FredFan4McCain's blog
Might want to pin this post high and save it in your bookmarks. As most junkies know, the # McCain must reach is 270 out of 538 available votes. However, for those new to politics, many don't know this. As such, I thought I would give a "guide" as to how to get there. In the coming days you'll see a lot of "map analysis", the best of which is probably provided by John King of CNN. You'll see some optimistic McCain maps and some optimistic Obama maps. It should be noted that despite that, much has remained the same since 2004. That being said, the phenoms that are Obama and Palin make this election potentially map-changing for either camp. Given the amount each campaign has in cash however, it is unlikely there will be an electoral blowout.
Here are some basic observations I have:
- I categorize electoral vote margins in the following ways: Blowout (350 or more EV), Easy win (300 or more), Narrow win (270 or more).
- Start with the Bush-Kerry # in 2004: 286-252.
- If there is to be a blowout in the electoral college, it is most likely that would come from McCain, not Obama, because Obama has a lower "floor" than McCain does. This is largely due to the "solid south/plain states" that McCain has, while Obama's base is largely packed in to the northeast and California. Given the dynamics in this election and the passionate supporters on both sides, I see it as highly unlikely either "floor" could be penetrated. That said, I do see it as a reasonable possibility that it won't be as close as 2004 or certainly as 2000 was, depending if either campaign catches fire.
- If any team is to catch fire, I believe it is more likely to be McCain than Obama. Reason being, Obama has been campaigning for two years and has had all the following on his side: unpopular war, bad economy, unpopular president, devoted supporters, gifted speech making, friendly media, tons of money. Despite this, Obama has hit 50% once, the day after his convention. He has never built a large lead against McCain. I believe, as such, that Obama has a relatively low ceiling despite the media's adoration of him. This is for a few reasons: too liberal, too self absorbed, experience issue, and Hillary's supporters. McCain, on the other hand, has a higher ceiling. One, he is not seen as too conservative. Two, Palin energizes the base and appeals to women. Three, both McCain and Palin appeal to independents. Fourth, McCain is not a polarizing figure like Obama is.
Analyzing the map further:
- The Democrats MUST MUST MUST have California. They are likely to get it but their entire electoral strategy is predicated on winning California. That's great to have in their camp but risky in that they lose in every non-CA scenario. You cannot take 55 out of the D column and add it to the R's and make it up. Period.
- The Republicans MUST MUST MUST have Florida and Texas. Florida is always dicey but it has to be in your column. Ohio is VERY close to a "MUST MUST" but you can draw the map in a way without Ohio. But, Ohio is close to being a must. Likely, thee who wins Ohio wins everything.
- Here are the 04 red states in trouble for McCain in order from most in trouble to least: 1) Iowa 2) New Mexico 3) Ohio 4) Colorado 5) Virginia 6) North Carolina 7) Florida. No other state will fall, period, though some may be closer than they were in 04. Others though (KY, TN, WV, AR) will be bigger. Note Missouri is not on this list..though it would be 8 or 9.
- Here are the 04 blue states in trouble for Obama in order frommost in trouble to least: 1) NH 2) Michigan 3) Wisconsin 4) Pennsylvania 5) New Jersey 6) Minnesota 7) Oregon
- Last state to fall in an epic blowout: McCain win: Connecticut Obama win: Georgia
Here is the count:
SAFE MCCAIN (will NEVER leave McCain) (145): Alaska (3), Arizona (10), Utah (5), Idaho (4), Wyoming (3), North Dakota (3), South Dakota (3), Nebraska (5), Kansas (6), Texas (34), Louisiana (9), Arkansas (6), Mississippi (6), Alabama (9), Tennessee (11), Kentucky (8), South Carolina (8), West Virginia (5)
STRONG LEAN MCCAIN (very unlikely to leave McCain except in blowout) (65): Montana (3), Georgia (15), Indiana (11), Missouri (11), North Carolina (15)
TOTAL SAFE/STRONG MCCAIN: 200
SAFE OBAMA (81): Hawaii (4), Illinois (11), Delaware (3), DC (3), Vermont (3), Rhode Island (4), Massaschusetts (12), New York
STRONG LEAN OBAMA: (76) California (55), Connecticut (7), Maryland (10), Maine (4) - though one CD is often tight)
TOTAL SAFE/STRONG OBAMA: 157
So, McCain's "death floor" is 145 while Obama's is 81. I don't see any scenarios where it's any more than that. You can see where McCain has an initial advantage.
SLIGHT LEAN MCAIN (54): Florida (27), Nevada (5), Virginia (13), Colorado (8)
These are states that Obama could reasonably win, but are more than likely, in a reasonably close election, to stay with McCain. This brings McCain to 254, just 16 away from victory.
SLIGHT LEAN OBAMA: (33) Washington (11), Oregon (7), New Jersey (15), Minnesota (10)
These are states taht McCain could reasonbly win, but are more than likely, in a reasonbly close election, to stay with Obama. This brings his total to 200, still 70 away from victory
TRULY UP FOR GRABS: Ohio (20), Pennsylvania (21), Michigan (17), Wisconsin (10), Iowa (7), New Mexico (5), New Hampshire (4).
Now, for one reason or the other some of these may shift back and forth. For example, I think Iowa, a red state in 04, is likely to go to Obama in 08, while NH, a blue state in 04, is likely to go to McCain. Let's add those to the totals. That gives McCain 258 and Obama 207.
That brings us down to five states: Ohio, PA, Michigan, Wisconsin, and New Mexico. As you can see, Obama has a problem. If McCain wins Wisconsin only, he forces a tie. Only New Mexico only wouldn't be enough. So, in order for Obama to win, he has to win EVERYTHING ABOVE AND sweep Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan while McCain only needs ONE to win or tie. And if New Mexico goes to McCain, he only needs one of the four to win.
Now, some people have said Obama could open the map by winning a place like Indiana, Colorado, or Virginia. Perhaps. But, I see it as unlikely that he wins Virginia but loses Ohio. Maybe that could be done in the case of Colorado, and that would even it up. If obama won colorado, that would back off his total to 249 or 245, and he'd need two other states. So, Colorado is a big prise.
So, what is the key for McCain:
MAKE SURE YOU WIN VIRGINIA, COLORADO, MISSOURI, FLORIDA, AND NEVADA. NO LOSSES THERE, PERIOD.
Win Ohio or Michigan. Even if you lost New Hampshire, you win either of those, you win, as you'd be at either 271 or 274.
A sampling of recent polls, pre convention?
Colorado: McCain 47, Obama 46 (CNN)
Ohio: Obama 47, McCain 45 (over labor day weekend, so post-Dems and only +2)
Virginia: McCain 48, Obama 47 (Rasmussen)
Nevada: McCain 46, Obama 39 (Mason Dixon)
New Hampshire: Obama 47, McCain 46 (rasmussen)
Michigan: Obama 43, McCain 41 (Det. News)
Florida: McCain 47, Obama 43 (SV) -- Mason Dixon had Obama up 1, by the way, only poll to show Obama up there though.
Pennsylvania: Obama 48, Mccain 43 -- CNN
New Mexico: Obama 48, McCain 44 -- rasmussen
My prediction, in the end?
McCain 295 -- from 04 loses IA and NM
Obama 243 -- from 04 loses NH and MI
Republican presidential and vice presidential nominees John McCain and Sarah Palin will be in the Kansas City area Sunday and Monday, the campaign announced this afternoon.
After flying into Kansas City on Sunday evening, they will attend a rally on Monday in Lee’s Summit. The rally is on 520 NW Murray Road at the Pavilion at John Knox Village.
Doors open at 8:30 a.m. The pre-program will begin at around 10:30 a.m. Tickets are not required. Admission will be on a first-come, first-served basis.
I’ve been trying to convince my fellow conservatives that they have been wasting their time in a fruitless quest for a new Ronald Reagan to emerge and lead our party and our nation. I insisted that we’d never see his like again because he was one of a kind.
I was wrong!
Wednesday night I watched the Republican National Convention on television and there, before my very eyes, I saw my Dad reborn; only this time he's a she.
And what a she!
In one blockbuster of a speech, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin resurrected my Dad’s indomitable spirit and sent it soaring above the convention center, shooting shock waves through the cynical media’s assigned spaces and electrifying the huge audience with the kind of inspiring rhetoric we haven’t heard since my Dad left the scene.
This was Ronald Reagan at his best -- the same Ronald Reagan who made the address known now solely as “The Speech,” which during the Goldwater campaign set the tone and the agenda for the rebirth of the traditional conservative movement that later sent him to the White House for eight years and revived the moribund GOP.
Last night was an extraordinary event. Widely seen beforehand as a make-or-break effort -- either an opportunity for Sarah Palin to show that she was the happy warrior that John McCain assured us she was, or a disaster that would dash McCain’s presidential hopes and send her back to Alaska, sadder but wiser.
Obviously un-intimidated by either the savage onslaught to which the left-leaning media had subjected her, or the incredible challenge she faced -- and oozing with confidence -- she strode defiantly to the podium and proved she was everything and even more than John McCain told us.
Much has been made of the fact that she is a woman. What we saw last night, however, was something much more than a just a woman accomplishing something no Republican woman has ever achieved. What we saw was a red-blooded American with that rare, God-given ability to rally her dispirited fellow Republicans and take up the daunting task of leading them -- and all her fellow Americans -- on a pilgrimage to that shining city on the hill my father envisioned as our nation’s real destination.
In a few words she managed to rip the mask from the faces of her Democratic rivals and reveal them for what they are -- a pair of old-fashioned liberals making promises that cannot be kept without bankrupting the nation and reducing most Americans to the status of mendicants begging for their daily bread at the feet of an all-powerful government.
Most important, by comparing her own stunning record of achievement with his, she showed Barack Obama for the sham that he is, a man without any solid accomplishments beyond conspicuous self-aggrandizement.
Like Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin is one of us. She knows how most of us live because that’s the way she lives. She shares our homespun values and our beliefs, and she glories in her status as a small-town woman who put her shoulder to the wheel and made life better for her neighbors.
Her astonishing rise up from the grass-roots, her total lack of self-importance, and her ordinary American values and modest lifestyle reveal her to be the kind of hard-working, optimistic, ordinary American who made this country the greatest, most powerful nation on the face of the earth.
As hard as you might try, you won’t find that kind of plain-spoken, down-to-earth, self-reliant American in the upper ranks of the liberal-infested, elitist Democratic Party, or in the Obama campaign.
Sarah Palin didn’t go to Harvard, or fiddle around in urban neighborhood leftist activism while engaging in opportunism within the ranks of one of the nation’s most corrupt political machines, never challenging it and going along to get along, like Barack Obama.
Instead she took on the corrupt establishment in Alaska and beat it, rising to the governorship while bringing reforms to every level of government she served in on her way up the ladder.
Welcome back, Dad, even if you’re wearing a dress and bearing children this time around.
Mr. Reagan is a syndicated radio talk-show host and the son of former President Ronald Reagan.
Hello everyone! I apologize for not posting for a while -- I have been busy getting married and moving!! Now that I am somewhat settled, I will be posting more frequently.
Another reason I'll be posting more frequently is that I am so absolutely inspired by John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin for Vice President.
In fact, if you visit a previous blog post of mine here you will see she was my second choice behind Romney. The ONLY reason I had Romney was due to the fact I knew the media would go after her for the "readiness" issue. Despite that, she was always my favorite at heart. I had even told a good friend of mine in the media that she was my "dream pick" several months ago.
To add some personal testimony to this, the moment I learned Sarah Palin was picked was one of those "remember where you were" moments. I had been up late the night before doing work, and kept seeing some indications it was going to be Pawlenty, and even thought to myself "maybe he'll shock the world and pick Palin".
Then, on Friday morning, the first thing I did was check my e-mail and that friend in the news business had written "I guess you are thrilled now, huh?" and that caused me to turn to Drudge where I saw a large pick of Sarah Palin and I was certifiably giddy. I then watched her first speech and like so many others I've read had the same reaction -- I shedded a tear. What an absolute breakthrough for women, for conservatives, for conservative women, for America!! read more »
In reviewing all the possible choices that John McCain would make, it seems to me that speculation seems to be centering around four people -- two men and two women -- Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, and Condi Rice.
I firmly believe Tim Pawlenty, though a competent governor, would be the disaster pick. If he is picked, I can imagine a collective "yawn" from the nation. First of all, he's not even that popular in Minnesota, where a poll indicated more Minnesotans would be less likely to vote for him than to vote for him -- so he actually would help Obama win Minnesota, not McCain. Though I'm sure McCain likes him, what does he had to the ticket? Nothing in my mind, and McCain needs to be mindful of the political consequences of such a choice. He is, right now, like it or not, the underdog and Pawlenty would do nothing to help that image -- in fact, he would enhance it.
Condi Rice would be an incredibly courageous pick and clearly would create a media sensation. I personally have always liked the idea and if Bush was any more popular than 30%, I think she'd be a shoo in. She is helped by the fact that we are now winning the war, and I think in the end the public would trust her with the nation...and like Obama, her winning the VP slot would be historic for blacks. The drawbacks are -- one, she's not been vetted as to many of her views on domestic issues, which are more moderate than not, which would potentially be harmful in McCain's courting of conservatives. Again, like it or not, McCain's campaign isn't exactly setting the world on fire right now, and Condi would be a risk -- would she motivate the masses or make the conservative base more upset? Hard to say. I'd like the choice but not sure that all would. If Condi were firmly pro-life, it would be a different story. Being at a crossroads in our nation regarding the life issue, however, I think that it is important to have someone who can speak on the issue, and speak well.
That brings us to Sarah Palin, the dynamic and gorgeous governor of Alaska. In my view, she would be a "home run" pick. She would motivate women, conservatives (she is rabidly pro-life) and be able to talk with authority on the energy issue, which is the predominant issue on Americans minds. She has been an executive, like Pawlenty, and has been courageous in dealing with lack of ethics in her state (despite what a poster in another thread says -- she may ruffle feathers but that's the sign of leadership to me, not a weak leader). Her ONLY drawback is that she is only recently elected and you could make a case she needs more high level experience. I dont think its much of one, but in the "readiness to be president" issue, I could see it hurting her.
That leaves us with Mitt Romney. Though not a home run or buzz-generator like Palin or Rice, he is a solid pick who would bring conservatives on board and bring crediblity on a host of issues. While the flip flop charge may hurt, I dont think it would as much in the #2 spot. He would also help win Michigan, Colorado, and bring a boatload of bucks to the campaign, which McCain sorely needs if he is going to win. Romney talks well, has no baggage family wise, and is a likeable fellow that I think creates the perfect #2. Also, I have no doubt he could take over if he had too. He is, what I call, the "safe choice" that brings a lot of positives with limited negatives, unites conservatives, and doesn't have the snooze factor of Tim Pawlenty.
So, I say -- while outside of Pawlenty, I would be thrilled with any of the above, and while my dream choice would have been our man Fred Thompson, I hope that John McCain picks Mitt Romney -- simply because he helps create a clear path to victory while also providing competent leadership to the job at hand.
MCCAIN/ROMNEY '08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Greetings all, I apologize for the recent hiatus -- I've been busy becoming engaged (I'm a lucky guy) and therefore haven't had time to post recently.
However, recent Supreme Court rulings have brought me out. Despite George W. Bush having appointed Roberts and Alito, it is increasingly apparent that the Supreme Court is increasingly liberal, with Anthony Kennedy slowly drifting left.
The two most glaring examples of this were in the GITMO decision and in today's decision regarding the death penalty being applied to child rape cases.
While Barack Obama is paying lip service to the cause of being against the court's ruling today, he did support the GITMO rulling and there is no doubt he would appoint very liberal justices in the old of Ginsburg. Heck, Bill Clinton was a political animal as much as anything, and HE appointed Ginsburg and Breyer, so what would an openly avowed liberal like Obama do? It's very scary, especially given the U.S. Senate is going to be a 54/46 or 55/45 split if current trends continue.
To me, this is the issue that should get social conservatives off their butts in support of John McCain. If fighting the war against terror wasn't enough, then this should be. Yeah, McCain may not exactly be marching in pro life rallies and going to social conservative events all the time, but the man has a pro life record and you could argue without him we wouldn't have Roberts and Alito, depending on how you argue the Gang of 14 debate.
Imagine this scenario for a moment. Sometime in 2009, John Stevens, who is in his 80's, gets ill and has to resign from the court. Many issues before our country and world are in the balance -- GITMO, the death penalty, Roe v. Wade, eminent domain. Who would you want?
John McCain might appoint someone like Diane Sykes, an attractive conservative, pro-life appeals judge out of Wisconsin. Barack Obama? Someone like Sonia Sotamayor, a liberal judge out of the 2nd circuit.
The recent rulings out of the court -- hopefully the 2nd amendment one tomorrow goes against his trend -- put into light the #2 issue, behind the war, of why conservatives must put aside their primary quabbles and go out and work for Senator John McCain.
In a year where Republicans in general look to be in trouble, it is absolutely amazing to me that the Democrats are going to nominate Barack Obama. Given Hillary's latest string of wins (an ARG poll also shows her winning South Dakota and close in Montana, which would be really embarassing for Obama) and the decision about delegates, Hillary is very close to winning the popular vote under all of the scenarios -- even the one that gives the uncommitted votes in Michigan to Obama.
Given that, and the fact Hillary has done so well in all the swing states, it is simply amazing to me-- and funny, in some ways -- that the Democrat superdelegates seem hell bent on nominating Obama, who I think will prove to be a disaster for them -- even though they have an out with the popular vote thing.
The pastor problems are issues...add that to the Michelle Obama video incident, and obama's extreme positions on the war, I think McCain will end up winning by a pretty solid electoral margin. If Hillary were the nominee, I would say we were in trouble. I have to say that though I disagree with her, Hillary has come across as a much more reasonable figure over time ... and would probably beat McCain in the general. Obama, however, I think will be this year's Michael Dukakis.
Not saying Obama isn't formidable -- he is a great campaigner -- but we are quite fortunate that the Dems are going down that road.
As I stated in my analysis piece, I have thought quite a bit about McCain's potential VP selections. Assuming he doesn't go with a real wild card like JC Watts, I think out of the standard figures that it should come down to three people:
Condi Rice
Mitt Romney
Mark Sanford
I got to those three "finalists" after doing a little bit of a "primary" among the several groups. Get me the best governor, best national figure, and best former candidate/official. I explained that in my previous blog entry.
After analyzing the three finalists, my initial reaction was to go with Condi Rice. I think it would be an historic pick, and to me, to be honest, makes the most sense. Who could deny that Condi has the experience? The knowledge? She's not politically ambitious yet perhaps a run for VP would give her some. I think she would bring women, moderates, and some minorities.
That said, she is so tied to Bush and I think in the current climate I'm not sure if all the above qualities could overshadow that enough, particularly given Obama's focus on trying to make McCain Bush III.
Sanford is an attractive choice because of his credentials as a conservative, but I don't think he brings you anything (McCain will win SC), and I think McCain needs more of a national figure. I think the public would spend a lot of time getting to know Sanford, and I'm not sure that's wise. read more »
»
- Login or register to post comments
- 1 trackback
Hey all, been doing some more thinking about the potential VP choices. As you know in the past I did a more detailed look at Romney, Huckabee, and Condi, and I wanted to list some of the other contenders and my thoughts.
CURRENT GOVERNORS -- There are a handful of governors that could appear on McCain's shortlist. They are:
Tim Pawlenty -- Minnesota
Sarah Palin -- Alaska
Mark Sanford -- South Carolina
Bobby Jindal -- Louisiana
Out of these, there are two that are appealing -- Palin and Sanford. Palin has Jindal's problem though of not being in office that long, and I think she could use more time to build her stock. Down the line, I think she will be a presidential candidate, maybe in 2012 even. Pawlenty has been in office 6 years but I am not that impressed with the guy and I dont think he brings Minnesota. Sanford is appealing because he is a rock ribbed conservative, a bit of a maverick in his own right, and I think would help lock in the south. However, in the end, I would not pick any of these. read more »
Rasmussen Kansas:
McCain 55
Obama 34
Rasmussen Arkansas
McCain 57
Obama 33
