#86 The Race is Tightening, As Expected, Near the End

Everyone's talking about it, so it must be so. Even the polls show it's happening. The race is tightening. And Race is one of the major reasons.

Jesse Washington's AP article in today's newspapers begins, "What's more scary: a bleak economy or a black president?" That sums it up pretty bluntly.

In Lafayette, Louisiana, Charles Palmer, a 74-year-old retired oil company manager and registered Democrat who is voting for McCain, is quoted in the article as saying about Barack Obama: "I do think he has that minority thing probably in the back of his mind, deep down. He's not going to hurt 'em, let's put it that way." Later, he adds, "It's just the attitude blacks have toward the whites in this country. It's very negative."

Maybe the way Louisiana and the Feds have treated blacks in Louisiana during and after Katrina has something to do with it, Charles? Maybe the way southern (and northern) blacks have been treated for, oh, ever has something to do with it? And maybe Charlie's view is colored by his generation's background, living through the twentieth century civil rights movement in an area of the country that, a hundred years earlier, lived through the Civil War.

But we digress. Not really. Racial issues are beginning increasingly to surface in the polls, and the polls are beginning to show a tightening in the presidential race. Such tightening has happened before. The last week of campaigning often shows the candidate behind making up some of the ground. In one of the most furious election-last-week finishes, Hubert Humphrey almost made up enough ground to defeat Richard Nixon forty years ago.

However, I believe the current shifts in poll results actually point to less of a surprise come election day this year, since the race issue is now being discussed more openly (it was always underneath the discussion; now it IS the discussion). While my own view is that a candidate's race is irrelevant compared to his policies and the people with whom he surrounds himself, I live enough in the real world to recognize that my view is not universally held. Thus, it is good to get the racial issue out in the open, where it can be examined and, one hopes, rejected by enough people that the major party candidate who will actually do the better job can be elected.

Here's how I still think next Tuesday will work out.

Obama will win New England, NY, NJ, PA, MD, DE. That's a broad swath of Blue to start with. If Obama actually loses PA, then "Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;/Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world" (thank you, William Butler Yeats). Obama may win Ohio, though I don't really feel confident yet that Ohioans will provide him with majority support. If he does win Ohio, the election is, for all practical purposes, over. Obama will win the northeastern part of the Midwest (Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan), and the West Coast (WA, OR, CA).

I think Obama will win at least one traditionally Red southern state, probably Virginia; Colorado; New Mexico; and possibly Nevada. In other words, I'm sticking to my recent projections, despite the tightening in some of the polls. Even without OH (which Obama could win), FL (some polls show him ahead, others have him behind), MO (depends on voter turnout in St. Louis), and NC (where it's been fluctuating between Obama and McCain), Barack Obama would have enough electoral votes to become president.

I see 271 to 284 electoral votes for Obama, without OH and FL, with the possibility of more if either OH or FL swings his way. Of course, something could happen to cause upsets, especially if there's high voter turnout in Georgia, moving it into the Democratic column, for example, but I'm not counting on too many surprises.

You heard it here first. If I'm wrong, you don't remember where you heard it. The campaign has been a long, wearying process, not just for the candidates but for all of America. Let's all now put our heads down on our desks, close our eyes, and take a long enough nap that we can get through these final days until the results are known.

-- triton --

# 84 Ohio has WHAT poll results?

Yes, that's the question. Right now the Ohio polling shows Obama ahead(!) by anywhere from 4 to 14 points. How can that be, he asks himself. Remember that I also raised questions when the polls showed West Virginia going for Obama by eight points shortly after they had shown McCain ahead by eight, and I did not move WV from my McCain electoral votes column. WV has corrected itself (or the pollsters have corrected themselves), and McCain has a comfortable lead in that state.

But Ohio? Senator Sherrod Brown (one of the several people I had suggested to be considered for VP on Obama's ticket) was on Rachel Maddow's show last evening, and indicated his belief that Ohio was moving toward Obama. He didn't phrase it quite like this, but what he implicitly said was that it takes Ohioans a little longer to get the point. And the point right now is that McCain's economic policies will continue the disasters of the dubya administration. Maybe Brown is right, and perhaps my original thought that Ohio would vote for Obama was also correct, before I saw that the trend in the state a couple of months ago was favoring McCain. That trend seems to have peaked, and to have reversed.

For now, I'm keeping Ohio as a Tossup state, but if it does go for Obama, the fat lady will have sung. And I'm NOT talking about any individual Ohioan. Remember: I'm a Buckeye too, and lived a great eight years there!

-- triton --

# 80 Are We Looking at 306 to 232?

Well, as I indicated last time, WV has shifted back to McCain, and now is even more strongly in the Red column. I'm not surprised. I am surprised that Ohio polling has Obama ahead by nine points(!), 51% to 42%. Frankly, I don't believe it.

Florida polling has McCain slightly ahead and, despite Obama's allegedly near-double-digit lead in Ohio, I'm still planning my electoral vote count with McCain winning both of those states. Nothing against Ohioans, "my friends," but I can't imagine the Ohioans who lived there when I was a graduate student at Ohio State (forty years ago, to be sure) voting for a black man. Well, yes, I guess I do feel something against Ohioans, at least those who in one poll last week tacitly admitted they were racist.

I still feel comfortable with my having placed CO, NV, and VA in Obama's column a few days ago. He maintains at least a 4% lead, and actually it's been fluctuating to as high as 10%, in those states.

So with two weeks to go, I still have Obama over 270 electoral votes. The surprise is his strength in what I have considered to be the two other Tossup states, MO and NC. Today's published poll has Obama ahead 49 to 44 in Missouri, and that's Rasmussen, reporting for Fox News, which is usually skewed in favor of McCain. In North Carolina, Obama's ahead 51 to 48. That doesn't leave a lot of Undecideds in that state.

I'm not willing to award either state to Obama, however. They're both within the potential Bradley (or Wilder) Effect, which is as high as 6%. Of course, Obama drew upwards of 100,000 people last week in St. Louis, and McCain drew downward of 2,000 soon thereafter in the same area.

Palin's the one who's drawing for the Republicans, but I'm not sure it's entirely due to her popularity. I think it's more like the crowds that gather around a train wreck, looking to see what damage has been done and what more might be done. In other words, I still think the negativity that has been imposed on Palin's speeches by her handlers has adversely affected the Republican ticket's support.

Right now, then, I still see it as Obama 291 and McCain 174. If I'm correct about OH and FL, and if even MO and NC go Red, it will be Obama 291, McCain 247. More likely, NC may go Blue and MO go Red: Obama 306, McCain 232.

In any case, my standard caveat is still in effect: there's no real way to determine how race will play out in this election. As fewer folk are listed as Undecided, my electoral numbers are based on what I hope is minimal racist influence. But, as they sing in "Porgy and Bess": "It Ain't Necessarily So."

-- triton --

#79 Updated Electoral Vote Guesstimates: 291-174 (73 Tossups)

With the debates over, with John McCain still shifting the tactics of his campaign, and based on today's poll numbers and the momentum that seems to be continuing, today I'm moving Colorado (9), Nevada (5), and Virginia (13) to Barack Obama's column. That's a big move, since all three states went for dubya four years ago and eight years ago. Obama currently leads in the polls by 7 points in Colorado, 5 points in Nevada, and 10 points in Virginia. He has been maintaining these leads pretty consistently recently.

These three states add 27 votes to Obama's previous total of 264, giving him 291 votes -- and the Presidency.

I have added no states to McCain's column; he remains with 22 states and 174 electoral votes.

Obviously the election is not over. These guesstimates are a snapshot in time--today--but I believe that, if the election were held today, Barack Obama would be elected.

West Virginia (5), which had shifted from eight points ahead for McCain in late September to eight points ahead for Obama in mid-October, has shifted back to McCain by two points. North Dakota (3) is now in play, but I suspect it will retreat to McCain by election day. Ohio (20) and Florida (27) are still Tossups and could go either way; for now, however, I'm assuming they'll go Red in November, though I haven't moved them yet into the McCain column. I feel the same way about Missouri (11) and North Carolina (15) going Red, but I'm leaving them in Tossup as well. They still have some slight possibility of going for Obama by November 4. Obviously, if two of more of these states go to Obama, he'll be well over 300 electoral votes and could be approaching landslide proportions.

Even without West Virginia, Ohio, Florida, Missouri, and North Carolina, Obama can win with either Colorado or Virginia. Both plus Nevada provides a cushion. And we still have more than two weeks to go.

A major international disruption, a major national gaffe by either side, or a host of any other events could alter the calculus.

Here are my current guesstimated totals. Remember -- You read it here first; if I'm wrong, you don't remember where you read it:

McCAIN
Alabama 9
Alaska 3
Arizona 10
Arkansas 6
Georgia 15
Idaho 4
Indiana 11
Kansas 6
Kentucky 8
Louisiana 9
Mississippi 6
Montana 3
Nebraska 5
North Dakota 3 – MIGHT BE IN PLAY?
Oklahoma 7
South Carolina 8
South Dakota 3
Tennessee 11
Texas 34
Utah 5
West Virginia 5 – MIGHT BE IN PLAY?
Wyoming 3

Currently 22 states with 174 electoral votes for McCain

-- -----

OBAMA
California 55
Colorado 9
Connecticut 7
Delaware 3
DC 3
Hawaii 4
Illinois 21
Iowa 7
Maine 4
Maryland 10
Massachusetts 12
Michigan 17
Minnesota 10
Nevada 5
New Hampshire 4
New Mexico 5
New Jersey 15
New York 31
Oregon 7
Pennsylvania 21
Rhode Island 4
Vermont 3
Virginia 13
Washington 11
Wisconsin 10

Currently 24 states + DC with 291 electoral votes for Obama

----- -----

TOSSUP
Florida 27 THOUGH OBAMA OCCASIONALLY AHEAD, I THINK WILL BE RED
Missouri 11 A SMALL CHANCE TO BE OBAMA’S THOUGH I DON’T THINK SO
North Carolina 15 REALLY A TOSSUP, PROBABLY McCAIN
Ohio 20 REALLY A TOSSUP, BUT I THINK WILL BE McCAIN

Currently 4 states with 73 electoral votes are Tossups.

-- triton --

#76 Some New Numbers

The new poll numbers are appearing. Right now on average Obama is ahead in states with 313 electoral votes. There are, of course, reasons why those totals can change, with unacknowledged racial bias being the primary one. There's no way we can determine the extent unless folk actually say so, as they've done in Pennsylvania and Ohio recently. McCain is listed as having 135 electoral votes.

Other items--such as an October surprise (international or national crisis in addition to the financial crisis, Cindy McCain personally contributing her fortune to eliminate the credit crisis, and stuff we can't even begin to imagine)--could change the polls quickly, so I'm not assuming anything. But if the election were held right now, we likely would have a new party in the White House.

According to these most recent polls, Ohio is still a tossup (in the polls I've seen, Obama is ahead more often than behind), but even Florida gives Obama a 5 point lead. Nonetheless, right now at least, I expect Florida and Ohio to go Republican.

Obama's ahead in New Hampshire (10 points), West Virginia(by 8 points!?), Nevada (4 points so I haven't even included NV in Obama's total), Colorado (more than 5 points), Minnesota (6 points), Wisconsin (more than 8 points), Virginia (more than 8 points! -- can that be?), Pennsylvania (14 points -- that's Biden's work), and Florida (5 points).

I've already put New Mexico (only 4+ points ahead) and Iowa (13 points ahead) into the Democratic columns.

I'll keep looking but not yet every day.

-- triton --

#65 It's Ohio

Pennsylvania may be known as "The Keystone State," but this year, as in 2004, Ohio is the key state. Almost on a daily basis, certainly on a poll-to-poll basis, the lead switches back and forth between Obama and McCain in Ohio, with its twenty electoral votes.

Right now the polls have McCain ahead but barely. A few days ago, Obama was ahead by four points. It's likely to continue to alternate until November 4. If Ted Strickland (the governor) or Sherrod Brown (the senator, though I don't know if he was seriously considered by the Obama camp) had been willing to run for the VP position, Ohio might be more likely to go Democratic this year. Right now, however, it's a tossup.

But it's appearing increasingly likely that, as Ohio goes, so goes the presidency. Once again. That's a scary thought, given Ohioans' documented difficulty to vote as they actually intend, the questionable accuracy of the machines used for the electronic balloting, and 2004's early surprising difference between exit polls and actual votes. The CEO of Diebold, which made the machines used four years ago in Ohio, proudly exclaimed when the company delivered the machines that Bush was going to win the state.

It is possible--but very difficult--for either candidate to win the election without Ohio. It's also very unlikely. I hope that Strickland and Brown will be campaigning for and with Obama in the state.

I'm not saying the other states are unimportant. For Ohio to be the deciding state, the other states have to line up as they are generally expected to do: the south solidly for McCain (and I'll include VA, WV, MO, TX, OK in this group); New England (except possibly for the battleground NH), NY, NJ, PA, MI, MN, and WI solidly for Obama (and some of these are currently questionable); the agricultural midwest solidly for McCain, except possibly for IA; MT, ID, UT, WY insane for McCain; AZ and one or both of NV and CO for McCain; and the western seaboard (WA, OR, CA) plus NM for Obama. Alaska and Hawaii will likely to continue to cancel each other out. There may be a shift or two of some of the smaller states without major effect, but if several states vote differently from currently expected, they could offset Ohio's large number of electoral votes. I don't think that will happen. Ohio seems to be the key.

-- triton --

# 63 "Numbers" -- Not Just a TV Show Any More

The report I cited in my post last night is still sticking in me, in part because today Yahoo has that report as one of its featured articles, so I'm constantly reminded of it. I've been fearful of latent racism since the Pennsylvania Democratic primary, when some voters indicated they weren't ready to have "an African-American as president."

We shouldn't be surprised, of course, that racial prejudice exists in our society. But the stakes in this election are so high and the Republicans have been running such a dirty, rotten scoundrel campaign that, frankly, I don't see how any one who is not a dyed-in-the-wool, can't-tell-his-ass-from-his-elbow Republican can even consider voting for McCain. On the other hand, I know some smart, good people who are supporting John McCain, so I can't apply my criteria to other folk. They have their own agendas and benchmarks, for good or for ill, and they'll vote the way they think is best.

I'm voting for Obama because (a) his ideas more closely align with my own in foreign and domestic policies; (b) he'll represent us well in international relationships, as dubya has clearly not; (c) he seems not to act impulsively and with anger, as McCain apparently does (at least according to sources from his own campaign); and (d) he chose a running mate based on qualifications, not political considerations. Joe Biden was not my first choice (or my fourth or fifth, for that matter) to be the VP candidate, but he does seem to be connecting with middle- and lower-economic classes in a way that Obama, despite his economically deprived childhood, is apparently not connecting.

Even some Republican elected officials can't support John McCain. Last week Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska said that Governor Palin “doesn’t have any foreign policy credentials” and added that it’s a “stretch” to say that Palin is qualified to be president. This may be the Democrats’ answer to Lady de Rothschild, a former donor to the Democratic party, who 0n September 17 announced her support for McCain and opposition to Obama. Senator Obama is “an elitist,” said the millionaire who married into a billionaire family.

Here are some recent poll numbers, as of late last week:

NYTimes/CBS: Obama 48-43
Gallup: Obama 48-44
CNN Poll of Polls: Obama 47-44
Virginia: McCain 49 to 41
New Mexico: Obama 49-42
Ohio: tied at 48% each, in a two-person race; when the three other candidates were listed, Obama remained at 48%, McCain dropped to 44%, and Nader got 4%.

I also saw that Indiana, which had been moving toward Obama (perhaps when he was considering Evan Bayh as his running mate?) was moving back to McCain.

But the countrywide polls notwithstanding, I'm still upset with the race issue, and have made some changes in how the electoral college stands, from my point of view, right now. John McCain is now favored in five additional traditionally Red states (even though some of them have Democratic governors and/or senators) which previously I had listed as Tossups; Barack Obama will likely carry New Mexico; but I have removed four states from Obama's column, and have moved them to Tossups. Three of the four are vital midwest states: Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin. If Obama had been able to convince Governor Strickland to be his running mate, Ohio might be strongly in the Obama camp.

KEY:
# moved from Tossup to McCain
+ moved from Tossup to Obama
* moved from Obama to Tossup


McCAIN
Alabama 9
Alaska 3
Arizona 10
Florida 27
Georgia 15
Idaho 4
Indiana 11
Kansas 6
Kentucky 8
Louisiana 9
Mississippi 6
#Missouri 11
#Montana 3
Nebraska 5
#Nevada 5
North Carolina 15
North Dakota 3
Oklahoma 7
South Carolina 8
South Dakota 3
Tennessee 11
Texas 34
Utah 5
#Virginia 13
#West Virginia 5
Wyoming 3

Currently 26 states with 239 electoral votes for McCain

----- -----
OBAMA
California 55
Delaware 3
DC 3
Hawaii 4
Illinois 21
Maine 4
Maryland 10
Massachusetts 12
Minnesota 10
New Jersey 15
+New Mexico 5
New York 31
Oregon 7
Pennsylvania 21
Rhode Island 4
Vermont 3
Washington 11

Currently 16 states + DC with 219 electoral votes for Obama

---- -----
TOSSUP
Arkansas 6 (Republican?)
Colorado 9
Connecticut 7 (because of Lieberman)
Iowa 7
*Michigan 17 (despite auto factory closures and McCain’s ineptitude talking to Michiganders)
*New Hampshire 4 (a bad feeling I'm having right now about Jed Bartlett's state)
*Ohio 20 (despite auto factory closures)
*Wisconsin 10 (McCain spending time and $$ there)

Currently, 8 states with 80 electoral votes are Tossups.

But remember: the election is very fluid and, in addition to the states I've classified as Tossups, several of the states under either candidate can shift (as clearly happened since my last electoral list). Right now, based on the above lists, Obama needs 51 electoral votes: barring any further defections from the Obama column, Connecticut's 7 electoral votes, Michigan's 17, Ohio's 20, and Wisconsin's 10 would give Obama 273 votes and the presidency.

In fact, right now that's the only way I see Obama winning the election: by carrying all three of those midwest states. That's a tough task, especially in Ohio with its strong conservative Republican tradition. A lot will depend on what Governor Strickland and Senator Brown do by way of campaigning.

Two more points: (1) my having even to list Michigan as a tossup is of concern, given the condition of that state's economy; (2) that I had to add Wisconsin is a real shock, and may be a function of McCain's spending time and money there, without yet badly screwing up his appearances.

-- triton --

#34 Why We Must Vote in November: Kathleen Sebelius' Dad. And Many Other Reasons

True, I don't sleep much. And true, I have just posted two entries to this blog in about two hours. But they're listed on two different dates, and they discuss two kind-of-different topics, so it's okay.

Seriously, let me tell you about Kathleen Sebelius’ dad, John J. Gilligan. Sebelius, you may remember from some of my earlier posts, is the Democratic governor of Kansas, a very Republican state, and has been mentioned as a possible Obama running mate. I think she’s great, but putting her on the ticket would not carry Kansas for the Democrats, so from that very practical point of view she shouldn’t be the VP candidate.

But this post is about her dad, John Gilligan. When I was voting in Ohio, as a graduate student at Ohio State, the governors were limited to two consecutive terms. After I left Ohio, Republican James Rhodes completed his second consecutive term, and Democrat John Gilligan was elected in November 1970. He was a very fine governor of Ohio from January 1971 to January 1975. When he came up for reelection in November 1974, Rhodes was again eligible to run, and did so.

I bring this story up for its relevance to the current presidential election.

All the polls indicated a strong sweep for Gilligan against Rhodes. Significant numbers of citizens of Cuyahoga County, i.e., basically Cleveland, didn’t vote. In fact, about two hundred thousand Cuyahoga County and other northern Ohio residents, most of them Democrats, stayed home apparently thinking that Gilligan had it wrapped up, and their votes weren’t needed. Rhodes won by fewer than 100,000 votes.

Several pundits (does that word really consist of “pun”—playing with words—and “dits”—short for ditzy?) are now beginning to view the upcoming election as a blowout for Obama. Wrong. Nothing is a blowout until the votes have actually been cast and counted. If all the new young Democrats vote who have participated in the primaries and caucuses, and don’t sit home thinking that Obama has it wrapped up, and if latent racism isn’t an issue, then Yes I agree Obama should win. If they don’t vote, he may indeed not win.

But we must leave nothing to chance. In honor of Kathleen Sebelius’ dad, we must vote in November. And for many, many other reasons.

#33 The (potentially, possibly, perhaps) Definitive Electoral College as It Now Stands

I promised the faithful readers of this blog that I would post updates on my view of how the electoral college would sort itself out during this election campaign. I did so initially in post #17 on April 14, and again in post #26 on June 5.

Following the commentary in the post is my current list:

Obama with 255 pretty secure (not entirely) electoral votes;
McCain with 202 (pretty secure);
Tossup lagging with 81.

Of those 81, I think 22 are leaning Republican and 5 are leaning Democratic. Even if they end up that way, Obama would have 260 and McCain would have 224. The candidates would be fighting over the remaining 54 electoral votes.

I say that McCain's 202 electoral votes are "pretty secure" because I don't see much chance, barring something really bad (read that, stupid) coming out of his campaign, that he will lose any of these states. Florida of course is being listed by "those who know" as a battleground state. I don't have much faith that it will become so unless the Hispanic and Jewish votes there go strongly for Obama, and right now I don't see that as very likely. Or perhaps if Bill Nelson (Democratic senator from Florida) becomes the Democratic VP candidate, and even then I don't know if that would be enough to swing Florida to Blue. Hence, I've put Florida pretty strongly in the McCain column. The large African American vote for Obama that might be expected in South Carolina, Georgia, and Louisiana probably won't materialize. In Louisiana, many African Americans who were moved out of state during Katrina have not returned, and as a result remain displaced and disenfranchised.

Sam Nunn's presence on the Democratic ticket in the VP position might inch one or two southern states toward the Democrats, but that strategy failed miserably four years ago when John Kerry put John Edwards on the ticket. Of course, we all know Sam Nunn--and John Edwards, sir, is no Sam Nunn. There's at least one other way to get some leverage in the south (Jim Webb of Virginia -- tell me you're surprised I've brought him up again!).

If I'm to be surprised in the south, I expect it would be in South Carolina or, a state where I dare to hold quietly to some hope, North Carolina. The research triangle (Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill) has brought a significant number of non-conservatives into the area. I just don't think they have the numbers yet. While I'm not betting that any of these southern states will vote for Obama, I am hoping to be happily surprised somewhere in the south.

Still, at this point, I've listed the south as pretty solid for McCain.

Obama's 255 are "not entirely" secure mainly because I don't yet have a good feel for how the key midwestern states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, even Wisconsin will vote. I suspect they will go Democratic for economic reasons. Pennsylvania has to go Democratic for the Democrats to win in November, and I think Obama can win that state without making Ed Rendell his VP candidate. Actually, he has to. He needs to use his VP position elsewhere. And yes, I know that Pennsylvania is not a midwestern state: but Obama will already likely do well in eastern Pennsylvania; he will need to carry the western part as well, which will present a challenge in its affinity toward Ohio more than toward the Philadelphia area. Pittsburgh will have to provide Obama with a strong majority in western Pennsylvania.

Ah yes, Ohio. Although Governor Ted Strickland has indicated he doesn't want to be Vice President, he would almost definitely add Ohio to the Democratic column in November and, while I think Obama can win without Ohio, it would be so much easier and more convincing if he carried those 20 electoral votes. Sherrod Brown, Ohio's Democratic senator, is much less well known than Strickland nationally, but he also would be a strong agent within the state to make the Scarlet and Gray become Blue.

Michigan is not a gimmee for Obama either. But unemployment in the industrial midwest is reaching horribly painful levels, and eventually (i.e., before election day) the pain of plant closings will manifest itself as Democratic votes. Finally, the economy will be the hot issue, given the price increases of oil, bread, and milk. And almost everything else.

New Hampshire in the solid Obama column might raise some of your eyebrows. It's true that McCain has run strongly there in primaries. But that's with already-Republican voters. In a statewide election between Democrats and Republicans, Obama will carry the state. You heard it here first. If I'm wrong, then you don't remember where you heard it.

Besides, any state that can give us Jed Bartlett just about HAS to give us Barack Obama. Especially since, until his last two or three years on the air, Bartlett was one of the best presidents we've always wished we had. Remember, too, that in 2004, there was a movement uncovered among soap opera buffs to vote for Bartlett against dubya.

I was going to write, "By this time, we might have expected one or the other party to have said more about a VP choice." Have you noticed how quiet that discussion has become? Obama is mending fences, and someone besides me just might have suggested to John McCain to let the Democrats announce first. That would be the smart thing for the McCain campaign to do, because then they could counter the Democrats' strategy.

I'll discuss the TOSSUPS two posts from now, since it's in the tossup states that the election will likely be decided. And now, the electoral college list, as seen by triton, as of early July:

----- -----
McCAIN

Alabama 9
Alaska 3
Arizona 10
Florida 27
Georgia 15
Idaho 4
Indiana 11
Kansas 6
Kentucky 8
Louisiana 9
Mississippi 6
Nebraska 5
North Carolina 15
North Dakota 3
Oklahoma 7
South Carolina 8
South Dakota 3
Tennessee 11
Texas 34
Utah 5
Wyoming 3

Currently 202 electoral votes for McCain

----- -----
OBAMA

California 55
Delaware 3
DC 3
Hawaii 4
Illinois 21
Maine 4
Maryland 10
Massachusetts 12
Michigan 17 (Tossup? despite auto factory closures and McCain’s ineptitude talking to Michiganders?)
New Hampshire 4
New Jersey 15
New York 31
Ohio 20 (because of auto factory closures)
Oregon 7
Pennsylvania 21 (Tossup?)
Rhode Island 4
Vermont 3
Washington 11
Wisconsin 10

Currently 255 electoral votes for Obama

----- -----
TOSSUP
Arkansas 6 (Republican?)
Colorado 9
Connecticut 7 (because of Lieberman)
Iowa 7
Minnesota 10 (depending on the Republican’s VP)
Missouri 11 T (Republican?)
Montana 3
Nevada 5
New Mexico 5 (Democrat?--depending on what Bill Richardson does)
Virginia 13 (depending on the Democrat’s VP)
West Virginia 5 (Republican?)

Currently 81 electoral votes are tossups, with 22 leaning Republican, 5 leaning Democratic, and 54 still up in the air.

#26 Why in the Blazing Saddles is no one else

talking about Hillary Clinton as a possible Secretary of Health and Human Services in an Obama administration? It's THE MOST LOGICAL position for her: she tried (unsuccessfully) to get health care reform when Bill was president, but now, fourteen years later, there's so much more pressure on Congress to pass some form of universal health care. We know even better now that many people cannot afford private health care, and don't have it through their employment (if they even have employment in this "bush"-league-disaster of an economy). Congress, especially if it's a more heavily Democratic Congress, has to look more favorably on a Hillary-inspired plan.

And Why in the Blazing Saddles is anyone putting public or private pressure on Barack Obama to choose a VP running mate sooner rather than later? Time was, the VP candidate was chosen at the convention. There should be no hurry for the Democrats. Let John McCain choose his VP person, and then the Democrats can determine who would best counter McCain's choice and complement Obama on the ticket (hint: someone from Ohio, possibly Florida, or a southern state like Virginia).

Of course it would be idiocy for McCain to choose his VP candidate first. There's absolutely no need for him to do anything right now. The Republican convention occurs after the Democratic convention. If McCain does nothing, nothing at all, the Democrats will be forced to choose their VP candidate no later than their convention, after which time McCain can make his choice public in early September.

But the press apparently has nothing else to talk about in its news reports, so it hashes and rehashes garbage about what Hillary would or would not bring to the ticket, or who else might be a possibility.

Too bad there aren't other news stories out there. Like cyclones in Myanmar and earthquakes in China, and attacks on Western diplomats in Zimbabwe, and.... oh. wait.

Here's a news story to take VP choices off the top of the news: "US boycotts Beijing Olympics because of Chinese Leaders' Handling of Earthquake Victims' Parents." That'd do it. Ain't gonna happen, but it would top the hourly news reports. You can tell how upset I am at China's quality control, not just in pet food and toys exported to us, but in their own shoddy school construction.

Barack -- if you're reading this, two points of advice: (a) offer Hillary the position of Sec'y of HHS, not the VP slot; and (b) don't tip your hand; allow John McC to tip his first. He's an impulsive guy anyway, so he won't be able to wait and wait and wait until September to announce his VP choice.

And now, as promised:

Electoral Vote Projections (538 total) as of 6/5/08 --

I've made one significant change, moving Ohio from out-and-out tossup to questionably-leaning-Democratic because of the recent auto factory closure announced there. Economic conditions will probably (and unfortunately) deteriorate even further in the industrial midwest, and the likely result will be more people voting for change. To the extent that Obama represents change and can continue to label McCain as "four more years of bush," Ohio I believe is leaning toward Obama. And Michigan, already leaning Democratic, is likely leaning more so, also based on announced auto factory closures. Of course, Obama will need to appeal more to the blue-collar and woman base that Hillary was able to, but I think with her help and his own campaigning abilities, he will do so.

The results are below: I have the Democrats up to 260 electoral votes solid or leaning toward them AT THIS TIME in the campaign. These numbers have to be fluid, however, since an October or earlier surprise by the bush administration, orchestrated to help McCain, could seriously change the numbers.

Alabama 9 R
Alaska 3 R
Arizona 10 R
Arkansas 6 T (R?)
California 55 D
Colorado 9 T
Connecticut 7 T (because of Lieberman)
Delaware 3 D
DC 3 D
Florida 27 R (T? depending on D's VP)
Georgia 15 R
Hawaii 4 D
Idaho 4 R
Illinois 21 D
Indiana 11 R
Iowa 7 T
Kansas 6 R
Kentucky 8 R
Louisiana 9 R
Maine 4 D
Maryland 10 D
Massachusetts 12 D
Michigan 17 T (D? maybe even more strongly D because of auto factory closures)
Minnesota 10 T (depending on the R’s VP)
Mississippi 6 R
Missouri 11 T(R?)
Montana 3 T
Nebraska 5 R
Nevada 5 T
New Hampshire 4 D
New Jersey 15 D
New Mexico 5 T (D?) (depending on what Bill Richardson does)
New York 31 D
North Carolina 15 R
North Dakota 3 R
Ohio 20 T (D? because of auto factory closures there)
Oklahoma 7 R
Oregon 7 D
Pennsylvania 21 D (T?)
Rhode Island 4 D
South Carolina 8 R
South Dakota 3 R
Tennessee 11 R
Texas 34 R
Utah 5 R
Vermont 3 D
Virginia 13 R (T? depending on the D’s VP)
Washington 11 D
West Virginia 5 T (R?)
Wisconsin 10 D
Wyoming 3 R

175 R
62 T leaning toward R or R leaning toward T
- - -
237

197 D
63 T leaning toward D or D leaning toward T
- - -
260

41 T very much up for grabs

-- triton --

#17 A Snapshot in Time: Early Electoral Vote Projections

Yes, yes, I know. The Democrats don't even have a presumptive presidential candidate yet, and neither party has anything more specific for Vice President than a list of several hundred potential candidates.

Yet we're looking at triton's first set of Electoral Vote projections! Here's why:
(1) they provide a baseline against which to measure subsequent movement of states from one party to the other and to or from tossup status;
(2) the list isn't final: it's in flux, and will remain so probably up until November 4; unimagined events between now and then could change the entire situation, including world events, national events, and really dumb comments by the candidates or their staff members; and
3) I find it amazing how well the Democrats actually seem to be doing right now, despite the internecine war raging between BO and HRC (though honestly I think HRC is doing more of the waging, because she and her advisors recognize that she has lost momentum and is losing the nomination battle).

Here's the abbreviation key for today's and subsequent electoral vote lists:

"D" and "R" are the two major parties;

"T" is "TossUp": please note that I avoided the humorously and connotatively negative abbreviation "TU" which implies a terminal condition: as easy as it is to view the Democrats as currently committing suicide, they actually have not yet done so, at least based on my projections below.

"?" does not mean, Who the hell knows? Instead, it means "perhaps leaning toward...." Or, I suppose, it could mean, Who the hell knows?

One strategic note: if the list below has any validity, then the Democrats need to concentrate on winning Connecticut (7 votes), Minnesota (10 votes), and Ohio (20 votes). Those 37 electoral votes, listed below as Tossups, would give the Democratic candidate 277 electoral votes, just over the 270 needed for election. In fact, he/she wouldn't even need to court Lieberman, and could still end up with the 270 required. But Minnesota will be a problem if its governor, Tim Pawlenty, is the Republican VP candidate. And Ohio is always a problem: nominating Ted Strickland (Governor) or Sherrod Brown (Senator) might help, but they'd still need to carry Minnesota. In any case, it's shaping up to be another really close election. So far.

The summary on this April 14 (caveat: always subject to change):
Democratic or leaning toward Democratic: 240
Republican or leaning toward Republican: 237
Currently a tossup: 61

And now, the first list:

State # of Electoral Current Projection
Votes (538 total) (as of 4/14/08)

Alabama 9 R
Alaska 3 R
Arizona 10 R
Arkansas 6 T (R?)
California 55 D
Colorado 9 T
Connecticut 7 T (because of Lieberman)
Delaware 3 D
DC 3 D
Florida 27 R (T? depending on D's VP)
Georgia 15 R
Hawaii 4 D
Idaho 4 R
Illinois 21 D
Indiana 11 R
Iowa 7 T
Kansas 6 R
Kentucky 8 R
Louisiana 9 R
Maine 4 D
Maryland 10 D
Massachusetts 12 D
Michigan 17 T (D?)
Minnesota 10 T (depending on the R’s VP)
Mississippi 6 R
Missouri 11 T(R?)
Montana 3 T
Nebraska 5 R
Nevada 5 T
New Hampshire 4 D
New Jersey 15 D
New Mexico 5 T (D?) (depending on what Bill Richardson does)
New York 31 D
North Carolina 15 R
North Dakota 3 R
Ohio 20 T (depending on the D’s VP)
Oklahoma 7 R
Oregon 7 D
Pennsylvania 21 D (T?)
Rhode Island 4 D
South Carolina 8 R
South Dakota 3 R
Tennessee 11 R
Texas 34 R
Utah 5 R
Vermont 3 D
Virginia 13 R (T? depending on the D’s VP)
Washington 11 D
West Virginia 5 T (R?)
Wisconsin 10 D
Wyoming 3 R

175 R
62 T leaning toward R or R leaning toward T
- - -
237

197 D
43 T leaning toward D or D leaning toward T
- - -
240

61 T very much up for grabs

--triton--