New York Times analysis:
October 27, 2000
THE WIDENING BATTLE
Bucking History, Tossup States Increase, Forcing Candidates to Rethink Strategies
By RICHARD L. BERKE
MILWAUKEE, Oct. 26 — The roster of states that are tossups in the general election is actually expanding in the closing days of the presidential campaign, a marked departure from previous elections and one that has forced Gov. George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore to hustle around the nation even more than past nominees.
The shift has transformed the campaign into more of a national election, with voters in several states enjoying much greater attention — and influence — than in the past.
Many governors and party strategists said they could not remember an instance where the list of states too close to call grew this late in the season. The two campaigns are battling over 18 states; typically at this stage, the contest is down to well under a dozen.
But with polls in so many states within the margin of sampling error, the Bush and Gore operations are pumping resources and campaign time into states that they never expected to be in play.
Most of the shifting is occurring on traditionally Democratic turf. The Bush campaign has sought to wrest away states like Wisconsin, Minnesota and West Virginia, all of which went Democratic in the last three national elections. Democrats are making inroads in Florida, a state Republicans never expected they would have to vigorously defend.
The ever-changing electoral puzzle has forced both sides to upend their closing game plans. Mr. Bush, sensing he can win Wisconsin, flew to Milwaukee for a rally on Monday and is returning to the state on Saturday. Mr. Gore popped up this evening in Madison. And he added more stops in the state for Monday.
"There's just so much territory, too many places to visit," said Gov. Gary Locke of Washington, a Democrat. "I wish for Gore that there were 48 hours in the day and it was daylight every hour of the day — and that he could survive on two minutes of sleep."
Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania, a Republican, who stumped in his state today with Mr. Bush, put it this way: "I can't imagine a race since 1960 where there were so many places in play. It's pretty remarkable. Maybe it's a sign that the strength of party affiliation in this day and age isn't as strong as it used to be, and appeals to independent- thinking folks on either side may be attractive."
Because so many states are toss- ups, polls show that Mr. Gore and Mr. Bush are far short of the magic 270 electoral votes needed to win the White House. Mr. Bush has a slight edge in the state-by-state count, but the map is quite fluid. Adding to the uncertainty and trepidation on both sides is that many polls are far from infallible.
This was demonstrated just this week, when a poll published on Monday found that Mr. Bush was nine percentage points ahead here in Wisconsin. Today, another survey was published that said Mr. Gore was seven points ahead.
"Our whole schedule is last minute," said Tad Devine, a strategist for Mr. Gore. "We want to retain complete flexibility about potential electoral targets. We constantly have scheduling meetings involving senior staff to look at the research and revise the schedule."
The race is so tight in these states that officials in both campaigns said they were braced for the unlikely, but certainly possible, prospect that Mr. Gore could reach the White House by capturing the electoral college while Mr. Bush could prevail in the popular vote. The last time there was such an outcome was in 1888, when Benjamin Harrison defeated Grover Cleveland.
Under that sequence of events, Mr. Bush would be more likely to win the popular vote because in many big states like Texas he is poised to win with larger margins than Mr. Gore is in the states where he is ahead.
"It's a very serious question," said Mark A. Siegel, a Democrat who is an authority on the Electoral College and a fellow at American University. "You could have a situation where clearly Gore can have 300 Electoral College votes and Bush could have a million more popular votes and lose significantly in the Electoral College. It would be a legal election. But we don't know whether a president elected that way could legitimately govern."
An even more implausible possibility is that each candidate could claim 269 electoral votes, throwing the verdict into the hands of Congress.
As part of this scrambled electoral map, states that each campaign expected to be fiercely competitive, like New Jersey and Illinois, have not emerged as major battlegrounds — and have been virtually neglected by the candidates. The airwaves in those states for the most part are devoid of presidential commercials.
The principal reason the candidates ventured into Illinois was to go to Chicago to raise money — or appeal to women nationwide by appearing on the "Oprah" program. But in a season of ever-changing calculations, even that could change. The Bush campaign, sensing that Mr. Gore could be newly vulnerable in Illinois, announced today that it would begin running commercials there.
Beyond the close race, the altered map reflects other factors in the campaign. Ralph Nader, the Green Party candidate, threatens to drain votes from Mr. Gore in states like Wisconsin, Minnesota and Washington, and that has contributed to the competitiveness. In other states, local issues have been engaged. In West Virginia, for example, traditionally a Democratic state, Mr. Gore has troubles in coal country because of his reputation as a champion of the environment.
Changing demographics are also a factor. Many states are less rooted in partisan loyalties than they once were.
"This all reflects the fact that the country is a lot alike now," said Gov. James B. Hunt of North Carolina, a Democrat. "We watch the same television all over the country. We're a more and more homogenous nation. We have a lot of issues that are really similar."
Karl Rove, Mr. Bush's chief strategist, said: "There really is a changing map. The old paradigm is decaying. Part of it is changing demographics and part of it is two different candidates and issue agendas."
Traditionally, Republicans built their electoral base on a clear swath down the midsection of the country, from the Dakotas to Nebraska to Texas. The party also has long been potent in western states, including Idaho, Utah and Arizona, as well as in the South. Mr. Bush has enjoyed strong support in all those states.
The Democrats' route to the White House has traditionally begun with California, the largest cache of electoral votes. The party has also relied on the Pacific Northwest and big Northeastern states like New York and Pennsylvania.
But this year, Mr. Gore is struggling in Washington and Oregon and, while he appears safe in most of the Northeast, finds himself in a tight race in Pennsylvania.
Overall, the states that many polls show are could go either way are: Michigan, Pennsylvania, Washington, Wisconsin, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Maine, Oregon, Tennessee, New Mexico, Nevada, West Virginia, Minnesota, Florida, New Hampshire, Ohio and Delaware.
"If you think of this as a football game, we're on their 30-yard line," said Matthew Dowd, a Bush strategist. "They're not contesting any of the Republican base states. I would not have expected Wisconsin to be leaning in our direction. I would never have guessed that we would have been contesting West Virginia, Minnesota and Tennessee."
But Mr. Devine countered that a must state for Mr. Bush, Florida, is up for grabs, and said that it was inevitable that the battle would be largely on Democratic turf because Democrats won the White House the last two elections.
"They don't get to win the election without winning states that Clinton won," Mr. Devine said. "By definition, the election is on our turf."
The one point on which both camps agree is that the tight state races have set off intense campaigning in states like Wisconsin that were often neglected in presidential years.
"We haven't seen this kind of attention in years," said Gov. Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin, a Republican. "Bush has been here 10 times in 12 months. And he's coming again Friday night."
Bob Dole, Mr. Thompson said, drew "very minuscule" interest in this state in 1996, and in 1992, President Bush took "his ill-fated train trip across Wisconsin and it was all collapsing around him."
Senator Russell Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat, said he had long predicted that this state would be competitive because voters here are independent minded. "People are really struggling with which direction they want to go," he said, "particularly in the upper Midwest."
Questioning polls showing that Mr. Nader has cost Mr. Gore support in Wisconsin, Mr. Feingold said: "The Nader candidacy is helping energize the race for Democrats and progressives in a way that's going to help Gore. It's going to lead to a better turnout."
One state that is even more traditionally Democratic is Minnesota. The governor, Jesse Ventura, an independent, said the Nader candidacy and lack of enthusiasm for either Mr. Bush and Mr. Gore would probably help the Texas governor.
"They're calling this a tossup state, which better be a shock to the vice president," Mr. Ventura said. "I think Ralph Nader is going to get a much higher vote total than anyone's predicting. And you've got such apathy in voter turnout that Republicans will benefit. Apathy equals Republican turnout."
While some experts predicted a virtual dead heat on Election Day, most said they expected Mr. Bush or Mr. Gore to pick up momentum by the middle of next week or into the last weekend.
"A lot of states that are now too close to call are going to surge en masse," Mr. Siegel said. "Whoever wins is who surges last in this season of surges."
nytimes.com |
