Tuesday, April 29, 2008

The electability argument favors Obama

Take a look at this map. Kos does the math:

Clinton does better than Obama in 6 states totalling 92 electoral votes.

Obama does better than Clinton in 15 states totalling 164 electoral votes.

This map has Minnesota for either Democrat. I thought Minnesota was a swing state; it has a Republican governor. But maybe it isn't. That would be good news. Anyway, I know Obama is polling way better there. One gripe: did the map really need to use the color brown for Obama and pink for Clinton? C'mon. As if their race and gender haven't been emphasized enough.

Anyway, here's something else to consider: the states where Obama does better are states that have important senate races:

Based on what we have seen so far this year, Hillary Clinton will have bigger coattails in the rust belt and Barack Obama will have bigger coattails out West. Only there aren't any contested Senate races in the rust belt and there are several in the West (Alaska, Oregon, Colorado, New Mexico, and Minnesota). This probably puts Schumer in a bind. He is supporting Clinton, but in terms of winning Senate seats, he's better off with Obama.

Since when is Minnesota "the West"? Some of Minnesota isn't even west of the Mississippi.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Internal Monologue home