Judge Moore: A third-party challenge from the right?

Great Debates
21

By Governor Quinn: “The only question that this leaves is, how large a following in the South does Moore have?”

Very little. He’s pretty much recognized as a crackpot. His outrageous positions get him more ink from the press than his minimal popularity deserves.

His “Big Rally” to garner support for his Ten Commandments monument in Montgomery drew about 500 people. It was a brag point that over half of these supporters came from as far away as Indiana, Illinois, and North Carolina. So less than 250 people from Alabama showed up. This in a state where over 80,000 routinely attend football games in Auburn and Tuscaloosa. The Good Judge ain’t exactly ridin’ a mandate from the people.

The deal as I see it: In the states where Moore might pull a few thousand votes, Bush will have a large plurality over Kerry anyway. Those electoral votes will still go to the Pubbies. Moore’s popularity, and thus his effect, would be much less in states where a third party candidate pulling some votes from Bush might actually make a difference. YMMV.

22

It’s a mistake to believe that the extreme right exists exclusively in the deep South. There are pockets all over the country, and certainly a few thousand people in swing states like Missouri and West Virginia might be tempted by Moore’s screeching. The number is small, yes, but remember that several states were decided by just a few thousand votes in 2000. I suspect that after Kerry’s primary bubble bursts, the two candidates will be almost exactly even. In an election that goes down to the wire, every little bit will count.

23

I’m thinking of the great state of Florida and it’s 27 electoral votes (and the demographics of the northern part of the state).

More locally, I’m thinking of OR and WA (where the 2000 elections were were closer than most people realize, and threaten to be again) and have their share of people who would proudly vote for Mr. Moore.

24

Though North Florida is culturally Southern, my impression is that those folks tend more toward the hell-raising, hard-drinking variety of Southerner, and less toward the Bible-thumping variety. I could be mistaken, but I can’t imagine a lot of support for Moore in Florida. Any Floridians wanna chime in?

25

I hate to rain on this parade, but it looks like a challenge from the left is more likely. And this would be in addition to the candidate whom the Greens field.

26

There’s another side to this that Conservatives might be happy about: If the religious right throws in behind an unelectable third party candidate, doesn’t it free the Republican party from catering to a base that’s as much a liability as a benefit? They can grab the center on social issues and the right on economics/foreign policy. In 2004, that would be an unbeatable combination.

Doesn’t anyone ever wonder what would happen if the right half of the Democratic party and the left half of the Republican party met in the middle, decried extremist politics, and locked up the presidency and both houses of Congress? Why, you’d have… the Liberal Party in Canada, which is perpetually in power (not by policy, so much as position).

27

My bolding. That sounds very dangerous. Let’s hope it doesn’t happen.

28

That’s a debate all in itself, and were I better versed in Canadian politics, I would start a thread. But I will observe that Canadian governments have far less trouble passing sweeping legislation that doesn’t suffer from the horse-swapping that omnibus bills in the U.S. do. It’s an interesting tradeoff: fewer checks and balances seem to mean purer legislation, for good or ill. To the extent that the Liberal Party is responsive to public opinion, it seems good.

29

If everyone voted the same way as they did in 2000, the electoral count would be (D) 260, ® 278.

I’d say the following are locked up as (D) states:

Washington
California
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Marlyand
Delaware
Washington DC
New Jersey
New York
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Rhode Island
Vermont
Maine

And the following are locked up as ® states:

Nevada
Arizona
Idaho
Utah
Colorado
Wyoming
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Nebraska
Kansas
Oklahoma
Texas
Louisiana
Arkansas
Mississippi
Alabama
Georgia
Kentucky
Indiana
North Carolina
South Carolina
Virginia

That puts the following in some form of contention, with how the fell in 2000 in parenthesis:

Oregon (D)
New Mexico (D)
Iowa (D)
Michigan (D)
Ohio ®
West Virginia ®
Florida ®
New Hampshire ®

Oregon, NM and Florida were within half a percent of going the other way, so lets say they do. The others stay the same, including New Hampshire as Republican despite it being a 1% difference. That puts the electoral vote at:

D: 273
R: 263

Now, lets say Florida remains on the Republican side, but New Hampshire and West Virginia, both states who generally vote Democrat, go (D):

D: 269
R: 269

Interesting, huh!

If Bush manages to keep all the states I’ve listed as solidly ®, lose all the states listed as solidly (D) and keep Florida and Ohio, giving the rest of the “swing states” to the democrats, we get a tie. If he keeps Florida, Ohio and either WV or NH he wins.

If the Democrats win Florida, they can afford to lose even Michigan at 17 electoral votes. If they get both Florida and Michigan, they can afford to lose both NM and Oregon.

I think this will be another Florida-centric campaign, and I’d have to give a very, very slight edge to GWB on this. I doubt many retired folks sympathize with gay rights, and they are certainly more prone to being molded by the fear of terrorism. The hispanics are also more likely to support Bush because of his amnesty program. The economy is a toss-up here though.

The Democrats are going to be hard-pressed to win without Florida.

30

And the only answer is, none.

John Kerry will win or lose on his own merits. Roy Moore and Pat Buchanan will make absolutely no difference i nthe coming election at all.

But if you lefties wanna fantasize, be my guest.

31

Why, thank you, Astorian, how very thoughtful. But, really, there is no need to fantacize. Fantasy would be a total sweep of all elective offices. Fantasy is Tom Delay (R, Undead) departing to sit at the feet of the Dalai Lama to learn humility. Don’t need fantasy. A simple win will suffice quite nicely.

But thanks anyway.

32

Yes, they were simply copycats of the Know-Nothings.

33

Not really. The Know-Nothings were pretty exclusively an anti-immigrant and anti-Catholic party. The Firsters were more pretty strictly isolationist, and, in fact, were endorsed by Fr. Coughlin in Social Justice

34

Your list of ‘safe’ states is much larger than I’d consider reasonable. For instance, Wisconsin went Democratic by 0.22% of the vote last time. If I’m working for Karl Rove, I’m not gonna suggest giving up on Wisconsin anytime soon. Ditto Pennsylvania.

Here’s an FEC list of how the two major-party candidates did in each state in the past four Presidential elections. It makes for a pretty good starting point for the discussion on what’s safe and what’s vulnerable.

States that Clinton won twice at least have the possibility of going Democratic in 2004: besides Arkansas and Tennessee, states he carried twice that you’ve listed as GOP locks include Nevada, Kentucky and Louisiana. Clinton took Arizona in 1996, and a lot of politicos think it might well be a Dem pickup this year.

I’m assuming you meant to list Missouri as a swing state, since it’s a swing state par excellence.