Blogswarm - Online Political News Magazine

by Chris Bowers

Yeah, we lost. But we did not lose everywhere. In fact, especially in the battleground states, we made some very real gains that should be celebrated. Although final results are not yet in, Democrats actually gained more states in the partisan index than Republicans.

States Moving From pro-RNC Partisan Index to pro-DNC Partisan Index
      2004	   2000
IA   DNC +2.1	 RNC +0.2
NV   DNC +0.4	 RNC +4.1
NH   DNC +4.2	 RNC +1.8
NM   DNC +1.3	 RNC +0.5
OH   DNC +0.5	 RNC +4.0
OR   DNC +8.0	 RNC +0.3
WI   DNC +3.4	 RNC +0.3

For the sake of comparison, zero states switched from pro-DNC partisan index to pro-RNC partisan index. Surprising as it may seem, because of our efforts in this cycle, Democrats are now in their best position in terms of the partisan index since the 1950's when the New Deal coalition was still fully operational (I envy the Democrat who is the 2008 nominee). We now hold the partisan advantage in 24 states plus DC (worth 289 electoral votes, up from 231), while Republicans hold the advantage in 26 states (worth 249 electoral votes, down from 307). Kerry-Edwards almost won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by 2.5%! That is literally, rather than vernacularly, awesome.

It is important to remember that the new voter registrations we acquired through the third party and coordinated campaigns that helped make this new partisan advantage in the Electoral College possible are not going to expire anytime soon. This campaign will have long-term, positive implications on our electoral chances. It was, simultaneously, the epitome of the Jesse Jackson 1980's strategy (energize and register the base as much as possible) and the Bill Clinton strategy of the 1990's (appeal to moderates and independents as much as possible). As I wrote yesterday, we excelled in both areas.

We also gained noticeably in other states:

      2004	    2000
CO   RNC +3.2	  RNC +8.9
ME   DNC +11.0	  DNC +4.6
MI   DNC +6.4	  DNC +4.6
MN   DNC +6.4	  DNC +1.9
PA   DNC +5.2	  DNC +3.7
VA   RNC +5.6	  RNC +8.5
VT   DNC +23.6	  DNC +9.4
WA   DNC +10.4	  DNC +5.1

Vermont, which for two hundred years until 1992 had never voted Democrat, is eye-popping. Washington, Maine and Oregon do not look like swing states anymore, as the partisan index margin in those states is greater than Bush Sr.'s national margin in 1988. Minnesota, Michigan, and Pennsylvania barely look like swing states now, and clearly lean-Democrat. Among the states I did not show, New Jersey and Delaware slid a bit, but stayed double-digit pro-DNC in the partisan index. New York, my home state and the site of the 9/11 attacks, slid one point, but stayed more than +20 DNC. We also gained a point in both California and Illinois in the partisan index, both of which stayed double-digit pro-DNC.

In short, our electoral base decidedly increased as a result of this election. The West Coast, Northeast, and Chicago are now a deep blue sea. We also gained in all three the Upper Midwest states. In 2008, we start with 190 electoral votes in the bag (CA, CT, DE, DC, HI, IL, MA, ME, MD, NJ, NY, OR RI, VT, WA). Even if we lost as bad as Dukakis, we would probably still win all of these states. We also start with another 48 (MN, MI and PA) clearly leaning our way. Even if we lost as badly nationally as Bush Sr. did in 1992, we would probably win these three states. 190 + 48 equals a very uncomplicated electoral path to 238.

Further, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio and Wisconsin (51 electoral votes), all now have slight Democratic leanings. The new people we registered in all of these states are not simply going to fade away just because Kerry did not win the election. 238 + 51 = 289. Still further, we turned Virginia, and especially Colorado, into real swing states rather than pipe dreams.

All in all, Democrats now hold a +6.0 or greater partisan advantage in states worth 217 electoral votes (up from 168). By contrast, Republicans now hold a +6.0 or grater advantage in the partisan index in states worth 200 electoral votes (down from 211). This campaign structurally shifted the Electoral College 58 votes in our favor overall, and shifted the two electoral bases 60 votes in our favor. When it came to the battleground, this was an incredibly strong campaign on our part. For the sake of comparison, here are how other Democratic tickets fared:

Democratic Partisan Index Gain (in 2004 EV's)
	Overall   Base
2004	 +58	  +60
2000	 -41	  +37
1996	 +22	  -51
1992	  +7	  +51	 
1988	 +18	   +6
1984	 -34	  -15
1980	  +3	   -8

The last two cycles have seen the forging of a new Democratic Electoral coalition. CA, MI, OR and WA have left the realm of the battleground and joined the Democratic base, while CO, NV and VA have left the Republican base to become swing states. At the same time, no safe Democratic state has become a swing state, and only AR, LA and WV have left the battleground to join the Republican base. The advantage in the battleground belongs to us for the first time in many, many cycles.

No one should ever serve as the scapegoats for the 2004 campaign. The efforts we put forth in the battleground will be felt in many election cycles to come. The only way that we should treat 2006 differently is that we need to perform new voter registration, coordinated campaigns and third party efforts on a national level. We almost won the Electoral College despite losing the national vote by nearly 3%, something not seen since 1948. The 51% Republican "mandate" still holds the seeds of an emerging Democratic majority.

Memo to Democrats

Today Bush said:

I will reach out to every one who shares our goals.

Translation: My way or the highway.

Alternate translation: You're either with us or against us.


For Democrats in the Senate:

Any "compromise" you try to achieve on various nills inevitably gets stripped out by DeLay's goons in the conference committee. Amendments should be written as land mines (metaphorical, of course) for the Republicans to trip on, not because any of them will end up being law.

For Democrats in the House and Senate: If you vote for the Republican agenda, you cannot later credibly criticize it. That's just the way it is...

Some historical perspecitve on the election

Yes, I'm devastated by Kerry's defeat as well, but I take some solace in the fact that it was a pretty pathetic victory for an incumbent. Bush and the Republicans will claim a great victory (a mandate, even), but the numbers (from 1900 on--see below, download the Word or PDF version) tell a different story:

• Assuming Bush gets New Mexico and Iowa, he will have gotten the lowest percentage of electoral votes (54%) of any incumbent running for reelection since Wilson. If those two states should swing Kerry's way (NM might), it'll be even lower.
• He will have won with the lowest percentage of the popular vote (51%) of any incumbent running for reelection since Truman (well, technically since Clinton, but he also ran against Perot, who was a more significant 3rd-party candidate than Thurmond and Wallace were in '48)
• He will have won by the lowest margin of the popular vote (3.5M) of any incumbent running for reelection since Truman (2.1M, and back then only 50M voted).
• He will have won the three states that put him over 270 (OH, NM and IA--assuming the last two go his way) by only 161,989 (not counting the provisional ballots, absentee, etc.).

So, this is NOT a smashing incumbent victory like those of Clinton, Reagan, Nixon, LBJ or FDR. It was a bit pitiful for an incumbent, frankly, especially after 9/11. There's really no mandate here; this is still basically a 50-50 country, and we'll live to fight and win another day.

Douglas Sosnik, who was a counselor to President Bill Clinton and who advised Mr. Kerry, said that contrary to the aftermath of the muddled 2000 election results, the Democrats now needed to accept that they had become - "no ifs, ands or buts" - the opposition party.

"As we go prospectively forward - to the question of 'now what?' - to me it's all going to be stuffed through the prism of what does it mean to be an opposition party," Mr. Sosnik said. "And to me, being more effective as an opposition party means being grounded outside the Beltway, through the governors."

"We've got to build the party back up from the ground up,'' he said. "That's going to require some bloodletting, and a rethinking on substance and style."

over 2000,1 and the turnout rate among these voters rose from about 42.3% to 51.6%, a sharp

Young people voted at a much higher rate in contested, "battleground" states.2 In the ten most

national exit polls. They were the only age group to prefer the Democrats.

Thank you and good work all

Posted by simon at 08:35 PM

We have much to think about today.

But before we begin to look back, and look forward, I want to say thank you.

Our network did so much these past two years. Lets take a moment to review:

• our members and our PAC raised millions of dollars for the very best candidates in the toughest races, helping usher in a new and better generation of leaders for Democrats.
• our members and friends helped launch a very important conversation about the long-term future of progressive politics, best captured in Matt Bai's New York Times piece this summer.
• and perhaps most importantly, NDN aggressively made the case for a more compelling vision, message and agenda for Democrats:
  • Our agenda, A Commitment to Hope and Progress, released in the summer of 2003, spelled out six big things we would fight for together in the coming years;
  • Our New Majority Coalition Project gave clear, consistent - and correct - message guidance to Democrats these past several years.
  • Our two national media campaigns were strategic, effective and innovative, reaching millions of people in twelve critical states.
  • And our ubiquitous commentary, on television, radio, the internet and in the print, echoed our powerful argument about our need for a new direction for America.

We did much these last two years to restore the promise of America, and for that I say thank you, and encourage you to stand tall this morning.

Friends, there will be time to talk, to debate, to discuss and even fight about where we go from here. My advice is take some time to take a deep breath, look at what went right – which was so much – and together lets have a conversation about where we go as a country, a party and an organization.

In the coming weeks we will be reaching out to all of you in a formal way to hear and learn from you. We have done much together these past two years, but somehow, today, I feel like our most important work together is still to come.

Thanks for everything, and keep the faith.