Obama's Blue Base And McCain's Great Red Wall

Freedom Democrats, a blog for libertarian Democrats, argues that both Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain have strong map-changing possibilities if they battled in the general election for the U.S. presidency: "There are eighteen states (plus the District of Columbia) that the Democrats have won in the last four elections: Hawaii, California, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, and Maine. Combined, these states offer up 247 electoral votes. Of those eighteen states and DC, John Kerry won over 55% of the vote in just six: DC, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, New York, and Maryland. George W. Bush received less than 45% of the vote in four additional states: Maine, Illinois, California, and Connecticut. Overall, the District of Columbia and these nine states will probably be the core Democratic states for Obama in the November general election. Combined, they would provide Obama with 150 electoral votes. It is possible to argue that John McCain's 'maverick' status will allow him to totally change the playing field. Given Joe Lieberman's successful independent Senate bid in 2006, I could see some possibility for McCain to win the Nutmeg State. But it probably depends on a bizarre McCain-Lieberman ticket; a Unity08 wet dream but a nightmare for the rest of the country. There could also be some concern about Massachusetts, where SurveyUSA shows that Obama is under 50% against John McCain. It is one of the few states where Clinton does better than Obama. He seems to hold his own in the western and central portions of the state, the biggest swings come from Boston and southeast Massachusetts. My only explanation, other than a bad poll, is to assume that Boston is still the racist city that it has been for much of history and that Deval Patrick was an odd fluke. As a Yankees fan, I'm more than comfortable in attributing negative stereotypes to Beantown."

The commentary continues: "More seriously, consider the competitive nature of New Hampshire. Rasmussen has Obama ahead of McCain and stronger than Clinton, but still under 50% and in a close race. Southern New Hampshire is dominated by the Boston media market, so if a candidate is making a strong bid for New Hampshire, they will see a spill over effect in Massachusetts. There could be a similar effect with Maine, which has a media market that overlaps into parts of New Hampshire as well. Although McCain probably has a poor shot at winning Massachusetts, and a better but still long shot at Maine, focusing on New Hampshire will create the opportunity for McCain to also focus some campaign resources on these two neighboring states. And if polls continue to show the Bay State curiously close for Obama, McCain could do just that. Now reverse the tables and consider John McCain's base. The same argument for changing the electoral map applies to Obama, sure maybe an energized African-American base, appeal to independents, and a depressed Republican Party could combine for Obama to win Mississippi. It's really easy to make those sorts of predictions when you live inside the Beltway and all you know about Mississippi is that it has a lot of black people. A whopping twenty ones states cast more than 55% of the vote to George W. Bush in 2004: Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, Nebraska, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Alabama, Kansas, Texas, Alaska, Indiana, South Dakota, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Louisiana, West Virginia, and North Carolina. The Democrats have managed to win only six of the states at least one time in the last four elections: Kentucky, Montana, Georgia, Tennessee, Louisiana, and West Virginia. Outside of these twenty one states, there is only one state that has gone to the Republican Party consistently in the last four elections: Virginia. In two additional states, Arkansas and Arizona, John Kerry received less than 45% of the vote, but both of them voted for Clinton previously. Focusing only on the states where Bush received over 55% of the vote in 2004 and Republicans have won in the last four elections, we have John McCain's most likely base of support in this presidential election: Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, Nebraska, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Alabama, Kansas, Texas, Alaska, Indiana, South Dakota, Mississippi, South Carolina, and North Carolina. For a total of 122 electoral votes. Of these states, only two stand out right now as possible swing states. Kansas, home of the equally partisan transcending Kathleen Sebelius, shows a surprisingly tight race between Obama and McCain according to SurveyUSA.....The second is North Carolina, a moderate Southern state that could potentially offer the right combination of African-American voters (21%) and affluent suburbs (Research Triangle) for Obama. But the state was a disappointment to Democrats in 2002 and 2004 with the Senate races, and John Edwards appears to have had almost no impact on the state in 2004. Call me more skeptical on this one."

In conclusion: "I've set up a very wide slate of swing states for Obama and McCain in this scenario: twenty six states total with 266 electoral votes. Some of them, like Montana and Georgia, seem like long shots for Obama. But I wanted to define the list of possible swing states broadly in order to give some credit to the proposition that both candidates have strong map-changing possibilities."

My response: A McCain vs. Obama matchup would be interesting. I ideologically agree with Sen. McCain about 70% of the time, and Sen. Obama only about 20% of the time. However, having a black man for president - even if he is liberal - who has challenged elements of black liberal leadership could have some ramifications for increasing black moderatism, black libertarianism, and black conservatism in the long-term and be a boon for black progress. I'd probably be a swing voter in this scenario. Freedom Democrats' commentary does not account for the fact that a portion of the white and Hispanic electorate (be they Republican or Democrat) will also be energized...in voting against the black candidate because he is black. It won't only be black and other pro-Obama voters who are energized about the black candidate in the race. What Sen. Obama will need to do to win is (1) get more black voters and young voters of all races to the polls; (2) hold Sen. McCain at 55% or less of the white vote. That figure is the portion of white votes that Republicans typically get in a presidential election. If Sen. McCain gets even 60% of the white vote, he will win the election.