The View From Here . . .
By Bob Morgan, Jr.

This year's presidential election is very likely to be contested in a greater number of states than has been the case recently.

In the 2004 election, there were no more than twelve states that reasonably could be considered competitive. And, as it turned out, only three states actually did switch parties from 2000. Iowa and New Mexico switched from Democrat to Republican, while New Hampshire did the reverse.

The result of having so few competitive states is that most "safe" states are pretty much ignored by the candidate, except for fundraising. (Of course, this strategy is the direct result of the "winner take all" electoral college, where margins of victory or defeat are irrelevant to the allocation of electors in almost every state.) Thus, a state like New York, considered safe for the Democrats, or Texas, thought in the bag for Republicans, will rarely be the site of campaign rallies for the candidates (again, except when the object is to raise money) and campaign advertisements generally do not appear on local television.

But this year, both parties are casting a much wider net, and seemingly for good reason. On the Republican side, a recent series of polls by the Rasmussen organization gives the GOP considerable cause for optimism. For example, the presumptive GOP nominee, John McCain, leads both Democratic candidates by a slight margin in New Jersey, and also in Michigan, both states last captured by Republicans in 1988. And Mr. McCain also has a narrow lead in Wisconsin, last won by Republicans in the 1984 Reagan landslide. While these obviously are early polls with results inside the margin of error, Republicans are certainly not going to be writing off these states any time soon.

But Democrats have plausible hopes of their own in traditional Republican states. In an article in last week's New York Post entitled "GOP Achilles Heel," libertarian columnist Ryan Sager reports on a conference he attended in Denver which focused on strong Democratic gains in the interior West in recent years. Mr. Sager's article notes that five of the eight states in the region have now elected Democratic governors and that a switch of 60,000 votes in Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico in 2004 would have made John Kerry president. Notably, Democrats have scheduled their convention in Denver and very likely will make a strong push for the entire region in November.

The substantially greater number of states in play could affect the feel and strategy of the campaign. Although not everyone loves political commercials, it is probably a good thing that more of the country will have a taste of the election and feel that their vote actually matters. Campaigns will also have to make important strategic decisions on allocating resources. It is very likely that some states that seem in play now will revert to their traditional voting patterns as Election Day nears, but which ones?

Even in New York, the widening of the political map has implications. While it would take a very optimistic Republican to predict that Mr. McCain will capture the Empire State in November, the emergence of New Jersey as a contested state may mean that New Yorkers will be viewing television commercials for the presidential candidates for the first time in years. This may increase interest and turnout in New York for the election and could have an effect on downballot races, particularly the hotly contested race for control of the state senate.

In any event, it likely will be a different political landscape this year.