Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

In 1980, Kerry states would have brought us 270 electoral votes

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 (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-04 12:23 PM
Original message
In 1980, Kerry states would have brought us 270 electoral votes
Here are the Kerry states with electoral vote distribution from 1980:

New York 41
Pennsylvania 27
Massachusetts 14
Rhode Island 4
Connecticut 8
New Jersey 17
Delaware 3
Maine 4
New Hampshire 4
Vermont 3
DC 3
Maryland 10
Illinois 26
Wisconsin 11
Minnesota 10
Michigan 21
California 45
Oregon 6
Washington 9
Hawaii 4

Moral of story, redistricting has screwed us in the Northern states. The Kerry states today bring us 252 electoral votes, if these states had the same electoral votes as they did in 1980 we would have had 270 electoral votes without adding Ohio, Florida, New Mexico or Iowa.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
batchdem04 Donating Member (337 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-04 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. yay!

lets all go back in our time machines to 1980 and say Kerry won!



sorry...:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
July Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-04 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. We're not really up for this kind of humor right now.
If you don't mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-04 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. it would be nice to do that
but unfortunately the sunbelt and south keep gaining population and electorally that tends to help the Republicans unless we can make some inroads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-04 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. Shift south is part of the problem, but local demographic shifts as well
Note that in 1988 Dukakis won Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota AND WV easily.
Something has changed in those states, and I can tell you what it is: Unions have been culturally divided. God and guns are now more important than the wallet.
It is sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-04 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. true
people used to post here that they were sure we would win "all the Gore" states. this election proved that is not necessarily the case. I consider Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Minnesota to be swing states.

The states we have as our base are: New York, New England states (except NH which is a swing state), Illinois, and the West Coast. Somehow we do need to make inroads elsewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pstokely Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-04 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. there's a shift to the west
Chimp had to put effort into CO, barely won NV
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidinalameda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-04 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
5. I don't understand what your point is
population shifts

Ohio has lost population as have the other rust belt states

California has added millions of new people in 20 plus years

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-04 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Yes, California and the West coast has gained
and we benefit from that, but GOP gains from huge population gains in the South while electorally we lose ground in the East and Midwest in states which are part of our electoral base. Overall even with California, Oregon and Washington gaining electoral votes we still lose 18 electoral votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCal Donating Member (170 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-04 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
8. That is an ominous sign for future elections
States in the northeast and midwest will continue to lose electoral votes with each reapportionment.

So, it will be harder and harder to put together 270 electoral votes by focusing only on the northeast, midwest and pacific coast states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill McBlueState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-04 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
9. the solution
The solution, of course, is to do away with the electoral college. Then we won't have Democrats' votes disappear when they move from a swing state to a red state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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