in 1988 vermont caucused for jesse jackson. in 2008

[jeff47]

19. If there are different ways, why are you claiming there is only one way?

And that way is to appeal to the nation as a whole?

the reference to SC was not as a purple state. It was because SC got coverage on CNN

It's 9 months until the first primary. A black guy with a funny name didn't get much media coverage either this far from the primary. Then he won.

Polling this early from 2008 said Giuliani would just edge out Clinton. That didn't quite turn out to be remotely accurate. And that's true every single election - W polled poorly early. Bill Clinton polled poorly early. Hell, Reagan's poll numbers were awful early in the campaign.

In fact, early polls are wrong more than 90% of the time. Why make decisions based on something you know will be wrong?

Do you really want to debate a definition of "purple" states? I guess that plays into your theory of how to get to 270? I think it's a little early for that math projection.

Not really. You base it on the actual results of statewide campaigns in the last election, in this case 2014. It gives you a very rough idea of where the state will end up in 2016. You may be off by 10%, but when the margin is >20% that really doesn't matter - you can still declare the state "red" or "blue" because at worst it's a 10% victory instead of a 20% victory.

Here's an analysis from right after 2014. From a Republican. He goes into detail about why he puts certain states in the "red" or "blue" or "white" column.

VA is one of the states with a growing immigrant population, so that's one Democratic candidates need to watch.

It has a much larger, growing DC suburb population. Which is not particularly immigrant-heavy or minority-heavy. But it has shown to be not interested in the status-quo.