tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post1512280317012387248..comments2024-03-26T14:01:36.240-05:00Comments on Public Policy Polling: Obama strong in MinnesotaTom Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06545052616714485196noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-36540123141883454142011-06-08T17:18:05.325-05:002011-06-08T17:18:05.325-05:00Inkan1969 wrote:
"I remember that in 2008, O...Inkan1969 wrote:<br /><br /><i>"I remember that in 2008, Obama won MN by only 10%, but he won by between 12% and 20% in MI and WI. If he's doing well in MN, does that mean he's doing better in MI and WI? "</i><br /><br />What is the meaning of "only"? Obama won MN by +10.24%, which is a LANDSLIDE margin. GWB 41 won in 1988 nationally by +7.73% and the GOP screamed from the rooftops what a landslide it was. Well, if +7.73% is a landslide, then so is +10.24%! It is true that his margin in MN was less than in WI (+13.90%) and in MI (+16.44% - one of the great unsung crushing landslides of 2008), but this state has a more democratic voting history than either WI or MI. To be clear, MN has gone DEM for 9 cycles in a row, all the way back to 1976. It took a massive Nixon landslide in 1972 of 60.80% nationally to flip this state. Not even Reagan could flip MN. It has gone DEM for 17 of the last 20 cycles, all the way back to 1932. Obama's margin in MN is less than I expected in 2008, but in line with Clinton's first election (1992) and Carter's margin in 1976. If the most popular GOP president in recent history could not flip this state in his re-election campaign in 1984, then a sitting democratic president who is very popular in this state is not about to lose it.<br /><br />WI, on the other hand, has gone DEM for the last 6 cycles, since 1988. Before that, it's electoral history is much more mixed: between 1952 and 1984, it was a predominantly GOP state. Obama's margin in WI is the largest for a any candidate candidate since 1964 and you have to go back to 1956 to find a republican candidate to have won this state with a higher margin than Obama.<br /><br />MI has a pretty much 50-50 electoral history: it has gone for the DEMS for the last 5 cycles (1992-2008), but for the GOP for the 5 cycles before (1972-1988), then for the DEMS for 3 cycles (1960-1968), then for the GOP for 3 cycles (1948-1956). Through the great depression and WWII it went democratic for 3 of 4 cycles (1932-1944), but from 1856-1928, it was a rock-solid GOP state. Obama's margin in MI was the largest for a democrat since 1964, but Reagan carried the state by a larger margin in 1984 (+18.99%).<br /><br />I brought you this history lesson to remind that it is easy to act like a jackass, but math wins over jackassery every time.Statistikhengsthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14117706673612587798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-11879769907082073892011-06-08T14:32:12.761-05:002011-06-08T14:32:12.761-05:00"If he's doing well in MN, does that mean..."If he's doing well in MN, does that mean he's doing better in MI and WI?"<br /><br />Well, we just showed him doing very well in WI a few weeks ago, so....Dustin Ingallshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599131416393266722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-17049038379681993082011-06-08T12:19:57.015-05:002011-06-08T12:19:57.015-05:00As goes Minnesota, so goes the rest of the region?...As goes Minnesota, so goes the rest of the region?<br /><br />I remember that in 2008, Obama won MN by only 10%, but he won by between 12% and 20% in MI and WI. If he's doing well in MN, does that mean he's doing better in MI and WI?Inkan1969https://www.blogger.com/profile/04206534534899828934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-40825143628156835252011-06-08T11:21:04.402-05:002011-06-08T11:21:04.402-05:00With your recent midwest polling you've just p...With your recent midwest polling you've just proved how bogus your polls are.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com