looking at that map makes Clinton's electabilty argument in May look silly:toast:

[Hope And Change]

4. Hope this will help...

Edit: I meant to say "then go to this site..."

[gabeana]

6. thanks a lot

:yourock:

[berni_mccoy]

3. Kerry's More Electable!!!

[Hope And Change]

5. LOL.

[Hope And Change]

7. Kick!

[Hippo_Tron]

8. Kerry's gonna do very well with those hard working white voters in November

:rofl:

[Mass]

9. You mean you discovered that polls that early are meaningless?

Congratulations!

[Hope And Change]

11. Don`t tell that to me.Tell that to Hillary.

:hi:

[ProSense]

10. It was crazy to put MO for Kerry, and AR, TN, GA and SC as weak for Bush, FL was iffy

Still, Hillary's electoral vote argument is BS.

[politicasista]

16. It really is

:rofl:

[RoadRage]

12. I'm not even going to vote.. Kerry so has this wrapped up, it's not even funny!

:eyes:

[Drunken Irishman]

13. This actually backs up a point I tried making Saturday.

You can view it http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=6114691">here

My argument was that Obama, while not beating Clinton in the EC, had far more solid supper against McCain than she did. If you look at this map, what is the first thing you notice outside of a possible Kerry landslide victory? He had extremely soft support.

While Kerry bested Bush in terms of STRONG STATES, he only managed to do so by 6 electoral votes. Outside of that, Bush had far more strong support than Kerry did. There were only 42 electoral votes that were WEAK BUSH, compared to 91 for Kerry, a difference of 49 electoral votes. Bush also only had 45 electoral votes that were BARELY BUSH, while Kerry had a whopping 106, a difference of 61. What this shows, compared to the actual support, is that Kerry had a lot of soft support, which became softer as the campaign went on.

Here are the states Kerry lost that this map has him winning:

Nevada
New Mexico
Missouri
Iowa
Ohio
Florida

Of those states, this map lists all but New Mexico has BARELY KERRY, while New Mexico was listed as WEAK KERRY.

Now compare it to today's Obama-McCain map:



What do you notice? Obama has a lot more strong support than Kerry or even Bush did in 2004.

There are only two states listed as BARELY OBAMA, Ohio and New Mexico. There are also ties in states that weren't ties in 2004, Indiana and Virginia. Obama's map only has 25 electoral votes that are BARELY OBAMA. Compare that to McCain, who has 46 electoral votes BARELY MCCAIN and Kerry in '04, who had 106 electoral votes that were tagged as BARELY KERRY 4 years ago.

That, to me at least, is a good reason why I think Obama will do well in November. His support is solid, while McCain's, on average, isn't.

[DerekJ]

15. Great point. Thanks. em