Dan Rather: 3 battleground states may decide presidential race

[question everything]

(snip)

Political experts know that, in a presidential race, you don't get excited over polls until after Labor Day. Then you look again, with two weeks to go in the campaign, and then you don't take your eyes off of them in the last 10 days. They can tick off the examples from campaigns past -- Dukakis with as much as a 16-point lead in the late spring of 1988, Clinton in third place at this point in 1992 -- and then they'll tell you that undecided voters often make up their minds in the last weekend before the election (Carter dead-even with Reagan on the last Friday before Election Day 1980).

It's also worth remembering that the polls that tend to get reported in the national press are national polls. And national polls are meaningless even on Election Day (ask Al Gore, who in 2000 won more votes, nationwide, than George Bush). No, if you really want to keep tabs on the progress of the Democratic and Republican tickets through the summer months, you keep a close eye on the battleground states. And in this election year, three battleground states figure to count most of all: Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan.

(snip)

But if neither candidate can score a clean sweep, here's how it seems to break down: It's hard to see how Kerry can take the election without winning at least two out of three -- and even then, it's by no means a sure thing (again, ask Al Gore, who won Pennsylvania and Michigan in 2000). Bush, meanwhile, could squeak by with only one (likely Ohio again, without which no Republican candidate has won a presidential election). And if Bush wins two of the three, you're likely looking at four -- as in four more years.

(snip)

Kerry's reasons for choosing Edwards are, instead, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan. As a candidate for the Democratic nomination, Edwards finished a strong second to Kerry in Ohio, and made a respectable showing in Michigan (the nomination was wrapped up by the time the primaries got to Pennsylvania).

(snip)

Dan Rather anchors the CBS Evening News and is a syndicated columnist. His column appears every Sunday.

http://www.dailybreeze.com/content/opinion/3076360.html

[booksenkatz]

1. Why is Michigan a tossup?

From what I can see, we're the only one of the 50 states that is not experiencing the Economic Miracle. I'm jealous of those of you who are in the other 49 states and are experiencing low grocery/gasoline prices, fantastic jobs creation, and an affordable cost of living. You still have your manufacturing jobs (we don't). Gee, it's all over the news, all the fun the rest of you are having. But it sure isn't evidenced here in the Great Lakes State. Bush is openly despised here.

So I ask again: why is Michigan a tossup?
:shrug:

[baby_bear]

2. No Economic Miracle in the Pacific Northwest

Oregon and Washington are really hurting.

The odd thing is that Oregon apparently could well go for Bush, yet he has caused that state nothing but pain.

s_m

[Lefty48197]

3. That's some interesting analysis Dan,

It's true that Kerry almost definately needs to win both MI and PA if he wants to win. It's possible for him to win, while losing one of those states, but it would take an electoral miracle.
It's also true that a Kerry win in Ohio pretty much locks things up for him. Bush can't win without Ohio, but Kerry can.
Florida is the same: Bush can't win without it, but Kerry can.
To me, the battleground states seem to be West Virginia, Missouri, New Mexico, and Nevada.

[bemildred]

4. I think Kerry will kick his ass in Florida, but what the heck. nt