Original article:	www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2003/07/08/news/wyoming/ 4f8b9da9b9e870baecf20a54a5516986.txt
Date:	07/08/03
Title:	Free State Project vote set for August
Author:	Nadia White
Publication:	Casper Star Tribune

---

Free State Project vote set for August

by Nadia White • Star-Tribune staff writer • 07/08/03

Liberty-minded activists will choose which sparsely-populated state will be the focus of their collective political might in a vote beginning in August.

Members of the Free State Project will have until Sept. 8 to vote on which of 10 states they would like to move to in order to advocate for limited government. Wyoming and New Hampshire are top contenders in the effort.

The Free State Project is an effort to sign up 20,000 advocates of limited government to move to a single state in which they can incrementally reduce the reach of government. That effort passed the 4,000-member mark earlier in June, prompting organizers to set a vote date.

The deadline to sign up to participate in the vote is Aug. 15, by which time the FSP should have more than 5,000 members, according to the group's projections. The deadline for members to return their ballots is Sept. 8, and the selected state will be announced on Sept. 15, according to a press release from Jason Sorens, the Yale University doctoral student who founded and leads the effort.

Tom Parker, a Louisville, Colo., resident who serves as the group's liaison to Wyoming, said the movement is a reaction to the current government climate.

"In terms of liberty, we see things drifting away with the latest moves like the USA Patriot Act, and the various wars, now Liberia, we feel our government is not playing by the rules of the Constitution so we're hoping to change things," Parker said. "By concentrating our numbers in one state we're hoping to have more influence and move things more toward liberty."

Eligible voters will be able to choose from among Alaska, Delaware, Idaho, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming. Once the group reaches 20,000 commitments, members have five years in which to move to the chosen state. Some members have already indicated that they will move as soon as the state is chosen, Parker said.

Dennis Brossman, a Wyoming Libertarian, said the project is very appealing.

" I am tempted by the project even if Alaska or Vermont were to try it. I prefer Wyoming, the climate and terrain and being in the heart of the 48 states, but the freedom experiment is very alluring to me," Brossman said. " I'd be willing to move to Alaska."

Brossman said the idea of newcomers changing the way things are done in Wyoming is nothing new.

"I think it's done in other realms, but not so openly and honestly," he said. "For example, in Lander and Jackson in the last 10, 15 years, we've had a large number of environmentalists move in and they heavily affect the policy in these areas."

He said he thinks the plan has a shot: "I think it's something that would be workable and doable. I don't think it's a pipe dream."

The Free State Project posts additional information on its Web site, (http://www.freestateproject.org).

---

More media articles about the FSP

These media articles are maintained on a non-commercial basis by The Free State Project, a non-profit organization, for historical, educational, scholarship, and research purposes. (For information regarding "Fair Use", see US Code Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 107).

Original article:	www.sierratimes.com/03/05/27/ar_fsp_2.htm
Date:	05/27/03
Title:	The Grand Western Conference Report
Author:	Ben F. Irvin
Publication:	Sierra Times

---

The Grand Western Conference Report

By Ben F. Irvin • 05/27/03

The most significant libertarian event of the year has just concluded in Missoula, Montana (May 24 and 25). Almost two hundred freedom seekers from around the nation and Alberta attended.

Fantastic presentations were given by the main presenters: J.J. Johnson, Nancy Johnson, Senator Jerry O'Neil, Jason Sorens, Vin Suprynowicz, and Claire Wolfe. All the presenters, save Jason (being neutral) agreed that liberty has the best chance surviving and expanding in the West. A couple of the main speakers indicated that freedom as sought by the FSP can only be procured in the West. A consistent point emphasized by the speakers was the idea that liberty needs elbow room to expand, and that the tiny Seaboarder states lack both the space and motivation for freedom to flourish. Jason seemed impressed by the attendance and enthusiasm of the gathered.

The Missoulian (Montana's second largest newspaper) and the Missoula Independent covered the event. The Montana Television Network and KPVI television from Pocatello, Idaho videoed parts of the event (video tapes were made of all activities by the MTLP).

State panel discussions were given by Idaho, Montana, South Dakota and Wyoming. In the final session on Sunday, the four Western state panels answered questions by participants. To demonstrate Instant Runoff Voting (another type of ranked choice voting called "Condorset's Method" will be used to select the free state), all porcupines (that's what FSP folks call themselves) were asked to gather around the table of the state they desire to be the free state. In the first round, South Dakota was eliminated and its supporters were asked to select their second choice. In the second round, Wyoming ended up with the short stick. A third round was not done as even if all of Wyoming's supporters moved to the Idaho table, Montana still had a majority. Indeed, Montana almost had a majority in the first round. It was observed that all of the presenters, save one (who was in the lobby in deep discussion) voted for Montana.

It was difficult to get many of the GWC participants motel/hotel rooms; however, most finally got accommodations. Nearly a dozen porcupines camped out. Most camped on Gary Marbut's ranch just a few miles north of Missoula. Gary was nice enough to provide free lodging for Jason. Both Gary and I supplied transportation for Jason.

A surprise at the GWC (Montana's winning was expected) was the six or seven Albertans that drove down to attend. Jim Turnbull explained in informal gatherings the Alberta plan for independence and liberty. It seemed to most that the Albertan political philosophy was compatible with that of most porcupines. Towards the end of the GWC three young Albertans told the Montana table that they intended to move to Montana regardless of which state becomes the free state and whether or not Alberta gains independence.

It took the work and effort of many people to make the GWC the libertarian event of the year. Special appreciation should be given to Mike Fellows (MTLP Chair), Gary Marbut, Andy Lochridge, and Mykl Meagher. Numerous others, too many to list, contributed heavily to the success of the Grand Western Conference.

I should also mention that my youngest son and I did manage to get Jason away from Missoula just long enough to see the National Bison Range and a panoramic view of the Mission Mountains and Flathead Valley.

---

More media articles about the FSP

These media articles are maintained on a non-commercial basis by The Free State Project, a non-profit organization, for historical, educational, scholarship, and research purposes. (For information regarding "Fair Use", see US Code Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 107).

Local Groups

• To find your Local Group, click on your location in the map below!
• Want to learn how help your Local Group become better?

• Building a Local Group
• Database Usage Guidelines
• Packing Meetings
• Speaking Guidelines

• See some success stories in Real Activism.
• Find out about events at our Calendar of Events
• Discuss other outreach activities in our Local Group forums.
• Read the Local Groups Coordinator's Blog, make comments and give feedback.
• Of course you can always just E-mail the Local Groups Coordinator.

Region	Porcupine Group	Contact	Email List	FSP Forum	Meeting(s) <!-- ****************************************************************** -->
Northeast	New England (ME VT) (For NH, click here)	Rich Tomasso	Yahoo	Forum
	Mass & RI	Jon Maltz	Yahoo	Forum
	Connecticut	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum	<!-- Fri 1/21 7pm at Molten Java Coffee Roasters in Bethel, CT. Details. -->
	Tristate (NYC NJ PA CT-suburbs)	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	Central NY	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	Western NY (Buffalo-Niagara-Rochester)	Jason Sorens	Yahoo	Forum
	Western PA	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum	<!-- ****************************************************************** -->
Mid- Atlantic	Mid-Atlantic (DC DE MD se.PA s.NJ n.VA)	Phil Denisch	Yahoo	Forum	Usually the third Saturday of every month. See the FSP Forum for details.
	Appalachians (WV w.MD w.VA)	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum	Appalachians FSPers are more than welcome at the Mid-Atlantic meetings (above).
	Coastal VA & NC (se.VA ne.NC)	Bryan Stevenson	Yahoo	Forum	<!-- ****************************************************************** -->
South	Florida-all Florida-Suncoast	Tim Condon (Vacant*)	Yahoo Yahoo	Forum Forum	Regularly scheduled dinners in Tampa Bay.
	Georgia	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	Alabama (AL w.FL)	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	Arkansas	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	Tennessee	Keith Carlsen	Yahoo	Forum
	Bayou (LA MS)	(Vacant*)	Yahoo
	Carolinas (SC NC e.TN)	Chris Rasch	Yahoo	Forum	Third Saturday of every month at Chris' apartment in Raleigh, 2-4 pm. <!-- ****************************************************************** -->
Midwest	Minnesota	Steve Bottari	Yahoo	Forum	For more info see Meetup.com
	Wisconsin	Richard Whitnable	Yahoo	Forum
	Chicago- Milwaukee (s.WI n.IL ne.IN)	Tim Bauman & Vito Vitkauskas	Yahoo	Forum
	Midwest (MI n.OH ne.IN)	Jeremy Couch	Yahoo	Forum
	St. Louis (e.MO w.IL)	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	Bluegrass (KY s.OH s.IN se.IL)	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum	<!-- ****************************************************************** -->
Plains	Breadbasket (SD ND NE)	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	Kansas (KS w.MO)	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	Iowa	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum	<!-- ****************************************************************** -->
Mountain	Big Sky (MT ID WY)	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	Utah	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	Colorado	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum	<!-- ****************************************************************** -->
Southwest	Arizona	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	New Mexico	Amanda Odom Powell	Yahoo	Forum
	Oklahoma	Holland O. Van den Nieuwenhof	Yahoo	Forum
	North Texas U of TX - Dallas	James Strater (Vacant*)	Yahoo Yahoo	Forum
	South Texas	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum	<!-- ****************************************************************** -->
Pacific	Pacific NW (OR WA)	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	N. California	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum	Bay area local group meetings
	San Diego County	Andrew Del Vecchio	Yahoo	Forum	Irregular meetings, but periodic events with other libertarian orgs.
	Nevada	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	Hawaii	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
	Alaska	(Vacant*)	Yahoo	Forum
Region	Porcupine Group	Contact	Email List	FSP Forum	Meeting(s)

* = No one has stepped forward to lead this group, but the email list has been created and is ready for use. If you would like to volunteer to be the local group leader, please contact the Local Group Coordinator. <!-- ********************************************** Map --><!-- LGstat: G=good, B=bad(no local coordinator) --> function chosen(LGstat,LGname){ window.status="Local Group Region "+LGname if (LGstat=="B") { var newwin = window.open("","Volunteer","height=270,width=400") var mailtoaction = "mailto:localgroups@FreeStateProject.org?subject=FSP-LG Coord: "+LGname var mailbody = "I would like more information about becoming a Local Group Coordinator for the "+LGname+" region.'" var wintxt = "Free State Project: Local Groups" wintxt += "

Go Where They Want Your Business

by Taylor George

One guaranteed quality of South Dakota is her commitment to a business-friendly atmosphere. This commitment is not something South Dakota is shy about. Just consider one of several media campaigns that are broadcast daily into the larger radio airwaves of Minneapolis by the Sioux Falls Development Foundation. Go here to read what they are saying: www.siouxfallsdevelopment.com. Pay particular attention to the vast amount of research which compares taxes and expenditures by state, and concludes that Sioux Falls, SD is one of the best places to do business.

The Sioux Falls Development Foundation conducts daily assaults on the high taxes of the state of MN. These campaigns boast of the fact that South Dakota has no state corporate income tax, no personal property tax, and no state personal income tax. They also provide convincing evidence that doing business in South Dakota can save your business at least $1 million off the bottom line (100-person company). The advertisements also boast of special business-friendly tax breaks that the city of Sioux Falls has enacted for companies relocating to the area, such as significantly reduced commercial property tax for up to 5 years.

The Small Business Survival Committee, a D.C. based small business advocacy group agrees:

Rank	State	SBSI Score
1	Nevada	27.060
2	South Dakota	28.250
3	Washington	32.010
4	Wyoming	32.150
5	Florida	33.180
6	Texas	34.250
7	New Hampshire	36.250
8	Alabama	36.830
9	Mississippi	38.160
10	Tennessee	39.540

With an outstanding 2nd place ranking, South Dakota is one of the friendliest business atmospheres in the nation. The ranking is based on taxes, electricity costs, workers' compensation costs, total crime rate, right to work, number of bureaucrats, and state minimum wage. You can read more about these rankings at: www.bcentral.com/articles/harper/115.asp

Economy

During the recession of the past couple years, South Dakota banks assets as well as savings and loan assets have increased significantly. For example, in Sioux Falls alone, bank assets rose from $29 billion in 2000 to $43 billion in 2001. In 2001, the city of Sioux Falls had $322 million of new construction; nearly $130 million of that was non-residential.

Landscape

South Dakota offers the FSP more than a bustling urban community. South Dakota contains the Black Hills, along with Mount Rushmore. For pictures go here: www.theblackhills.com.

These are the fabled Black Hills of South Dakota, an oasis of pine-clad mountains on the Great Plains. The Black Hills offer everything you expect from a mountain vacation: five national parks, scenic drives, waterfalls, abundant wildlife, acclaimed recreation trails and trout fishing. A place where bison and wild horses still roam free. – South Dakota Vacation Guide

If you're wondering whether the Black Hills are as grandiose as some of the mountains in Colorado or Wyoming, don't. They're not as big, but they offer the state a decent amount of tourism, and an interesting landscape compared to the rest of the state, which is mostly flat.

Politics

Bob Newland, the Libertarian candidate for Attorney General in the 2002 election, received 12,131 votes. This is interesting for the FSP because it introduces a few questions. Why did Bob Newland receive 12,131 votes, while all other statewide Libertarian candidates received less than a tenth of that amount? Are these 12,131 voters libertarians, or did they just dislike the other two candidates?

One reason is that Newland was at the center of two major referendums on the ballot last fall. One measure would have legalized the growth and cultivation of hemp with less than one percent THC. The other was a measure called "Constitutional Amendment A." The latter received fair amounts of national exposure and would have made it possible for the accused to argue the validity and applicability of laws in South Dakota courts. Unfortunately these measures failed, but Newland did his best to promote them and in doing so may have garnered higher name recognition among libertarian voters.

To read more about efforts in South Dakota for Amendment A go here: www.commonsensejustice.us. Of particular interest are the county-by-county voting results and the analysis about why the measure failed.

To read more about efforts in South Dakota for legalized hemp go here: www.sodakhemp.org

One problem the FSP may encounter is the possibility of voter fraud within the Democratic Party of South Dakota. South Dakota does not require a photo ID to register to vote, and absentee ballots can be obtained without personal appearance. National Review Online also reports that the South Dakota Democratic Party was paying $3-per-head bounties for voter-registration cards. It goes without saying that some voters were receiving more than $3. It certainly is strange that South Dakota has 48% Republican voter registration and has two Democrats for senators.

These political games are particularly bad for the FSP because we know that the media will not afford our project dirty politics, as they will the Democrats. The FSP will have to play a cleaner game given the fact that most media outlets will be unsympathetic toward our cause. We already have conservative talk radio hosts like Michael Medved telling lies about the FSP. Just think what liberals are going to write who are much less sympathetic about reducing the overall size of government.

The FSP must also take into account the large Indian Reservations in South Dakota. The FSP should not take lightly the fact that Indian Reservations depend heavily upon the federal government. This dependence could bring resistance to many of the rights we would propose for all of South Dakota's citizens, including legalized gambling.

On the other hand, the Indians could turn out to help the FSP. County voting results on "Amendment A" show that the Indians supported the measure (see county voting result from above links). The Indians also showed major support for the effort to legalize hemp. In addition to these factors there is speculation that the Indian population in South Dakota is tired of being treated like children by the federal government. This may all mean that in reality the Indians may support our cause more than we would have realized. If those in the FSP can embrace the Indian culture and prove to them that we care about their liberties as well as our own, we could cultivate a lasting friendship.

Another factor for South Dakota is that politics is becoming slightly expensive for a lower population state. According to the Associated Press, $5 million was spent in the primary races for the 2002 federal elections, and most of it by unsuccessful candidates (Joe Kafka, AP, 10/31/2002). AP also reports that campaign spending for governor in South Dakota was in excess of $7 million, breaking the old record of $2.8 million set in 1994. This new trend is probably due to the tightly held senate race between Thune and Johnson which brought a lot of outside money.

South Dakota is a predominantly Republican state, as evidenced by the state legislature. The South Dakota House of Representatives holds 49 Republicans and 21 Democrats, but the Reservations remain the wildcard of South Dakota politics, one just can't be sure how they would respond to reducing the size of state government. For the purposes of the FSP the Reservations would have little to do with early success; later on, however, when the FSP decides to run a candidate for governor, Indian support could become more important. South Dakota is a state that is eager for new business, and it is a state with some disdain for big government, but probably not the level of disdain held in Idaho or Montana.

The greatest asset South Dakota offers the FSP is balance. South Dakota is small enough for our efforts to succeed, yet big enough for us to have a job, or start a small business.

South Dakota Advantages

by Crystal Bogue

As a general rule, most people dedicated to the FSP think that states such as New Hampshire or Wyoming will win this race. Granted those two seem like the place to be for one reason or another and both rank considerably high on the scale of being more "libertarian" than the other eight. Depending on the poll and the reason for it, South Dakota always seems to fall in the middle. Never number one but never number ten either. Let's consider what South Dakota has to offer in relation to the other states and what makes it the best candidate for success in this "free state race."

South Dakota has taken it upon itself to prove that states don't need income tax from the people. It is interesting because there are VERY few states that believe this. This is not to say that SD doesn't have taxes. All the states of taxes in some form or another. When considering the sales tax of the states, SD only has a 4% tax on all items. This percentage is relatively low when considering other states.

Cost of living is another factor. South Dakota is among the bottom percentage of cost of living which contributes to the ability of the people to stay in business. This lower cost of living coupled with a growing economy only spells success for the state in more ways than one. Sioux Falls is home to many large corporation businesses because there is no corporate tax in this state. It is interesting to note that more and more companies are moving here from other states to take advantage of this tax break. With an increase in big business, little businesses can only benefit. Construction of new homes and new factories is driving the premium cost of land in Sioux Falls up very quickly. Even though Sioux Falls is a city of about 100,000, it has been noted that it is one of the top three cities of that size that are showing a high rate of growth while keeping unemployment at an all time low of only 2.9%. Rural living is a majority in South Dakota but Sioux Falls, Rapid City, and Aberdeen are all relatively large towns that offer the many things that individuals enjoy about big cities.

The right to keep and bear arms is a big issue for a considerable amount of people involved in this project. Even though Alaska ranks as number one for their gun laws, South Dakota hasn't ever had a law that made carrying a pistol a financial burden. It is VERY economical and convenient to apply and receive a concealed carry permit in South Dakota. If it were any more economical, it would be a mimic of Alaska and be no cost at all. It is important to note that South Dakota believes that the owner of a firearm is responsible for that firearm and NOT the manufacturers or sellers of such items.

This porridge is not too hot nor too cold, but just right. Because of this middle of the road outlook and position, South Dakota is best placed at the top of the FSP list simply because once South Dakota is picked and changes for the betterment of the living conditions and political outlook is made, North Dakota won't be far behind in making the same changes. This factor is very important in the choice of which state should be THE Free State. Within months, North Dakota would join the trend of South Dakota's success as it has done so many times before. Not too cold, not too hot, but just right.

Analysis of Presidential Elections
in the 10 Candidate States

by Keith Carlsen

In Tennyson's report Analyzing the Freedom Orientation of Existing State Populations, he analysed the results of the 2000 presidential election and what it means to the FSP and its members. The gist of that report is in this table:

Voter Predisposition to Vote for Small-government Candidates
(2000 Presidential Election)

Rank	State	Percentage
1	Wyoming	151%
2	Idaho	141%
3	North Dakota	73%
4	Alaska	70%
5	South Dakota	66%
6	Montana	53%
7	New Hampshire	-3%
8	Delaware	-35%
9	Maine	-21%
10	Vermont	-37%

Source: Analyzing the Freedom Orientation of Existing State Populations

By looking at the 2000 election, we see that Wyoming and Idaho come out far above all of the other candidate states. However, one election is just that – one election, and cannot be considered the whole picture.

Nine most recent presidential elections

Here is the data from the nine most recent presidential elections: 2000 – 1968. This data presents a more complete picture of all recent Presidential elections.

	2000		1996		1992		1988	1984	1980	1976		1972	1968
State	Candidate	%	Candidate	%	Candidate	%	Cand.	Cand.	Cand.	Candidate	%	Cand.	Candidate	%
AK	Bush (R)	58.6	Dole (R)	50.8	Bush (R)	39.5	Bush (R)	Reagan (R)	Reagan (R)	Ford (R)		Nixon (R)	Nixon (R)
DE	Gore (D)	55.0	Clinton (D)	51.8	Clinton (D)	43.5				Carter (D)	52.0
ID	Bush (R)	61.2	Dole (R)	52.2	Bush (R)	42.0				Ford (R)
ND	Bush (R)	60.7	Dole (R)	46.9	Bush (R)	44.2
NH	Bush (R)	48.1	Clinton (D)	49.3	Clinton (D)	38.9
ME	Gore (D)	49.1	Clinton (D)	51.6	Clinton (D)	38.81							Humphrey (D)	55.3
MT	Bush (R)	58.4	Dole (R)	44.1	Clinton (D)	37.6							Nixon (R)
SD	Bush (R)	60.3	Dole (R)	46.5	Bush (R)	40.7
VT	Gore (D)	50.6	Clinton (D)	53.3	Clinton (D)	46.1
WY	Bush (R)	67.8	Dole (R)	49.8	Bush (R)	39.5

1 Ross Perot beat George Bush in Maine with 30.44% to 30.39% of the popular vote.
Sources: www.multied.com/elections and www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/frametextj.html

(Note: I stopped doing research at the 1968 election because in the 1964, 1960, and 1956 elections, most of the candidate states voted for the same candidate and because the farther back you go, the less representative the data is to the reality of today. Even in the 1970s and 1980s most of the candidate states voted for the same candidate. Before 1956, well, most current Americans were not even alive or at the very least, not even voting back then.)

Republican Totals

The Republican presidential candidates from 1968 to 2000 generally sold themselves as, or were perceived as, or pretended to be, more pro-small government than the Democratic Party presidential candidates. Generally this is the case and is clearly evident by the specific campaign literature and ads of the above presidential candidates.

So we can rank the states by the number of Republican presidential candidates that won their state elections:

Amount for Republicans from 1968 to 2000

Rank	State	GOPs Won
1	Alaska	9
	Wyoming	9
	North Dakota	9
	South Dakota	9
	Idaho	9
6	Montana	8
7	New Hampshire	7
8	Vermont	6
9	Delaware	5
	Maine	5

Reagan and Goldwater

What about races where a candidate from a major party ran on downsizing the federal government?

This has occured twice in somewhat recent times. In 1980 Ronald Reagan (R) ran for president and in 1964 Barry Goldwater (R) ran for president. Both times, their major issue was Downsizing DC. Reagan communicated the message better and won the 1980 election while Goldwater lost his election.

According to Harry Browne and many others, the media even tried to portray Reagan as more libertarian than he was. Ronald Reagan did not act as a libertarian once in office, but that is how he ran for his first election.

(Note: Votes for the LP candidate, Ed Clark, are included with Reagan's, because Reagan used many of Clark's ideas and this is the best election ever for an LP candidate.)

1980 Election - Vote for Ronald Reagan

Rank	State	Percentage
1	Idaho	68.4%
2	Alaska	66.0%2
3	North Dakota	65.5%
4	Wyoming	65.2%
5	South Dakota	61.7%
6	Montana	59.5%
7	New Hampshire	58.2%
Entire U.S.		51.8%
8	Delaware	48.0%
9	Maine	46.6%
10	Vermont	45.3%

2 Ed Clark got 11.7% of the 66.0% total.
(He got < 3% in all the other FSP candidate states)
Source: www.presidentelect.org/e1980.html

Barry Goldwater only had the opportunity to run for office because the paleo-conservative and the libertarian Republicans were able to take over the Republican Party primary and hand the nomination to Barry Goldwater. The national GOP did not even support his bid for president after he was nominated. All records show that Barry Goldwater was set on dramatically reducing the size of government and those in change of the GOP wanted nothing to do with him or such ideas.

1964 Election - Vote for Barry Goldwater

Rank	State	Percentage
1	Idaho	49.1%
2	South Dakota	44.4%
3	Wyoming	43.4%
4	North Dakota	41.9%
5	Montana	40.6%
6	Delaware	38.8%
Entire U.S.		38.5%
7	New Hampshire	36.1%
8	Alaska	34.1%
9	Vermont	33.7%
10	Maine	31.2%

Source: www.multied.com/elections/1964state.html

Average of Reagan and Goldwater elections

Rank	State	Percentage
1	Idaho	58.7%
2	Wyoming	54.3%
3	North Dakota	53.6%
4	South Dakota	53.1%
5	Alaska	50.1%
5	Montana	50.1%
7	New Hampshire	47.2%
Entire U.S.		45.1%
8	Delaware	43.4%
9	Vermont	39.5%
10	Maine	38.9%

Conclusions

I computed this table by averaging the "Amount of Republicans from 1968 to 2000" and "Average of Reagan and Goldwater elections" rankings:

Total Average Ranking According to this Report

1	Idaho
2	Wyoming
3	North Dakota
4	South Dakota
5	Alaska
6	Montana
7	New Hampshire
8	Delaware
	Vermont
10	Maine

Now that we have the whole picture, let's compare it to just the 2000 presidential election:

State Rankings

Rank	Tennyson 2000 Report	This Report
1	Wyoming	Idaho
2	Idaho	Wyoming
3	North Dakota
4	Alaska	South Dakota
5	South Dakota	Alaska
6	Montana
7	New Hampshire
8

Delaware 9 Maine Vermont 10 Vermont Maine

Amazingly, they are very similar, almost eerily similar. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe, just maybe, the 2000 presidential election really does provide us with a very good look at the ideology of the candidate states. None of the candidate states move more than ONE position in the state ranking.

Whatever the conclusion, one thing is for sure: Time and time again, both Idaho and Wyoming stand out in the above rankings.