The heading is interesingly: Obama vs Kerry? This is from a NCEC mailing that starts with the erroneous assumption that
Now that Senator Barack Obama has secured the Democratic nomination for president, Democrats can move forward as a party to face an even more daunting task: defeating John McCain.
I didn’t expect any sound judgment to come after that, but I found interesting that they are lowering expectations:
National polls consistently show Barack Obama ahead of McCain, but those polls are seldom an accurate reflection of how the Electoral College will play out. Every analysis of the electoral map suggests that 2008 will be just as close as the two preceding elections. Some new states have joined the elite “swing state” club,(meaning states Hillary won, Obama can’t)
but the only important number stays the same, 270. National polls suggest that Democrats have a slight advantage, but in going state-to-state the situation is complicated. NCEC is not stopping to rest or reflect after the primary; we are moving ahead, because we know that every day counts.
I wonder if “as close as the two preceding elections” is code for “we might not make it? I am one of the few who know the past two presidential elections were stolen – put THEY never quite admited it – for THEM – those were losses. So, as they watch Hillary’s states going to McCain they plan on winning others -
the re-drawing the map thingy…
Considering the erroneous presumption all this planning started with, i wouldn’t hold my breath…Even ignoring the fact that most of those states are leaning mccain, i don’t see how their EVs will make up for Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Ohio…..
Frankly, It’s wishful thinking – considering what delegates told Hillary
while the
party might lose the election in the short term (the presidential
election, that is), the long term would be good, as the party would
have lots of new voters and money.Updated with another look at electoral votes
7 comments
July 29, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Mountain Sage
I think Tim Kaine will probably be the VP choice….they are targeting Virginia HARD.
They MUST pull in some southern states.
Mountain Sage
July 29, 2008 at 2:26 pm
edgeoforever
Virginia yes, Roe no? Lose women for 13 electoral votes? All righty then.
July 30, 2008 at 9:22 am
Mike
I’m not sure if I agree with your analysis of this piece…I read it, and I got a completely different impression. Firstly, Hillary isn’t running anymore, so people need to move on. I was a Clark supporter in 2004, and he lost, should I have abandoned John Kerry because of that?
Secondly, this statement that “states that Hillary won are now going to McCain” is simply incorrect. Unless you’re talking about Kentucky (which Dems never would win in a general anyway) Avereges of several polls show Obama ahead in Michigan (which Hillary didn’t really “win”) He’s ahead in PA, and close in both OH and FL.
You continue to ignore the fact that Obama has made states such as Colorado, Georgia, Montana, North Dakota, and Virginia all possible wins, which are states that Hillary never could have won. It’s time to put the pro-Hillary stuff to bed and move on as loyal Democrats.
August 1, 2008 at 7:04 am
JB in VA
There is a whole string of states Hillary would win handily that BHO hasn’t a prayer in — WVa, AR, TN, OH, FL, NH, just to name a few.
Hillary might even have a good chance in VA, but Kaine and all other the o-bots here are dreaming if they think this state will vote for an inexperienced, ineffectual prima donna who disses the military.
If the superdelegates continue to ignore their better judgment in favor of BHO’s money, he will be the nominee — and his loss in Nov. will be quite ugly.
Hillary would be much the stronger candidate for Dems across the board. The question is why the DNC and supers keep ignoring the facts.
August 1, 2008 at 9:22 am
Mike
You actually think that Hillary would carry TN??? do you recall that Al Gore, former TN Senator, didn’t even win his own state in 2000?
WV? come now, I know this was traditionally a Dem state, but the voters have changed and the demographics don’t favor us. Wave it bye bye, there is no way Hillary would have won.
The only one I’ll give you is AR…because of Bill, not because of Hillary.
What facts are they ignoring? the fact that Obama has more money? the fact that he is ahead in all swing states according to the most recent polling? the fact that Hillary is broke? the fact that she hasn’t been campaigning for more than a month? the fact that she LOST based on the rules that ALL of them agreed to at the begining of the process?
Way to be a bigot and throw the “Hussein” thing in there…really intelligent, by the way. I am so sick of you Clintonistas….GET OVER IT. SHE LOST! It’s no one’s fault but her own campaign, who was more arrogant than Obama ever was or has been. It must be nice to forget the facts…
August 1, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Laurie
No need to yell. We heard you.
We women are tired of being yelled at-You GET OVER IT cus’ we’re NOT COMING BACK!!!!!
PS not entirely true…..mmm….we might just ponder over a possible return to the Democratic fold IF Hill’s name is on the Nomination ballot… at the Denver so-called “open” Convention…
August 1, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Mike
what good does voting for John McCain do for women’s issues? Give me one example of where McCain jibes with the progressive women’s movement. Be careful that you don’t shoot yourself in the foot…do you really want to elect another conservative judge to the Supreme Court and countless federal court positions?
Candidates lose, that is how politics works…sometimes you have to deal with it.