Who's winning Swing States? (The States that Matter: 2004 Edition)

These are the 11 States where Kerry and Bush were within 5% in 2004.

Applying results and current CW predictions, there's a Hillary advantage in the States a candidate need to actually win a Presidential election.

This is not presented to demonstrate a real advantage for either candidate. You can argue how Barack would do in Michigan, or how close some of the primaries have been, or whatever...

This is presented to show that since the most straightforward, least tortured method of addressing the question "which States matter?" results in a clear Hillary advantage, maybe everyone ought to stop playing these "who wins where it counts" games and accept if one is trying to be honest, rather than force a result through sophistry, that it's probably too close and too intrinsically inexact a question to bother arguing about.

Wisconsin, Kerry, 0.38% - ???
Iowa, Bush, 0.67% - OBAMA
New Mexico, Bush, 0.79% HILLARY/OBAMA practical tie
New Hampshire, Kerry, 1.37% - HILLARY
Ohio, Bush, 2.11% - HILLARY
Pennsylvania, Kerry, 2.50% - HILLARY
Nevada, Bush, 2.59% - HILLARY
Michigan, Kerry, 3.42% - HILLARY
Minnesota, Kerry, 3.48% - OBAMA
Oregon, Kerry, 4.16% - OBAMA
Colorado, Bush, 4.67% - OBAMA
Florida, Bush, 5.01% - HILLARY

____________________________________________________________

Added on edit, a reply from below expanding the list, and adressing the question of how applicable 2004 is to 2008:

The 5% range is a good swing state indicator as any arbitrary cut-off. 2004 isn't 2008, but we are not likely to see gigantic 10% party swings in only four years. For instance, Kerry won CA by less than 10%, and nobody considers CA a swing state. Hawaii and New Jersey are not swing states.

But here are the states that were between 5% and 10% in 2004... as you can see, Obama's advantage, such as it is, in this set of states is found in safe blue states... Deleware, Maine, Hawaii, etc.

The only possible Bush swing state here that Obma will win big in the primary is Virginia. Hillary counters that with her big win in Arkansas, as another potential pick-up. One can argue that Obama would run stronger in Missouri in Novemeber, and he very well might, but the Democratic primary there was a tie.

It's all very close stuff.

New Jersey, Kerry, 6.68% - HILLARY
Washington, Kerry, 7.18% - OBAMA
Missouri, Bush, 7.20% - HILLARY/OBAMA practical tie
Delaware, Kerry, 7.60% - OBAMA
Virginia, Bush, 8.20% - OBAMA
Hawaii, Kerry, 8.75% - OBAMA
Maine, Kerry, 8.99% - OBAMA
Arkansas, Bush, 9.76% - HILLARY
California, Kerry, 9.95% - HILLARY

The 5% range is a good swing state indicator as any. 2004 isn't 2008, but we are not likely to see gigantic 10% party swings in only four years.

For instance, Kerry won CA by less than 10%, and nobody considers CA a swing state. Hawaii and New Jersey are not swing states.

But here are the states that were between 5% and 10% in 2004... as you can see, Obama's advantage in this set of states is in safe blue states... Deleware, Maine, Hawaii, etc.

The only possible Bush swing state here that Obma will win big is Virginia. Hillary counters that with Arkansas as a potential pick-up where should would run stronger than Obama.

It's all very close stuff.

New Jersey, Kerry, 6.68% - HILLARY
Washington, Kerry, 7.18% - OBAMA
Missouri, Bush, 7.20% - HILLARY/OBAMA
Delaware, Kerry, 7.60% - OBAMA
Virginia, Bush, 8.20% - OBAMA
Hawaii, Kerry, 8.75% - OBAMA
Maine, Kerry, 8.99% - OBAMA
Arkansas, Bush, 9.76% - HILLARY
California, Kerry, 9.95% - HILLARY

And there's also no good correlation between primary results for a particular candidate and GE results for that candidate.

Michigan & Florida don't currently count. Giving it to Hillary because she won 2 elections that didn't count according to the parties own rules means nothing at this point.

Further more, Ohio & PA haven't happened yet. Yup, i'm sure she's up in the polls right now.. but I think Obama has won about 20 states that he was BEHIND in the polls in before he won them. So let's not count our chickens before they hatch (or don't)... to push an argument about Hillary being the only one who can win a General Election.

If you take out those four, then Obama wins 4, and Hillary wins umm.. 2.

You might have missed the point of the OP, but that's cool.

If it soothes you in some way to play intellectual grab-ass with even the simplest sets of facts in order to force an emotionally satisfying conclusion, that's your business.

Clinton would lead in Electoral votes, 205 to Obama's 150.

Of course, this is not the GE, so you really can't compare it too much... nonetheless, I find those numbers interesting, especially since a very decent chunk of Obama's are in red states that, frankly, aren't going to turn blue.

I definitely think it's important to look at these potential swing states, because it's absolutely critical that we get Ohio, at least, this time.

As an Obama supporter, this is the only compelling argument to me that Hillary should get the nomination if they end up in a virtual tie among pledged delegates and the popular Democratic vote. However, some comments on the following IN CAPS:

New Hampshire, Kerry, 1.37% - HILLARY ... BUT KEEP IN MIND HILLARY ONLY WON BY 2.6% OVER OBAMA, STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT GIVEN THAT EDWARDS AND RICHARDSON WERE STILL IN THE RACE.

Ohio, Bush, 2.11% - HILLARY ... THIS RACE IS OVER 3 WEEKS AWAY, WOULD NOT MAKE PRESUMPTIONS AT THIS POINT GIVEN HOW OBAMA HAS CONSISTENTLY CLOSED THE GAP OVER TIME

Pennsylvania, Kerry, 2.50% - HILLARY ... THIS RACE IS OVER TWO MONTHS AWAY!

Nevada, Bush, 2.59% - HILLARY ... AGAIN, HILLARY ONLY WON THIS STATE BY 5.5 POINTS, AND OBAMA GOT MORE GEOGRAPHICALLY DIVERSE SUPPORT

Michigan, Kerry, 3.42% - HILLARY ... AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT, THIS CANNOT BE COUNTED AS OBAMA'S NAME WASN'T EVEN ON THE BALLOT

Minnesota, Kerry, 3.48% - OBAMA ... THIS ELECTION HASN'T OCCURRED YET

Oregon, Kerry, 4.16% - OBAMA ... OBAMA BEAT HILLARY HERE BY OVER 30 POINTS

Colorado, Bush, 4.67% - OBAMA ... OBAMA ALSO BEAT HILLARY HERE BY OVER 30 POINTS

Florida, Bush, 5.01% - HILLARY ... THIS ELECTION WAS ALSO NOT VALID

As we can see, in the swing States that Hillary won legitimately, she only bested Obama by several points whereas he tended to wallop her in the States that he won (including Iowa). Given his propensity to gain votes over time, this argument for Hillary becomes less convincing to me.

In terms of which states are Clinton or Obama states, there is no clear cut answer for many. I gave Hillary NH, and gave Obama Iowa just because that's who won the contests, but neither candidate got 50%.

As for the validity of a given election, it has no bearing on the issue. I didn't give Hillary Florida and Michigan because she won there, but because they are Clinton states. With Florida, the point is beyond argument. With Michigan it is less clear, but my analysis is that it's a comfortable Clinton state, though less so than FL.

The contests that haven't been held yet are obviously projected, but not unreasonably. Wisconsin is too close to call. TX, OH and PA are considered Clinton leaning by everyone with an informed opinion... doesn't mean she'll win, but they favor her. Just a matter of putting states in one column or another based on whatever evidence I have today. (Interestingly, nobody has complained about the many states I put in the Obama column though the contests haven't been held yet.)

Anyway, I think you got the real point, which is that Clinton has not done POORLY, nor is she projected to do poorly, in swing states.

That doesn't mean she is more or less electable... it really means nothing more than to say that it is not obvious that Obama has an electoral advantage because he dominates in Red states. Clinton at very least holds her own in swing states, which is the more pertinent category.

I think the fad of extrapolating general election performance from Democratic primaries is just bizarre, but there are a lot of folks here who seem to actually believe that Obama will win Idaho and Utah and Kansas and South Carolina in the general election. (While talking about an important swing state like Florida like it's a foreign country) That's what impelled me to look up what States were closest last time around.

but Obama beat Hillary in Minnesota 66 to 32. :D

More than 40% indies. Count on that.

November is an Obama meme that I am deflating.

I am not proposing a counter Hillary meme. I am saying that it's absurd to make arguments extrapolating primary performance into general election performance.

The point seems lost on every Obama supporter who has replied so far... they seem to want to correct the methodology to favor their candidate, even though the methodology is presented up front as probably meaningless.

C'est la vie.

Wisconsin, Kerry, 0.38% - Hasn't happened
Iowa, Bush, 0.67% - Huckabee (and McCain didn't even place)
New Mexico, Bush, 0.79% - Hasn't happened
New Hampshire, Kerry, 1.37% - McCain (37% to 32% against Romney)
Ohio, Bush, 2.11% - Hasn't happened
Pennsylvania, Kerry, 2.50% - Hasn't happened
Nevada, Bush, 2.59% - Romney (51% to McCain's 13%)
Michigan, Kerry, 3.42% - Romney (39% to McCain's 30%)
Minnesota, Kerry, 3.48% - Romney (41% to McCain's 22%)
Oregon, Kerry, 4.16% - Hasn't happened
Colorado, Bush, 4.67% - Romney (59% to McCain's 19%)
Florida, Bush, 5.01% - McCain (36% to Romney's 31%)

So in short, of these 12 critical states, 5 haven't voted yet, and of the 7 that have voted, McCain's only won 2 of them.

He didn't get over 50% in either of the states he won.

He's gotten SCHOOLED in four states. :D

People who say a Dem will do well in red states because he wins those Democratic primaries should note that if that was a valid approach, we shouldn't bother even running a candidate!

If primaries equaled genral elections, McCain would "obviously" win NY and CA and all the other big blue states.

This is info that really is usefull. Although, I think you have to also take into account the "obama" factor. There is no doubt some type of hysteria following the guy. But, it does appear to show Clinton with a slight advantage.

Thanks