You forgot Nebraska. It has split electoral votes.

Thanks for the analysis, Eric. I'm still mulling it over. I kept stumbling over this:

To start off, Obama is trailing McCain by double-digits in Florida.

Contrasted with the poll results that you reference:

Florida (27 votes)
McCain (R) 45%, Obama (D) 41% (Quinnipiac, May 22)
McCain (R) 50%, Obama (D) 40% (Rasmussen, May 21)

4 points vs. 10 points doesn't add up to double digits, so to speak, so I was wondering if there were other polls you were referring to.

Probably seems like a nitpicky point, but the entire premise is how Obama can win without Florida.

(Which, frankly, I'd be happy about. I don't want any more elections depending on Florida. Ever.)

I know I've said this a thousand times, but you don't seem to be getting it, so I'll spell it out again: FLORIDA POLLS ARE INACCURATE BECAUSE HE HASN'T BEEN ABLE TO CAMPAIGN THERE!!!

Seriously, we know that in every single state he goes to his numbers shoot up, and Florida/Michigan are the only two he hasn't had a chance to really campaign in, thus, his numbers there are his minimums, and he has a long way to rise.

If you are going to keep pointing out Florida polls, you could at least add that disclaimer.

Good work, Eric.

It looks good, eminent even, but while we scream about how unreliable polls are that show Obama losing, it is likewise too early to assume anything where polls show him leading or closing ground.

The problem is holding on to the Kerry states. That is going to be as much work as winning some red states in my estimation.

The polls look good for Obama in VA, IA, NM, CO, OH and such, but then the polls don't look too good (at least right now) in WI & MI.

I'd say he will really need to work hard winning all Kerry's states and work really hard at winning multiple red states because if he fails at one, he will need the other.

I think all this is premature. Even the polls you cite are all over the place. I don't think pollsmean much until much closer to the election. As recently as late January, Hillary Clinton had a 15+ point lead over Obama in the Gallup tracking poll, and last year eveyone had written off Joohn McCain based on polling data. (Remember Rudy Guiliani?) Furthermore, right now, the only candidate being hit from two different sources is Obama. (Certainly, saying every day that only she (Clinton) can beat McCain does not help Obama.) Hopefully that will all change once Clinton withdraws

Well it's pretty well established that Rasmussen sucks ass, turnip.

I'm telling ya.... Tim Kaine of Va for VP. It just makes sense.... and he's term limited to one term.....

Nice. He trails in Florida in "double digits" in the Rassmussen poll - but has a four point spread in the second poll you post. I'm normally one to defend you guys, but that's just sloppy.

This just states what most rational observers have known for months - there's no dramatic remaking of the map at work, but Barry's going to pick up states where democrats have been outcasts for a long time: the Mountain West.

Colorado and New Mexico will flip for sure. Nevada will with a little leg work. A little further east, last I saw Barry was in the lead in North Dakota... effin' NORTH DAKOTA ppl! Every electoral vote counts. Throw Virginia on top of the heap and show's over - even without Florida! He's going to win PA, for sure and likely Ohio. Even without Ohio things look pretty damn solid.

The thing I enjoy most about this is giving the finger to Florida (apologies to all Floridians - misanthropic rant coming up).

That place is a mosquito filled, overpriced festering disaster filled with the cacauphonos blather of right wing cuban exiles, bad theme parks, emptying aquifers and the smell of slow musty death from a thousand retirement villages. Eff Florida.

It has long had an outsized sense of influence on the American political process that I for one will be glad to see erode as it slowly sinks into the ocean in the coming years.

I agree with HusseinTenaX 100%. Why has Obama done so well and come from behind to beat Clinton? Because he is the superior candidate and it comes through the more he campaigns.

To follow up on my recent comment, Obama is now 10 points up over Clinton in yesterday's Gallup tracking poll. That's a 25 point swing since four minths ago, and the general election is more than five months away.

The McCain Blowout Fallacy
By Bob Beckel

Last weekend David Paul Kuhn on Politico wrote about the possibility that John McCain could beat Barack Obama by as many as 50 electoral votes this November. Kuhn cited several GOP strategists, Democrats and an anonymous RNC source who agreed with the "blowout" scenario, which is what a 50+ electoral victory would be.

To the contrary, I'm willing to go on the record saying that, barring an unforeseen scandal, a far more likely scenario is that John McCain will lose by at least 50 electoral votes in November - and possibly as many as 150.

The foundation of the McCain "blowout" scenario rests on the 286 electoral votes George Bush received in 2004. It assumes McCain would win New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Minnesota - all states won by John Kerry in 2004. I'll concede the possibility of New Hampshire going red this year. John McCain has a unique relationship with the Granite State which has given him two sizable primary victories in 2000 and 2008. But, at best, McCain's chances there are 51-49.

Let's take the rest state-by-state:

Pennsylvania: If anything, the Keystone State has become much more Democratic since 2004 when Kerry won there. In 2008, 170,000+ Republicans switched their registration to Democrat; Bucks and Montgomery Counties in suburban Philadelphia (once the most reliable of Republican counties) for the first time have more registered Democrats than Republicans.

Pennsylvania has 200,000 unregistered black voters and we should count on a minimum of 100,000 to register and vote. By November, 250,000 new voters will turn 18, a group that has voted 60% + nationally for Obama. The fastest growing Pennsylvania demographic group is college-educated, white-collar suburbanites. We know who this group supports. Don't count on a massive disaffected rural blue-collar vote against Obama. They are the smallest and lowest turnout demographic in the state.

Bottom line? McCain is going to be a heavy underdog in Pennsylvania this year.

Michigan: The most devastated economic state in the Bush years is a McCain target? Let me get off the floor and stop laughing. Michigan has 1.4 million blacks with 300,000 yet to be (but will be) registered. It has one of the largest populations of college students in the country, and 150,000 new voters will turn 18 by Election Day. Any bets how they will vote?

Michigan is highly unionized in a year where unions will spend more and be more active for Democrats than at any time since the halcyon days of the 1950s. "Uncommitted" in the Democratic primary almost beat McCain's total vote - and that's when no Democrat campaigned in the state.

The truth is that McCain has very little chance of winning Michigan.

Minnesota: Let's be clear, in 1984 Minnesota voted for my boss Walter Mondale. Suffice it to say, it was unique in that regard. More importantly, the state's growth is virtually all in the Minneapolis/St. Paul region, which is full of young, upscale voters who aren't known for their GOP sympathies.

The GOP could have a convention there every two weeks and still would have trouble winning Minnesota.

Now for a real view of the landscape. Start by giving Obama all the states Kerry won in 2004 (except maybe New Hampshire) and look at a few states Bush won that year:

Iowa: This state is Obama's spiritual home. It is prosperous and has the largest number of colleges by population than any state in the union.

Iowa is a lock for Obama in November.

Colorado: Once reliably GOP, the state is increasingly Democratic. It has a retiring GOP senator whose seat looks good for a Democratic pickup. It will also be home of the DNC convention and has a Hispanic population that has come to despise Republicans' immigration views. McCain showed guts bucking his party on comprehensive immigration reform but then ran from it like a scalded dog when conservatives cornered him on it last year.

Bottom line: Obama has a good shot at turning Colorado blue for only the second time since 1968.

New Mexico: Like Colorado, there is a vacant Senate seat with a favored Democrat. But more importantly, there's Bill Richardson, who will turn every screw he has (and there are many) for Obama and will be the attack dog against McCain among Hispanics. New Mexico also has a population that is becoming heavily Democratic with tens of thousands of Hispanics yet to be registered.

New Mexico is as good a bet for Obama as Big Brown was in the Derby.

Ohio: In 2006, amid rampant Republican state corruption, Ohio elected a Democratic governor and a Democratic senator. Home foreclosures are equally as rampant and Ohio is bleeding good paying jobs daily. Ohio had a massive Democratic primary turnout, which is the strongest predictor of general election results. It has a large college population and 1.38 million blacks of which 300,000 are unregistered. Expect 225,000 new black voters in November. Over 600,000 Ohio residents have turned 18 since 2004. They are registering in record numbers and are overwhelmingly for Obama.

For a state Kerry lost by only 117,000 votes, I'd say Ohio leans strongly Obama in 2008. The RCP Average currently has Obama leading McCain in Ohio by 1.8%.

Virginia: The Commonwealth has been moving inexorably Democratic for the last decade. It has a Democratic governor and one Democratic senator, soon to be two. Twenty percent of the population is black, of which 200,000 are unregistered. If black turnout increases by 20% and Obama gets 90+% of their vote, as expected, it will constitute more votes than Kerry lost to Bush in 2004, and Kerry never contested the state. One third of the state vote is now from Democratic Northern Virginia where a huge increase in turnout is expected in 2008. Already 131,000 new voters have registered, half under the age of 25. Over 400,000 Virginians have turned 18 since 2004; expect Obama to win them in a walk.

Although McCain currently leads Obama in Virginia by 1.3% in the RCP Average, expect that to reverse when Obama becomes the nominee.

Other Bush states in play that McCain must protect include Florida, North Carolina, Montana, and even Georgia.

Ponder this: In 2004 the economy was strong, the Iraq war still marginally popular, Bush's favorability was near 50%, and voters were generally content. In 2008 the economy is in shambles, the war despised by most Americans, Bush has the highest negatives of any president since polling began, and the public, by an 80-20 margin, believes the country is on the wrong track.

Yes, there will be a blowout in November. But it won't be McCain's.

Eric,
It's a stretch to call Florida a "long shot" for Barack when you show him down 4 and 10 points in a state in which he hasn't campaigned in yet to any significant degree and that is the epicenter of his delegate fight with HRC -- a fight that will be, if not completely solved, surely much less salient for voters in Nov than it is now. There are favorable demographics there (shift of younger Cuban-Americans away from Republicans), and Obama will energize the state's large African American population.
It's a challenge, sure, but to call it a "long shot" is too dismissive. Perhaps becomes closer to a long shot if McCain picks Crist as running mate, but not now.

When this election is over, all the experts are going to ask why they didn't foresee Obama with 350+ electoral votes... That is the honest ones. All the rest will be sweeping this under the rug.

There are multiple scenarios by which Obama can win without winning Ohio and Florida. Far and away the most doable ones revolve around him either flipping Virginia or Colorado.

The key phrase being multiple paths. Sen Obama grants himself options, and more opportunities will present themselves once the Clintons shaddup already. I'd say the old red/blue maps won't be of much use in 2008.

Senator Bush McCain will be 72 years old soon. His father died when he was 70. There goes the longevity genes claim. Just because Senator Bush McCain's mother has longevity genes it does not mean that she has passed them on to her little Maverick of The Panderosa. He may have his fathers genes, and may be living on borrowed time.

We need to elect a young vigorous leader, who is not already on a daily regime of geriatric medicial stop gaps.

This is a good start. From my meager experience, Ohio may be out of reach for Obama unless there's a massive snowstorm centered over Cincinnati on Election Day.

They still think he's a Muslim there. And they loooooooooove John McCain. The only way they stop loving him (and this is referencing the small subset of people I still know there, having grown up in SW Ohio) is if he keeps up that "My friends..." crap. That actually might get on their nerves because it sounds so disingenuous. And if he gets on their nerves enough, maybe they stay home. Again, that, or a blizzard.

Excellent post.

I probably don't have to say this, but I will anyway. I hope all of you are donating time and/or money to the campaign. I'm not taking anything for granted and I hope you aren't either.

On another note, the SurveyUSA poll has McCain getting 17% of the African-American vote. Another one of those hard to believe numbers.

Geez, when was the last time you all did a post telling us that either candidate had added a superdelegate? 3 days ago. Obama has gained 6 since then (Hillary added one and one switched back to Clinton after switching to Obama)

As far as this horse race stuff - it is kind of like fantasy football. It is fun to play and great to be the best in your league, but whatever strategy and analysis we have is absolute crap compared to the strategy and analysis of the pros playing the game. What I'd really like to see is what the Obama camp spreadsheet for the fall looks like. After all, how may pundits had "real world" analysis in December that involved Obama winning every race between 2/5 to 3/4 and never trailing in pledged delegates?

Obama now leads McCain in Presidential polling - and leads Shrillary by 10 points!

Thanks for some good analysis, Eric et. al.

Once again, polling FIVE MONTHS before the f***ing election! A lot of people they're polling in states Shrillary won are still saying they're voting for McCain because they're so pissed off she's not going to win the nomination.

I'd love to see these polls once cooler heads prevail and they gradually accept their loss and support Obama.

This "double digit" lead for McCain will distintegrate and Obama may tie or eventually lead!

A very, very interesting look at possible scenarios for the Democratic delegate count with 5 possible scenarions... The bottom line, even if Florida and Michigan are fully seated, Obama needs 128 of the remaining 345 available delegates (including 33 uncommitted pledged delegates from Michigan). Hillary needs to win 236 of them.

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/05/fl-mi-by-numbers_21.html

Hey Eric and Greg, this is the kind of "let you make up your own mind analysis" that I would love to see. I love this site, but you guys set yourself up for alot of flack with alot of the guessing game, crystal ball, psychological games stuff.

Turnout, turnout, turnout.

If Obama gets voters registered and to the polls, then all of the likely-voter (and registered voter) models go out of the window.

He's looking at five or ten percent of the 90 million who didn't vote last time. That's enough to change the map in radical ways.

This is going to be a 50-state election. No, really. Even Utah. There will be no massive, abandoned chunks of the country this time. This is not going to be 2004, where everything focused on a tiny bunch of Ohioans.

I'd be shocked if voter turnout in November does not exceed 200 million people if Obama is the candidate!

His route to the White House is the same as previous presidents--a stroll down Pennsylvania Avenue.

Clinton 08...

You do know that even if you fully seat the Florida and Michigan folks as voted, Obama is still way, way closer to getting the nomination right? Both in pledged delegates and superdelegates? Hillary would have to get over 66% of the remaining uncommitted delegates for your best case scenario to come true. The superdelegates would still have to overturn the will of the pledged delegates.

That is what is getting lost here - Clinton can not overcome Obama's pledged delegate lead. Even with Florida and Michigan seated in the Clinton wish way, Obama would still be 80 some pledged delegates and 50 supers ahead of her. My guess is that most her supporters have no idea that their dream scenario would still result in her being behind by 130 delegates.

Regrettably, the last polls I saw on TPM for Oregon and Washington showed McCain slightly leading or tied with Obama. I think we'll be playing defense on the West coast.

On a more upbeat note, I share the opinion voiced by many commenters that the numbers are likely to change a good deal before November. I sense that the more people get to know Obama, the more comfortable they will feel. And the more then get to know McCain, the more they will turn against him.

Two words, Wes Clark for Veep.

Please excuse me while I go out and blow my brains out.

How on earth can any of these states be this close?

We have a Republican candidate who is a poor excuse for what has been eight years of disaster.

Is this country really that accepting of corruption and incompetence that these numbers are true.

For the sake of the country, I sincerely hope not.

[Apologies from my scrambled reply. I'm a rube at this, and think I accidentally put in some code which deleted my copy. Let me try this again:]

You might want to check out the post entitled Robo pollsters over at Daily Kos, or Pollster Ratings, v3.1.1 over at FiveThirtyEight, in which you'll see that Rasmussen comes in at No. 3.

Easy solution.

Nominate Hillary, Obama VP, win in a landslide.

HyperRevue - Do you accept or do you not? Assuming this bet is legal and all, I am anxious to know, one way or the other.

Thanks - PA

Thanks

Being hopeful is good, and there is reason to be so, but being delusional doesn't help and could lead to a wasteful allocation of resources. At the Nadir of Kerry's 04 campaign, they thought Edwards would bring NC and help in other southern states. Kerry is sitting in the White House now if he'd picked Graham (Florida) or someone from Ohio instead of Edwards.

There is hope. We're within the margin in Virginia (Clinton is losing outside the margin) and a few small western states look good for us. There is also hope in Ohio, which would be huge.

We are not, however, going to win in Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and other southern states. McCain has 14 to 16 point leads in the latest (albeit a couple of weeks old) polls. Moreover, he is well about 50% already. It's one thing to be trailing 42-28 and another to be trailing 54-40 (Georgia 5/14), 60-38 (Alabama 5/29) or 54-39 (Mississippi 5/23).

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html#

The biggest problem, though, is the "Obama would be able to hold on to the Kerry states," assumption. If we lose Michigan and Pennsylvania, we can't win, period. If we lose just one, we can't win without huge flipping elsewhere. Two recent polls show McCain ahead in Michigan by 4 points, but with a lot of room (44-40 and 41-37). Pennsylvania seems to be moving our way, but there is only one poll I could find and it showed a reasonable lead for Obama.

The problem is that our candidates spent six weeks and millions of dollars campaigning in Pennsylvania while McCain was off on tour somewhere. Every Pennsylvanian has our ads, heard our candidate and still we're only in the mid forties. On the other hand, Obama hasn't campaigned in Michigan. If we seat the entire Michigan delegation for the convention and start campaigning there our numbers may improve. In the end we might lose both, win one or win both, but it'll probably be a close call. I've projected elseware that we would lose Pennsylvania and Michigan would be a toss-up. I may have been overly pessimistic.

A discussion of Colorado should include talk of ballot initiatives, such as the current proposed constitutional amendment to classify a fertilized egg as a human being.

http://coloradoindependent.com/view/nothing-mature-about

Aside from the fact that the military vote is small, being black and in the military doesn't change your feelings about how black people have been treated. My wife is black and a 13-year military veteran, and she and all of her freinds are 1,000% for Obama. I don't even understand the 5-10% of blacks who have voted for Hillary in the pirmaries. I suppose it has to do with their nostalgia for Bill. They are not going for McCain. Put yourself into the shoes of a black person in this country with the chnance of seeing a black person become President. Are you going to vote for the white, Replublican guy?

This talk about remaking the electoral map and winning over states that Democrats haven't won for over 50 years is a venture in wishful thinking and an escape from political reality. Obama is a liberal Democrat, and the only difference between him and other liberal democrats who have run for the office is that he is also black and he has very little experience. Now that the primaries are about over, those things aren't likely to be an advantage in any state.

The ONLY thing that Obama has going for him is the fact that Americans are completely fed up with Bush and the Republican Party. And McCain is an old man offering more of the same. Even Dukakis and Kerry could easily knock off McCain if they were running this time around. So could Hillary. The only question is whether Americans are willing to take a big risk on someone whom Republicans will paint as being completely out of the mainstream politically, racially, and culturally, and someone who has absolutely no foreign policy experience even though we are in the midst of a war.

You can dream up all the unlikely scenarios you want because it really doesn't matter. The point is that polls - as well as the popular vote - show that Obama is a much weaker candidate than Hillary in terms of electoral votes.

The only question is this: Is Obama too weak a candidate to beat McCain in the general election, even with extreme anti-Republican mood in the country? Another factor is what may happen in Iraq, Iran, or elsewhere between now and the election.

The answer is: You'd better hope that Obama can take out a crippled and cranky old man who wants the war to go on for 1,000 years, and you'd also better hope that Bush doesn't stir up everyone's fear and patriotism just before the election, because you're the ones rolling the dice - not me. I want to go with the sure thing - Hillary.

"Hoping" for trials. So much hope. So little reality. (Sound familiar?)

Here's a list of prominent Dems against impeachment.

Pelosi
Durban
Reid
Feingold...etc.

And!...I saved the very best for last....The "hope and change" Messiah himself...Sen. Barrack Obama.

"Deep Shit"?

Indeed.

What a group of posters when it comes to Obama. First thing out of the window is CS - Yes I will be harsh. Here are a few choice random examples -

-Central problem Obama faces is his race (says billinvirginia) What a crock! His central problem is the positions he has taken to win the nomination. Meeting with leaders of hostile regimes the first year without precondition. Or his hidden stance on Social Security. Or his fried egg v scrambled egg Economic policy

-Seriously how does he NOT hold on to Kerry states?....This will be over by the time the lights go down at the Dem convention (says Mason). Dream on. Dream on. Can you sort of count the number of times the Dems have nominated the liberal of the candidates and won? Do not forget Teddy ran to the right of Carter and Carter lost. So did Mondale who ran to the left of Hart and lost. As did Dukakis and McGovern and Stvenson in '52,'56. (PS:In 2008 over the more liberal Bradley, Gore prevailed in the general election and went on to win the election).

-if African Americans turn out in the numbers they have for the primary, and they continue to go 9-1 for Barack, places like MI, PA, OH look a lot safer for Barack, and places like NC, VA, MO are put into play (says Dorn76. Open you eyes. MO is a lost cause. Obama won barely, barely over Clinton. He has ZERO chance, if that, in MO. I have inlaws in rural south MO. No play what so ever. Lived in VA for four years. Not a chance. He will not get the margin he need in the Northern VA suburbs to offset McCain votes downstate. Same in NC - research triangle area will not give him the margin either.

- Worst case scenerio?
OBAMA 302 MCCAIN 236
Obama wins CA, OR, HI, WA, CO, NM, DC, PA, MN, IA, WI, IL, MI, OH, VA, MD, DE, NJ, CT, RI, MA, NY, VT, ME
Best Case Scenerio?
Obama 359 MCCAIN 179
Obama adds NH, NV, FL, GA, MS
and makes plays for AK, TX, NC, and SC
I think the path is pretty clear...and I much prefer it to 2 out of 3 Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida or lose.
(so says DemDave1972).

No.Comment.Necessary.

How the hell can't Obama win Ohio? After the state has been ravaged by GOP economic policy, how can any Democrat not be guaranteed an overwhelming victory in Ohio?

What's the matter with Kansas? Forget that, what the hell's the matter with the people of Ohio?

The problem with New Hampshire is that McCain has campaigned here so extensively in 1999-2000 and 2007-08. He must have visited almost every New Hampshire town with a population over 2,000 and has probably personally met tens of thousands of people here. The state has been trending Democratic, and Shaheen is leading Sununu in all polls I've seen for the open Senate seat, so there is always a chance, but the myth of the Straight-Talk Express lives on among the Republican-leaning, rural independents in New Hampshire. On the other hand, the Iraq war is not at all popular here; witness the poorly-funded Carol Shea-Porter's surprise victory against Jeb Bradley, a moderate Republican House member, in 2006. Still, Obama has work to do here, and our 4 electoral votes may not be worth the effort (although had Gore won NH in 2000--and he lost by the smallest vote margin than in any state but Florida--Bush would never had been President).

The geography of victory is important, but policy is even more import. It's the stupid economy.
Early polls help psephologists program efforts to optimize candidate visits and spending. It is believed from mkt theory that when a voter moves he will not retrace his prior moves. Early commitment is important. Momentum and inertia are important. No one will move the 30% (28?)of rockribbed immutable Republicans. Ignore but do not annoy them. Same with the extreme left. Start planning a Bugiosi-led task force to find and prosecute war criminals (news of which will leak). Start planning another to investigate economic crimes, in Iraq, Wall Street, and New Orleans. Positive nonpartisan moves early will attract many independents or weakly committed Republicans (especially Reagan Democrats)to an attractive not yet demonized candidate. Watch the Iowa market and the British bookies. Real money in play. Obama's lead is astounding given the slimoid attacks. Barring something worse, or a flop next week, Obama should gain marginally in visited states until November and win the GE with something to spare. One problem is the crypto-racist fringe who wouldn't vote for a black Jesus. They are everywhere, in the South, in the hills. I judge they range from 7.5 - 10 per cent of potential voters (many just grumble and don't register so their presence in the likely voters is smaller. The Obama campaign is the best organized and best financed in history. There are several millions unregistered AA's who can be signed up. As health and SS and pension debates increase, I would expect massive numbers of middle class 40-65's to move to the candidate who promises them increased security in a believable package. Very important to let anyone keep the insurance they have (I've had three heart attacks and spent 15 days in hospital last month, and it cost me nothing at Kaiser). Old folks are highly pissed at problems in Medicare. Go for full and fast payment of doctors, and a big chunk of the AMA will switch. A sensible real reform of both Medicare and Medicaid will attract millions. John Bush is defeated by his own ideology. The presentation and marketing of high quality reforms can win the day. Have some pitiful old people talking with Obama. The money can come later. Don't make a no-tax-increase pledge. Selah.

Another idiot ranting from the pulpit of his church--Father Michael Phleger. Check it out on Youtube.

With Bob Barr at the top of a Libertarian ticket, economic conservatives and religious conservatives will be siphoned away from John McCain. What we are on the precipice of seeing this fall is not just a stunning victory by Obama, but the disintegration of the Republican Party itself.

In eight short years, George W. Bush and Karl Rove have pushed the Republican Party onto the scrap heap of history.

Webb or Warner for VP and Kaine for their replacement in the Senate.