Sen. McCain’s supporters have began making the claim that the bevy of general election polls currently being released demonstrate that McCain fares better against Hillary than any of his competitors for the GOP nod. Is there any truth to this claim? Using the excellent polling archive over at Dave Wissing’s site, I’ve examined every general election poll for the past three months pitting Hillary against one or more of the GOP candidates. When allocating states to either Hillary or the Republicans, I’ve utilized the following rules:
1) Where multiple polls of the same state exist, I’ve awarded the state to the victor in the most recent poll.
2) Where the most recent poll shows a tie, the state remains in its 2004 column.
3) Any state that has not been polled during this period remains in its 2004 column, which seems reasonable given that, excepting New Hampshire, Colorado, and Nevada, only deep blue and dark red states have seen a dearth of general election polling since August of this year.
The result: while Hillary wins general election matchups against all the Republicans, only McCain comes out of the gate basically even with Hillary in the electoral vote count. That’s because McCain is the only candidate who basically keeps the red/blue template from 2004 intact. According to my formula, if the election were held today, McCain would win all of the red states from 2004 minus three: Kentucky, Missouri, and Arkansas. Hillary, meanwhile, would win all of the 2004 blue states except for Oregon. That gives Hillary 270 electoral votes to McCain’s 268. That means that all McCain has to do is win Kentucky, which is unlikely to ultimately vote for Hillary, or snag Wisconsin (McCain – 2), or Minnesota (McCain – 3), or Pennsylvania (McCain – 2), or McCain-friendly New Hampshire. If any single one of those states flip, McCain is President of the United States.
As a Rudy guy, I strongly believe that, at the end of the day, the Mayor has a strong chance of being victorious over Mrs. Clinton. I’m sure Romney, Huckabee, and Thompson supporters feel the same about their candidates. But the simple fact of the matter is that McCain has the numbers on his side. In Rudy’s case, the Mayor is certainly winning his share of new voters for the GOP, and the national head-to-heads between Rudy and Rodham show a race too close to call for that reason. But in the Electoral College, Hillary is creaming the Mayor. The reason appears to be that Rudy is upping GOP numbers primarily in the dark blue Northeast, where his gains don’t actually flip any states. Both Rudy and McCain are holding the Deep South, including Florida, as well as the Plains States. And both are losing border states like Missouri, states that voted for Bill Clinton in the 1990s and that may have only gone Republican in recent years due to a cultural connection with a southern, evangelical president. But McCain makes up for those losses on two fronts. First, McCain increases GOP numbers in the West. This allows the GOP to hold light red states like New Mexico and pick up light blue states like Oregon. Secondly, McCain ups GOP numbers in the Great Lakes region, allowing Republicans to hold Ohio and Iowa and put Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania in play. Rudy, on the other hand, lacks McCain’s regional and temperamental appeal to the West and Midwest. This means that in addition to the border states, Rudy loses Midwestern states like Ohio and Iowa and Western states like New Mexico and Oregon. Rudy’s gains are entirely in the Northeast. He’s down three in Connecticut, two in Pennsylvania, is tied with Hillary in New Hampshire, and is tied in New Jersey. But again, without actually winning any of these states, Rudy is unable to make up for his red state losses elsewhere and loses fairly significantly to Hillary. All of this brings with it shades of 1968, when Hubert Humphrey lost the popular vote to Nixon by less than a single percentage point but lost the Electoral College by a mile.
For Rudy to beat Hillary, he’s going to have to either close the deal with Northeastern voters by doubling down on his own regional brand of Republicanism, or make up ground in the West, Midwest, and border states, or all of those things. For McCain to win, he only has to maintain his current status and convince the good folks of the Granite State to finish the job they started in early 2000. Moreover, if McCain selects Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty as his running mate, such a move would probably close the deal with the Upper Midwest, locking in Minnesota and perhaps Wisconsin for the victory.
All of this begs the question: just how does one explain McCain’s newfound general election strength against Hillary? The answer may lie in the internals of the most recent SurveyUSA poll out of Kansas. In this poll, McCain beats Hillary by 17 percentage points. Rudy, his closest competitor, beats her by only six points. Huckabee and Romney lose the state to Hillary. All of the candidates win similar proportions of Republicans and conservatives, but only McCain wins the Right while simultaneously taking 50% of Independents and 50% of moderates. Rudy takes only 42% of each group, while Romney and Huckabee take only a third. In other words, McCain is the American Sarkozy.
Like Sarko, who was of Chirac’s party but not of Chirac, America’s swing voters have intuited over the years that there is little love lost between McCain and George Bush. Conservatives like McCain not because of any connection with the president, but because his positions on the issues of the day match up with the Right’s priorities fairly well. This was less true seven years ago than it is now. McCain is solid on spending and life issues, has gutted his past support for amnesty prior to enforcement and for Clinton-level tax rates, and is 100 percent behind victory in Iraq and in the broader war against expansionist Islamism. On paper, this shouldn’t be a candidate moderates and Independents are rallying around. But they are, and McCain can probably thank his perennial feud with Bush for his popularity among swing voters. Put simply, centrist voters who hate both Bush and Hillary intuit that McCain feels the same way. As such, anti-Bush, anti-Hillary voters in the middle have a temperamental soulmate in McCain, but one who is also a political soulmate to conservatives. Republicans like the fact that McCain will fight to win in Iraq. Independents like the fact that McCain will fight Iraq in a smarter way than did Bush. Conservatives like McCain’s focus on the separation of powers and federalism when he refuses to issue signing statements or support new constitutional amendments, all things that Bush did. Moderates like the fact that the president isn’t railing about gay marriage or qualifying Congress’ acts with his own interpretation. As such, conservatives and moderates both get the president they want in John McCain, the only candidate left who can win by expanding Red America instead of scrapping it in favor of something new. Which once again brings us back to New Hampshire, and whether Granite State voters are plotting something that they don’t yet plan to tell the pollsters. January 8th will be an interesting day indeed.
November 26th, 2007 at 11:25 pm
I think after 8 months of campaigning against Hillary he would slip up pretty bad… the guys just can’t seem to hold it together for a long time period…
I also think he lacks the energy and excitement we need to beat her.
Would I work as hard as I can for McCain, of course, but I just don’t think he’s the best choice.
November 26th, 2007 at 11:52 pm
Iowa, Sen.McCain works harder than any other candidate in this race. Our country needs Sen.McCain right now b/c we are tired of being a divided country. Sen.McCain can unite our country and he is our best hope. I pray that he will get the nomination and i think he will
November 26th, 2007 at 11:57 pm
Huckabee / McCain would make a strong ticket
November 27th, 2007 at 12:04 am
WiseGuy,
Yes you are right, McCain/Huckabee would be a nice ticket versus Obama/Clinton.
November 27th, 2007 at 12:34 am
Hello, all-
First, I’d like to give props to DaveG for his impeccable research, which is a hallmark of his posts. Also, I think that it’s great that he’d pour so much effort into pursuing a conclusion which does not favor his chosen candidate, which is admirable. So let’s dive in:
I agree w/ Dave’s conclusion (and not solely b/c I have the McCain-focused site) that McCain is the best positioned of any of the Republicans to win an Electoral College victory, and that Giuliani’s popularity tends to leave the map largely in place. (That is, his improvements are nice to have, and might force HRC to spend some time or money in Northeastern states that otherwise she could safely ignore). But that McCain, in contrast, might win some states that Giuliani wouldn’t.
Per Pawlenty-
I had mentioned in a previous comment that the persistent rumor is that he would be McCain’s VP, due to the traditional ticket balancing principles involved. One key factor Dave cites is the fact that he’s from the Upper Midwest, and might be able to bring Minnesota and/or Wisconsin on board. It would be great if he could, although we have to keep in mind that no Republican has carried either of those states at the presidential level since 1984. Of course, both of the 21st century elections in those states were close and competitive. They will likely be close and competitive again, as genuine purple states.
Thoughts are welcome.
November 27th, 2007 at 12:41 am
To DaveG you listen. A Jedi Knight he will make you.
November 27th, 2007 at 2:22 am
word. i can dig that logic. it kills me that mccain didnt get the nod over bush in 2000. of course i think mccain – feingold is lame. these are nice numbers, but rudy is winning the PR battle on “electability” with his dumb logic. who really cares if he can make it close in states that he cant win?
November 27th, 2007 at 8:50 am
Once nominated, Rudy will run stronger than the polls show because religious conservatives will come around.
November 27th, 2007 at 10:20 am
I and my family will never support Rudy.
November 27th, 2007 at 10:22 am
and guess what? it is logic like that, (Screw the christian social conservertives) that makes me hate rudy even more.
What national security experience does he actually have? None. What foreign policy experience does he have? None. What humanitarian experience does he have? None. This guy is a fiscal genius at best. That is all.
November 27th, 2007 at 10:26 am
Where is Rudy’s electablity? I mean the guy couldn’t even win the senate race in New York.
Why does everyone think that he is more electable than Hillary when he couldn’t even beat her for the Senate? In a socially liberal state mind you.
Every independent and liberal that I talk to say that Rudy is just another Bush.
November 27th, 2007 at 10:31 am
If Rudy would have run against Hillary then, and beaten her, we could have knocked her out and wouldn’t have to worry about another Clinton in the Whitehouse ever again.
November 27th, 2007 at 11:04 am
[...] the whole article here or below. I bolded the most important paragraph… Sen. McCain’s supporters have began [...]
November 27th, 2007 at 2:17 pm
ts stop picking at straws. rudy dropped out because of his treatment for cancer. he would have beaten HRC in NY.
November 27th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
Go McCain
November 27th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
independent, I’ll second that.
Go McCain!
DaveG, thanks for your objectivity. It is a rare quality in the blogosphere and should be much admired.
November 28th, 2007 at 10:40 am
Good information that I’ve not seen before. Of course the electoral college is what must be factored in, notjust the telephone polls, of which I’ve gotten quite a few. McCain’s patriotism, loyalty and common decency would be refreshing
November 28th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
I realize this post is a real politik post: CAN it be done? CAN McCain win? The answer appears to be yes, but it’s very, very close. The question, of course, remains why it SHOULD be done–and it should. If McCain is simply not electable, then ’should’ in this equation almost doesn’t matter. After all, many good people aren’t running. I’d like to lay out why I think we should support McCain.
1. The biggest issue we face as a nation is on the foreign policy level. There are some pretty bad guys out there that would love to see us fall–not just nationless terrorists, but leaders of countries: Russia, Iran, China. Name a few more. They’re serious and, by and large formidable. They can do damage; and they think they’re really smart. I can’t imagine a better Commander-in-Chief than John McCain. He’s a warrior. He’s straight, and he’s tough. I would love to have him facing down our enemies because I know he can do it. I have doubts about the other candidates. I’m afraid they are impetuous. That’s why I want McCain.
2. There is the issue of character. McCain has it in abundance. Has he made mistakes? Sure, and he says so. But he’s not dissing Muslims for no good reason. He’s not hiding his expense accounts in ‘lofts,’ and he appears to have no liabilities on the issue of character. Yeah, he has a temper. But he’s on our side.
I think it’s wrong to say he’s ‘earned’ the Presidency, but I do think it is fair to say that the crucible of his sometimes painful life has shown him to be a man of steadfast integrity, courage, and perserverance that we have not seen in a presidential candidate in generations.
I do not begrudge any candidate for wanting to become President and being willing to undergo this grueling process. But I also don’t think the Presidency should be seen as the culmination of a lifetime of privilege nor a reward for doing well in a protected environment. The Presidency should not be awarded to someone who had an accident of history propel him into the limelight, nor because one is a relative of a previous President of dubious qualities.
We need someone who is capable of leading us through times of trouble, someone who has proven time and time again that he is capable of the job. I just don’t see anyone else in the entire field who has proven themselves under adversity that he or she is up to the task. John McCain is the only one who has.