Obama gaining ground in West-by-god-Virginia?

According to MSNBC’s Chuck Todd, he sure is! From Chuck’s column:

Three weeks until Election Day, Obama now holds a more than 100-vote lead in NBC’s latest electoral map. He’s ahead of McCain 264-163, with 111 votes in the Toss-up column. Last week, Obama was up 264-174. Our changes: We moved Missouri from Lean McCain to Toss-up; Oregon and Washington from Lean Obama to Likely Obama; and West Virginia from Likely McCain to Lean McCain. Something’s happening in West Virginia — yes, West Virginia — because of the economic angst. Obama’s been buying a bunch of TV time in markets that bleed into West Virginia, and the numbers have been closing for a time. By the way, political analyst Charlie Cook is moving West Virginia all the way to Toss-up. If that state is on the move, could Arkansas be far behind? Both are states that can show Democratic movement in a bad economic environment.  

Sphere: Related Content

Ground Zero for 2008

MSNBC put up their list of the current “likely scenario” for the electoral map.

Base Obama: CA, CT, DE, DC, HI, IL, MD, MA, NY, RI, VT (153 electoral votes)
Lean Obama: ME, NJ, MN, OR, WA (47 votes)
Toss-up: CO, FL, IA, MI, NV, NM, NH, OH, PA, VA, WI (138 votes)
Lean McCain: AR, GA, IN, LA, MS, MO, MT, NE, NC, ND (84 votes)
Base McCain: AL, AK, AZ, ID, KS, KY, OK, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, WV, WY (116 votes)

I’m not going to get into their premise that by adding the Base and Lean numbers for each candidate they are a tie and of equal strength, which I don’t buy for a New York minute, and once you factor in who has what money and fundraising potential, becomes even more ludicrous.

Instead, I’m going to reach out in a conciliatory way to CO, IA, MI, NV, NM, NH, OH, PA, VA, and WI (I’m in FL) and say, gee guys, fall is going to suck with the ad blitzes. The second tier of blitz is ME, NJ, MN, OR, WA AR, GA, IN, LA, MS, MO, MT, NE, NC, and ND - because “Lean” is not bagged, and until it is, you’re going to get mauled too.

Which takes me back to my above point. 26 of 50 states are in play this election. That’s going to take monster bucks. From The Politico:

• If each of Obama’s donors gave him a modest $250, he’d have $375 million to spend during the two-month general election sprint. That’s $186 million a month, $47 million a week.
• During the same September to Nov. 4 period, McCain will have about $85 million to spend since he has decided to take taxpayer money to help finance his campaign activities.
• The Republican National Committee, which is charged with closing the gap between McCain and Obama, has $40 million in cash. Obama raised almost as much - $31 million - from just his small donors in the month of February. His total for the month, $57 million, exceeded the RNC’s cash balance.
• Obama has more than 1.5 million donors; McCain has a few hundred thousand. If just a million of Obama’s donors sent him the maximum donation, $2,300, he could raise $2.3 billion.

Granted, that last one is an outlier. Nevertheless, this is a recipe for low budget muck raking ad buys from McCain. He doesn’t have the jack to run positive. Obama has enough jack, george, jill, bob and donna to do whatever needs to be done, and the cojones to call McCain on the muck. By November the Republican implosion will be complete, with 26 states completely sick of McCain and the Rep’s BS. Further, Obama will probably be able to afford to run positive ads in McCain’s base states, which will give the down tickets more traction there. (50 State strategy rocks our world!)

I am LOVING the rise of the Democratic phoenix. Burn, baby, burn.

Crossposted at Bring it On!

Sphere: Related Content

The Path to a National Popular Vote

The Path to a National Popular VoteBy David Sirota
Creators Syndicate, 12/28/07

Right now, many are frustrated about Iowa and New Hampshire voters having such oversized influence in America’s presidential elections. In a few months, as the general election campaign unfolds, we will be similarly frustrated about Ohio and Florida. Who arbitrarily gave this handful of states the disproportionate power to determine our national political path?

When it comes to the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary, the answer is the parties. They decide which states select nominees first. In the general election, the culprit is the Electoral College. Most states award their electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis. By no matter what margin presidential candidates win your state, they get all your state’s electoral votes. That means if you don’t live in a “battleground” like Florida or Ohio whose statewide vote is perpetually up for grabs, you are ignored.

The nominating system is easily modified. Parties can add early primary and caucus states if they choose. Changing the general election, on the other hand, looks much harder. The Electoral College and its negative consequences seem locked into the Constitution.

But the operative word is “seem.”

To read the full nationally syndicated newspaper column, go to:
http://www.creators.com/opinion/david-sirota/the-path-to-a-national-popular-vote.html

Sphere: Related Content