GOP Nominee
Former Candidates
The New York Times today published a fairly credible map of the current electoral college landscape.
The tally shows John McCain with 24 states worth a total of 200 electoral votes safely in his corner while Barak Obama can sleep easy about 12 states and D.C. worth 172 electoral votes.
The map is a bit deceiving in that the “battleground” states are shaded red or blue not based on who is currently leading there, but on how each voted in 2004. While there are roughly an equal number of red and blue states that could flip this November, the most vulnerable blue states (some of which in McCain is either tied or ahead) represent much larger electoral prizes (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michian) than do the most vulnerable red states (Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico).
Happily, McCain’s 200 solid electoral votes do not include Florida, where he boasts a strong lead currently or Virginia where, despite worrisome demographic trends, McCain seems to maintain a stubborn lead.
I am in no way minimizing the enormous task Senator McCain has in front of him, but I would rather be in his position than that of his adversary. Obama may have history, party ID, right track/wrong track and Bush fatigue working in his favor but McCain is strong in the one area that will actually decide who takes the oath of office next January.
May 11th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
I have a theory that the trend for the general election is going to be similar to what we saw in the Democrat primaries. I suspect that polling will show Obama doing better than he ultimately does on Election Night. Obama might just be a “bridge too far” - fairly because of his radical ties or unfairly because of race. If McCain can keep this a close game nationally and state-by-state, I posit that we’ll also see a high number of “undecideds” swing to McCain in the final week of the campaign.
May 11th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
The market gives Obama twice as much chance to win.
Let’s be realistic.
May 11th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Gary,
I agree. I think Obama is very beatable and John McCain is pretty well situated to beat him. I generally vacillate on whether I’d like to be involved in the political world, but looking at an Obama/McCain matchup, I have a sense that it’d be alot of fun being a Republican operative this election cycle. I’m not a big fan of personal destruction, but alot of times, I feel as though it wouldn’t be terribly hard to so eviscerate Obama’s image, that the American public will long for the return of John Kerry.
May 11th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
I am guessing you don’t look into a lot of mirrors.
May 11th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Matthew why do you vacillate on whether to be politically involved?
May 11th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Yea, that’s a pretty reasonable map, especially from the the Times…
I would say:
Florida and Virgina lean McCain(+40)- 240
Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, & Wisconsion lean Obama(+76)- 248
Toss-up: New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, and Pennsylvania
May 11th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Actually, the polls other than in NH have fairly represented Obama’s votes. Indeed he more often overperformed.
People also seem to fail take account that McCain has had his nomination for two months and has had a pretty free ride. In such a world shouldn’t a more experienced war hero have greater standing in the polls?
May 11th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
#6, McCain is leading in Wisconsin.
May 11th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Obama only “overperformed” in southern high AA states (you can’t poll caucuses). In TX, OH, PA, IN (especially after the Wright fiasco and BitterCling) we saw case after case where polls showed high undecideds and those undecideds broke heavily AGAINST Obama when people actualy went to the voting booth. Recall that in PA, there was even talk from some of the Obamaphiles that he might somehow pull off a win. The Lehigh Valley, as some of the rosy scenario crowd over at Daily Kos would tell it, was to be a “swing region”. Obama lost Allentown/Bethlehem/Easton by 20. So they may have fairly represented Obama’s votes - but those high undecideds where a manifestation of the Bradley Effect.
If we see polls on Halloween that say McCain 47, Obama 47, undecided 6 - then McCain is probably in good shape.
May 11th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Michael,
I wouldn’t write off CO so quickly. Two most recent polls show Obama up 3 and McCain up 12. It’s going to be close either way.
May 11th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
The so-called Bradley effect is not manifested in high undecideds, but rather in affirmatives pledges that are actually negative. And, again, one can’t extrapolate from how voters behave in these primaries to the general election.
The constants in elections are issues, money, and party identification (which is also an indication of enthusiasm or lack thereof). In this current cycle the dems are up in all three.
Finally, organization can account for a couple percentage points and Obama’s team has shown incredible strength in organizing volunteers and voters.
May 11th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Part of the reason some of the polls favor Obama is because they give Democrats anywhere from a 10-15 pt advantage in party ID.
In 2004, the turnout was 37 apiece for Rs and Ds and 26 for Independents. Most polls now have it around 40 for the dems and somewhere between 25-30 for Republicans.
If that holds, Obama would probably win. Heck, Kucinich would probably win with that turnout.
It would also be the lowest Republican turnout ever. Certainly in the last 40 years or so.
If you look at all the polls, and reweight them so that the Rs are at least within sight of the Republicans average for the past 20 years, McCain is in pretty good shape.
As for Obama overperforming, I have a feeling some of the disciples are going to be questioning their savior after back to back 40 point drubbings in WV and KY.
He’s going to win the nomination having averaged about 35% of the white vote in democratic primaries. Most of those primaries were before Wright and the bitter comments and his recent downswing.
If Obama gets 35% of the white vote in November, and that’s when all white are factored in, not just those in democratic primaries, he’ll lose.
In fact, looking at the math, Obama will need to get around 43% of the non-black vote to win the election. Considering no Democrat has really done that in a 2 man election since 1976, I’d say all is not yet lost for the GOP.
May 11th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
Well if Obama’s schtick of being able to win over people after they’ve been exposed to him actually was rooted in reality then undecideds wouldn’t be breaking away from him in contest after contest. I wouldn’t be too comforted in your assertion that primary results offer nothing to extrapolate for general election results. Ask yourself honestly if Obama’s WV drubbing scheduled for 48 hours from now REALLY is just because those folks have some amazing affection for Hillary that never existed until two or three months ago.
RNC has plenty of money to make up for McCain’s deficiencies. It’s not going to matter in the end. All the money in the world couldn’t buy Iowa for Romney or Pennsylvania for Obama. Party identification didn’t help Mondale or Dukakis the last time Democrats had a big advantage - and the last time blue-collar whites were this hostile to the Democrat standard-bearer.
To whatever extent Obama successfully organized his caucus wins - good for him. For having such a crack organizational team though, Team O hasn’t found a way to piece together a winning coalition in the general election. Smart Democrats know it. Superdelegates know it. That’s why we haven’t seen more of a flood. Obama has a chance - there’s no denying that. But he has weaknesses that have been masked by AA bloc voting. That’s not going to be enough to bail him out in November. Beating Obama is not nearly as insurmountable of an obstacle as you seem to suggest.
May 11th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
The obsession with race is distorting your analysis. If Obama were white the question of what percentage of the white vote he received would be irrelevant. Thus, the entire premise of the argument is that the whites who voted for Hillary were actually anti-black votes - an absurd proposition.
I think the media will be watching closely to see whether the GOP runs a racial campaign. If McCain is seen as reverting to a southern strategy he will get killed in the press.
May 11th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
I think the white vote against Obama is an off shoot of the Wright ordeal. Obama is perceived by many now to be anti-white, so its a self preservation vote now. It has nothing to do with whites being rascist, but rather the perception that Obama seems to be in a crowd of bigoted cronies who hate whites. He may not be, but he sure doesn’t mind hob knobbing with them for 20 years.
May 11th, 2008 at 9:14 pm
“RNC has plenty of money to make up for McCain’s deficiencies. It’s not going to matter in the end. All the money in the world couldn’t buy Iowa for Romney or Pennsylvania for Obama.”
I’m just a political observer, but Romney did indeed try to buy Iowa but Obama invested in PA to force Clinton to spend money she would have preferred to save for Indiana and NC.
“Superdelegates know it. That’s why we haven’t seen more of a flood.”
Again, just repeating what I’ve heard but superdelegates are rightly giving Clinton some time and space. In fact, the best way for it to play out is for her to win WVA then drop out. Then she can actually be seen as giving superdelegates permission to go with Obama. It would look unseemly if there were actually a stampede rather than a graceful flow.
May 11th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
good one gary
May 11th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
It will take awhile before a lot of voters see through Obama. I wouldn’t be surprised if McCain didn’t start to really pull away until the last week or two of the race. By the time of the actual election though, I expect to see McCain break through in 2 or 3 states in the upper Midwest (most likely: Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin) and hold states like Colorado and Nevada, winning somewhat comfortably.
May 11th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
Dave says - “It will take awhile before a lot of voters see through Obama”.
Dave - I think it’ll take about 5 minutes. Half the Democrats are picking Clinton over him now, and should he get the nomination, about 1/3 of the Clinton voters won’t vote for him. That is all Republicans need to know - when even your own party members can’t stand you, you must not be much of a candidate.
May 11th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
Does anyone really, really care whether it’s McCain or Obama? Honestly.
May 11th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Yes, Obama would (a) set the prolife movement back 10 years by appointing extremely liberal judges, and (b) cost me upwards of $1,000-$2,000 per month in tax hikes and removing the Social Security cap.
May 12th, 2008 at 12:11 am
metcalf,
I’d say anyone with half an ounce of sense should care. The difference is stark, and the effects will be enourmous. But sure, it doesn’t matter at all. Just keep going on thinking that.
May 12th, 2008 at 12:13 am
Also, the general is totally different from the primary. There’s no proprtional allocation. Whether you win by 1 vote or 1,000,000 votes doesn’t matter.
And even if Obama was white, if the Democratic nominee only got 35% of the white vote in the democratic primaries, I’d be worried.
If you take out the caucuses and states where blacks made up 30%+ of the turnout, Clinton has pretty much beat Obama handily. He’s won VT, UT, CT and MO. She’s won everywhere else. In November, there won’t be any caucuses or states where blacks make up 30% of the turnout.
Even if you were to double Obama’s white support and 70% of white dems voted for him, that’d still be enough to give McCain a comfortable victory.
Now, things may be so bad that the GOP simply can’t win in this environment. With a bad economy, Iraq, 8 yrs of Bush, etc… it may be that any democrat would win and no matter what McCain does, he’s doomed from the start.
I thik that’s partially why so many establishment dems are supporting Obama. They know he’s more liberal and to the left than Clinton. They know Clinton would bring them 8 more years of triangulation. But they sense an opportunity to move far to the left so they’re going for the gold with Obama. In a more competitive enviroment, they’d be wary of him, but they feel they can’t lose this year so they’re going with their heart and the more liberal candidate.
But this isn’t over by a longshot. I think WV will really change things. KY will change them even more. And after PR, it will become apparent that we’re headed to Denver.
May 12th, 2008 at 12:23 am
Here in Kentucky I’ve actually seen a lot of Hillary! signs.
I’ve seen no Obama signs and I live in a college town of 16,000 people.
I think Obama gets about 25% of the vote outside Louisville.
May 12th, 2008 at 6:51 am
I’ve said this before, but the fundamental problem the Democratic Party has, is that Obama is perfectly built to avoid a collapse in a Democratic Primary, to such an extent that it has camouflaged his real and enduring weaknesses. Roughly 40-45% of Democrats were guaranteed to absolutely LOVE Obama. It’s no exaggeration to say that Upscale whites and black voters haven’t had a candidate they liked this much since 68′ and RFK. Alot of this is identity politics; if you offer up a well-educated black man, who speaks of lofty ideals, in a Democratic, you’re going to find a huge percentage of the Democratic population who finds him simply irresistible.
But, another big part of it is ideological; Obama is talking about things that Democrats have been afraid to talk about for over 20 years, but it such a way that he doesn’t seem inherently politically unviable. He’s willing to meet with any dictator or thug without pre-conditions. That sends into positive shivers of joy. Finally someone who’s willing to repudiate Clintonian triangulation.
But, rhetorically he insists that he wants to “move beyond” partisanship. He seems to offer extreme liberalism, without some of the political drawbacks of extreme liberalism. After 8 years of Bush, and 8 years of Clinton, when the upscale progressive latte liberals were largely disappointed, these folks simply aren’t going to abandon Obama. He could eat a small child, and they’d still be inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. Ditto with blacks voters, albeit for different reasons (Obama’s a viable black candidate, and they don’t much like Hillary after her tactics). So he has 40-45% of the Democratic vote absolutely locked in.
But, it’s within the 55-60% remaining that we’re starting to see his fatal weaknesses. Most of these folks are entirely opposed to Obama even though, by all rights, they should have fallen behind the leader given Clinton’s serious predicament. Hillary has a poorer chance of winning the nomination now then Mike Huckabee did after Super Tuesday. But, John McCain, hated though he is by many Republicans, still managed to easily beat Huckabee in every remaining primary (if I recall, Virginia was the closest, with around +10 McCain). The fact that Hillary’s quite likely to win more then half of the remaining primary vote, if she decides to stay in through June, is utterly untenable if you’re an Obamaniac. Yes, Demographically they favor her, but the whole point is, Obama has to start winning Hillary’s demographics somewhere, sometime. And if he can’t win them when Hillary Clinton is all-but finished, then he’s looking at an extraordinarily tough general election campaign.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:04 am
Sorry but you are a raving fool if you think this goes to Denver.
It doesn’t go to June.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:15 am
Hillary has a poorer chance of winning the nomination now then Mike Huckabee did after Super Tuesday. - Matthew E. Miller
I don’t know about that.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:43 am
Ed Rendell this morning made the argument I have been trying to get people to understand. What people are trying to spin as an Obama weakness should be attributed to Clinton strength. If Obama was winning his base and Clinton’s this would have been over in January. Just as McCain would have won much earlier had he won his voters and Huckabee’s. The difference is that Huckabee did not have near the name recognition and base of support Clinton has.
Even thought the press has reached the conclusion the race is over, finality comes only when Obama does reach the magic number of delegates. When he does and he is standing on stage with the Clintons, Dodd, Biden, Edwards and Richardson, there will be an absolute wow factor. There are going to be a lot more magazine covers like the Time cover with Obama on it. And with all the cameras on the dems, they will unload on McCain. He may need to name is VP just to get some attention.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:04 am
If you add Florida and Virginia to the total, that brings McCain to 240 electoral votes, a very good position to be in.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:35 am
PabloZed,
Why should it be attributed a Clinton strength? The idea that Obama’s pretty well-liked by the Clinton demographics, but they just REALLY love her, so much so that they vote for her even at the expense of party unity, and even knowing that she can’t win, simply can’t be taken seriously. Hillary Clinton has higher negatives then any politician in the country. Even within the Democratic Party, she entered the primary as a fairly disliked figure. And her negatives haven’t improved, but have gotten worse. And yet somehow, as the rest of the country comes to dislike her more, we’re expected to believe that blue collar whites are beginning to LOVE her, to such an extent that they vote against the presumptive nominee, who they like well enough, in droves? It’s ludicrous. Hillary Clinton is a rich, mainline Methodist. She won Catholics by 40% in Pennsylvania. She won weekly Catholics by 50%. These aren’t temporary faults, which will be easily healed by a few kumbaya’s they’re deep and lasting divides. And they put Obama on the wrong side of history.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:35 am
Matthew wrote:
“He’s willing to meet with any dictator or thug without pre-conditions. That sends into positive shivers of joy.”
Actually, Obama who has begun triangulating, himself, with his sights set on the general election, flip-flopped over the weekend on this issue.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/05/changing_conditions.asp
May 12th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Aron,
Yes, I know. It’s so very typical. But, we’re not going to allow him to get away with it. If there’s one issue McCain’s willing to attack from the right on, it’s defense.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:52 am
I’ve always thought that presidentelect.org had a pretty good electoral map. He posts four categories (Trong R, Lean R, Lean D, Strong D), with no tossup category. It started strongly in favor of Sen Obama, but has drifted to a slight lead for Sen McCain. His goal is to not come at this with any institutional bias.
May 12th, 2008 at 10:11 am
*grumble* *seethe*
May 12th, 2008 at 11:07 am
I just want to point out that many, many pundits, such as Larry Sabato, have been flogging the idea that for McCain to win in the current political environment (very negative to the Republicans), McCain will have to pull off a serious, never-before-happened upset. However, ALL of these same pundits do not mention that the same historical logic applies to Obama also. Obama has to overcome the fact that a African American has never won the Presidency. Yes, McCain has a steep hill to climb, but Obama does also.