Had John Kerry picked Bill Richardson--a centrist,hispanic governor of a state which traditionally gives its electoral votes to Republicans--he could have narrowly won the election. With John Edwards, I honestly don't believe John Kerry can win.

Not won, but maybe carried NM, AZ & CA, which he won't now.

How can you guys be soooo optimistic?

The media loves Edwards and will hide his blemishes and Kerry's. The left has practically an unlimited advertising budget thanks to Soros and MoveOn and the media has hyped Michael Moore's propaganda. The Valerie Plame indictments are likely to come out around the convention.

The only upside Bush has is that Iraq is quieting down, but not enough to be sending large numbers of our guys home and the economy is gradually recovering, though not enough for the major media outlets to notice.

Whatever you're drinking, pass it over to me.

OJ, if Kerry/Richardson were to carry AZ how would you see Bush winning back the electoral votes from that state. WA, OR, MN, IA? Just curious.

No Hispanic swing vote. Plus, Kery/Richardson would have gotten slain in states where the black vote matters.

Orrin, are you suggesting that Bush will win California? If so, then you are very misguided. I live in California, and there is no way this state will go for Bush.

Yes, Bush will win CA.

OJ, will you please knock on wood every now and then, please??

. . . . . jinx!!

Orrin, I know you live in New Hampshire so I can understand your ignorance when it comes to California's cultural and political scene. The truth is this state has become so far left.

During the California gubernatorial election of 2002, the Republican candidate Bill Simon ran on three issues: the economy, education and infrastructure. Those issues are safe and undivisive; and with Grey Davis having made a huge mess with the state's budget and energy, there was no reason why Bill Simon shouldn't have won. However, it was revealed that Bill Simon was a traditional Catholic, who was personally pro-life, yet he repeatedly said that he would not make abortion an issue in his campaign.

Even if Bill Simon wanted to make abortion an issue, it would not have made any difference. Since the California Constitution gives women the right to abortion, there is nothing a governor can do to make abortion illegal without 2/3 of the Senate and Assembly, which would never happen since both of those houses are heavily dominated by radical, pro-choice Democrats. And even if by some miracle, abortion were once again illegal in California, it wouldn't matter anyways since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled over 30 years ago that states can't ban abortion.

So what was the problem with Bill Simon's belief that abortion was murder? Absolutely nothing. Abortion rights were under no threat. Of course, that didn't stop the media, during press-conferences and debates, from constantly bringing up abortion, abortion, abortion. Bill Simon was depicted as being a far-right Catholic who would force pregnant victims of rape and incest to bear children. Unfortunately, Bill Simon lost for nothing more than his personal beliefs, and a year later California had to recall Grey Davis.

I will say again, there is no way this state will give its electoral votes to a conservative Christian Republican.

Orrin's the Criswell of our times. He makes these crazy predictions, knowing that the wrong ones will be quickly forgotten and that the right ones will make him look like a wise old sage. I recall in 2000, he predicted that Bush would win in a landslide. Now that I think of it, it's an old lefty ploy (think Paul Ehrlich: who remembers his wrong calls except conservatives who hate him anyway?). So, go Orrin go! Your 50-0 articles are always a good morale booster, even if that prediction doesn't have a chance in heck of coming true. Now tell us who Liz Taylor's gonna marry next!

Well, I'm not predicting 50-0, but don't be distracted by the fact that, right now, the election is a lock for the President. I'm not saying that he can't lose -- he can -- but he won't. Remember, it's not in anyone's interest, not the President's, not Kerry's and not the press', to tell us that the election is a lock.

Still no answer as to how Bush is a favorite right now, let alone an overwhelming one.

These articles about the election projections showing a strong Bush win are comforting but like others above I'm not convinced yet.
Vince - I'm not from CA but it appeared Simon was done in by the charge of corruption of one of his companies (later reversed but the media ignored it) which killed his image as an effective and clean manager compared to Davis. And Arnold's popularity will at least cause the Dems to pay some money and attention to CA.
JAB - There have been reports Bush may have a chance in WA due to Kerry ineptness, in OR given the gay marriage issue, has been polling ahead of Kerry in MN, and barely lost IA in 2000 so any of these states may be Bush pickups.

AWW, I agree that all 4 states are doable for W and I'd add WI.

Still, the failure to find lots of WMD in Iraq, an extremely biased media environment and a relatively poor communicator as a candidate leads me to believe we have a coin toss here and if there is to be a blowout, it will be Kerry's.

I respect Bush for taking risks and believe that he's earned some good luck, but I just do not see where it's coming from.

All;

I say we make OJ put something near and dear to him on the line. If Kerry gets more than 45% of the vote, then OJ has to visit someplace not in the Eastern Time Zone. Say, San Francisco. We can all chip in for the plane ticket.

JAB: You mean aside from the fact that there is a booming economy, we're just coming off a victorious war, the president's base is solidly behind him and the battleground is in the blue states?

AOG - San Francisco? Why not send him to Paris to really rub it in?

JAB - The media dominance won't matter much, the left has nothing to say and so the media can only say nothing loudly. Bush doesn't have to be that articulate to point to a growing economy and success in the war.

David,
I'm not saying the fact you cite don't exist. Only that the Admin has done a poor job of exploiting them, the press is minimizing them and there is no electoral college margin of error.

Plus, WV and OH are tossups and Kerry is close in NC. These are 'red states.'

I want to believe, but don't see it in the data.

The war is won now and the economy is booming now. So when does Bush make his move in the polls?

JAB - For WV, OH, and NC other polls show Bush picking up PA, MI, others. I put myself as more optimistic than you but less optimistic than OJ - I'm thinking a solid Bush win like in '88.
DJS - the polls were beginning to show Bush pulling ahead. The GOP pollster yesterday predicting Kerry would be up 10 pts or more as he gets all of the coverage in July but will settle back down in August/Sept as Bush gets the spotlight. Remember Dukakis was +18pts to Bush Sr in August of 1988.

AOG:

I've already seen the Reagan Library.

djs:

Reagan didn't break away until October in either of his victories--no one pays attention until after the debates start.

JAB:

Take a look at the Fair Model. It's not possible for an incumbent to lose with an economy as good as ours:

http://fairmodel.econ.yale.edu/vote2004/index2.htm

Vince:

When the landslide comes it takes everything with it.

Governor:

And he knocked off a popular incumbent vice president in a time of unprecedented peace and prosperity. Meanwhile half the GOP was scurrying to line up behind McCain because he was "electable:". Bush woin and is our most conservative president ever. Not bad.

I'm definitely willing to chip in for oj's plane tickets if we can find somewhere sufficiently hideous to send him.

James:

I know a few grotty little industrial towns in Quebec where there is absolutely nothing to do and no one speaks English. We can save mony, too, as they are only a few hours from New Hampshire by car and accommodation is very cheap.

Actually, Paris strikes me as the best destination. A treat for Dr. Judd and a punishment for OJ.

However, I don't think he'll actually have to go.

The answer to "when?" is "August." The whole campaign is built around putting the Dem nominee away in August and then not looking back.

Dr. Judd hates the frogs more even than I.

How about Berlin?

The Wife is Jewish--the only thing she wants to see of Berlin is a mushroom cloud over it.

I should have remembered that - perhaps Athens for the Olympics? It would be an exquisite form of torture.

Vince,

You spend too much time in the wrong parts of California. The Central Valley and Inland Empire will solidly back Bush, while the coastal regions will split their votes between apathy and Nader.

Simon's problem wasn't abortion - it was lack of name recognition. Though I'm a lifelong Republican, the only thing I knew about the guy was that he inherited lots of money, came from out-of-state, and was endorsed by some New Yorker (Giuliani). Needless to say, these qualities did not inspire me with passion to make him the next Governor of California.

I have a tough time believing that California will be in play. If CA is in play, however, there really isn't any realistic scenario that can elect Kerry.

OJ's 50-0 scenario is obviously not going to happen, but examining the race from the Electoral College map is fairly informative.

A 269-269 tie is not out of the question.

The best that Kerry can do is 347.
The best that Bush can do is 331.

IMHO the likeliest scenario is, Bush 273