RK ARCHIVE - 10 Paths for Obama to Get to 270

1. Win Ohio and get to 272 Electoral Votes. In 2006, Ohio elected a Democrat, Ted Strickland, governor with 60% of the vote. Ohio also elected a progressive Democrat, Sherrod Brown, to the US Senate with 56% of the vote. The Republican Party in Ohio is in disarray. Basically, this state is prime territory for Democrats to win in 2008 -- with the right kind of candidate, that is.

2. Win Missouri and Iowa, both of which border Obama's home state of Illinois, for 270 EV's exactly. George W. Bush won Iowa over John Kerry in 2004 by just 10,000 votes out of 1.5 million cast. Iowa's governor is a Democrat, Chet Culver. In Missouri, Democrat Claire McCaskill defeated Republican Jim Talent for the U.S. Senate in 2006 by a 2 percentage point margin. Just the other day, Gov. Matt Blunt (R) surprised everyone by announcing he was retiring. In the aftermath of this announcement, the Missouri GOP appears to be in disarray during a presidential election year.

3. Win Virginia and Iowa for 272 EV's. We've already discussed Iowa. Virginia, in a lot of peoples' opinions, will be in play during 2008 for the first time in decades. With the victories over the past few years of Mark Warner, Tim Kaine, and Jim Webb, combined with a great candidate like Barack Obama (strongly backed by Gov. Kaine), why wouldn't it be in 2008?
4. Win Virginia and Nevada for 270 EV's. Nevada went for George W. Bush with just 51% of the vote in 2004, and the state is trending Democratic. This year, 116,000 Democrats voted in the Nevada caucuses, more than DOUBLE the 44,000 Republicans who showed up. Nevada's certainly a possibility for Barack Obama in November.

5. Win Virginia and New Mexico for 270 EV's. New Mexico went for Bush in 2004 by just 6,000 votes out of 750,000 cast. Its governor is Bill Richardson and the state is trending Democratic. I'd say New Mexico is less likely to go for Obama with Arizona's John McCain as the Republican nominee, but it's still possible. With anyone else as the Republican nominee, I'd say New Mexico is a strong possibility to go for Obama.

6. Win Virginia and West Virginia for 270 EV's. If Virginia goes Democratic, it certainly seems to me that West Virginia could do so as well. The state's governor (Joe Manchin) is a Democrat, as are both of its U.S. Senators (Robert Byrd and Jay Rockefeller). We'll see...

7. Win Virginia and Louisiana for 274 EV's. This will be the first presidential election since Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and it's hard to know how demographic changes might affect Obama's chances in Louisiana. Still, I'd have to say that this one's a possibility, especially depending on who the Republican nominee is.

8. Win Arkansas, Iowa, and Missouri for 276 EV's. Can Obama win these three states heading down the Mississippi to the west of Illinois? They all seem potentially competitive, depending on how energized Democrats are vis-a-vis Republicans this year. And who better to get people "fired up...ready to go!" than Barack Obama? :)

9. Win Florida for 279 EV's. OK, this one might be more of a longshot, but heck, it we get enough "hanging chads"...oh, forget it.

10. And just for fun...win Iowa, Nevada and New Mexico for 269 EV's, throwing the election to the House of Representatives. In the House, each state delegation has one vote. Currently, the Democratic Party controls 26 state delegations, and the Republican Party controls 20. Not likely, but you never know!

Comments

American SW (Silence Dogood - 1/27/2008 2:54:56 PM)

I'm not betting on picking up any EVs in the Southwest outside of California in an Obama/McCain matchup. McCain has a much more reasonable stance on immigration and should weather an anti-Republican backlash among Latino voters better than other candidates. Plus there are some racial tensions that I'm not even going to try and explain between blacks and Latinos (this might be counter intuitive to many whites who tend to think a minority voter is a minority voter, but you might have noticed by now that the NAACP doesn't get involved in non-black issues and Latino community leaders didn't have much to say about the Jena 6).

My top three states to swing in an Obama/McCain matchup would be Virginia, Ohio and Missouri, not necessarily in that order.

Obama and 270 Electoral Votes (Flipper - 1/27/2008 3:17:26 PM)

I have an interesting theory on presidential politics and the electoral college and it actualy has a proven track record. In every presidential election since 1908 except one, the candidate who has won the majority of the states that divide the country in two geographically has won the election. The row of states I am referring to are MN, IA, MO, AR and LA. Lowell hit on this in scenario number 8. Throw MO and IA to Obama and he is at exactly 270. And that combination, while winning MN as well, keeps my theory intact as well.

Not a bad theory (Silence Dogood - 1/27/2008 3:38:11 PM)

I don't think it's geography so much as something a lot of those states happen to have in common: populous metropolitan areas coupled with significant rural areas. Minnesota features Minneapolis/St. Paul. Missouri has St. Louis, and Kansas City straddles the Kansas/Missouir state line. Louisiana has New Orleans (but I'm ignoring it because the electorate looks SO different post-Katrina). If you can win in states that combine metropolitan areas with sparse rural regions, chances are you're going to be able to find 270 electoral votes somewhere.

the path the same? (Alter of Freedom - 1/27/2008 4:21:26 PM)

So how does this path compare in theory should Clinton win the nomination versus Obama. The comparison may help folks understand just how important it is to get the nominee right in the process. Obama appears more able to take on the red state status then Clinton, but the comparison would be helpful.

If Clinton wins... (Lowell - 1/27/2008 4:48:21 PM)

...my thinking at this point, after all the "slash and burn" of Bill and her campaign the past couple of weeks, is that she would probably have trouble holding all the "blue" states (e.g., I think she'd have to fight for Wisconsin and Minnesota), MIGHT have a shot at one or two southwestern states (although much less of a chance if McCain's the Republican nominee), very little chance at Virginia, and a battle royale in Ohio. She also could pick up Arkansas. The question is, how hard would she have to fight to lock down "blue" states like NJ and PA, especially if African Americans are still pissed at her? Doesn't look promising to me at all anymore...big change from a couple of months ago before they went all "slash and burn."

my thinking (Alter of Freedom - 1/27/2008 7:04:03 PM)

pretty close to what I have been thinking. As you know I will never support her regardless and have been saying this since 2006 in large part because I never felt her machine had a real relatedness to what I have been seeing in states like ours over the course of the Iraq War. As the ranks of independents grow and with no viable third party save potentially Blommberg, the ranks lean towards Obama on the Dem side overwhelmingly. Many of these voters are inspired and though his politics may be somewhat different than say a Reagan, moderate conservatives in the Republican Party which have seen the Party continue to slide away from them on fiscal issues may take solace in voting or shifting to Obama. If Clinton were the nominee that opportunity would be lost for the Dems. Independents and on the fence Republicans will not support her in the South or MidWest period. The Northeast bodes better for her, but the Kennedy endorsement could elevate Obama. The issue may be whether African Americans would stay home if she wins the nomination and choses someone other than Obama as a running mate which I believe given the month is highly unlikely. If they stay home frankly Clinton could not beat either Mccain nor Romney and only possibly Huckabee. I know just like Clinton was annoited early this year, Reps are looking to annoit McCain, but the one that independents are shifting to now in VA is taking a hard look at Romney. I think a Romney vs.Obama debate in general would be the best thing for the future of America.

I wonder (aznew - 1/27/2008 7:14:57 PM)

how your calculations might be affected if millions of Hillary's supporters tire of hearing their candidate called a racist and being subjected to attacks that utterly twist the facts, and say, "You know, I might not vote for Obama if he gets the nomination."

One of the surprises of 2000, for example, was Bush's strength among Hispanics. And as Nevada showed, Hillary is very popular among union rank and file. Then there is also the fact that we have seen that Hillary's support in the primaries among Democrats so far is centered on older, white, female voters -- the very voters who tend to show up for elections in higher numbers than other group.

So, as Obama folks continue to disingenuously and unfairly slam Clinton, you might want to start thinking, at least in terms of your electability analysis, what happens if her supporters decide to fight fire with fire and start to talk about withholding their support from your guy.

You are kidding yourself if you don't think this is going to happen, or if you can continue on this course of Clinton bashing without some blowback.

no bashing (Alter of Freedom - 1/27/2008 9:16:22 PM)

There is no bashing, but a legitimate question given the tone of the Clinton campaign. The brought the issue or at least Bill Clinton did on her behalf so it is relevant. How are we to sup[pose she can unite the country as she claims if she can not manage to demonstrate the ability to unite Democrats? Its not bashing but simply a question of strategy that I believe has to run its course before we know. To say that she was "annoited" is hardly bashing. Facts are facts and most determined early she would be the nominee and now she IS in a fight with Obama and Edwards. Your point of blowback is valid, my only point was blowback works both ways and Clinton certainly will need that vote come the General and it appears she is alienating it with the tone of the campaign. I do not see Obama or Edwards alienating anyone let alone older or women should he become the nominee.

No, Alter (aznew - 1/27/2008 9:25:13 PM)

to say she was anointed is hardly bashing.

But have you been reading the threads on this site (as well as other progressive sites) recently.

The rhetoric is considerably harsher than "anointed."

In Florida (Alter of Freedom - 1/27/2008 7:06:21 PM)

I have to admit I was blindsided by the endorsement for McCain by Crist in FL. That to could be a potential positioning for the VP slot on the Republican side. In the General Republicans will definitely require FL should Dems pickup OH through any VP selection from that State

I love Virginia but... (legacyofmarshall - 1/27/2008 9:08:30 PM)

First of all, Obama is not a Virginia Democrat. Second of all, Northern Virginians LOVE McCain. A Democrat cannot win this state without Northern Virginia independents, who in that matchup would probably pick McCain.

Now...

Obama/Huckabee - Obama would have a good shot at Virginia

Obama/Romney - Obama would have a good shot at every state that isn't Utah or Idaho.

I think you just said ... (Ron1 - 1/27/2008 10:08:58 PM)

that Obama isn't a white dude. Which is true.

However, neither was Douglas Wilder -- which, granted, was not a federal election.

The McCain of now is not the McCain of 2000 -- the McCain of 2000 would win Virginia easily, but that guy is long gone.

All of this is to say that I think Obama is actually the Dems' best chance to pick up Va, maybe excepting JRE. Multi-cultural NoVa will turn out for him in percentages that will be hard to believe; plus, heavily black Richmond and Tidewater will also turn out in large numbers.

I think Obama has a very good shot to carry Va against anyone the Republicans nominate; I'd go so far as to say he'd be the favorite.

[BTW, Lowell, love this kind of analysis. Thanks for it.]

I don't think the penultimate commenter implied anything about race. (Silence Dogood - 1/27/2008 10:37:14 PM)

I think it's pointlessly reductionist to say that any criticism about Obama must ultimately come down to how he's black. It's also kind of insulting. I do disagree with Legacy of Marshall in that I think Tim Kaine probably knows better than anyone how to spot a candidate who can win statewide in Virginia, but automatically dismissing any critique of Obama as having some sort of nebulous racist undertone dismisses other possible weaknesses.

And everyone has weaknesses. I love the guy, but he's not Jesus Christ reincarnate.

Your other point was both salient and supported my iteration that everyone has weaknesses: John McCain's weaknesses haven't been exploited yet by his rivals in an effective manner. Provided enough financial resources and the willingness to go through with it, I think his mythical public persona as a straight-talkin' maverick can be destroyed.

I was reacting to the phrasing (Ron1 - 1/27/2008 11:34:14 PM)

"I love Virginia, but ...", "First of all, Obama is not a Virginia Democrat."

I wasn't implying that legacyofmarshall is racist in any way -- had he/she said something I thought was racist, I would call it out in no uncertain terms. I was tongue-in-cheek reading between the lines -- legacyofmarshall appears to be skeptical that Obama can win a statewide federal race, which is a plausible thesis. There are many parts of Virginia that probably aren't ready to vote for a black man for President. We should be able to admit that; that's what I think legacyofmarshall was implying.

Maybe legacyofmarshall just meant Obama is too liberal. Then, my bad. Regardless, I think Obama will fire up so much of Northern Virginia and the cities in Hampton Roads and Virginia that he'd carry Virginia -- I'm talking 70/30 splits in Arlington, Alexandria, Falls Church, and 60/40 Fairfax County, with record turnouts.

another independent (Alter of Freedom - 1/27/2008 11:26:17 PM)

As an independent I can say you may be half right. If this were not following a week of the worst gloom and doom rhetoric about our economy I might agree but Romeny numbers are climbing. The campaign is coming to him now due to this talk of recession. If Romney if you listen to his economic visions he is more like Mark Warner than any other candidate and we know how popular he is in NVA. I want to stress that is on business and its role and economics as an issue, obvious on other issues there is great divide but as long as we stay on track as having the Economy the number one issue and not the War or something else Romeny will pick up the independent vote or at least a greater portion of it. Is number in FL are rising in direct correlation to this last weeks fed cuts and stock woes. Again, he would have to beat McCain first but his back ground like Mark Warners is convincing in this particular environment while McCain's is not.