This doesn’t include the electoral vote for Nebraska’s second district, which could once again be in play. It’s a tough call to say Maine can’t be in play, considering the size of 2010’s wins in the legislature and the governor’s mansion. The GOP had lame showings in the congressional races indicate that the state is unlikely better on a national level. In fact, Chellie Pingree won by a greater margin this year.
The 10 states here, and Nebraska, were won by Bush in either 2000 or 2004, and Obama in 2008. Obama had a big advantage due to the anti-Republican sentiment. So I don’t see them all going to him again. Florida, Indiana, New Hampshire, and Nebraska’s 2nd should favor the GOP. I think 2008 was an anomaly with these states, and they may be getting more Republican.
New Mexico, Nevada, and Colorado should remain with Obama. These states have become more Democratic and will be tougher for any Republican in the future.
That leaves Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, and Iowa. With the exodus of Democrats from the Cleveland area, Ohio keeps becoming more Republican. Virginia, on the other hand, keeps adding Democrats in the D.C. area. I still put these as toss-ups.
There are six states which could go Democratic this year. Conventional wisdom is that if Georgia were to go Obama then he will have already won. After all, wouldn’t he get this state after getting all the more Democratic states?
Not necessarily. Georgia has seen an influx of African-Americans, the most reliable Democratic voters and voters that are extraordinarily loyal to the President. Georgia was 30% African-American in 2008 and may be even have a higher concentration in 2012.
Arizona is tricky. Native son John McCain was able to blunt any possible Democratic lean in 2008. The governor’s mansion and the legislature went Republican again this year, but Democrats did better than expected in the congressional races. While the GOP did pick-up two congressional seats, they left two others on the table. This state probably isn’t a swing state yet, but you can’t ignore that Nevada to the north and New Mexico to the east have gone Democratic. Arizona has had the same Democratic migration as these states have had.
I consider Missouri an unlikely flip, but it was so close in 2008 that I included it.
I’m skeptical that Montana and the Dakotas could flip, but they are small states that could tip if Democrats keep moving into them. If they aren’t swing states now, they will be in 2016 or 2020.
There is, however, a group of states that could swing that Republicans haven’t been very competitive in years.
All these states have been losing population. Democrats have made western states more Democratic, but the Democrats have to come from somewhere. When they leave these states, they become more Republican. The GOP now has all eight of the legislative houses in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. Three of them elected Republican governors and the GOP took two senate seats from Democrats. New Jersey had no elections in 2010. So it’s tough to see how the wave impacted this state. This state is a long shot to flip, but all five bear watching.
http://baselinescenario.com/2011/01/19/deficit-hawkoprite-eric-cantor/
ReplyDeleteThere is this misperception the 2001/2003 tax cuts increased the deficit. In 2004 Federal tax revenue increased by 5.5%, more than double the inflation rate of 2.7%. In 2005 revenue went up 14.6%. It went up 11.8% in 2006. Then it went up 6.7% in 2007.
ReplyDeleteDespite the dot com bust that dropped income and thus Federal revenue, the 2007 fiscal had revenue 29% higher than Clinton's last fiscal in 2001 and 44% higher than the last down year of 2003.
The problem, of course, is that in 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 expenditures went up at a faster rate than revenue came in. Thus, there were deficits. In 2005, 2006, and 2007 expenditures went up at a slower rate, however, and the deficit was reduced from $413 billion in FY 2004 to $161 billion in FY 2007. Then the Democrats took over and spending jumped dramatically higher, to the point that revenue couldn't keep up.
I have no idea if revenue would've been higher with higher tax rates, but higher tax rates discourage earning, so there's no 1 to 1 correlation of raising taxes and raising tax revenue. What we do know that deficits weren't caused by lowering taxes, since the result of that was much higher revenue.
Washington doesn't have a revenue problem. It has a spending problem.