Re: 15 States to Watch in the US Presidential Elec
Sept. 4, 2008 | Right now, I'm thinking this.…
With a John McCain win, he mirrors the 2000 Bush Electoral College: 278 (Bush had 271, then-reflective of the 1990s Census). McCain doesn't come across—at least not yet—as really having the chops to win over the electorate and pick off the industrial states.
Truth be told, I'm sticking with predicting Barack Obama to win the presidency. He would do so by starting off in retaining all of John Kerry's 2004 states (the three previous, presidential party pickups retained their party's losing candidates' states from the election just prior). Obama would add to Kerry's cumulative 252 electoral votes of states by first winning back Iowa, 7, and New Mexico, 5; they voted for Al Gore in 2000 and Bush in 2004.
Obama would reach the winning 270 mark by picking up at least two of the three leading bellwethers: Ohio, 20, and Nevada, 5. Never in history between Republican and Democratic matchups—and this dates back to 1856 (Abe Lincoln was the first Republican winner, in 1860, and won all three bellwethers at the same time Nev. first had the vote in his 1864 re-election)—has the winning candidate failed to carry those two plus that third of the leading bellwethers, Missouri, 11. Speaking of which, no Democratic president has won election while failing to carry Mo. or Virginia. If a winning Obama fails to carry Mo., then he'll pick up Virginia, 13—a major feat because it is one of eleven states that has voted for the GOP in all of the previous ten elections (1968-2004). (Additional note: Of the last four Democratic presidents—John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton—two of them failed to carry all three leading bellwethers. Kennedy lost Ohio in 1960 to Richard Nixon. Carter lost Nev. in 1976 to Gerald Ford. If Obama wins the election but loses his neighboring Mo., it would also be on par with the fact that the Show-Me State last voted for the loser—in this case, John McCain—in 1956. They've been on a roll since 1904, voting only once for the loser—52 years after the hot streak began. And, here we are, 52 years after Mo. backed Adlai Stevenson in his failed rematch with Dwight Eisenhower. If Mo. does indeed end up in a prevailing Obama's win column, Mo. would be the last of the three to go along, if you catch my drift, with Nev. and Ohio. Stay tuned.)
Keep an eye on Colorado and Montana. As I have mentioned in this thread, their voting record has been identical over the last 15 elections (1948-2004). Both polling as toss-ups, I believe however they'll vote in 2008 will once again be the same. (Fact: In those past 15 elections, Colo. and Mont. voted for Democrats only three times—Harry Truman [1948], Lyndon Johnson [1964], and Bill Clinton [1992]—and all were candidates who won their elections.)
And having mentioned this before, Florida and/or Georgia have been in Democratic presidents' win columns over the last 25 elections (1908-2004). Winning both Fla. and Ga. were: Woodrow Wilson (1912, 1916); Franklin D. Roosevelt (1932, 1936, 1940, 1944); Harry Truman (1948); and Jimmy Carter (1976). Winning Ga. was John F. Kennedy (1960). Winning Fla. was Lyndon Johnson (1964). Winning them both—separately—was Bill Clinton (Ga., in 1992; Fla., in 1996). Anyone checking out the polling knows that if Obama wins the election, he's more apt to carry Fla. than Ga. in this election year.
I'll end it here; but it is interesting to note that between the Carolinas and Dakotas it is the Norths that leave the Republicans more vulnerable. This is going to get even more interesting over the next two months—leading all the way to Election Day.
