Breaking up Texas

After reading this entry http://www.fivethirtyeight.com… by Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight about dividing Texas up into 5 states I became interested in other possibilities.  After all, as the second most populous state in the nation there is certainly enough people to make several decently sized states.  To pay homage to Nate Silver for the idea I decided to keep a few of the states names, one of which is almost identical to what he did since it was so awesome.  Using Daves redistricting application this is my vision of Texas.  A few major differences between the 538 version and my version is that I have no problem splitting up metropolitan areas.

Plainland

The plains of west Texas are conservative.  So conservative that Plainland would be the most conservative state in the United States giving Barack Obama a mere 24% of the vote to John McCain’s 75%.  If you are not familiar with Texas do not let the geographic size fool you, it is the least populated of the new states.  If a Liberal, Progressive or Democrat gets off on getting crushed in elections and wants to put on a token campaign Plainland is the place.

Population:  2,547,860

Demographics:  71% White, 4% Black, 23% Hispanic, 2% Asian

2008 Vote:  McCain 75% Obama 24% Other 1%

Major Cities:  Lubbock, Amarillo, Witchita Falls

Congressional Seats: 3

East Texas

East Texas is slightly more populated that Plainland.  The small population increase may be enough to give East Texas an additional congressional seat.  The partisan difference between Plainland and East Texas is minimal.  Giving Barack Obama 29% of the vote compared to John McCain’s 70%.  Don’t expect much love for Liberals, Progressives or Democrats here since Plainland would be the second most conservative state in the United States based on 2008 Presidential Election results.  East Texas expands down into the greater Houston Metro area and is home, like Plainland, to several of the lesser populated DFW Metro area counties.

Population:  2,775,191

Demographics:  75% White, 13% Black, 10% Hispanic, 2% Asian

2008 Vote:  McCain 70% Obama 29%, Other 1%

Major Cities:  Tyler, Longview, College Station-Byran

Congressional Seats: 4

Trinity

Names after the trio of major cities which comprise the majority of the states population, Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington.  The four county conglomeration comprises the overwhelming majority of the population with the most of the remainder along I-35 running south including the cities of Waco, Killeen-Temple, Georgetown and Round Rock.  Dallas and Fort Worth would run the show and I suspect a death match of monumental proportions would ensue to see who gets the title of “State Capitol.”  At last we have a state where there is a county which voted for Barack Obama.  Dallas County gave Barack Obama a respectable 57% of the vote in 2008, also Dallas County has by itself has a population roughly equal to Plainland.  However in Trinity Dallas County was the only county to vote for Obama.  Based on the 2008 results Trinity would essentially be a smaller  version of old Texas mirroring the 55%-44% McCain-Obama results.  Given the large population Trinity would be home to 11 congressional seats.  

Population:  7,620,736

Demographics:  62% White, 13% Black, 20% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 Vote:  McCain 55% Obama 44%, Other 1%

Major Cities:  Dallas, Fort Worth, Arlington, Waco

Congressional Seats: 11

Gulf Land

With a population of 9,142,795 Gulfland is the most populous of the new states.  Austin would remain as the state Capital and the largest city is Houston.  Barack Obama would have won Gulf Land in by a slim 3% margin, roughly 73,000 votes.  As a slightly GOP leaning swing state Democrats would have to rely on serious get out the vote efforts in Travis, Harris and Hidalgo Counties to pull off wins.  One item I have neglected to speak about up to this point is demographics.  As seen in Plainland and East Texas they are rather bland, very white, Trinity is a bit more diverse.  However Gulfland would join the rank of majority-minority states at 44% white, 38% hispanic, 13% black and 5% asian.  

Population:  9,142,795

Demographics:  44% White, 13% Black, 38% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 Vote:  Obama 51% McCain 48% Other 1%

Major Cities:  Houston, Austin, Corpus Christi, McAllen-Edinburg

Congressional Seats: 13

El Norte

This would be a Democratic strong hold.  Obama would have won El Norte with a 13% margin, larger than Pennsylvania.  The cities of San Antonio and El Paso bring the majority of the population here.  However El Norte is not that populous, in fact it’s population is only about half a million larger than Plainland.  However that may be enough to give El Norte 5 seats.  

Population:  3,155,854

Demographics:  28% White, 5% Black, 64% Hispanic, 4% Asian

2008 Vote:  Obama 56% McCain 43% Other 1%

Major Cities:  San Antonio, El Paso

Congressional Seats: 4 or 5

The congressional seat estimates were done in an incredibly rough manner.  

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

GE 2008, the Democratic pick up states: an exhaustive summary analysis

Now that all 9 Democratic pick-up states plus NE-02 have been analysed, I have also provided an exhaustive and most unique non-partisan summary of the pick-up states. I can guarantee you that there is information in this summary that you will not find anywhere else in this quality, clarity or combination.

There are a number of side-documents that go with the summary, plus links to all of the nine analyses and the GE 2008 final analysis for the entire Union.

I want to explain again that I have farmed this kind of thing out to Google Docs as it makes it easier for me to publish charts, tables and graphics. It is my hope that you will read the summary in it’s entirety. There are surprises all over the place that only become apparent when one scratches under the surface and researches the GE 2008 at the county level, county for county. In the case of the 9.25 pick-ups, we are talking about 696 counties.

The summary is divided into 2 parts and all of this information is after the jump.

Part I of the summary contains:

– links for the individual analyses for all the pick-up states plus the links for the GE 2008 analysis for the entire Union are given again. They will be reproduced at the bottom of this diary entry.

– an overview of the raw vote and percentage totals for the pick-ups states, first for 2008 only and then a comparison to 2004.

– three maps. One shows the geographic position of the pick-ups within the USA. The second shows the geographical relationship between the pick-ups and the Democratic retentions from 2004. The third shows the Democratic states from 2008 plus the 5 leanest GOP wins from 2008.

– a question: “How does this compare on a historical level?”

The question is referring to the number of electoral votes that changed parties in 2008, namely, 113 EV. I then provide a table showing each general election back to 1948 and how many electors changed parties, and in which direction. The answer to the question is that Obama’s EC shift is on par with the last election cycle, but less than in the 1980s.

Afterward, there is an introduction to the county-level analysis, including an exact numeric count of counties per state: Democratic retentions, Democratic pick-ups, Republican retentions and Republican pick-ups.

Quote:

“In the pick-up states, the Democratic party retained 146 of 148 Democratic counties from 2004 and then picked-up an additional 89 counties, for a total of 235 counties (33.76%). The Republican party lost 89 counties from 2004, retaining 459 counties and then picked-up 2 counties, for a total of 461 (66.24%). 235 + 461 = 696 counties.”

“Nationally, all 9 states trended Democratic as Obama won them and their electors according to the WTA (winner-takes-all) system, but when we look at the inner details, the picture is much clearer: 642 of 696 counties in the pick-up states (92.24%) swung Democratic. The remaining 54 counties (7.76%) swing Republican. This indicates a statistical grand sweep for the Democratic party in the pick-up states.

In 4 states, the ENTIRE state trended Democratic: Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada (all three western pick-ups) and Indiana.The pick-up in Indiana is historic not only because this is the first time since 1964 that a Democrat has won the state, but it also had the largest partisan shift of all 50 states in the GE 2008: +21.71%

The state with the largest contra-trend (Republican) against the national trend: Florida.”

Part I ends with maps of Ohio, Virginia and North Carolina, showing the geographic position of the 28 counties that swung Republican, showing their proximity to Appalachia.

You can link to Part I via Google Docs.

Part II starts with an extensive study of the 39 largest counties out of the 9.25 pick-ups states, plus Durham County (NC) as honorable mention.

Quote:

“I have done a statistical analysis of the 39 largest counties of the 9.25 pick-ups. These are all counties that had a total vote of more than 170,000 and at least one candidate should have also gotten at least 100,000 of those votes or very,very close to it. All of those counties meet both criteria. Two counties (Stark County / OH, Washoe County / NV) had no candidate with 100,000 votes or more, but in both cases one candidate was very close to 100,000 and the countwide total vote was well over 170,000.  Those 39 counties accounted for 44.49% of the total popular vote of the pick-up states, which is actually slightly LESS than it was in 2004 for the same states: 44.91%. Nonetheless, when only 39 of 696 analysed counties (5.60%, numerically) have almost half the electoral firepower of the region, then it is statistically very clear that the large urban areas have the real electoral firepower in presidential elections. The candidate who sweeps the urban areas has a far better chance of winning the presidency.

Of these 39 counties, there were 21 Democratic retentions, 8 Democratic pick-ups and 10 Republican retentions. This means that of the same 39 counties in 2004, the picture was much more even: in 2004, there were 21 Democratic counties of these 39 and 18 Republican counties.

The Democratic party picked up Hillsborough (Tampa) and Pinellas (Clearwater) counties in Florida, Wake (Raleigh) county in North Carolina, Washoe (Reno) County in Nevada, Hamilton (Cincinnati) County in Ohio, Jefferson (Golden) and Arahapoe (Littleton) counties in Colorado and Douglas (Omaha) County in Nebraska.”

The important thing about this study is it’s depth and breadth: each of the 39 (40) counties are analysed comparing 2008 to 2004, measuring raw vote and margin differences, also the counties’ percentual take of their respective states’ popular vote and also their take of the pick-up states combined. But the counties are also each given a spreadsheet to trace their voting history back to 1960 and the results are nothing less than amazing!

Next, from the analysis in Part II:

Superlatives:

– the largest raw vote total of all 39 counties: Miami-Dade County, FL: 864,636 votes

– the largest Democratic winning raw vote total: Miami-Dade County, FL: 499,831 votes

– the largest Democratic raw-vote margin of the pick-ups: Cuyahoga County, OH (Cleveland): +258,542 vote margin

– the three highest Democratic winning percentages: Denver- CO,  Boulder, CO and Cuyahoga- OH: 75.45%, 72.29% and 68.70%, respectively.

– the three largest Democratic winning margins (by percent): Denver- CO,  Boulder- CO and Cuyahoga- OH: +52.41%, +46.14% and +38.74%, respectively

– the highest democratic margin-shift (swing): Marion County, IN: +26.40% margin shift. This is especially impressive, as this shift was not from a pick-up, but rather, a Democratic retention county.

– the largest Republican winning raw vote total: Duval County, FL: 210,537 votes

– the largest Republican raw-vote margin of the pick-ups: El Paso County, CO: +51,419 vote margin

– the three highest Republican winning percentages: Butler – OH, El Paso- Co and Lee- FL:  60.52%, 58.69% and 54.67%, respectively

– the three largest Republican winning margins (by percent): Butler – OH, El Paso- CO and Brevard- FL: +22.58%, +18.82% and +10.37%, respectively

– the lowest negative Republican margin-shift (swing): Brevard County, FL: -5.73% margin shift

All of the Democratic retentions and pick-ups showed raw vote, percentual and margin GAINS.

All of the Republican retentions showed percentual and margin LOSSES.

4 of the Republican retentions showed raw-vote gains: Brevard, Lee, Polk and Pasco counties, all in Florida. The other 6 Republican retentions showed raw-vote losses.

9 Republican or Democratic tipping-point (margin = less than 4%) counties from 2004 became solid Democratic wins in 2008: Pinellas, Volusia and Orange Counties-FL, Wake, Guilford and Mecklenburg Counties- NC, Montgomery and Stark Counties – OH, Arapahoe County- CO

5 Republican retentions have become tipping point counties for 2012: Sarasota (+0.10%), Virginia Beach (+0.71%), Duval (+1.90), Seminole (+2.70%) and Pasco (+3.75%) . Statistically this means that 1/2 of the Republican retentions studied here are endangered territory for 2012 and (this has been proven historically many times over) in the case of a sucessful re-election campaign for the Democratic party in 2012, these five counties are the most likely candidates to become Democratic pick-ups in 2012.

O Democratic retentions or pick-ups are tipping-point counties for 2012.

Here is the EXCEL SPREADSHEET that has all of the raw calculations for the 39 (40) largest counties.

In order to simplify the look of the table and make the information easier to see, I created a table to show the chronological progression of each county from 1960 to 2008. For each county and year, I have assigned either a D, R or an I, depending on which party won the county in that year. And then I have shaded each cell according to winning party. I then organized the table in order from CORE GOP counties to CORE DEM counties. Take a good, hard look at the table when you read Part II, it is most enlightening.

You can link to Part II via Google Docs.

Quotes:

“In the case of some counties that visually look as if they should be core GOP counties there is instead the marking steady; these are GOP counties that should be core counties, but which almost flipped in 2008, so their status is now uncertain. And some Democratic counties are marked as steady as the margins are very lean.

But the table makes it very easy to see which years are landslide years: 1972 and 1984, to a smaller extent 1992 and 2008. In 1972, we see a sea of red go through all counties except Lucas County, OH. In 1984, we see a sea of red go through all counties except the bottom 5. At the top we see 3 core GOP counties that also resisted the Johnson landslide of 1964. Notice that all three counties are in Florida.

Starting in 1988, the Democratic party started re-building in the urban areas:

3 counties were added to the Democratic column in 1988, resisting the GOP pull in that year: Boulder, Summit and Lucas counties. And those counties have become core DEM counties since then.

8 counties joined the Democratic column in 1992 and have stayed there since then: Palm Beach, Broward, Volusia, Bernalillo, Franklin, Montgomery, Clark, Miami-Dade. They are mostly strong DEM counties, save for Montgomery and Volusia, which tend to go with leans margins. There are 4 more counties that joined the Democratic column in 1992, but were reclaimed by the GOP in either 1996 or 2000: Pasco, Wake, Stark, Guilford. Pasco returned to the GOP in 2004 and has stayed there. It is therefore the only county to complete buck the blue trend, in spite of reduced margins in 2008.

Mecklenburg and Pinellas counties joined the Democratic column in 1996, were reclaimed by the GOP in 2000 or 2004 and were reclaimed by the Democratic party in 2004 or 2008.

Fairfax joined the Democratic column in 2000 and has stayed there since, with ever increasing margins.

Orange and Marion counties joined in 2004 and were retained in 2008. Both of these retentions had massive margin shifts toward the Democratic party in 2008: +18.41 and +26.40%, respectively.

The 8 counties that Obama picked-up are clear to see in the middle of the table. Six of those counties have one thing in common: this is the first time they have gone Democratic since 1964, statistical evidence of a sweep similar to but not as extreme as Johnson in 1964: Hamilton, Douglas, Jefferson, Wake, Hillsborough and Pinellas counties were slightly smaller wins for the Democratic party than in 1964. However, Washoe and Arapahoe counties were larger wins for the Democratic party than in 1964, thus breaking a 44 year record. Notice that both of those counties are in the west.

We can see clearly from the table that the last time a party had flipped 8 counties or more was in 1992, when Bill Clinton picked-up 12 counties. George W. Bush, Jr. picked up 3 counties in 2000 and 1 more in 2004. Those counties returned to the Democratic party in 2000 or 2004.

In 1988- just analyzing these 40 counties- there were 8 Democratic counties and 32 Republican counties. In 1992, out of the same mix of 40 counties, there were 20 Republican counties and 20 Democratic counties, an even split. In 2000, there were 21 Republican counties and 19 Democratic counties. But in 2004, in spite of a republican re-election, the Democrats had 22 counties, the Republicans 18. And now in 2008, it’s 30 Democratic, 10 Republican. There can be no doubt about it: statistically, the urban areas in the Union have moved decisively to the Democratic party in 47 of 50 states (the evidence for which I will present before the end of 2009). This example from the 9.25 Democratic pick-ups is mild in comparison to the statistical data that came out of cities in core Democratic territory: Philadelphia (83% for Obama), Detroit (74% for Obama), New York (86% for Obama), Los Angeles (69% for Obama), Seattle (70% for Obama), Portland (77% for Obama) Chicago (76% for Obama), Boston (64% for Obama), Honolulu (70% for Obama), Milwaukee (67% for Obama), Madison (73% for Obama), New Orleans (79%), Baton Rouge, Dallas (deep in GOP territory: 57% for Obama), St. Louis (60% for Obama) etc, etc, etc.”

Conclusion:

“The Democratic wins in the pick-up states, as in the retentions, was not the example of the Democratic party barely holding on the to so-called “blue” states plus one “red” state or getting to one vote over 50%. The sweep through the pick-ups is statistically clear. The last time a sweep like this happened in the Republican party, it held the white house for 12 years. On the other hand, Johnson and Nixon had massive sweeps in 1964 and 1972 and in spite of this,the White House switched hands in the following cycles. So, though such a sweep is no forecast for the future, the data tells us quite clearly where the new battle lines will form in these nine states for the 2012 General Election. And both parties will be targeting key counties in key districts in 2010 in order to sway the affected area to their side before 2012 even gets off the ground.”

————————————————————–

Here the links to the individual analyses, with a detailed description afterwards:

Mid-west:

OHIO – Part I, Part II, Part III , raw data / INDIANA – Part I, Part II and Part III, raw data

IOWA – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data / NEBRASKA CD-02 – raw data

South:

VIRGINIA – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data / NORTH CAROLINA – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data  

FLORIDA – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data

West:  

COLORADO – Part I , Part II , Part III , raw data, special 9-county 48-year voting history study

Supplemental to Colorado: DEMOGRAPHIC and ECONOMIC profile of Colorado (p.4, hispanic population)

NEW MEXICO – Part I, Part II, Part III, raw data, special 12 county 48-year voting history study   Supplemental to Nevada: DEMOGRAPHIC and ECONOMIC profile of New Mexico (p.4, hispanic population)  

NEVADA – Part I, Part II , Part III, raw data, special 6 county 48-year voting history study  

Supplemental to Nevada: DEMOGRAPHIC and ECONOMIC profile of Nevada (p.4, hispanic population)   Quick Census facts on Nevada  

An analysis for NE-02 (which is the „.25″ part of „9.25″) will be published when I have received the complete precinct data for Douglas and (part of) Sarpy counties from election officials who are willing to dig up the data over 48 years for me. But a comparison 2008 to 2004 is already possible and here is the raw-data.

Links to the large analysis for the entire Union

Full analysis Part I

Full analysis Part II  

Full analysis Part III

Full analysis Part IV  

Full analysis Part V

raw-vote total data  

Obama’s standing in the national rankings since 1824  

Obama’s standing in the rankings, per state

VIRGINIA – a county by county in-depth analysis

As was the case with INDIANA and OHIO, I have now completed a massive county-by-county study of the results of the GE 2008 for VIRGINIA.

President Obama, who won the Commonwealth of Virginia with a +6.30% margin, was the first Democratic candidate to win this state since 1964 and the second Democratic candidate to win since 1948. Of note: VIRGINIA and COLORADO, both Democratic pick-ups in 2008, are the no. 1 and 2 states that came closest to Obama’s national winning margin; VIRGINIA went „blue” for slightly less than the national margin while COLORADO went for President Obama with slightly more than the national margin. It is rare when an unexpected battleground state flips and also mirrors the national numbers, but even rarer when this happens with two such states. Note also that these two states are in completely different regions of the Union, more proof that the GE 2008 was a so-called “re-alignment election”.

In a nutshell:

1.) Obama set a new VIRGINIA raw vote record for a candidate of any party: 1,959,932 votes, 242,573 votes more than Bush’s record-breaking raw vote from 2004. This is also the largest increase in votes for one party from one cycle the the next in VA history; the Democratic party added 504,790 votes to it’s total over 2004. Incidentally, McCain also did better than Bush (2004) in VIRGINIA: he bested Bush’s PV take by 8,046 votes. However, the ratio of the democratic vote increase over the GOP vote increase was 63.74 to 1! The popular vote growth rate for VIRGINIA was 16.91%.

2.) Obama won VIRGINIA with the 11th largest winning percent, the 11th largest winning margin, the 4th largest state partisan shift and the 4th largest Partisan Value* in US history for a Democratic candidate. Of the 14 Democratic winning cycles in VIRGINIA, this puts Obama roughly in the middle of the standings. That 4th largest partisan-shift, by the way, is larger than Johnson’s from 1964. You have to go back to 1912 to find a Democratic partisan shift in VA larger than this one. The dynamics of President Obama’s win in VIRGINIA are very, very different than in the other two states (IN, OH); this information is critical and has far reaching ramifications for both the Democrats and the GOP in future elections. For this reason, I’ve done such an analysis.

*Partisan Value = the difference between the state partisan shift and the national partisan shift. For instance, the partisan shift in Virginia was +14.50%, while the national partisan shift was +9.73%, which means that Virginia was +4.77% stronger than the national pull toward the democratic party in 2008.

I’ve divided the information into three parts, and that data is in the extended text.  

In Part I, there is important background information on Virginia, including details on the 14 DEM election cycles where a democratic candidate won the state.  Also in Part I is the general overview of the county-wide results. You can link via Google Docs.

Part II contains a very large, detailed and enhanced (in comparison to the analyses of INDIANA and OHIO) table of the 134 counties/independent cities in Virginia, first by descending partisan shift and an analysis of the partisan shift ranges, and then by county size (% of the 2008 statewide popular vote), descending. Harrisburg (independent city), Fairfax and Buchanan counties are used as a prime examples of how Obama won Virginia, even through counties where he lost. We also see statistical proof of the “appalachian phenomenon” in the southwest part of the state. You can link via Google Docs.

Part III is an analysis of the democratic pick-up counties and also of the “tipping-point” counties, including some colorful maps. The conclusion draws pointed differences between Obama’s historic win in Virginia and his wins in Indiana and Ohio (quoted also below). You can link via Google Docs.

Auxiliary sources:

I took the county-wide raw data for the entire state for both 2008 and 2004 and plugged it into an excel spreadsheet, which you can find here. Subsidiary data for all 134 counties/independent cities in VIRGINIA can be found here. Should you have difficulty calling up the spreadsheet, if you email me, I can send you a copy.

—————————————————————————————————————

Here a full quote from the conclusion:

“In INDIANA, every single county trended more or less democratic, without exception – there was a blue shift that moved the entire state and those overwhelmingly white, rural counties contributed greatly to Obama’s narrow win here – yes, the counties that he still lost to McCain. This shows a large level of GOP defection to Obama in 2008. Here, Obama gained 405,028 raw votes over Kerry from 2004, while McCain lost 133,790 raw votes over Bush from 2004, an uneven shift. Indiana’s PV growth rate over 2004 was 11.47%. And Obama won by +1.03%.

In OHIO, not every county trended democratic (11 trended GOP), but there were no GOP county pick-ups. Also, in Ohio, the largest cities, all five of them, played the crucial role in moving the state into the democratic column and those overwhelmingly white, rural counties contributed very little to Obama’s narrow win, in contrast to INDIANA. Surely there were some moderate GOP defections, but there were also a moderate amount of newly registered voters. Here, Obama gained 198,877 raw votes over Kerry’s total from 2004, while McCain lost 181,948 raw votes over Bush’s total from 2004, a moderate mirror image shift. Ohio’s PV growth rate over 2004 was a nominal 1.36%, way under the national PV growth rate of 7.46%. And Obama won by +4.58%.

However, in VIRGINIA, there was real resistance to Obama, but this resistance occured in counties that are „emptying out”, so to speak. We see a large poli-demographic shift in VA, with the north and the southeast gaining greatly in political strength for the democratic party. Here there were obviously far fewer GOP defections, if at all (McCain scored more raw votes in VA than Bush from 2004), but far more newly registered and democratic dedicated voters. This poses a far larger problem for the GOP than either Indiana or Ohio, for Obama’s +1.03% margin in Indiana can be overcome and Ohio is expected to be a battleground state in virtually every cycle, but the addition of more then 500,000 voters to the democratic rolls in just one cycle is much harder for the opposition to overcome. The best case scenario for the GOP is that VIRGINIA becomes a bitter battleground state. However, +6.30% is hardly a battleground margin. It is a better margin than Obama scored in OHIO, FLORIDA, INDIANA and NORTH CAROLINA. It is a lean winning margin, but a comfortable one and will require a minimum 12.60% shift back in order for the GOP to regain the state; I doubt that this shift will come from those 500,000 new voters. The worst case scenario for the GOP is that Obama cements VIRGINIA into the democratic column in his first term, adding the state to core democratic territory and thus making the electoral math for the GOP more difficult.”

AZ-Sen: Minuteman founder to challenge McCain in primary

Doesn’t sound like a serious threat to McCain, but it should make the primary interesting if nothing else.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/…

Social conservatives tolerated John McCain as the party’s nominee, but never trusted him, and he now appears to be facing a serious primary from the right in Arizona next year.

Chris Simcox, the founder of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps and a prominent figure in the anti-immigration movement, will announcing tomorrow at an event on the Mexican border that he’s resigned from the group to run in the 2010 Senate primary.

From a forthcoming release:

“John McCain has failed miserably in his duty to secure this nation’s borders and protect the people of Arizona from the escalating violence and lawlessness,” Simcox said. “He has fought real efforts over the years at every turn, opting to hold our nation’s border security hostage to his amnesty schemes. Coupled with his votes for reckless bailout spending and big government solutions to our nation’s problems, John McCain is out of touch with everyday Arizonans. Enough is enough.”

McCain was forced to abandon his own immigration reform legislation during last year’s Republican Primary, a move that may have cost him substantial Hispanic support to which his record could have given him access.

So he’s basically getting it from both sides on this one.

Simcox, with a national base and a high profile on the right, is well positioned to give McCain a serious local headache. He’ll find some allies among the conservatives who recently took over the Arizona Republican Party from McCain’s allies, and he has a national fundraising base.

In-depth county by county analysis of INDIANA

Before I analyzed OHIO, I first did an intensive analysis of INDIANA, which you can find at Google Docs, in three parts:

Part I

Part II

Part III

Excel Document with all raw data.

If you don’t have a gmail account, you probably don’t have access to the excel document, you can get it from me over email by writing to me here

Rationale: Obama, who took the Hoosier state by a +1.03% margin, was the first democratic candidate to win this state since 1964. This means that two complete generations of citizens from Indiana had voted in the majority for the republican presidential candidate until 2008.

A number of myths and angry retorts have gone around (mostly from the GOP and the extreme right) about what happened in INDIANA since election day, so I decided to do an exact analysis to get to the facts and to dispel myth and rumour. The results of this analysis are quite amazing.

Proposal For 2012 Primaries

From December 2007 to March 2008, I wrote various drafts of a proposal on how our political parties — starting in 2012 — might adopt primary election procedures that would better serve our country in selecting presidential candidates. I originally drafted a hypothetical calendar for 2008, based on general election results from 2004. Now that we have the results for 2008, I can now propose a calendar specific to 2012.

The system by which our parties choose their presidential candidates has proven itself to be, at best, highly questionable — at worst, severely flawed.

The primary calendar we need most is one that is built on an orderly and rational plan — one that is based on mathematics and on recent historical outcomes — and not on an arbitrary, publicity-driven, system of one-upsmanship. The change I propose would provide for a more effective, equitable process than the one we have now.

The following factors are the key ones to consider:

Margin of Victory

– The state primaries would be placed in order according to the leading candidates’ margins of victory in the preceding general election — with the states registering the closest margins of victory going first.

For example, John McCain won Missouri by 0.1% and Barack Obama won North Carolina by 0.4%; conversely, McCain won Wyoming by 33%, and Obama won Hawaii by 45%. Therefore, the primary calendar I propose would commence with primaries being held in states such as Missouri and North Carolina — and would close with such states as Wyoming and Hawaii.

– The purpose of ordering the states according to the margin of victory is to help the parties determine which candidates can appeal to those states that have found themselves most recently on the Electoral Divide. A narrow margin in the general election is reflective of an evenly divided electorate. In this scenario, a candidate who appeals to, say, Florida and Montana is more likely to appeal to a greater number of Americans on the whole.

Iowa, New Hampshire, and Fairness

– Iowa and New Hampshire might object to this new system, given their longstanding tradition of being the first states to cast their ballots. However, so long as Iowa and New Hampshire retain their record of being fairly bipartisan states, they’ll maintain their position towards the front of the primary schedule.

– Just because a state should have its primary later in the season does not mean that that state will prove invaluable to the process. Indiana and North Carolina weren’t held until May 6th, but those two states might have very well decided the fate of the 2008 Democratic nomination.

– This new system allows other states to play a greater role in how the parties select their candidates. For example, Missouri and North Carolina would be two of the states to get the limelight in 2012. Likewise, based on the results to come in November of 2012, a still-different slate of states could have a more significant role come 2016. A rotating system will be healthier and fairer.

Groupings of Five, and Timing & Spacing

– By placing states into groupings of five, no one state will be overly emphasized on any given date.

– Candidates will still need to address the concerns of individual states, whilst having to maintain an overall national platform. For example, a candidate will be less able to campaign against NAFTA in Ohio whilst campaigning for it in Florida.

– Given that each state has its own system for electing its delegates, these groupings of five states will act as an overall balancer. Ideally, caucuses will be done away with altogether by 2012. However — should that not happen — states with caucuses, states with open primaries, and states with closed primaries can all coexist within a grouping, therefore no one system will hold too much influence on any given date.

– Racial and geographic diversity in this process has been a great concern for many. The narrowest margins of victory in 2008 were in a wide variety of regions — the Midwest, the Great Lakes, the Mid-Atlantic, the South, and the West.

– All parties would have an interest in addressing these narrow-margined states early on. The incumbent will want to win over those states that were most in doubt of him in the previous election, and opposing parties will want to put forth candidates who have the best chance of winning over those very same states.

– Primaries will be held biweekly, giving candidates and the media enough time to process and respond to the outcomes of each wave of primaries.

– Washington DC will be placed in the same grouping as whichever state — Virginia or Maryland — is closer to its own margin of victory.

– American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and Americans Abroad — not having Electoral votes of their own — will determine their own primary dates, so long as they occur between the first grouping and the last grouping.

Under these guidelines, the proposed calendar for the 2012 primary season is:

January 2012

Tue, 1/10

Missouri

North Carolina

Indiana

Florida

Montana

Tue, 1/24

Ohio

Georgia

Virginia

Colorado

South Dakota

Tue, 2/7

North Dakota

Arizona

South Carolina

Iowa

New Hampshire

Tue, 2/21

Minnesota

Pennsylvania

Texas

Nevada

West Virginia

Tue, 2/26

Mississippi

Wisconsin

New Jersey

New Mexico

Tennessee

Tue, 3/6

Kansas

Nebraska

Oregon

Kentucky

Michigan

Tue, 3/20

Washington

Maine

Louisiana

Arkansas

Alabama

Tue, 4/3

Connecticut

California

Illinois

Delaware

Maryland

Washington DC

Tue, 4/17

Alaska

Idaho

New York

Massachusetts

Rhode Island

Tue, 5/1

Utah

Oklahoma

Wyoming

Vermont

Hawaii

AP: McCain running for another term

AP confirms McCain is starting up his PAC again in hopes of winning another term.

WASHINGTON – Sen. John McCain, whose presidential bid was snuffed out two weeks ago by President-elect Barack Obama, is setting up a political action committee as a first step in running for a fifth term in the Senate.

A McCain spokesperson says the 72-year-old senator decided with his senior advisers Tuesday night to set up the fundraising PAC. The spokesperson spoke anonymously because the decision had not yet been made public.

http://apnews.myway.com/articl…

I was among the minority who didn’t believe he would retire in 2010. McCain is not going to go out with his debacle of a Presidential campaign as being the first thing in people’s minds when they think of him. He cares too much about his faux “maverick” repuatation and needs to rebuild that (as well as his repuation among the press) before he sails off into the sunset.  

The Rove “Math” 2008 version

http://online.wsj.com/article/…

Now he has a point that 2010 is likely to be better for Republicans but even if they get the average 23 seat net gain in the House that barely gets them back above 200 seats, if that.

Also, on reapportionment. Same old conservative spin that Michael Barone parrots in the latest Almanac – red states will gain House seats thus more electoral votes after the 2010 census. Problem for the GOP is that Florida is now a blue state and Arizona should be ripe for going to Obama in 2012 without McCain on the ticket. I also believe North Carolina is due to pick up at least one more seat which supports the idea that as states increase in population they become more open to Democrats due to urban growth.

The Changing Electorate (and the implications for down-ballot races)

Cross-posted at Election Inspection 

(Note: due to formating issues, I didn't post the charts here, to see how Obama did compared to Kerry, visit the Election Inspection link) 

I've actually been quite interested in doing a comparison of how Obama did compared to the last Democratic nominee (Kerry). Here's the difference between Obama and Kerry's margins in each state (for reference, I subtracted Kerry's margin from Obama's margin to get the final number, for example, if Obama's margin in California was 24 and Kerry's margin was 9, the equation would be 24-9=15).

Obviously, since Obama won the popular vote by 7, while Kerry lost it by 3, Obama is going to outperform Kerry almost everywhere, and speaking of, the only states where Obama did not outperform Kerry were in Alaska (-1), Arkansas (-11), Louisiana (-4), Tennessee, (-1), Oklahoma (0), and West Virginia. This, however, only tells us what we already know, Obama outperformed Kerry almost everywhere. A more important question to ask would be, where did Obama do better than Kerry relative to how the entire country did (to put it another way, we know that Kerry won California by 9 points, but he lost the national popular vote by 3 points, so Kerry actually ran 12 points higher in California than in the country, and Obama, who won California by 24 points but won the popular vote nationwide by 7 points, performed 17 points better than the country at large. Subtracting Kerry's performance in California compared to the country at large from Obama's same performance means California voted 5 points more Democratic relative to to the rest of the country than it did 4 years ago).

So how did Obama do in these other states compared to the national vote relative to Kerry?

(Follow link at the top for a look at the relative performance of Obama to Kerry in each state)

This gives us a much better picture of which states, in any given year, are moving more Democratic, and which ones are stalling out. Of course, it would be smart to keep in mind that some of these numbers have to be taken in context of home state effects of presidential and vice presidential candidates (Arizona, Alaska, Illinois, Hawaii, and Delaware are the home-states of McCain, Palin, Obama, and Biden respectively; while Texas, Wyoming, Massachusetts, and North Carolina are the home-states of Bush, Cheney, Kerry, and Edwards, if some people over/underperform in certain states and regions, it has to be taken in this context). The glaring exception to the home-state advantage here is North Carolina, where Obama performed three points better relatively to his popular vote standing than Kerry did (and could easily be attributed to the growth of the Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill area). The states where Obama had the highest outperformance of Kerry's standing were in Hawaii (+26), Indiana (+12), North Dakota (+9), and a three-way tie between Utah, Montana, and Nebraska (+7 each). Obama's top under-performances, by comparison, were in Arkansas (-21), Louisiana (-14), Alaska (-11), Tennessee (-11), with a tie between West Virginia and Oklahoma (-10 each). There are, of course, a bunch of others, but generally speaking, we can say that by comparison, Obama generally underperformed Kerry in the south and the northeast (the exceptions being Vermont, Virginia, Georgia, Delaware, Connecticut, and North Carolina), while he generally outperformed Kerry in the midwest and the west, particularly where there was a large Hispanic population (New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, and California). Obama seemed to stick pretty close to Kerry's relative performance in Washington State, Oregon, and Iowa (in fact, it seems that compared to the country, Iowa seems to have a consistant Democratic lean, as it changed exactly zero relative to the country)

This has extremely important ramifications for both presidential and down-ticket races in the future, for example, three states which Obama won which Kerry did not (Ohio, Florida, and Iowa) might seem to be massive improvements for the Democrats compared to how Kerry did, but in actuality, Obama underperformed Kerry relative to the rest of the country in Florida and Ohio, while Iowa stayed the same relative to the rest of the country (that is to say, in both 2004 and 2008, Iowa was roughly three points more Democratic than the country at large) (of course, for Ohio, Kerry actually did relatively better than most Democrats normally do in Ohio, but it usually tends to vote slightly more Republican than the rest of the country, whereas Ohio voted slightly LESS Republican than the national vote in 2008). Now, relatively speaking, Obama tended to GREATLY outperform Kerry in the midwest (Obama's relative performance in Wisconsin was 2 points better, in South Dakota was 3 points better, in Nebraska it was 7 points better, and a full 9 points better(!)). Of course, Obama did, relatively speaking, underperform Kerry in Minnesota, but that might be more a function of McCain spending a dispropotionate amount of time and resources in Minnesota (one of the only places where McCain was significantly outspending Obama on both field organization and advertising). The places where Obama really outperformed Kerry though were in the southwest and the mountain west (Obama outperformed Kerry by 3 points in Colorado, 4 points in Idaho, 5 points in Nevada, 5 points in California, , 6 points in New Mexico, 7 points in Montana, and 7 points in Utah. Like I said above, Obama did tend to underperform in the south, but the three places where Obama outperformed Kerry are states which have strong implications for state-wide Democrats are in Georgia (+2), North Carolina (+3), and Virginia (+4). The other two big deals are California (which has become almost as Democratic as New York) and Indiana (which went from being 18 points more Republican than the country to being only 6 points more Republican).

Democrats are probably going to have a harder time getting elected in Southern states like Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Oklahoma, but strong Democrats are going to have a much easier time running in states like Montana, Colorado, New Mexico, Indiana, North Carolina, Virginia, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Furthermore, with California's gubenatorial race in 2010, if the Democrats don't rip each other apart like they did in 2006, they should have an extremely good chance at winning the governor's mansion, and controlling redistricting for the census.

Detailed County Predictions for Presidential Race

I spent hours writing this as a Daily Kos diary and virtually nobody read it, but I figured some around here would appreciate the regional specifics and hope some enjoy the read.

It appears incredibly likely at this point that Barack Obama will be elected President in nine days, and I’m excited as hell to see the county maps roll in on CNN and USA Today websites on election night to see how much more blue there is on the national county map than in 2000 or 2004, when more than 80% of the terrain was colored red.  It seems certain that Obama will dramatically improve upon the 582 counties and independent cities that John Kerry won in 2008, but I’m wondering how many of those 582 from last time will be lost.  The ideal would be none, but looking at polling data from several states, it seems likely that a number of them are at serious risk.  Details below the fold.

Alabama–11 counties went for John Kerry in 2004, all in a narrow belt of heavily black counties south of Birmingham.  The only two that might be at risk are Montgomery County and Russell Counties, both of which Kerry won narrowly.  My bet is that higher black turnout than what was seen in 2004 will keep those counties blue, but I’m skeptical whether Obama will pick up more than those 11 Alabama counties.

Alaska–no counties so I’m scarcely interested in their undefined “election districts”

Arizona–Right now it seems Obama is poised to overperform Kerry in McCain’s home state.  Kerry won four Arizona counties, all four of which seem near slam-dunks to shade blue again.  There aren’t too many likely candidates for pickups beyond those four though.

Arkansas–Here’s where Obama is likely to cede some territory.  Obama is underperforming Kerry in Arkansas polls, and given that there are some Yellow Dog Democrat strongholds in Arkansas that are more than 95% white, it seems unlikely that Obama will hold all 21 of Kerry’s counties.  Likely gone:  rural counties in the northeast such as Clay, Randolph, Lawrence, and Poinsett; and at least a few southern counties that aren’t majority black such as Little River, Hempstead, and Bradley.  High black turnout in some of the 30+% black turnout counties could help flip one or two 2004 Bush counties to Obama, but I’d bet against it.

California–Kerry won 22 counties in California, but with few exceptions, the CA counties will remain polarized.  I’m not anticipating Obama losing any of the Kerry counties, but only see a handful of opportunities to pick off Bush counties, such as Ventura County and San Joaquin County.

Colorado–Kerry won 19 Colorado counties in 2004, several more than Gore did, picking off a number of Rocky Mountain counties but losing ground in the Hispanic-heavy region in and around Pueblo.  I’m hoping Obama regains the footing with Latinos that Kerry lost in that region and pick off Huerfano and Alamosa Counties, but more important to Obama’s statewide victory is the need to improve upon Kerry’s performance in the Denver suburbs.  He needs to grow the Kerry margin in Adams County and pick off at least two out of three of Jefferson, Arapahoe, and Larimer Counties, all of which went narrowly Bush in 2004.

Connecticut–Kerry won seven out of eight but lost Litchfield County in the northwest corner of CT.  I think Obama will win that one back as Gore did in 2000.

Delaware–With Biden on the ticket, I’m hopeful Obama can win at least one of two of Republican-leaning Kent and Sussex Counties.  Fortunately for Dems, they can win handily with New Castle County up north, the one county Kerry won in Delaware.

Florida–Kerry pulled out only 11 Florida counties.  My sense is that Obama holds those 11 (although fast-growing St. Lucie County is a question mark), and will probably pick up several more battlegrounds, ideally both Pinellas and Hillsborough (along with possibly Flagler, a Gore county) in the Tampa-St. Petersburg area.  Osceola County near Orlando is an option, as are a few rural counties near Tallahassee with high black populations that have narrowly gone Bush in the past but may benefit from higher black turnout this year.  Whether this would be enough for Obama to win Florida remains a question mark.

Georgia–Kerry won 26 Georgia counties, which may sound impressive until you realize there are 159 counties in Georgia.  High black turnout and a hard-fought Senate race seem likely to expand the number of Obama counties, but mostly in rural regions of southwestern and east-central Georgia.  It’s doubtful that any of the more heavily populated Bush counties in Georgia will turn blue this year.

Hawaii–Kerry won all four counties, but only narrowly eked out the population center of Honolulu County.  Obama should vastly overperform in all four Hawaii counties.

Idaho–Kerry won only one county, Blaine County, which is where he skiied in Sun Valley.  That will go Obama this year, and I suspect Latah County, which includes the college town of Moscow, will as well.  Beyond that, the pickings will be mighty slim for blue territory this year.

Illinois–Kerry won only 15 of Illinois’ 105 (is that correct?) counties in 2004.  Needless to say, Obama will perform remarkably better than that.  But I’m not sure exactly how many more.  Will Obama win the long-standing GOP stronghold of Du Page County next to Chicago?  It’s possible, but I wouldn’t bet money on it in a national election.  Overall, I’d bet that Obama wins slightly more than half of the Illinois counties, but expect a sea of red in the southern Illinois counties (the region south of St. Louis and Decatur, aside from a handful of Dem strongholds like Carbondale and Cairo).  Several of the southern Illinois counties went for Alan Keyes in 2004 and many more voted for Hillary Clinton in the primary.

Indiana–This one should be fun.  Kerry won only four Indiana counties, but even if we assume Obama falls a few points short of winning the state, alot more turf would turn blue since 2004.  I expect most of Indiana’s population centers would turn blue, including counties like Vigo (Terre Haute), St. Joseph (South Bend), Howard (Kokomo), Tippecanoe (Lafayette), and Delaware (Muncie).  It’s possible even hard-core conservative Allen County (Fort Wayne) could turn blue.  The wild cards that will determine if Obama wins or loses Indiana will be southern Indiana, including Vanderburgh (Evansville) and the north river Louisville counties of Clark and Floyd.

Iowa–Even when narrowly losing Iowa, Kerry still won 32 of Iowa’s 99 counties.  If Obama is ahead by double digits this year, expect him to win the “Harkin coalition” of 60-some counties, essentially everywhere but the western two tiers of counties, and a few outlying GOP bastions.  Southern Iowa thinks and votes like conservative northern Missouri, so Obama may fall short in most of the territory south of Des Moines.  Still, it seems very unlikely that any of Iowa’s 32 Kerry counties will go McCain.

Kansas–Kerry won two Kansas counties.  Those two are still solid, but Obama is unlikely to gain much ground, but could conceivably win Shawnee County (Topeka).

Kentucky–Not good.  Kerry won 12 counties out of 120 in 2004, all but one in culturally conservative eastern Kentucky coal country.  The only Kerry county I feel solid about regarding Obama’s chances is Jefferson County (Louisville), where polling internals suggest Obama is vastly overperforming Kerry and likely keeping the statewide margins in Kentucky in line with 2004.  That indicates Obama is underperforming elsewhere in the state, and the very eastern Kentucky counties that Kerry won, by more than 60% in three of those counties, are the places where Obama was most fervently destroyed in the primaries, pulling in as little as 5% in a couple of them.  That suggests a serious cultural disconnect in play and I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama lost all 11 of those east Kentucky Kerry counties.  If he wins any of them, I anticipate they would be the staunch Democratic counties of Elliott, Floyd, Knott, and Breathitt.  Obama’s only pickup opportunity in Kentucky would seem to be Fayette County (Lexington) or Franklin County (Frankfurt), but I wouldn’t bet on either of those.

Louisiana–This one’s completely up in the air due to Hurricane Katrina displacements.  There are conceivably a few heavy black Bush counties that could be picked off with a high African-American turnout, but I’m not optimistic that Obama will net much more than the 10 parishes Kerry won.

Maine–Kerry won 14 out of 16 Maine counties in 2008.  It seems tough to imagine the other two going into the Obama column this year, but I suppose Washington County would be possible.  I doubt McCain will gain any of the Kerry counties, but Penobscot County is possible given Kerry won it by a half-percentage point.

Maryland–Five of Maryland’s 23 counties, along with the independent city of Baltimore, are usually all the Democrats can hope to get in Maryland given the overwhelming Republican tendencies of the rural parts of the state.  Both Gore and Kerry won these six and these six alone.  Obama could conceivably pick off Anne Arundel County and maybe one of those soft GOP counties on the Eastern Shore like Somerset, but he won’t encroach into GOP territory too much.

Massachusetts–Kerry won all 14 Massachusetts counties, and Obama should do the same.  If any switch, it’ll be Plymouth or Barnstable Counties in the southeast, but I doubt that’ll happen.

Michigan–Kerry won only 15 out of Michigan’s 83 counties, but as is the case with most of the Upper Midwest, Obama is poised to really build upon that number and conceivably win an outright majority of those counties.  Bush won many of his Michigan counties with very soft margins, suggesting a partisan breeze of only five points in Obama’s direction will turn multiple counties blue, including populous counties such as Macomb, Monroe, and Calhoun, as well as large numbers of thinly populated rural counties in northern Michigan and on the Upper Peninsuala.

Minnesota–Kerry won 24 of Minnesota’s 87 counties, and demographics suggest Obama stands point to significantly grow upon that, again potentially winning an outright majority of Minnesota counties.  Internals from polls of North and South Dakota suggest Obama is winning the eastern farm counties of both states.  If that’s true, it likewise means Obama is winning the populist farm counties of western Minnesota, which Gore and Kerry both got smashed in.

Mississippi–Kerry won an impressive 24 counties in Mississippi, but don’t expect that to change much in 2008 simply due to the racial breakdown of those counties.  Obama is likely to grow Kerry’s margins in most of those 24 counties, most of which are majority black, but I’d be surprised if he picked off more than one or two of the 2004 Bush counties.

Missouri–Kerry won three counties and the city of St. Louis in Minnesota…out of 115 counties!!!  Obama will do better than that, but not significantly so.  There are a number of counties encircling metropolitan St. Louis that should be favorable turf.  Boone County (Columbia) seems like Obama territory, and possibly Buchanan County (St. Joseph) north of Kansas City.  Still, I’m not expecting more than 10 Missouri counties for Obama even if he wins the state.

Montana–Kerry won six Montana counties, all of which seem solid for Obama.  Beyond that, it’s not inconceivable to imagine Obama victories in populous (at least for Montana!) Yellowstone County (Billings), Cascade County (Great Falls), and Lewis and Clark County (Helena), along with rural counties like Hill and Blaine that are winnable for Democrats with high Native American turnout.

Nebraska–Kerry won one Nebraska county in 2004.  If Obama gets as many as five, he’ll have done better than any Democratic Presidential candidate in my lifetime.  Possible pickoffs:  rural Saline and Dakota Counties, Lancaster COunty (Lincoln), and conceivably but doubtful in my opinion, Douglas County (Omaha).

Nevada–Kerry won only Clark County in 2004, but narrowed the gap to four points in Washoe County (Reno).  Obama needs Washoe to win the state, and early indications are that he’s winning it, but none of the other 15 Nevada counties are likely to be in play.

New Hampshire–Kerry won six of 10 New Hampshire Counties in 2004, but not among them were the two most populous (Hillsborough and Rockingham).  With current trendlines, it seems as though Obama should win those two counties, but is still unlikely to win the other two Bush counties.

New Jersey–Kerry won 12 of New Jersey’s 21 counties, two fewer than Gore won in 2000.  Those 12 counties seem secure, and Obama could pick off the Gore county of Salem (increasingly Republican Gore County, Monmouth, seems like a stretch) but is unlikely to pick off any of the twice-Bush counties.

New Mexico–Kerry won 12 counties in New Mexico yet lost the state.  If Obama wins comfortably this time, as polls suggest he will, he’ll probably take a handful of additional counties and grow his margins in some of the soft Kerry counties, but I suspect most of the ranch counties in southern and eastern New Mexico will remain red.

New York–Kerry won only 21 New York counties, but I anticipate Obama is poised to overperform Kerry in a number of upstate New York counties (as well as win back Rockland County and Staten Island in metropolitan NYC), particularly those that went Gore in 2000.  McCain will still probably win close to half of the upstate New York counties though, particularly those out in Tom Reynolds and Randy Kuhl country.

North Carolina–Kerry won 20 out of 100 North Carolina counties in 2004, five fewer than Gore did four years earlier.  Expect Obama to win as many as 35, with several heavily black rural counties in eastern North Carolina having gone narrowly Bush in 2004 that will be easier picking this time.  Obama should dramatically grow his margins in the population centers, picking off two pretty significant prizes including Wake County (Raleigh, Cary) and Buncombe County (Asheville).

North Dakota–Kerry won only four of North Dakota’s 53 counties in 2004, but polling internals shows Obama is ahead in eastern North Dakota now.  It’s possible Obama could be the first Democratic Presidential nominee in my lifetime to win Cass County (Fargo) and Grand Forks County.  At the very least, expect Obama to win 15 or more counties in North Dakota, as several of those eastern ND sugar-growing counties should be favorable territory for him if the statewide race is as close as polls suggest.  A high native American turnout could turn the tide in a couple western North Dakota counties such as Mountrail, but for the most part, western ND will still be bright red.

Ohio–Very tough to call this one as polls are all over the place.  Kerry won only 16 Ohio counties, the same number as Gore won.  Obama has to do better than that to win the state.  A high black turnout in Cincinnati is very likely to flip Hamilton County blue and Lake County in the Cleveland suburbs seems like a decent bet to flip.  But if we’re to believe the polling median that Obama is 5-7 points ahead in Ohio, that would mean Obama is likely winning some of the southern Ohio counties like Scioto (Portsmouth) and Ross (Chillicothe) that are generally bellwethers for statewide victory in Ohio.  There’s too much conflicting information at this point, and the poll spread suggests Obama could win as few as 12-15 Ohio counties or as many as 30.

Oklahoma–Gore won nine Oklahoma counties in 2000….Kerry won zero.  Expect Obama to repeat Kerry’s performance.

Oregon–Kerry won only eight counties amongst a sea of territorial red in this blue state, but Obama’s poll leads in Oregon are so substantial than I suspect Obama will win double his number of county victories, though still mostly in the northwestern quadrant of the state.

Pennsylvania–Another state that’s difficult to call.  Kerry won only 13 counties here, ceding some territory that Gore won in western Pennsylvania.  If Obama is really winning Pennsylvania by 10 points as the polls suggest, he probably is winning all or most of those 13 Kerry counties and then some, but the conventional wisdom is that Obama is underperforming Kerry in western PA, and could end up losing the culturally conservative Kerry counties of Beaver, Washington, and Fayette.  That certainly is possible, particularly if we assume Obama’s margins in PA are entirely the product of his running up the score in suburban Philadelphia counties such as Montgomery, Delaware, and Bucks.  Tough to call, but I think we lose some Kerry counties in PA, but also pick up fast-growing Chester County in exurban Philadelphia for Obama.

Rhode Island–Kerry handily won all five Rhode Island counties.  Obama will do the same.

South Carolina–Kerry won 15 counties, most of them majority black.  Obama could win back two or three more with high black turnout, but I’m not expecting to grow the county map much within South Carolina.  The I-95 corridor will remain blue, the rest of the state will remain red.

South Dakota–Polling internals suggest Obama is ahead in northeastern South Dakota.  That means Obama is likely to improve upon the nine SD counties that went for Kerry (but keep in mind that several of the Indian reservation counties will have a lower turnout without a battleground Senate race on the ballot).  It’s conceivable Obama could win 25 counties in SD, since most of the Daschle coalition in eastern SD are smaller counties size way that tend to vote as a bloc.  I doubt Minnehaha County (Sioux Falls), now the destination for college Republicans across the country, will go blue, but expect other population centers like Brookings County (Brookings), Beadle County (Huron), and Brown County (Aberdeen) to either vote Obama outright or come very close to doing so if current polling is to be believed.

Tennessee–Gore won 36 of Tennessee’s 95 counties, Kerry halved that by 18, and if Obama is lucky, he’ll get by only halving Kerry’s numbers to nine counties this year.  Obama should hold population centers Shelby County (Memphis) and Davidson County (Nashville) along with a couple of heavily black rural counties in West Tennessee, but some of the Yellow Dog Democrat rural counties in West and Middle Tennessee that have slowly slipping away for 20 years, including Smith County, home of Al Gore’s hometown of Carthage, will probably turn red.  A handful of tiny deep blue counties such as Jackson, Houston, and Trousdale may stay blue, but I anticipate losing the majority of them.

Texas–Kerry won only 18 counties in Texas, but I’m anticipating Obama to do much better.  Several of the majority-Hispanic south Texas counties (like Cameron and Frio) went narrowly Bush in 2004, and I expect to win them back.  Several population centers in Texas could tip.  I’d bet heavily on Dallas County turning blue this year, as Kerry narrowly missed it in 2004, but beyond that, Bexar County (San Antonio) and Nueces County (Corpus Christi) are also within the realm.  We might be close in the big prize of Harris County (metropolitan Houston) but I still think Obama will fall short of victory. Overall, I’m betting on 30 or more Obama counties in Texas this year.  The bad news…he’ll still lose more than 200 of them.

Utah–Kerry didn’t win any counties in Utah, but I actually think Obama has a chance in three of them this year, including the big prize of Salt Lake County.  The youthful mountain counties of Grand and San Juan in the state’s southeast corner are more likely to flip though.

Vermont–Kerry won 13 of 14 counties in Vermont and Obama will probably win the same 13.  Tiny Essex County in the northeast corner of the state seems likely to remain red though.

Virginia–Kerry won 13 Virginia counties and 19 independent cities in Virginia, and Obama should win most if not all of those locales, with the possible exception of those two southwest Virginia coal counties which remain question marks.  The good news it that Obama is poised to win handily in the important places, namely fast-growing exurban NoVa counties Prince William and Loudoun, both of which would have been inconceivable to see turning blue in 2004.

Washington–Kerry won 12 counties in WA, all on or near the coast.  There are probably about five or six additional counties in play for Obama, again mostly in the western third of the state.  Spokane County used to be a pretty reliable Democratic county, even going for Dukakis in 1988, but seems way out-of-reach for Obama 20 years later.

West Virginia–Polls seem to have backslid a little bit in West Virginia in the last week, and I suspect the end result will be just as bad as Bush’s 13-point victory in the state in 2004.  My anticipation is that the county map will look a little different though.  Obama may likely pick off 2004 Bush counties in population centers like Kanawha County (Charleston) and Monongalia County (Morgantown), but I’m not confident he’ll hold too many of the southern WV coal counties that Kerry won, aside from possibly McDowell and Boone, the bluest two counties down there.  Overall, I’d be surprised if Obama got more than seven WV counties, compared to Kerry’s nine.

Wisconsin–Even though Kerry won by the skin of his teeth, he still managed to win 27 of Wisconsin’s 72 politically polarized counties.  There are probably about 15 more counties in play if Obama has a double-digit lead in Wisconsin as polls indicate.  Most of the Obama pickups are likely to be found in northwestern Wisconsin.

Wyoming–Kerry won one Wyoming County, Teton, and Obama will probably win that and that alone as well.  Albany County (Laramie) may have enough youth votes to turn blue.