Missouri Political Status: Good or Bad?

Missouri has been a bellwether state for over a hundred years, . That label has drawn attention to the state from across the nation.  This year it’s different.

In past elections, Missouri’s status has brought millions of dollars into the state, buying TV, Radio and Ads across the state. This election year the funding is going to other states like Ohio, Virginia and those called, “Purple” states.

In past election cycles, Missouri was a purple state too.  But the excesses of liberal policies at the state and federal level have had consequences. Missouri is now a solid Red state. We have not a hint of Blueness left. A column in USA Today expands on that shift.

Missouri slips from political bellwether status this fall

By Deirdre Shesgreen, Gannett Washington Bureau

Missouri has been a bellwether state for more than 100 years, with presidential candidates lavishing attention on Show-Me State voters and spending millions on field operations, glossy campaign mailers, and TV ads. But this election? Not so much.

This year, Missouri isn’t on the list of top swing states — those vote-rich battlegrounds that political experts and campaign strategists say will determine who wins the White House on Nov. 6. Most political handicappers instead have Missouri in the “leans Republican” column.

So even though Barack Obama lost Missouri by fewer than 4,000 votes in 2008, the president’s re-election campaign isn’t expected to make a major investment in Missouri this time around. And Mitt Romney probably won’t be tromping through the state for a bevy of big rallies or small meet-and-greets, either.

“We used to look to Missouri,” said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics. “We don’t anymore.”

There’s no question that other states, such as Virginia, Nevada, and Colorado, have bumped Missouri aside as an electoral battleground, because of demographic changes and political shifts within their borders. Virginia, for example, has seen a spike in affluent and politically moderate residents, particularly in the suburbs at its northern tip, outside Washington. And Colorado and Nevada have seen increases in their Hispanic populations, giving those Western states a purple hue.

An assumption in this column is that the influx of Hispanics will shift the demographics to the democrats.  In other words, the assumption is that voting Hispanics will be supporting more government handouts. More gimmes. The fact those handouts are paid by others is lost to them. That assumption says Nevada and Colorado are more likely to shift to the democrat camp.

I think that is a poor assumption.

More and more, Hispanic leaders are repudiating the left’s liberal policies and agenda.  They, like any other taxpayer, realize the hazards of the left’s unlimited and unsupported spending. It is foolish to think all Hispanics, like all Blacks, will vote, in lockstep, for democrats.  Some will. But all?  I don’t think so.

“Missouri is not on the presidential TV radar screen right now,” said Elizabeth Wilner, who conducted the analysis and is vice president at CMAG.

Wilner said to the extent some Missourians in the northern part of the state are seeing presidential ads, it’s “spillover” meant to influence voters in Iowa. That stands in sharp contrast to previous presidential contests, when Missouri airwaves were swamped with presidential TV spots early in the election season.

Wilner said the “issues menu” in this election, such as ballooning deficits and opposition to Obama’s health care law, make Missouri a tough state for Democrats.

Others echoed that assessment, saying Missouri hasn’t undergone any major demographic changes, but has seen a few subtle political shifts. — USA Today.

Subtle changes.  Yes, like a solid ‘Pub majority in both state houses. Roy Blount’s 13 point victory in his 2010 election for the US Senate.

The democrats poo-poo that shift. They refuse to acknowledge that Claire McCaskill’s three ‘Pub opponents all poll higher than she. If I remember correctly, Sarah Steelman polled 12 points higher than McCaskill a few weeks ago.

No, it should not be a surprise than Missouri is no longer a bellwether state.  The state must have the possibility of falling into either camp, to be borderline for either party. No more for Missouri. We’re solidly Red, now.

Missouri’s goal, now, is to shed the last tentacles of the left from our state and local governments. Come the Fall, I believe we will make solid progress towards that goal…if we don’t achieve it completely.

2 thoughts on “Missouri Political Status: Good or Bad?

Comments are closed.