Is it possible for us to pick up Colorado this year?

[JohnLocke]

[freetobegay]

1. Anything is possible. probable?

When pigs fly!

[On the Road]

2. #3

"Only if Bush screws up bad and the media actually follows through."

That, however, has been happening for a month or two. A few more months of the status quo will hand Colorado (and a number of other states) to Kerry on a silver platter.

[richmwill]

3. Could happen

When gas prices hit $4/gallon, which I'm sad to say really looks inevitable- Kerry can pick up Western and Southern states. Even Pubbies won't like having to pay $60+ to fill their SUV's.

4. Colorado has been poised to wear the blue bandana for some time.

The population is growing and changing from rural to urban, evolving not unlike California did some years ago. When states go urban, they tend to go Blue.

Red states vs Blue states...sounds like gang wars - Crips vs Bloods.

sheesh.

Oh yeah, Colorado. Better change the state's name to Colorazul. ;)

[Awsi Dooger]

6. I disagree, Colorado has been trending Republican

Both Colorado and Nevada are improperly identified as states trending our way. Significant numbers of wealthy and conservative relocating newcomers (primarily Californian) have been heading into both states for years, more than overcoming the Hispanic newcomers who should vote Democratic. Several months ago there was an article with specific numbers that makes this case, but I can't find a link.

Regardless, here are the presidential voting numbers from Colorado since '88, with comparisons to the national average:

'88: Bush (53.06 - 45.28) = + 0.06% Republican
'92: Clinton (40.13 - 35.87) = + 1.30% Republican
'96: Dole (45.80 - 44.43) = + 9.90% Republican
'00: Bush (50.75 - 42.39) = + 8.87% Republican

As these numbers indicate, in '88 and '92 Colorado was tilted only slightly Republican, virtually the same margin as the national vote. But in '96 and '00 the shift is dramatic, nearly 10 points more Republican than the national margin.

If this trend holds up in 2004, Kerry would need a national margin of high single digits to contend in Colorado. In other words, Colorado is irrelevant. We are in landslide mode if Colorado is in play. Kerry is wasting money and time in Colorado.

10. Look again at the REAL picture

1980
Right - 66
Left - 31
(Carter - 31 / Reagan - 55 / Anderson - 11)

1984
Right - 63
Left - 35 (Mondale - 35 / Reagan - 63)

1988
Right - 53
Left - 45
(Dukakis - 45 / Bush - 53)

1992
Right - 59
Left - 40
(Clinton - 40 / Bush - 35 / Perot - 23)

1996
Right - 53
Left - 44
(Clinton - 44 / Dole - 46 / Perot - 7)

2000
Right - 50
Left - 47
(Gore - 42 / Bush - 50 / Nader - 5)


So, obviously, over the last 20 years and the last 6 Presidential elections, Colorado has become increasing Liberal, to the tune of about 3%-4% per year. The only exception is Dukakis, who jumped ahead by 10% over Mondale. Clinton dropped from Dukakis, but was still 5% over Mondale. After Clinton, the 3%-4% per election increase continued.

Colorado should go Blue in 2004 or 2008 if the trend continues.

[NewJerseyDem]

11. There are serious flaws in your statistics

Anderson ran to the LEFT of Carter and Reagan so he certainly cannot be considered as part of the right. Also, Perot cannot be simply considered as part of the right because his views were more a mix and he drew from both democrats and republicans.

What matters isn't the percentage that each candidate got, but the percentage in comparison to the national vote. For instance, if Kerry got 55% in 2004 nationwide and he won Colorado with 49% it doesn't mean that Colorado shifted to the right, it means that Colorado shifted with the rest of the country for one election.

So, this is a better way to look at it.

1980: Nationwide: Reagan 51%
Colorado: Reagan 55% 4% republican advantage

1984: Nationwide: Reagan 59%
Colorado: Reagan 63% 4% republican advantage

1988: Nationwide: Bush 53%
Colorado: Bush 53% 0% republican advantage

1992: Nationwide: Bush 37%
Colorado: Bush 35% 2% republican DISadvantage

1996: Nationwide: Dole 41%
Colorado: Dole 46% 5% republican advantage

2000: Nationwide: Bush 48%
Colorado: Bush 50% 2% republican advantage

So, this really shows little change in Colorado's presidential voting patterns since 1980, but that excludes the effects of third parties and democrats so that could actually change these numbers slightly. However, if you look at their congressional voting patters it seems like republicans are doing better, but then again that has ocurred nationwide.

14. Actually, the flaws are in your analysis

Anderson was a 10 term Republican Congressman before he lost the Primaries to Reagan and ran as an Independent. His platform was moderate, but his base was certainly Republican.

As for Perot, look at the numbers! He drew MAINLY from the Republican's vote tally. Deny it if you like, but it is obviously true.

I stand by my post. I made no errors (At least not the errors that you think I made) :)

[fujiyama]

5. I'd consider it

a second tier swing state.

The first tier, I'd classify as those states that were won by either Gore or Bush by 5% or less. CO doesn't quite fall in that category. It did have a high Nader presence, and not counting that, Gore lost it by some 6% or so...That too after not campaigning there a whole lot.

[JI7]

7. i would say it's not impossible .

meaning it's not impossible as in utah, alabama, and wyoming. but not as possible as new mexico , west virgina, nevada, ohio. somewhere between the first group and the second group i would say.

[DaveSZ]

8. Sure.

As long as Kerry doesn't push gun control issues we can pick up WV, TN, or even CO.

[Leilani]

15. Utah, Wyoming, & Alabama

will go for Kerry when hell freezes over.

That would be like Mass. & Vermont going for Bush.

Gore won New Mexico, barely, in 2000, so it will be battleground.

West Va. should be a Dem state, so it is battleground.

Nevada & Ohio are battleground states.

[NewJerseyDem]

9. Depends on Nader

If Nader is a smaller factor this year than we have a chance in Colorado considering that Bush only got slightly over 50% in the state. However, if Nader gets 3% of the vote or so nationwide than it is likely that Kerry will lose Colorado just like Gore did in 2002. Colorado is trending to the right in recent years so it will be an uphill battle to retake the state in 2004 if the race is close, as many expect.

[BillZBubb]

12. Not gonna happen

Even if it were possible, it would take time and resources way out of proportion to the electoral gain. Kerry would have to tack even harder right than he already has as well. That would hurt elsewhere.

[Lefty Pragmatist]

13. Low priority state

If CO goes blue, Kerry's going to win in a walk, so I'd rather spend our money wisely in purple states.

As for CO becoming more liberal... no way. It's hard to live in/travel through the west and remain unaware of just how fundmentally anti-liberal the west is. Other than the hippy-dippy west (parts of OR, WA, CA, and NM), the rest of the west virulently detests government intervention and taxation. The only time Dems win in the west is when the Dem is well-wired into agri or mining interests, when the GOP really, *really* messes up and costs the taxpayers a bundle, or when the GOP presses an insanely theocratic candidate and the 60% large town/city vote takes out the 40% rural vote (we see this in OR statewide elections all the time, because the OR GOP thankfully hasn't learned to hide their copies of the Turner Diary until after the election).

[RafterMan]

16. Uhh

"The only time Dems win in the west is when the Dem is well-wired into agri or mining interests, when the GOP really, *really* messes up and costs the taxpayers a bundle, or when the GOP presses an insanely theocratic candidate and the 60% large town/city vote takes out the 40% rural vote"

So. Landslide then, eh?