By Steve Sailer
11/05/2008
| State | McCain 08 | Bush 04 | Change |
| Hawaii | 24.8% | 45.3% | -20.5% |
| Nevada | 39.5% | 50.5% | -11.0% |
| Indiana | 49.2% | 59.9% | -10.8% |
| North Dakota | 52.9% | 62.9% | -9.9% |
| Nebraska | 56.8% | 65.9% | -9.1% |
| Utah | 62.5% | 71.5% | -9.0% |
| Montana | 50.1% | 59.1% | -8.9% |
| Delaware | 37.0% | 45.8% | -8.8% |
| California | 36.9% | 44.4% | -7.4% |
| Vermont | 31.8% | 38.8% | -7.0% |
| Wisconsin | 42.3% | 49.3% | -7.0% |
| Idaho | 61.6% | 68.4% | -6.8% |
| Colorado | 45.0% | 51.7% | -6.7% |
| Illinois | 37.9% | 44.5% | -6.6% |
| North Carolina | 49.4% | 56.0% | -6.6% |
| New Mexico | 43.5% | 49.8% | -6.3% |
| South Dakota | 53.6% | 59.9% | -6.3% |
| Michigan | 42.0% | 47.8% | -5.8% |
| Texas | 55.4% | 61.1% | -5.7% |
| Iowa | 44.3% | 49.9% | -5.6% |
| Maine | 39.0% | 44.6% | -5.6% |
| Kansas | 56.5% | 62.0% | -5.5% |
| Connecticut | 38.6% | 44.0% | -5.4% |
| Virginia | 48.6% | 53.7% | -5.0% |
| Oregon | 42.2% | 47.2% | -5.0% |
| Pennsylvania | 43.5% | 48.4% | -4.9% |
| South Carolina | 53.1% | 58.0% | -4.8% |
| Washington | 40.9% | 45.6% | -4.8% |
| New Hampshire | 44.3% | 48.9% | -4.5% |
| Georgia | 54.0% | 58.0% | -4.0% |
| New Jersey | 42.4% | 46.2% | -3.9% |
| Missouri | 49.5% | 53.3% | -3.8% |
| Florida | 48.4% | 52.1% | -3.7% |
| Rhode Island | 35.0% | 38.7% | -3.6% |
| Ohio | 47.4% | 50.8% | -3.4% |
| Minnesota | 44.2% | 47.6% | -3.4% |
| New York | 36.7% | 40.1% | -3.3% |
| Maryland | 39.7% | 42.9% | -3.3% |
| D. C. | 6.5% | 9.3% | -2.8% |
| Wyoming | 66.2% | 68.9% | -2.7% |
| Mississippi | 57.1% | 59.4% | -2.4% |
| Alabama | 60.1% | 62.5% | -2.3% |
| Kentucky | 57.4% | 59.6% | -2.1% |
| Arizona | 53.7% | 54.9% | -1.2% |
| West Virginia | 55.3% | 56.1% | -0.7% |
| Massachusetts | 36.2% | 36.8% | -0.6% |
| Oklahoma | 65.7% | 65.6% | 0.1% |
| Alaska | 61.2% | 61.1% | 0.1% |
| Arkansas | 56.5% | 54.3% | 2.2% |
| Louisiana | 59.0% | 56.7% | 2.3% |
| Tennessee | 60.7% | 56.8% | 3.9% |
My reader suggests that energy importing states swung left, while energy exporters drifted right, but it’s hard to tell.
One thing to note is that in the Greater California Foreclosure Zone, McCain got devastated in Nevada (second worst fall) and got hit hard in California and Colorado. He was down only 1.2% versus Bush in Arizona, but he’s the native son, so that’s a bad performance.
Another thing to keep in mind is that there’s a fair amount of randomness injected into these 2004 to 2008 changes by the impact of levels of advertising delivered. It’s hard to prove statistically that candidate advertising has any affect, but it seems hard to imagine that it’s completely a scam dreamed up by political consultants who get 15% cuts on each ad buy. Lots of states got only minimal amounts of advertising because they are deemed irrelevant to the electoral college results. Other states get a (presumably) offsetting flood from both campaigns. And some states get more ads from one campaign than from the other. This should inject a lot of randomness into the results from election to election, yet affordable family formation continues to dominate three elections in a row now.
This is a content archive of VDARE.com, which Letitia James forced off of the Internet using lawfare.