In my previous post, I noted that almost all the counties President Barack Obama won have become more Democratic since 1992, while almost all the counties Senator John McCain won have become more Republican since 1992.
In fact, comparing maps of the 2008 presidential election and the county changes from 1992 indicates a striking correlation.
Here is the 2008 presidential election:
Here are the changes from the 1992 presidential election:
I will attempt to analyze what this means below the fold.
(Bumped for those of you in the Denver area, hope to see you this weekend. - promoted by Mike Lux)
Three things I like doing are quoting the Bible, talking about economics, and hanging out in Colorado, one of my favorite states. I get to do all three on the Sunday, January 24th at an event hosted by the Interfaith Alliance of Colorado. They are hosting an event entitled Taxes: An Investment in the Common Good. I'm on the program along with a Republican state rep, a school board member, a leader of the CO Bankers Association, and the President of a school of theology, so it should be quite an eclectic conversation. Anyone in Denver that weekend should come by. I promise to keep things lively.
Taxes: An Investment in the Common Good
A Public Forum Presented by
The Interfaith Alliance of Colorado
Sunday, January 24, 2010
2:00 - 5:00 PM
Cameron United Methodist Church
1600 S. Pearl St.
Denver, CO 80210
The forum will address Colorado's budget crisis and consider potential solutions to build a more sustainable, financially-healthy state that meets the needs of all Coloradans.
Panelists will include:
Don Childears
President, Colorado Bankers Association
Moderator: Carol Hedges
Senior Policy Analyst,
Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute
Michael Lux
Author, The Progressive Revolution
Rep. Ellen Roberts (R)
House District 59, Durango
Rev. Dr. David Trickett
President, Iliff School of Theology
Sue Windels
Board Member, Great Education Colorado
The forum is free and open to the public. Light refreshments and conversation will follow a question period.
More than fifteen years after the passage of the National Voter Registration Act, few states are complying with the law's requirement that voter registration services are provided to those who apply for public assistance. Though highly successful in the first two years the NVRA was implemented, in 1995-1996, registrations through public assistance agencies have steadily declined, and had fallen by 79 percent nationwide in 2007-2008. Project Vote and other voting rights organizations have been working to bring several states into compliance with this key provision of the NVRA, and-as a last resort-have been forced to bring lawsuits in several states to ensure that low-income public assistance clients have access to voter registration services as required by law.
Access to voter registration continues to be an issue in the U.S. where only 71 percent of the voting eligible population is registered to vote. With young, low income, and minority citizens lagging behind in voter registration and participation, this fraction of registered voters only represents a skewed picture of the American people.
Enfranchising America's least represented citizens is as simple as following the law: that's the message Project Vote and a coalition of voting rights groups sent today as they filed lawsuits against Indiana and New Mexico for failing to comply with the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).
Ask Shannon Hilt, who's seen our broken system for forming unions firsthand, and she'll tell you that there's no question: Workers need the Employee Free Choice Act.
Hilt spent three years as a field examiner for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), overseeing the elections process and investigating unfair practices. She says the system we have now, one in which companies, not workers, have all the power, isn't free, it isn't fair and doesn't protect workers.
Writing in the Boulder, Colo., Daily Camera, Hilt explains how her years of experience as an NLRB field examiner have convinced her that we need fundamental labor law reform that gives workers, not their bosses, the ability to decide how they form a union and bargain.
David Sirota mentioned some Democrats' (ahem, Harry Reid) plentiful lack of backbone when it comes to empowering workers to organize.
Last Friday night, I was in Colorado and attended a House party for recently-appointed Colorado Senator Mike Bennet. Joining me was Darcy Burner, the legendary people-powered congressional candidate from Seattle, who spoke on a panel with me the next day.
I was very much looking forward to taking inventory of this new senator. Was he smart? Was he authentic? Did he connect with regular people? The answer to all of these things was yes. Indeed, in 30 minutes of Q&A, he quickly rose on the list of politicians I respect.
With one big exception. For some odd reason, he seemed to freeze up -- twice -- when asked about his position on the Employee Free Choice Act. He said he didn't have a position.
The next day, Darcy mentioned this during our panel. Local progressive activist Max Tyler raised his hand and said he asked Bennet the same question at another event and got the same answer. Colorado blogger John Erhardt of SquareState.net describes what happened next:
Darcy Burner challenged us in that discussion to call [Colorado] senators and congressmen, to pressure them to support worker's rights. So when the panel ended, an amazing thing happened. Candidate for CO-06, David Canter came to the front of the room and asked if he could be part of that challenge.
On the spot, Canter cut a YouTube video with Darcy and Max Tyler, announcing that he was posting an online petition urging Colorado's congressional delegation to stand with workers and publicly endorse the Employee Free Choice Act. Here's the video:
This was a remarkably bold thing for a first-time congressional candidate to do--challenging a sitting U.S. Senator and others to get off the fence on an important issue. You can add your voice to Canter's call by signing his petition here. (You can also give this bold progressive a buck by donating here.)
And Senator Bennet, if you'd like to do something similarly bold, feel free to announce your position on the Employee Free Choice Act right here at the OpenLeft!
Recent analyses of the 2008 general election find that overall participation increased on November 4, with a significant surge in voter participation among historically underrepresented Americans. Yet, while some lawmakers have been inspired by the recent voter turnout to propose election reforms that expand access to voting rights, others continue to focus on creating additional barriers to voting.
(In confluence with Chris's thesis about the growing demographic Democratic base, here's the latest from Project Vote. - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
The United States saw dramatic increases in voting from traditionally underrepresented groups, including minorities and young voters, according to a new analysis released this week by Project Vote. If borne out by systematic analysis of the voter rolls, this change in the electorate is evidence of the power of successful voter registration drives and an indication of the strong inclination of voters to participate in the process when candidates address their issues.
Following one of the most momentous elections in the nation's history, officials and advocates across the country are already turning their attention to the future of American democracy. After a grueling battle over voter registration, voter roll maintenance, and ballot access for the ever growing electorate, leaders and advocates are evaluating what worked this year and considering major administrative and legislative overhauls before coming elections.
Two days to go til the election and, surprise surprise, McCain is doing everything from criticizing Obama's patriotism in speeches to pamphleteering many unsubstantiated charges... like Obama favors criminals over police.
Barack Obama has won the 2008 Presidential Election.
Yes, you read that right. And no, I am not joking.
People will probably say that I am calling the election too early, which could depress turnout. People might say that I am taking too much for granted, which is especially bad for a committeeperson in West Philadelphia. People might say that I am simply being foolish, because there is time left and a lot can change in four days. For these people, I have five quick points (more in the extended entry).
Well, Obama's national lead has been stable at 7% for a month now. The national campaign is not tightening, and we are just seeing statistical noise.
Even if the campaign were tightening, Obama would still have a comfortable national lead. According to polling conducted over the weekend during the tracking poll "tightening," Obama reaches 264 electoral votes in states where he leads by 9.5% or more, passes 277 in Virginia where he leads by 8.0%, and hits 286 in states where he leads by 7.3% or more. So, he is actually doing even better in the Electoral College, where 270 votes are needed to win, than he is doing in national polls where he leads by 7%.
Sound too good to be true? It isn't. I provide complete details in the extended entry.
There's been much discussion over the McCain campaign's apparent retreat from Colorado in favor of longshot Pennsylvania. And now we get the news that John McCain and Sarah Palin will crisscross PA next week, making numerous appearances.
Why give up on Colorado, the state that could give Barack Obama his winning margin and where polling and history suggest better potential than Pennsylvania? Most of the speculation I've read has centered on electoral math and the desire of the McCain campaign to win one big blue state rather than trying to defend multiple poor-trending red states.
Here's another idea I got when looking at the polling for competitive House races at Pollster: Pennsylvania has more closely contested House races than any other state except Florida which has the same number, 10. Colorado, meanwhile, has only one and that one moved strongly toward the Dems a month ago.
The RNC has been footing much of the bill for the McCain campaign which is limited to 84 million dollars in federal matching funds. Has that money come with strings attached? Has the McCain campaign been pressured into the PA strategy in a bid to limit the damage in House races there? Another state McCain and/or Palin will visit next week? Ohio, with seven more competitive House races.
If the RNC believes McCain is going to lose they may at least want him to limit the damage in Congress. Does this theory make sense or not?
The "right-to-lifers" in Colorado are trying to get an amendment to their state constitution that declares a "fertilized egg" to be a "person." On the web site "Life Counts" we find this:
Colorado for Equal Rights has announced the support of over 70 physicians and pharmacists, including neonatologists, family physicians, ob/gyns, pediatricians, and other physicians. nationwide. These physicians have stated that they concur with the statement, "A 'person' includes any human from the time of fertilization."
Democrats who monitor advertising spending now put at five the number of states where Senator John McCain is reducing his advertising - New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Colorado, Maine and Minnesota.
In essence, Mr. McCain's campaign has decided to spread the advertising time he bought for the upcoming week in those states over the next two final weeks.
While station managers in the affected states said they were not ruling out the possibility that Mr. McCain would pump money back in before election day, on Nov. 4, the move represents a stark reordering of priorities.
The consensus seems to be that McCain will now target Pennsylvania instead of these other states. Outside of the Morning Call Tracking poll, there has actually been somewhat minimal polling in Pennsylvania over the last two weeks. Still, what polling there is indicates that McCain is further behind in Pennsylvania than he is in Colorado. Pennsylvania is also far more expensive, making it more difficult for McCain to compete financially against Obama's overwhelming money machine.
Best as I can figure it, the McCain campaign simply figures that Pennsylvania is worth exactly as many electoral votes as Colorado, Iowa and New Mexico combined. So, they are basically deciding to target the 2004 Bush states, plus Pennsylvania, minus Colorado, Iowa and New Mexico. I still think it is a stupid strategy, but the McCain campaign hasn't particularly impressed me with their intelligence so far. Why would their final move be any less dumb than genius decisions like "Green Screen," "Sarah Palin," and "Suspend Campaign." Just throw poor electoral targeting onto the end of a very long list.
There was apparently a major revelation about each campaign tonight, with McCain reportedly writing off Colorado and Obama canceling his appearances on Thursday and Friday in order to visit his ailing grandmother in Hawaii. However, I encourage everyone to look at the fine print in both of these moves, which are not as earth shaking as they might appear.
* = Can't actually find the number. Going from user comments back on Monday
No matter which way you look at it, McCain has gained ground, really anywhere from 1%-2.5%, The varying movement comes from different organizations using different polls in their averages, and / or from weighting the polls differently in their averages. I tend to prefer Pollster.com, because it using all polls and applies equal weights to them ( I think).
Still, no matter which way you look at it, Obama still holds a strong lead, at least in comparison to the two most recent elections. He appears to lead by about 6% which, according to the partisan leanings of individual states in the 2004 election, would be enough to score 349 electoral votes: all of the Kerry states plus Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio and Virginia. With none of the Kerry states remotely close right now, one then is prone to look at Iowa and New Mexico, which were the two narrowest Bush victories in 2004. Of the seven pickups listed above, they also happen to have the two widest margins for Obama right now according to Pollster.com and according to my own averages. So, even with a tightened campaign, we reach 264 electoral votes without breaking a sweat. And yes, there have been new state polls during the tightening period to confirm this.
So, which of the five remaining pickups are the best bets to secure victory for Obama? As long as I am allowed two answers that is actually a very easy question: Colorado and Virginia. Obama leads both of these states by 6% or more according to Pollster.com, Real Clear Politics, Electoral-Vote.com, fivethirtyeight.com, and myself. This puts both of these states right at, or possibly even above, the current national trendline. Excepting Iowa and New Mexico, they also currently give Obama noticeably wider leads than any of the other current pickup opportunities.
This is actually very good news, because it now means that Obama has not one, but two "low hanging fruit" paths to victory. If you are worried that Obama's lead is shrinking, my advice is simply to look to Colorado and Virginia. As long as he is ahead in one of those two states, then he is still headed to victory. Right now, he is so far ahead in both states, that there is virtually no chance he would the election. We have also been on real winning streaks in both states recently, picking up the Colorado Governorship (we already had the Virginia Governorship), two--and soon to be all four--U.S. Senate seats, two--and soon to be three or four--U.S. House seats, not to mention three of the four branches of the state legislatures. In other words, these are just not states where Democrats have been losing much at all.
Colorado and Virginia serve as a very strong two-state firewall. And remember, Obama only needs one.
Cross-posted at Project Vote's blog, Voting Matters Weekly Voting Rights News Update
By Erin Ferns
Monday marked the last day to register to vote before November's presidential election in many states and the conclusion to one of the nation's largest nonpartisan voter registration drives in history. Helping more than 1.3 million of the America's underrepresented young, low-income and minority citizens register to vote, Project Vote and its voter registration drive partner, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), have played a leading role this election cycle in changing the face of the electorate to represent all Americans.
