Let's not kid ourselves. The Deep South cannot be won in the General Election.

[Zynx]

I want to make this point abundantly clear because I have seen many wild eyed idealists for both candidates claiming our potential chances in the Deep South are better than some think. First, Clinton doesn't have a shot pure and simple. Any Clinton supporter claiming she does I want to smack down right now.

However, the Obama supporters claim some kind of strange logic to it. The revolves around the relatively large black populations in the states of the Deep South. Let's actually look at numbers and not absurd hope.

Case in point: Mississippi. There is no blacker state than Mississippi.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi#Racial_makeup_and_ancestry
37% Black in 2005.
In 2004 the electorate was 34% black. These voters voted for Kerry 90% to 10% for Bush.

Problem: Bush got 85% of the white vote and that was 65% of the electorate.

Result: We lost by TWENTY POINTS! Twenty! If Mississippi is competitive for us, Rhode Island is for them. Can someone explain to me how that white vote will be dramatically different? If we can't make material inroads into southern whites, we can't win these states.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/MS/P/00/epolls.0.html

Let's go through the rest of this exercise:
Alabama
Black Percent in 2005: 26.70%
Black Percent of vote in 2004: 25%
Black Vote in 2004: Kerry 91% to Bush 6%
White Vote in 2004: Bush 80%
Total Result: Bush 62% to Kerry 37%(25 points)
There's no chance with virtually any sized increase in black turnout this can be done.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/AL/P/00/epolls.0.html

Georgia
Black Percent in 2005: 30%
Black Percent of the vote in 2004: 25%
Black Vote in 2004: Kerry 88% to Bush 12%
White Vote in 2004: Bush 76% to Kerry 23%
Total Result: Bush 58% to Kerry 41%(17 points)
Once again, the math simply will not add up here.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/GA/P/00/index.html

South Carolina
Black Percent in 2005: 30%
Black Percent of the vote in 2004: 30%
Black Vote in 2004: Kerry 85% to Bush 15%
White Vote in 2004: Bush 78% to Kerry 22%
Total Result: Bush 58% to Kerry 41%(17 points)
Once again, same story.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/SC/P/00/epolls.0.html

Until southern whites stop voting so monolithically for Republicans, even pathetic ones, we don't stand a chance. They vote nearly as solidly Republican as African Americans vote for Democrats. How would either Obama or Hillary change this? I can't see a way. There's a reason we don't win down there. Just deal with it. We don't need those states anyway.

[NightWatcher]

1. I think that more black people will vote for Obama here in Georgia, then they did for Kerry

I see it on the streets while I canvass

[Zynx]

39. That doesn't bring us anywhere close.

Do you want me to put a hard number on it? We lost Georgia by 550,000 votes.

[jlake]

52. If you look at the numbers, 100% of black support will not win.

[yardwork]

137. It's hard to get higher than 88%. That's the percentage of blacks who voted Kerry in 2004.

That 12% of blacks who vote Republican are hard to sway. It's about the same percentage in NC. They vote Republican for social reasons - anti-abortion, mostly. They won't vote for Obama or Hillary in 2008.

I agree with the OP. The only way for Democrats to win the deep south is to get more whites to vote Democratic, and we can't do that right now without compromosing our Party's core beliefs. Over time, maybe more southern whites will start voting with some sense. Right now, they're high on kool-aid and that won't change in this election.

If McCain is the Republican nominee, though, a lot of them might sit this election out. They don't like Romney much either. Didn't like Giuliani, either. They're generally unhappy with the Republican slate, except for Huckabee.

[polichick]

2. We need the WESTERN states...

Kind of fitting to embrace the West anyway ~ new frontiers and all that!

[harun]

84. Dem strategy has to be West, Midwest and Northeast, the deep

south is lost forever.

The deep south doesn't like McCain though. So I do think their turnout will be much less. Hopefully this will help with congressional seats.

[XemaSab]

3. I think if McCain is the nominee

a lot of Republicans will just stay home.

[ErnestoG]

4. Not with Hillary, it can't.

Obama has a better chance. See the S.C. primary.

[Zynx]

5. Come up with the math that gets it done with what I presented.

Those are hard facts and they are stubborn things.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

10. thank you

[FrenchieCat]

6. Let Obama have at it.....you will see! The electoral map will look a whole lot different..

and better for Dems.

[Zynx]

8. Votes are numbers, not wishes. Come up with numbers.

[jlake]

55. Hope won't change the numbers.

The South will NOT FLIP.

[Nitrogenica]

7. I agree that we will win without those states, however I bet

those states will be nowhere near as "rad" as they were in 2004.

Just look at the turnout in S.C. for a primary.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#SC

[Zynx]

12. Primary turnout is a lousy indicator of general election success.

I examined numbers in 1980 and 1988. Those didn't help us.

[Nitrogenica]

20. Well....maybe ok. But don't you think the political climate

is a bit different now? 7 years of *, a failed war, 9 trillion national debt, Katrina, and a poor economy might just drive a lot of Democrats to vote.

[Zynx]

28. Nope. I don't. I don't see a realignment election. I see the most favorable

environment in 16 years for a Democrat to be elected president, but I don't see a paradigm shift.

[Nitrogenica]

41. Well OK. I don't know because I don't live down South.

STill, I think polls cannot be relied upon as much, electronic voting is untrustworthy, and there are some racist sexist folks down south who we don't want to embrace anyway.

I wish it was a paradigm shift. I hope we can look forward to an actual sea change in our lifetimes.

[Hippo_Tron]

9. It's not about winning the south per se, it's about making it closer...

And forcing the GOP to spend money and time in those states. Remember also that the GOP base isn't totally behind McCain and a lot of them may stay home unless he gives them a reason to go out.

Every minute McCain spends in the south trying to get his base out to vote is a minute he's not spending in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Colorado, or Florida,

[Zynx]

37. I'm not sure you appreciate the margins by which we lost those states.

Those are bigger margins than we win California, Hawaii, New Jersey, in some cases New York, Rhode Island, and Connecticut by.

[Hippo_Tron]

40. I responded to another post of yours

And again maybe it won't be Mississippi but it might happen in Tennessee.

Also, this isn't 2004 it's 2008 and George W. Bush won't be the nominee, John McCain will be. Things may be different this time.

[Zynx]

44. Tennessee is a possibility, a slim one though. We lost that by 16 pts as I recall.

[Hippo_Tron]

54. If we close the gap to anything less than 10, the GOP gets worried

And more importantly the MSM picks up the story and starts talking about how McCain may be having trouble in the red states.

The Republican Party in general is a lot less popular now than they were in 2004.

Bush did this in 2004 as you may recall. Hawaii and New Jersey went to Al Gore by huge margins but Bush got close enough that Kerry started to worry and spent some resources in those states. That was a huge story in the media. While we had a good feeling that Kerry would pull it out in Hawaii and New Jersey (and he did) Bush forced him to spend money and time there and that was money and time he could've spent in Ohio.

[yardwork]

139. McCain might not be the nominee, and in any case, he's strong in the west.

[H2O Man]

11. Evaluations on a

state-by-state level are really the only important ones. National polls are nice in the pre-season, but of far less significance at this point.

[Zynx]

15. I take it you agree with my assessment.

[H2O Man]

31. I've said a few

times that there were three factors that led Senator Kennedy to endorse Obama:

(1) He viewed polls that suggest Clinton's negatives are too high to allow her to win;

(2) He viewed the Clinton campaign as causing serious divisions in the party; and

(3) He believes Obama has the ability to unite the party and win in November.

That assessment was made after viewing the state-by-state polls.

[beachmom]

13. Virginia, however, is in play IF we nominate the right Democrat.

But I agree with you that the deep south including my state, Georgia, is not in play.

[Zynx]

17. I believe Virginia and Florida can be won. Arkansas too.

Nothing else though.

[never_get_over_it]

93. Well you just keep on believing it

I live in Florida and I say we won't....

I have never seen more racist, more sexist, more uninformed people in my freaking life... and some just plain STUPID - Ron Paul supporters abound - and if you asked one of them what he stood for I bet all they would say is NO TAXES - it will not happen even some of the Democrats here don't even know what the hell is going on - when I first moved here I met this very nice gentleman - a good Dem - and would occasionally talk to him about "things" he had NO FREAKING CLUE what I was talking about half the time - just went to a gathering he was at recently and now three years later he has a clue that there were no WMDs and he is one of the BRIGHT ONES....

[Zynx]

96. More likely than the Deep South.

At least that's what the numbers say.

[never_get_over_it]

118. I use to think Florida wasn't the deep South

before I moved here - trust me - it is the deep south - I learned the hard way....

and about Virginia - I moved from VA to FL - I was VERY involved in politics there - and I think we do have a chance there - although I've thought that before - but things are WAY better there than they have been especially in Northern VA which is what gave the win to Webb - and of course the ma caca statement - VA has not gone for a Dem in 44 years - we were a bit hopeful in '92 and I practically beat my phone bank folks to keep making GOTV calls trying to push it over for Bill Clinton but in the end he didn't carry that state. Mark Warner is running for the open Senate seat - I'm not even sure who is running against him but he will WIN BIG - but Virginians have a funny way of not voting a straight ticket - so I wouldn't be surprised that a lot of voters who will vote for Warner might not vote for Clinton or Obama - but I do think this is our best chance there in YEARS....

[Zynx]

122. I think Florida is a harder nut to crack than many give it credit for, but we'll agree to disagree.

I'm glad we agree on Virginia.

[never_get_over_it]

128. Well you see we have to throw in the possibility of

election fraud - which of course changes everything - because there is NO question that Al Gore won this state - NO QUESTION AT ALL that more people intended to vote for Gore than Bush - and there is even a legitimate concern that Kerry won or came a lot closer in FL - BUT NEITHER got the electoral votes from this state - so combine that issue with so many dumb ass voters here and either a woman candidate or a black candidate and I really believe we have a problem here And when you mention election fraud to folks here they just kind of look at you like you're a little off or laugh - oh ha ha that's funny - HELLO PEOPLE

and with that said I would love to be WRONG WRONG WRONG - but I'm telling you this is a scary place - I never would have believed it - I have had more racist incidents here in 3 and a half years then in my WHOLE LIFE before and I'm a white woman - they just come up to you and say the dumbest things - I think they think since I'm white I will agree with them. And its not just black/white - its gender - race - religion and foreigners - I have had incidents for all these groups SHOCKING - I had a screaming match at a post office because some old white man was being ridiculously rude to a foreign women with an accent I literally had to yell from across the post office for him to knock it off he was being SO abusive to her - and he simple looked at me and told me to SHUT UP....

It has been unbelievable....and if the housing market wasn't so damn bad I would be moving because I have had enough....and sad - it was my life's dream to live near the ocean - go figure....I finally made it to the ocean and have to put up with this shit....

[MH1]

14. But you can cause the R's to spend money on campaigning there. nt

[Zynx]

21. No you can't. They'll never be worried about them. Those margins are

insurmountable.

[Hippo_Tron]

36. All that it takes is one poll showing a fairly tight race in a state they didn't expect

And the media jumps all over it, meaning that the Republicans have to respond. Maybe it won't be Mississippi but it could be Tennessee where Harold Ford did pretty well last time.

Again, remember that the GOP base isn't all that enthusiastic about McCain and he has to give them a reason to show up.

[Arugula Latte]

16. So what? We don't need them to win the general.

[Zynx]

18. I said as much if you read the whole post.

[Arugula Latte]

23. Yep. Just saw that.

That's what I get for skimming. :)

There's so much info. on DU, I sometimes don't read everything as carefully as I should.

[featherman]

19. Don't need the Conferate States IMO but might make a play for VA

Just gotta hold together the Gore/Kerry states: New England, Mid-Atlantic, Upper Midwest, Pacific Coast and add one more big one to win:

OH, FL, MO, VA are the biggest plums out there.

CO, NV, NM, KY, WV could all be in play. AZ is out if McCain. Long shot red states: KA if Obama, AR if Clinton.

[Zynx]

24. I never said we need them. I said we don't.

Virginia is a state I have been pushing for over 4 years as a possibility. I have watched the state move slowly our way and now I believe dramatically our way. NoVA has turned big time.

[featherman]

29. I know... I just like to push the formula every chance... some forget

that it's always about the EV's

[jwirr]

22. The only thing I think that would help us is if more black people

register to vote. In your stats does the electorate include all blacks old enough and eligible to vote or just those that were registered to vote already?

[Zynx]

25. Those were actual voters. However, I also presented the census stats.

There simply aren't enough of them.

[jwirr]

38. I more or less figured that but was hoping it would help. O well here

we go again. Better watch the voting machines.

[elizm]

Don't speak for my state...South Carolina..

If any Democrat is going to win it, it will be Obama. And by the way....I am a white, middle-aged woman. I live here and I see Republicans (friends/relatives) every day who are considering Obama. Don't be thinking you can predict what will happen here...You don't know how much Obama has changed things already just with his candidacy. It is a movement....You should get onboard...You'd LOVE the ride! :)

[Zynx]

30. I'll bet you $500 it won't happen.

[elizm]

43. I've never bet money in my life...

And don't intend to start now. But I think you will be very surprised in 08 and might have wished you were on the right side of history. :)

[Zynx]

46. I study statistics and history far too much to be caught up in false hopes.

There's only one way South Carolina will vote Democratic and that is a total economic disaster that is blamed on the Republicans. I am talking 10-15% unemployment and major bank failures. Unless that happens, I don't see it happening, particularly not running against McCain.

[elizm]

48. Good luck with your statistics and history...

Hope that works well for you in 08. Bubye! :)

[Zynx]

50. It did well for me in 2006 for predicting those elections.

I trust them more than a "feeling".

[Tatiana]

26. I want Georgia and South Carolina.

I think the people there have had enough of Bush economics.

[Zynx]

34. Yeah, but they're as hard-wired to vote Republican as they used to be

to vote Democrat. It takes an awful lot to move them our way.

[blm]

27. MANY blacks in the south have not VOTED or registered to vote. I would BET my house

that the number of black voters increases by the MILLIONS In the south.

Nothing against Kerry or Gore or the Bush protecting Clinton, but many blacks still didn't feel the pull or attraction that they will feel for Obama.

[Zynx]

32. There isn't significant undervoting among blacks as a percent of the population.

They were roughly equivilant to their share of the population. I came up with the hard numbers showing you how it can't be done. I challenge you to come up with the hard numbers the other way.

[blm]

45. Just saying based on my time in SC and NC.

And the fact that I have strong ties into many areas that would be strong indicators.

Have you ever CANVASSED in states in the south and into the hundreds of miles in between the cities and larger towns?

It is a completely different world that rarely gets visited by canvassers - because many of the folks stay to themselves uninspired by much politically over the last thirty years.

[Zynx]

47. I've been all over the South in my life. Every state, and many regions in each state.

I've talked with southerners of all stripes. I just don't see it happening. Maybe in 30-40 years with a generational change. Maybe sooner with a nationally transforming event. Not until then though.

[blm]

65. I would call Obama's candidacy a nationally transforming event.

And I think ALL the numbers right now are wrong, because I believe MOST black voters and POTENTIAL VOTERS are just now keying in to the LIKELIHOOD that he can/will succeed. And it's only been a month since Iowa's caucus occurred.

THAT is the aspect that no pollster has factored in at this point.

[Zynx]

76. I am examining an electorate that has not fundamentally transformed since 2004.

I just don't see how we can mathematically overcome those margins.

[blm]

79. Well, I do. And it is NOT gonna happen at all with Hillary. She'll have the OPPOSITE effect

in the south.

[Zynx]

85. Explain with hard figures how we overcome 550,000 voters in Georgia.

That's what we lost that state by. Tell me how we do it. How about 470,000 in Alabama? How about 230,000 in Mississippi? How about 270,000 in South Carolina? How do we overcome these margins? Where do our votes come from? What has changed in these states in just four years? Remember we aren't running against Bush, but rather a person with far higher favorables in John McCain.

[blm]

98. Except you also aren't factoring in Katrina, Social Security fiasco that revealed

Bush's true intentions, and the loss of support on Iraq. There is also the OTHER matter rarely discussed of Dean's work STRENGTHENING the party infrastructure in states where it had been long collapsed.

I believe millions of votes in too many states were lost to rampant election fraud which was able to occur because the DNC sat on their hands for years while the RNC gained control of the election process in those states at every level where the votes are allowed, cast and counted.

I really don't think there is GOOD reason to believe all those numbers you listed, and I believe the US attorney firing scandal is just the tip of the iceberg.

And Dean has been doing for the last 3 years what Terry McAuliffe would NOT - he's strengthening the party infrastructures in all those states where it had been left to collapse for so long the RNC went mostly uncountered for more than a few election cycles.

[Zynx]

102. If those states shift, it would be the largest shift since 1964.

I sincerely doubt it.

[blm]

114. Well - look at Siegelman case. And Georgia in 2002. Cleland and Barnes won.

The polls had them ahead by 11% on election day. Had the election process been fully secured by a COMMITTED Dem party what would have been the results?

[Zynx]

119. I called Cleland losing in 2002 and I had polling evidence to suggest it.

I can't find it at the moment in the archives, but that wasn't totally unexpected. A lot of forecasters saw it as a possibility. I watched that campaign very closely. The Barnes election was a total shock. I have no idea how that happened, but I doubt widespread voting fraud very much.

[blm]

124. Siegelman AND Barnes losing? US attorney firing scandal DOES have stories to tell

and 2002 and 2004 election fraud is a huge part of it.

[Zynx]

126. Siegelman's race I had listed as a toss-up.

I had him winning it, but I predicted by only 2 points. In the end, he lost narrowly. That could have been fraud. It was quite close. I won't rule that out. Barnes I think fell victim to a seismic shift in Georgia politics.

[blm]

127. You're pretty benign when it comes to Rove and the RNC. US attorney firings

stories have YET to come out, but all those people involved leaving the WH suggests that your numbers used are likely nowhere near accurate.

[Zynx]

131. My 2004 numbers are based on exit polls and those numbers were in line with pre-election polls.

I think 2004 is a decent benchmark for looking at those states. I don't see evidence of widespread electoral fraud. I went looking for it after the '04 election with the assumption I would find it. I didn't.

[blm]

132. We'll see. And sooner rather than later. If Dean has done his job and blacks come out

in the south in numbers higher than ever - we've got ourselves a whole new ballgame in this country.

[Zynx]

135. They voted in proportion to their population in 2004. It just isn't enough.

[blm]

136. I say you're wrong. Many HAVEN'T voted for years. There IS an untapped

vein of votes in the south, and I believe it can be tapped.

[Zynx]

138. I'd love to be wrong. I just don't think the numbers are there.

[blm]

140. If numbers WERE reliable - then there wouldn't BE a US attorney scandal or

any need to counter election fraud, would there?

heh

[Zynx]

141. I will admit I haven't been paying close attention to the U.S. attorney scandal, but I don't recall

it relating to the switching of millions of southern votes.

[ErnestoG]

33. I totally agree with you. Obama would do spectacularly well in the South

for a post civil rights Democrat.

[Zynx]

35. I challenge you to prove it with numbers. Blacks vote roughly equivilant to

their share of the population and we get nowhere close.

[ErnestoG]

42. You can't prove a vote that hasn't occured yet. Backwards logic.

[Zynx]

49. I proved it with the numbers I posted.

[ErnestoG]

51. You did no such thing. You made projections based on your numbers. "Proved" nothing.

Since the vote hasn't happened yet.

[Zynx]

56. The burden is on you to prove how it can be done.

I am posting based on the most recent national elections that demonstrate the hard facts of these states. You would need virtually 100% turnout among African Americans to make these numbers work and hope that whatever you are doing to cause that level of turnout doesn't raise the general level of turnout because if white turnout is above 50% it becomes damn hard to win these states.

[ErnestoG]

60. No, you made the claim. The burden is upon you in that case.

[Zynx]

62. No, you are saying we can win the Deep South against all data and history.

I presented the data and history. I made my case. Make yours.

[ErnestoG]

66. Yes, thats an opinion based on Obama's performance in SC, Your's is an opinion too.

You cannot "prove" opinions. That's why they are called OPINIONS.

[Zynx]

70. You have not demonstrated how Obama can overcome so many consecutive elections

of Republican blowouts in SC or anyother Deep South state. Your opinion is total, baseless conjecture. Mine has a boatload of data behind it.

[ErnestoG]

73. Sure I have. I called S.C. primary as an example.

[Zynx]

75. What exactly does that prove? In 1980 we had way more voters in the Florida Primary

and we lost it badly in the General Election.

[ErnestoG]

77. You cannot prove an opinion. I already schooled you on that.

[Zynx]

81. These aren't opinions in the sense "I think we should spend more money

on highway construction in Maine." is an opinion. Opinions can have varying degrees of evidence and support. I have a mountain of evidence behind my assertions with links, facts, figures, and history. You have a baseless conjecture equivilant to if I declare there is intelligent life on the planet Quintessa.

[ErnestoG]

83. Yes they are opinions. They are not facts that have happened yet.

You need to research the differences between opinion, prognostication, theory, hypthoses, and fact.

[Zynx]

86. I have an analysis here.

I am prognosticating, with significant factual evidence, on how this can't happen. It will be verified by the results in the fall, and I believe verified in the affirmative of my position. These are hard facts. The vote in the South has a huge inherent bias against Democrats. You have presented NO REAL INFORMATION WHATSOEVER on what will change this fact.

The vote in 2000 and 2004 has happened. That is data that can be analyzed. States do not dramatically flip from election to election often. The burden is on you to show how this election might be different than all of those since 1976.

[ErnestoG]

87. Yes you have demonstrated a viewpoint. But you haven't "proven" anything.

Because opinions cannot, by definition, be proven.

[Zynx]

89. As I said, theories, and this is more a theory than an opinion, have greater

degrees of evidence than belief. My evidence is, by any objective standard, far greater in quantity than anything you have produced.

If the evidence I have presented is not proof of the difficulty involved in winning these states, then I would be similarly without proof in asserting we will win New York this year by your absolutely absurd standard.

[ErnestoG]

91. but still not provable. That's where your demonstration falls apart.

[Zynx]

94. Could you at least, with your opinion, put together the shifts in the numbers

necessary for us to win a Deep South state? I have put together my case. I want to see you put together yours.

[ErnestoG]

97. No, its simply opinion based on a few factors like Obama's win in SC,

his clear ability to forge alliances across party and ideological lines, and the frustration of military families.

He will not sweep the South by any means, but he is far more capable of grabbing alot of Southern votes, than Hillary Clinton - who is a near universal paraiah there.

[Zynx]

100. So you concede he cannot win these states?

That's what I was demonstrating and evidently you agree.

[ErnestoG]

105. I concede no such thing. In my opinion, he can win some of the South.

[Zynx]

113. I think he can win Virginia, Arkansas, and Florida.

Beyond that I don't see it.

[ErnestoG]

115. Oh for sure. But I'd throw in the Carolinas too.

[Zynx]

121. Off the top of your head, can you tell me the margins we lost them by?

I'll give you a hint. They both start with 1 and end with 3 and 7 respectively for North and South Carolina. Those aren't competitive states.

[ErnestoG]

129. That doesn't matter. You are basing your conclusions on dynamics that change almost daily.

[Zynx]

130. The relative Republican natures of those states have been in place for 40 years.

They have, if anything, been trending more and more Republican.

[ErnestoG]

134. Yet this year you actually see the GOP fragmenting.

See this massive exodus of people from the idea of a McCain nomination.

You have to realize that all you numbers based stuff don't work if the model changes, which it is.

[Medusa]

53. South Carolina had record turnout-with the percentage of dems

turning out something like 50% more than the GOP vote the week before. Upsets are in the making my friends. The South is now in play.

[ErnestoG]

57. Exactly.

[Zynx]

59. Get me hard numbers on new registrations and projected turnouts for the general

election that make those mammoth margins go away.

[ErnestoG]

67. Stop it with the hard on for numbers already. The dont mean alot when you are prognosticating

[Zynx]

71. They sure as hell do. Where is the evidence that a flood of black voters

can overcome these margins in the South. Has it ever happened? I have demonstrated the hard demographic and electoral facts of these states. You have done nothing but point to the notoriously inaccurate primary turnout indicator. By the same standard, Democrats would have won virtually every state in 1980.

[ErnestoG]

80. No, they don't. They can show trends, but they cannot "prove" a damn thing.

[alteredstate]

112. Some facts about the Sc Democratic primary

· Barack Obama won 44 of 46 S.C. counties (all except Horry and Oconee)

· Democratic primary turnout increased to 532,000 this year from 293,000 in 2004

· Turnout in the Democratic primary exceeded Republican turnout by over 86,000 voters

· Obama received more votes than John McCain and Mike Huckabee received combined

· 27% of those who cast a ballot were first-time voters

· Obama claimed 67% of 18- to 29-year-old voters, and he drew more under-30 votes than all Republican candidates combined, according to exit polls

· According to exit polls, Obama won every level of income and education, and among voters who named Iraq, the economy and health care as their most important concerns

· Obama won in 8 of the 10 whitest counties in the state, and he tripled Clinton's vote in the 5 counties with the highest concentrations of nonwhite voters

· Statewide Early-Vote totals: Barack Obama 61%; Hillary Clinton's 28%; Edwards's 10%

[Jed Dilligan]

58. Obama will cause massive black turnout in swing states

which could carry any election for the Democrats. They just need the inspiration.

[Zynx]

61. I am talking about Southern states here. Not swing states.

This is a parallel conversation otherwise.

[Jed Dilligan]

63. I agree with you that the South is basically unwinnable

But it doesn't affect my views on electability.

[intheflow]

64. Don't underestimate the effect the war is having.

You may be right that we can't win the South on our platform, but the South is filled with a lot of poor families who have loved ones in the services, along with many military bases. When I was on the Mississippi Coast, I met a lot of AF guys and vets who were NOT happy with the Iraq war. If they don't vote Dem, they still may refrain from voting Repub.

[ErnestoG]

68. Good point. Military families are REALLY souring on Rethugs.

[Zynx]

74. We have made the economic pitch for decades. It hasn't worked.

As for the war, sure there is dissatisfaction, but I don't think it is enough. I haven't seen evidence in polling yet to indicate these states will be much closer than last time.

[ErnestoG]

88. Don't put too much faith in polls. They are an indication and nothing more.

And sometimes poor ones at that.

[Zynx]

90. Better than wild-eyed belief, blind to evidence.

[ErnestoG]

92. Belief starts movements.

[Zynx]

95. I don't see a Republican Party that is atrophied to the point of blowing away.

Nearly 2 million voted in the Florida Primary. They are a significant roadblock still. They have strong support in many areas still. They won't be so impressed by the sincerity of our beliefs, however right they may be, to blow over and go away. The man in your avatar ran into the problem of entrenched opposition to what seemed like a just movement first hand.

[ErnestoG]

99. Oh they are damn close. They are spent.

[Zynx]

101. Nearly 2 million Republican voters in Florida demonstrate otherwise.

It does not indicate they will win that state by any means, but it shows enough are interested in their party to show up. By your standard you apply in SC, it would be conclusive proof they are on their way to a national sweep.

[ErnestoG]

110. Florida is one state. Republicans, and conservatives, can differ state to state.

There are all sorts of factors that play into this.

[Zynx]

142. South Carolina is one state. Democrats and liberals can differ state to state.

There are all sorts of factors that play into this.

[McCamy Taylor]

69. Hillary plus Obama might pick up some of the South. You would mobilze almost

the entire Democratic base---minorities, women, blue collar, people hit hard by the economic recession, people angry about the war, people worried about health care, people worried about retirement and the solvency of social security (the old New Deal-Great Society coalition), the youth vote.

That is a huge number of people and it would eat into the Independents from whom the Southern Republicans have been getting votes.

The GOP has been trying hard to create trouble between the Obama and Clinton camps because they are scared shitless of what would happen if either combination of the candidates appeared on the same ticket. Tradition Democratic men will vote for either candidate and a combo of the two will not phase them. We do not need a "token white male". But having two such visible symbols of progress representing the party will make the general election even more exciting than the primary season has been.

My suggestion--whoever shows up at the convention with more delegates leads the ticket and the other is the VP--and gets to run for president in 8 years. It is a win win. They are both young. It assures the Democrats 16 years of White House rule, if the pair does a good job.

Bill might not like being the husband of the VP but he can lump it. Hillary should take the job if offered. Same for Obama. It is good for the party and the nation.

[Zynx]

72. I can make an argument for Mid-south states. Not Deep South ones.

That coalition can win in Virginia, Arkansas, Missouri, and possibly Tennessee.

[never_get_over_it]

78. Let me make this abundantly clear

You're right and there are a number of Southern States you didn't list - like oh I don't know the dumb ass state I live in Florida - neither one will win here....

and oh don't kid yourself - racist and sexist people don't just live in the deep south -

[Zynx]

82. I was countering a specific point made by others in other threads.

[Lisa0825]

103. Defeatist talk will get us nowhere.

When the national party gives up on a state, then there is no chance to try to BUILD support in that state. Keep ignoring it, and there is no chance to ever regain it. Once upon a time, Texas was a DEMOCRATIC STATE! The Rethugs took it through years of work. We need to start working as hard as they did to regain the south.

Or we could just write them all off since they don't matter anyway. :sarcasm:

[Zynx]

107. I agree, but we will hurt ourselves if we put too much emphasis on a pipe dream.

[D-Sooner]

104. I agree with your analysis

And I find it quite naive that so many posters are arguing against your very stark numbers with anecdotes about how fired up people are. Don't get me wrong, it warms my heart that people are encountering other passionate Democrats, but I've encountered those same passionate Democrats in Georgia and Alabama. Still didn't stop the landslide. Anyone hoping for the deep south to turn is setting himself up for disappointment.

[MadBadger]

106. We Will take Virginia.

[Zynx]

109. I never said we couldn't. Virginia is a fundamentally different state than Alabama.

[Medusa]

108. We've lost the last two elections with the whole "the south can't be won"

crap and we lost the nation. Maybe it's time to change the equation?

[Zynx]

111. I think some of the South can be won. The Deep South is no more approachable for us than

Rhode Island is for the Republicans.

[Lisa0825]

117. You miss my point.

Before I ever heard Dean mention the 50 State Strategy, I heard a Harris County (Texas) party leader talk about firing people if he ever heard them speak in defeatist terms. THAT is the attitude I think the national party needs. NO STATE should be given up on. If we can't win them now, maybe we can in 10 or even 20 years, but we NEVER will if we don't start investing money in those states. That means NOT writing them off when it is time for national elections as well as giving them support for local races like school boards and county level offices.

With your attitude, we might as well just let them secede and get it over with. :eyes:

[donheld]

116. Yes. We. Can.

[Zynx]

120. Okay, decent slogan. What else ya got?

[slick8790]

123. I'm sorry. I'm not ready to concede a large part of the country already, before we even have

a candidate.

[Zynx]

125. No liberal candidate will win these states.

Not gonna happen. People can talk about FDR and JFK all they want, but that was a different time.

[slick8790]

133. Doesn't matter if you're liberal or not. It's all about perceptions.

Edwards was definitely running on the most liberal platform out of the top 3, yet he led in conservatives in exit polls frequently. It'S all about how people percieve a candidate.