Take a gander at this and this...
Here are the results, as best I can tell, if the election were held today:
Alabama GW
Alaska GW
Arizona GW
Arkansas GW
CA JFK
CO GW
CT JFK
Delaware JFK
DC JFK
FL JFK
GA GW
Hawaii JFK
Idaho GW
IL JFK
Indiana GW
Iowa JFK
KS GW
Kentucky GW
LA GW
ME JFK
Maryland JFK
Massachusetts JFK
MI JFK
MN JFK
Mississippi GW
Missouri GW
Montana GW
NE GW
NV GW
NH JFK
NJ JFK
NM JFK
NY JFK
NC GW
ND GW
Ohio GW
Oklahoma GW
Oregon JFK
PA JFK
RI JFK
SC GW
SD GW
TN GW
TX GW
Utah GW
Vermont JFK
VA GW
Washington JFK
WV GW
WI JFK
Wyoming GW
John F. Kerry is elected President by 288 Electoral College Votes. Bush wins 250 Electoral College votes.
Kerry wins 22 states and DC
Bush wins 28 states
Kerry slightly wins the popular vote, 49% to 48% to 2% for Nader and 1% for all others.
Anyone else have an opinion on this?
(BTW, according to my reckoning, Bush only needs to hold the above listed states and capture Florida to win it again, by 277 to 261. JEB is still the Governor of Florida, after all ... Fun stuff!)








Article comments
1 - RJ
Er...
Maybe Bush would win 274-264 in that case. I dunno. I goofed up somewhere.
Anyway, if Bush wins Florida, he's likely re-elected under my scenario. If he doesn't he's toast.
Enjoy! :)
2 - Bob A. Booey
Most of the pundits seem to believe Nader will cave to pressure and drop out of the race after the Democratic convention, so I don't know which states that would tip over to the blue side.
Bush has trouble on his hands in Florida since there's apparently some law now that makes it harder for immigrants to visit and send money back to Cuba. I'm too lazy to do the research and find a link but this has been in several of the major papers. The Cuban vote is generally strongly Republican but this could mean that there's less turnout or a smaller percentage for Bush among Cubans. Kerry has yet to really establish himself in South Florida -- I'm guessing he'll head there after he and Edwards spend most of the summer toughening up their midsection in the industrial states.
Kerry should dispatch Bill Clinton to Arkansas and have him speak every damn day after his book tour until the election on his behalf. Of course it won't happen, but that seems to be one of the few states where Clinton would help his cause. Clinton also fared well in Louisiana in his career, so perhaps he could be of use there as well. Clearly he won't be needed in California or New York.
This all looks good now for the Kerry folks, but keep in mind that the polls are razor-thin and could shift either way in many of the swing states.
I don't think anyone really reads these in-depth political discussions, but maybe I'll dig up some state-by-state polls.
That is all.
3 - Eric Olsen
very interesting RJ, thanks! I would say this actually looks good for Bush because the overall situation in Iraq is likely to improve over the next several months, the economy will likely continue to improve, and Kerry excites his pets alone
4 - JR
I would say this actually looks good for Bush because the overall situation in Iraq is likely to improve over the next several months, the economy will likely continue to improve, and Kerry excites his pets alone
But Bush will likely find something else to screw up by then. He's done so pretty consistently for the past three years, hence the inexorable slide in his approval ratings from something over 90% to below 50%.
Stupid does as stupid is. Bush loses in November.
5 - Voxxy
I agree with Eric. By election day, you can put Iowa, Pennsylvania, maybe Minnesota and Washington in Bush's column. It won't be close.
6 - mike
Notice how confident Bush is he's going to win? Remember that trial balloon floated a few weeks ago about cancelling the election if there is another terrorist attack, or the threat of one?
We live in post-democratic and post-repubican America, my friends. Bush and Co. ain't leaving office. If it looks like they're going to lose, they're simply going to postpone the elections and introduce a modified form of military dictatorship.
The only enjoyable part of it will be watching while all the advocates of spreading "democracy" to Iraq turn around and announce, that, sadly, reluctantly, they must support the President's action in these dark times. I'm keeping a list.
7 - Rodney Welch
"It won't be close." Maybe not. Chew on this.
8 - Phillip Winn
mike (#6), that's just crazy talking, man. Republicans have consistently shown themselves willing to turn on their own when they betray party principles. Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott leap to mind. If anybody were to pursue anything like the fantasy notion you've described, there would be blood in the streets -- that of the Bush administration.
Seriously, I'm not sure what combination of events leads to someone making statements like that one, but it seems flat-out off the charts.
9 - boomcrashbaby
Phillip, a lot of people in this country, to the tune of millions, believe exactly what Mike wrote. I don't want to believe it personally, but it is a fear of mine nagging in the back of my head nevertheless. My biggest concern is the republican controlled, paperless, unverifiable voting machines. It might sound crazy to you, but a lot of people feel that way.
10 - Mark Saleski
ah fooey! none of this matters.
if things keep moving along the way they are, economy slowly improving, no more major terrorist kaboomies...bush will win easily because:
a. the bush camp will continue to roll out mountains of tv ads asserting that kerry is the worst thing this side of castro, liberal, liberal, liberal, liberal, liberal...
b. the democrats, as usual, will do nothing to fight back.
11 - Rodney Welch
Wake up, Mark -- it's 2004. Bush, Sr., learned the hard way in 1992 that the opposing party no longer sits back and lets them Willie Horton-ize issues. Whatever happens, it's going to be a relentlessly tough fight where NO ONE is going to be sitting down and every fist will be swinging.
12 - Bob A. Booey
For what it's worth, I do think Bush will win (unfortunately). The reason is that he's seen the worst of the Iraq situation and has bounced back in the polls from it. Americans also refuse to hold a sitting President accountable for his national security blunders since they sympathize with his response to the tragedy he inadequately acted to prevent. The main reason, however, is that Americans are finally starting to believe that the economy is better even though statistics show that wages and job creation are still lagging behind overall growth. It took a while, but Americans feel better about the direction of the economy, which will be the bottom line in this election. Iraq is barely on the top 5 list of issues people care about.
The biggest challenge for Kerry and Edwards will be mobilizing labor against Bush and keeping the blue-collar votes that Bush got in 2000 from getting him industrial states.
Absent some huge scandal or absolute catastrophe, the election will be decided on people's perception of the economy in the last two months of the campaign. Everything else is window dressing.
The debates will get a lot of the usual commentary from pundits and political geeks like me, but we already know what's going to happen. Kerry will out-argue Bush and we'll find Bush agreeable enough that people won't vote based on the debates.
That being said, Kerry can win this if he runs a good, smart campaign. I think the electoral map lines up somewhat favorably for him at this point and Bush's numbers are precarious. His campaign staff (Rove, Dowd et al) know it'll be a dogfight. History proves that incumbents with his approval numbers and particularly the highly predictive "right direction - wrong direction" numbers that he has lose. I do expect those numbers to tick up after the convention, but he's in historic trouble strictly based upon the polls. There was also a recent study by Peter Nardulli of the U. of Illinois cited in the Chicago Tribune that showed that so-called "wartime" incumbent presidents get no boost at all from going to war and in fact are more likely to lose. History would seem to favor Kerry. I don't know that people's perceptions of national security and the economy are quite the same today as they have been in past elections, however. It'll be a hard race to predict because there's so much conflicting evidence and data -- the pundits were all wrong in 2000 and most of the talk now won't accurately predict what Americans will have on their mind as they go to the polls.
Vonny: There is no way Bush is winning Minnesota. And it's also very unlikely that he'll win Washington. But he will center his efforts on states like Iowa, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Florida.
My gut tells me that Bush will win. There's a lot of evidence to the contrary and perhaps it's my pessimism, but I think America refuses to hold him to high standards of accountability. We reward him for our low expectations of performance. Other factors like the ongoing culture war over gays and censorship will play a small, ancillary role, but this election will be more about the economy than social issues.
The critical time for real analysis will be after the Republican convention. I'm interested to see then what the poll numbers say about the percentage of Americans who think we're headed in the "right/wrong direction" and the percentage of Americans who are confident in the economic recovery. We can't really say now though who will win this election with any certainty.
That is all.
13 - Bob A. Booey
Eric: out of curiosity, you're a Bush backer, right? You'll be voting Bush-Cheney in November? I'm assuming you also voted for them in 2000?
Thanks.
14 - Eric Olsen
I am undecided for 2004, leaning reluctantly toward Bush for foreign policy reasons. I have never voted for a Republican for president before.
15 - Hal Pawluk
Republicans have consistently shown themselves willing to turn on their own ...
Only after they see which way the wind is blowing.
16 - Hal Pawluk
Bush, Sr., learned the hard way in 1992 that the opposing party no longer sits back and lets them Willie Horton-ize issues.
That was then; this is now.
Mike is right - the Dems need some grit.
17 - boss7777777
i am a Bush supporter, i voted for him in 2000 and i will vote for him in 2004. he has done a great job during diffcult times and he has prove himself as a leader that does what he says weather public opinion/ or this so call U.N. we have. Kerry is not a leader and he changes his opinions like the wind. our ememys would love for kery to get the job because they could talk him into anything. GOd bless president Bush and may God give him wisdom for the next 4 years as our country is going through difficult times.
18 - Taloran
Bush is counting on, and will receive, the support of the illiterate oafs out there like boss7777777 in comment 17. Since there are plenty of them, I fear Dubya will win the election.