Is Wyoming Purpling? Depends on Who You Talk To

By Guest Writer, 7-28-08

	Caption: Sen. John McCain, courtesy photo.

Laramie, Wyo. (WyoFile.com)—It requires 270 of the 538 votes in the Electoral College for a candidate to be declared the winner of an American presidential election. So, in the grand scheme of national politics, Wyoming’s three electoral votes are a small – and generally predictable – prize.

Indeed, even among those post-election maps that did a bit more subtle shading and analysis of Red State-versus Blue State voting patterns in 2000 and 2004, ours was a consistently red blob in the middle of western part of the U.S. Wyoming has voted for Democratic candidates only twice since World War II – in ‘48 and ‘64. Only eight of the 29 presidential elections held in Wyoming since statehood in 1890 have gone to Democrats.

Despite a relatively tight race at the national level, Wyoming voters overwhelmingly supported George W. Bush in the last presidential campaign, giving the incumbent Republican an astounding 69- to 29-percent margin over Massachusetts Senator John Kerry. Bush took 67.8 percent in 2000. Even when Bob Dole scored only 50 percent of the state’s vote in 1996, he did so running against two candidates – Bill Clinton (37 percent) and H. Ross Perot (12 percent) – again earning Wyoming’s three electoral votes.

Wyoming is among the reddest of the red states, whose outcome is either accepted as inevitable by Democrats or taken for granted by Republicans. Despite that vaunted prize of three electoral votes – an election-tipping 0.68 percent of the national total – ours is not a battleground state.

But wait, can 2008 be different? The energy surrounding the Democratic Party’s presidential caucuses this past February may have given some hope that the party could pull off an upset win this November. With a ten-fold increase in turnout and filled-to-the-rafters Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama rallies, it finally looked like the Wyoming Democrat would even be removed from the endangered species list in time for the November election. Back from the brink of extinction, maybe, but able to pull off a miracle win?

“Hey, anything is possible,” notes long-time Casper Republican activist Diemer True. “Politics is a game of the possible.

Would I predict an Obama win in Wyoming this year? No way, but you never know ... that’s why they hold elections.”

True argues that the national Democratic Party always faces an uphill battle in a state like Wyoming, considerably more so than Democrats running for state-wide office.

“The national Democrat policy matrix is simply counter to the best interests of Wyoming,” True recently told WyoFile. “With coal, oil, gas, trona, cattle and hay, we are a natural resource-based economy. Democrats tend to favor more restrictions and that’s why Wyoming tends to favor Republicans.”

Wyoming Democratic Party executive director Bill Luckett concedes that an Obama win in the state would “certainly be a long shot,” but points to recent poll results that show the margin much closer than in previous elections.

One of those surveys, the Research 2000 Wyoming Poll of 500 likely voters in May, gave Republican John McCain a 53- to 40-percent lead over Obama. Wyoming is still listed among the “solidly Republican” states when political bean-counters run their electoral vote projections, but Luckett remains hopeful.

“We’re not quite a swing state, but we are within striking distance,” he said.

Not so, says state GOP chairwoman Diana Vaughan: A Wyoming win for Obama “isn’t even in the realm of possibility.”

Even an influx of caucus-energized Democrats doesn’t have Vaughan too worried. With a two-to-one advantage in registration, the state’s Grand Old Party has plenty of wiggle room, and as far as Wyoming is concerned, the big issues fall Republicans’ way, she adds.

Like True, Vaughan notes that Wyoming’s resource-based economy will have an impact on the way the state votes in November. While national economic trends might be disheartening, Wyoming is one of those places where $140-a-barrel oil is greeted with at least mixed emotions.

“Things look really great for the state of Wyoming,” observed Vaughan.

Whether the pendulum swings back to the other side this November, the presidential contest may have an impact on the outcome of races within the state, too. John Kerry lost the state by a 40-point margin in 2004. Poll results suggest the margin will at least be closer this time around.

Laramie state senator Mike Massie says while the state may not be turning blue, “it is a little more purple than it used to be,” and that can only help Democrats within the state. Massie notes that in Gary Trauner’s race against Cynthia Lummis or Mark Gordon, for example, Obama’s biggest impact may be that “he doesn’t create a dynamic that will hurt (Trauner’s) candidacy.”

“Unlike many of the recent nominees, Barack Obama has a chance to make his case in the state,” said Massie, “but given the disparity between Democrats and Republicans, winning the state shouldn’t be his goal.”

Instead, Massie suggests that Obama’s candidacy – and, he hopes, eventual presidency – will begin a long-term improvement in the state’s perception of the party.

“He has a good opportunity to make his case in Wyoming that he will take a practical, bipartisan approach to solving the critical issues in our nation. And that would be a huge gain for the national party in the state of Wyoming,” Massie suggested. “He will show that the national Democratic party has something to offer the people of Wyoming.”

One thing the Obama campaign won’t be offering in Wyoming is an active campaign in the foreseeable future. While Obama is leading McCain in fundraising battle on the national level, not much of that money will be spent in the Cowboy state.

“We don’t have an Obama state director for Wyoming yet,” concedes Luckett. “The guy who did it during the caucuses is gone. The campaign hopes to have someone in Wyoming by the end of the month.”

According to the most recent Federal Election Commission reports, Obama currently enjoys a nearly three-to-one advantage in the amount of cash on hand ($72 million versus $27 million) and, in June, raised $52 million, more than twice that of the McCain campaign’s $21.5 million.

But with an overwhelming sense of the inevitable here, neither presidential campaign is spending in Wyoming.

When it comes to Wyoming, McCain has what could be called a “comfortable” buffer. He probably won’t have to spend much to win here, especially when he’s fighting off heavy spending efforts in places Republicans have not been forced to defend in the past.

Flush with cash and declaring he has a “50-state strategy,” the Obama campaign is nonetheless spending selectively when it comes to those states carried by the GOP with wide margins in 2004.

Like Wyoming, Idaho, Utah, Oklahoma and Nebraska were overwhelmingly carried by the Bush ticket, tallying at least 65 percent of the vote in each. The Obama campaign is currently not airing television commercials in any of them. But in nearby states, where the margin was almost as large, the campaign is mounting an aggressive effort, buying TV time in Montana (60.5 percent for Bush in ’04), North Dakota (63.9 percent) and Alaska (63.2 percent).

In Colorado, where the margin was much tighter in ‘04 (52.4 percent for Bush), there will be aggressive media buys as the November election approaches.

With limited expenditures on both sides, one might expect the presidential battles in Wyoming to be fought with lawn signs, bumper stickers and the letters pages of the Casper Star-Tribune. Television and radio in Wyoming may be relatively free of campaign commercials. Hey, there may be a benefit to being written off.

This story comes from WyoFile.com, a non-profit organization devoted to providing public service journalism, focused on politics and public policy, to Wyoming’s news media.