Indicated that it will be a midwesterner, ratther than atttempt to fight Bush in the south. A map of the states in which Kerry has solid leads, and in which Bush is attempting to cut into Kerry's lead is essentially a map of the Midwest. BUsh is not going to Conneecticut, or New York, or New Jersey, or Maine, or any of the states in which Kerry has a lead. But he is going to Ohio and Michigan, where Kerry;s leads are solid. I believe that some pollsters are actually tryng to influence public opinion by issuing poll results showing Bush leading in midwestern states in which Kerry has had clear and large leads over Bush. Recent polls show Kerry leading Bush in Ohio, until a polls released today by Masin Dixon, which totally reverses the findins of Zogby, and ARG. Same thing happened with a Mason Dixon poll released in Minnesota where all other recent polls have Kerry with very large leads over Bush. The other states in the midwest in which Kerry has a samll lead over Bush are the states he needs to turn into large leads in order to win. It is will take Kerry less effort to win Ohio, Iowa, Missouri and Pennsylvania thatn it would for him to try to try to compete with Bush in Oklahoma, Alabama, Louisiana and most of the rest of the south Where BUsh holds significant leads. Kerry must have the midwest, and political convention has always indicated that a favorite son as a running mate has a far better chance of helping the presidential candidate win a region than someone from outside of the region. Kerry will not give up the south, but his strategy firmly is one which does not rely on the south for a single electoral vote. Right now without being ahead in an southern state, Kerry still is in the lead in sttes which right now give him a 70 point lead in the electoral college over Bush. This with the only "southern" state in which Kerry leads Bush by significant numbers being Maryland, which is really a southern border state, and not a significantly "southern" state.
Where Kerry leads:
Solid Blue:
Maine, Vermont,New Hampshire,Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Wisconsin, Michigan,Illinois California.
Leaning Blue:
New Jersey, Maryland,Washington, Oregon, New Mexico
States too close to tell, but where Kerry has been leading in most polls:
Pennsylvania,Ohio,Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Florida.
If you look at the other states too close to tell, Right now Kerry leads in Nevada, but only in a one recent poll.
The other states too close to tell, West Virginia, where Bush has been leading, and Tennessee, where Bush has been leading, but in a recent poll, Kerry has pulled within the margin of error of the poll.And Arizona, Bush leading.
Now lets look at the solid red states. It is literally a map of the south:
Indiana, Kentucky,Texas, Louisiana,Oklahoma, outside of the south we have Idaho,Montana,Utah,South Dakota,Kansas.
Now leaning towards Bush:
North Carolina, Arkansas, Colorado.
Where does it seem that Kerry needs to absoltely shore up his strength, and prevent any Bush upset...Obviously the midwest and states around the Great Lakes. The south is not s viable strategy for Kerry.
Right now Kerry has a significant lead through the entire northeast, in California , with very large counts of electoral votes. He has a good lead, but not an indestructable one in a number of midwestern
states. States that can deliver a good deal more electoral votes than any southern state except for Texas. In the only states that Edwards or Clark could reasonably be expected to deliver, North Carolina and Arkansas, ther are a total of 21 electoral votes. And both those states are in the leaning towards Bush region.
However, in the midwest, there are still a number of states considered close, but in many of them Kerry leads, Iowa, Missouri and Minnesota, where Kerry is ahead, and keeping him ahead is critical and they deliver 28 electoral votes, and would be far easier to shore up, than to try to get state that is leaning toiwards Bush to change directions. Pennsylvania is too close to tell, but has been leaning more towards Kerry than Bush. Same thing with Ohio.
Kerrys strategy has been to take and hold onto as many states east of the Mississippi, and North of the Mason Dixon line as possible. This strategy is largely responsible for Kerry being so much further ahead in electoral votes than Bush. With California all of the Midwest except for Indiana, Pennsylvania,and the entire Northeast, Kerry could conceivably take the electoral college without a single southern state, and without Washington State and Oregon. Bur Kerry's hold on the Midwest outside of Indiana must be absolte and unshakable.
A running mate from this region does not assure this, but makes it far more likely.
Now lookining at the map states solidly for Kerry, or leaning towards Kerry, he is sitting on 216 electoral votes, Kerry is within 56 EV from a win if he can keep them, which is highly likely. Of the states in which he is ahead of Bush by a relatively good margin, Missouri, Iowa and Minnesota, will give Kerry almost half of the 56 needed to win. . The three midwestern states noted above then move Kerry to 243 electoral votes. 27 away from 270, the winning number. Winning both Ohio and Pennsylvania gives Kerry 41 more electoral votes. Winning Florida alone, gives him the 27 needed to win by 270. But that is ONLY if he can win those midwestern states.There are few options for Kerry without a candidate who canb secure Missouri, Iowa, and Minnesota, all states in which Kerry is ahead of Bush. Both Iowa and Minnesota have been solid blue states until recent Mason Dixon polls threw a monkey wrench into the calculations, but which most other have given Kerry larger leads in the recent past. Missouri had been leaning towards Bush until the news that the teamsters wanted Gephardt to be the nominee. After that Missouri started polling too close to tell, not with Kerry in the lead.
Every aspect of this campaign indicated that Kerry is going for a strategy of first winning the electoral college, and then worring about the popular vote. Looking at the same map shows that outside of his own region of the country, Kerry is focusing on the Rust Belt and the Midwest and the West Coast. This strategy is keeping Kerry ahead, and must be maintained in order to assure that he wins. Any other strategy would be tempting fate, and give Bush a very string opening to overtake Kerry's very large electoral college lead. He can waste his strength going after the south. Or carefully defend what he already has fairly well secured, and go after a few choice states, in which he already leads, and would need far less of an effort to take.
The midwest is the key to a Kerry win, and it is the most likely strategy to use for Kerry to win. His running mate must absolutely be able to help him hold onto and secure the midwest. This invariably leads to the selection of a midwestern running mate, someone who has a political base in the area. By cherry picking states, some of Kerrys opponents for the nomination were able to do well in a few midwestern states, but it took a massively concerted effort, which relied on focusing totally on one state at a time. This type of one state focus will not be available during the height of the campaign season. Someone who is a regionally known figure will have a better chance than any of the people who ran against Kerry for the nomination. Gephardt, Vilsack, Bayh, ir some other yet to be revealed chouce will be the only safe way to give erry the best chance in the region he needs to win. Not speculation that One of the opponenets "MIGHT" do well in the Southwest, because they did well in one state in the midwest or in the southwest during the primaries. In that case, by and large democrats were running to attract the votes of other Democrats. During the campaign for the White House, someone who has a record of attracting either independents OR Republicans in the regions and states needed is what is necessary. Remember, think Midwest. Remember that I said it. It is the region that will either make or break the democratic attempt to retake the White House and then Congress.
As noted in a recent article:
In 2000, George Bush swept every state in the region against Vice President Al Gore, including Gore's native Tennessee. With the 2004 election little more than five months away, Kerry remains a virtual stranger in much of the South.
Republicans argue that once swing voters in the South learn more about him, many will be turned off by Kerry's opposition to the death penalty, his votes against banning a procedure known as partial-birth abortion and other stands that are out of step with the region.
Even some Democrats suggest Kerry would be better served by steering his resources to battleground states in the Midwest and West where he is more likely to prevail...
But while jockeying for the nomination, Kerry drew flak for suggesting a Democrat could win the White House without winning in the South...
http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/4803747.htmlThe article does go on to state that Kerrys staff have stated that they will not wite off the south.