Obama has now won 5 "blue states" and 13 "red"(of which 2 were "close red" in 04) - why would he be

[papau]

stronger than Hillary in the general if he can not beat her in the "base" of a Democratic election victory in 08?

Below are results to date with 08 winning percent and Bush-Kerry 2004 vote totals.


Primaries

Alabama 56% 1,176,394 693,933
Connecticut 51% 693,826 857,488
Delaware 53% 171,660 200,152
Georgia 67% 1,914,254 1,366,149
Illinois 65% 2,346,608 2,891,989
Missouri 49% 1,455,713 1,259,171
South Carolina 55% 937,974 661,699
Utah 57% 663,742 241,199

Caucuses

Alaska 75% 190,889 111,025
Colorado 67% 1,101,255 1,001,732
Idaho 79% 409,235 181,098
Iowa 38% 751,957 741,898
Kansas 74% 736,456 434,993
Minnesota 67% 1,346,695 1,445,014
Nebraska 68% 512,814 254,328
North Dakota 61% 196,651 111,052
Washington 67% 1,304,894 1,510,201


Lousiana (likely win), 1,102,169 820,299

[stahbrett]

1. Because the solid blue states will stay blue, and Obama is more likely to win...

Obama is more likely to win against McCain in the battleground states (in my opinion, backed up by recent poll results).

[Barack_America]

4. Ding ding ding...we have a winna! n/t

[neutron]

7. Hillary still has the Delegates

[stahbrett]

16. She has a percentage of the delegates, not all of them

And the question dealt with Obama's chances in the general election, which obviously assumes that he wins the nomination.

[Barack_America]

17. Not after today, my friend, not after today...n/t

[Tellurian]

37. As of right this minute Hillary has 1100 delegates BO has 1039

thats with all the states he's won tonight..

Hillary's totals are not counting delegates from FL and MI..(which I think will need to be seated)

[Barack_America]

38. Pledged delegates, my friend.

The others can (and might) switch sides.

[Tellurian]

41. The point is...with all Obama's wins...he's not ahead, my friend..

[WillyT]

26. Precisely !!!

Well played!!!

:hi:

[HeraldSquare212]

54. Exactly - and the point is to expand the battleground, not hunker down in safe states and hope

for the best.

[jackson_dem]

2. Conservative, DLC Democrats are voting for the most conservative Democrat running

[Barack_America]

6. Again, not in Washington! n/t

[jackson_dem]

23. One state disproves a national pattern?

ackson_dem (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat Feb-09-08 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. There are exceptions to the rule

Nebraska is a DLC stronghold. It has the most conservative Democratic senator.

Here are the states he has won:

Iowa: (next door to Illinois)
South Carolina: 29% black, half black in the Democratic primary and he won blacks 78-19-1 after placing third with whites
Connecticut: Home of Joe Lieberman. Despite Joe it is relatively progressive. Count this as an exception.
Georgia: Almost a third black, half black in the Democratic primary and he won blacks 88-12
Alabama: See Georgia
Illinois: his home state
Minnesota: exception
Missouri: he barely won a neighboring state. He was fueled by nearly unanimous black support and support among affluent Democrats. Even in a state that at first blush looks like an exception when you look at the numbers he won for the same reasons as the general rule.
North Dakota: DLC
Kansas: DLC
Colorado: exception
Utah: DLC
Idaho: DLC
Alaska: DLC

Louisiana: See Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina
Washington: exception
Nebraska: DLC

Then take a look at the states he lost and you will see they don't have many conservative Democrats, the black population is under 20%, and he loses badly among working folks.

[cloudythescribbler]

29. I can't figure out what the theory is here, but CO, MN, CT, and WA are all "exceptions?"

:shrug:

[Alexander]

32. And Missouri, and Iowa, and Illinois, and Delaware....

I guess the Shillbots expect us to only carry blue states and somehow win.

:eyes:

[cali]

12. bwahahaha.

Washington is a blue state. And so is MD where he'll win on Tuesday. And he'll win VT big time- please don't even try saying that the most progressive and liberal dems in the fucking country are conservative.

you are getting to be quite entertaining.

:rofl:

[jackson_dem]

22. MD

Almost all his wins come from DLC states or states where the black population is above 20%. There are a few exceptions, like neighboring Iowa and Missouri (even in MS the internals show he won with heavy black support and support among the affluent). Maryland falls into the second category along with South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Louisiana. Vermont hasn't voted and the only available polling for it had him well behind. "Hope" that he will win does not translate into winning a state.

Obama has three components to his base: conservative Democrats, blacks, and affluent whites.

[cali]

28. I live here. Obama has raised over $400,,000 in VT. Clinton? $47,000

It's not hope. I know this state. I've been involved in politics for over 20 years here. And he will win big. The only polls are a year old or so. And Vermont isn't affluent. He'll win even win the poorest most rural part of this state- the Kingdom And he wins more than just affluent dems. I know you can't stand it, which I find delicious, but he's now the front runner, and stands a good chance of being the nominee.

[WillyT]

30. And Of The Three... Which Do You Find Most Offensive ???

:evilfrown:

[NJSecularist]

3. Because the states that Hillary has won will stay blue anyways

Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and California will all stay blue regardless of whether Hillary or Obama is nominated.

[bowens43]

5. ahhh....because he can win the red states.

Do you think Hillary supporters are going to stay home if Obama get the nomination?

[MadBadger]

8. Is it that hard to swallow the gracious pill tonight?

[book_worm]

9. Let's hope in November he wins CO, MO and IA because if he does he will win the election

He will hold states like NY (no surprise there in HRC winning), CA, MA and NJ.

[Carrieyazel]

45. MIssouri will not go blue. Winning a Democratic caucus in CO isn't a great predictor

McCain will likely win every interior Western state in a GENERAL election.

[kevsand]

56. Missouri has elected democrats for both governor and us senate in the not too distant past.

There is every reason to believe it can go democratic for the right presidential candidate.

[Radical Activist]

10. Here we go

http://www.wickedsunshine.com/WagePeace/Election2004/Images/AwJeez,NotThisShitAgain!.jpg

Once again, the Democratic base is not enough to elect a President. We need someone who can appeal to independents and swing states as well as Democrats. Obama does. Hillary doesn't. That's how the election will be won. Its not that complicated.

[Bonobo]

11. Is this based on the assumption that Clinton voters won't vote for Obama?

If not, it is not very well thought out.

[Perky]

13. Because he will win any Blue state that Hillary can... Do not be stupid.

He will win purple states with greater ease he might eceb pick up LA and SC

[Buve]

27. whaaaa

Winning a Democratic caucus is not winning a "Red State". It means you've won with the democrats who can make the meeting. Any argument using Obama's vitories in these states to suggest that Democrats will win in these states come November is fundamentally flawed. The media is perpetuating this myth and it's going to get us killed in November. Killed.


Ha, democrats winning in ID, ND, UT, GA, TN, AL, NC, SC, AK. HA!


Look at the breakdown of the votes. Rich and educated liberals and African Americans for Obama, blue collar workers for Clinton.

Who do you think lives in the purple states?

[Perky]

34. Look at missouri. Look at Connecticut... look at Virginia

Loook at Iowa.

[VolcanoJen]

39. Except in November, none of that matters.

You need to win every state John Kerry won, plus Ohio or Florida.

That's all. And with Democratic turnout blowing Republican turnout away, and with Republicans saddled with a dissapointing candidate that has failed to close the sale to them, you could see even more Republicans sit November out.

Every state John Kerry won, plus Ohio or Florida. It's not going to be nearly as difficult as so many Clinton supporters think it will be.

[milkyway]

14. Because in the blue states he'll be running against a repug, not a Dem. I could run

as the Dem in November and win NY, Mass, NJ, Cali, etc. (well, maybe).

What matters is the swing states.

And also what matters is the downticket Dems. Hillary will kill the Dems in the plains and mountain states. That's why all the Dem pols there are with Barack.

[Skip Intro]

15. he's only running against Dems (mostly) in those states

He carried Utah.

Think Utah will go blue in Nov because of it?

c'mon

[ginnyinWI]

36. Dems are out-voting and out-donating the Repubs now---

Why would that change in the Fall? Dems are raising at least twice as much money. Republican coffers are pathetic. Repub voters are not happy, not unified, don't really like any of their candidates. They aren't coming out to vote in the primaries.
Dems are getting about three times the voters to come out, including people are coming out to vote for the first time. Republicans are switching and voting for Obama. Independents favor him by 62%.

In this climate, yes-even Utah could turn blue.

[Laelth]

18. Obama is stronger because he can win the blue AND red states.

It's not like the Democratic nominee is likely to lose any of the states we carried in 2004. Obama may, in addition to those blue states, also pull some red states. How can his strength in red states be a bad thing? I just don't understand that argument.

:shrug:

-Laelth

[high density]

19. In the general election you already have "the base"

What we need are people to vote for Obama or Clinton that are not in "the base" in November.

[Seabiscuit]

20. In the Dem primaries, there are no "red" states. They're all blue.

[Nailzberg]

21. Blue states are called blue states for a reason.

Blue states aren't gonna all of a sudden vote Repub just because Hillary beat Obama in their primary.

[Bonobo]

24. Answer post #11.

Hit and run?

[ecstatic]

25. Question: Do you trust Dean's 50 state strategy? nt

[Renew Deal]

31. The "base" states are going to vote for Obama anyway.

His ability to move into those other states is impressive.

[last_texas_dem]

33. Are you expecting Democratic base voters to abandon the party if Obama

receives the nomination and not Clinton? Otherwise, I don't understand the point of your post. Why would it make a difference in how "blue" states would vote in the general election if a different Democrat than the one that they had voted for in the primary were to get the party's nomination?

[RoadRage]

35. Do you think he's going to LOSE to McCain in California? Please!

The Blue states will stay Blue.. they're not going ANYWHERE.

But, OH MY GOD.. what the fuck would happen if a DEMOCRACT actually won 2 or 3 RED states? What would happen then?

We'd win the damn election - that's what.

Hillary would NOT win any red states.. she can't even beat Obama, how is she going to beat a republican?

And, if you were paying attention.. it's the whole "need to win a few red states" thing that is going to continue to keep us from winning general elections.

OBAMA IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE WHO HAS A CHANCE AT THIS.

[Carrieyazel]

46. He barely has a chance at this. These states are conservative-leaning and

for a mainstream liberal Democratic senator to win them in a general election is highly unlikely. Why would they go with Obama, if McCain positions himself as a maverick? These states like mavericks. Obama's record will not allow him to claim any maverick status. His record is clearly one of an establishment liberal Democratic senator.

[RoadRage]

53. They "may" not go to him.. but they DEFINITELY will not go to Hillary

And,MANY conservatives do not like McCain. In some of those red states, they may choose to just stay home and sit this one out.. unless they can vote against Hillary.

I'm not saying he'll take all of 'em that he's winning by huge margins (i'm in NE, and I don't think he has much of a shot here even though he did really well).

But, I think he has a chance to get a couple which is all we need, and Hillary doesn't have that shot.

[windbreeze]

40. How Many "red" states that he's won allow

people to change parties to vote in the primary, or have primaries where they can vote cross party, and then switch back for the general election? Is it possible that R's are voting for Obama, because they do not want to face Clinton? I think something curious is going on...but I just can't figure it out...wb

[Tellurian]

42. No Obama won't be stronger or viable at all in the "red" states..

Obama has nothing to offer the "red" states against a Republican. Hillary has a better chance of turning them "blue" because of her Universal Health Care Plan and the fact she already has access to a plan to end the war in Iraq. Hillary has met with the Dept of Defense and asked them to make withdrawal plans available if she wins the presidency.

Obama has been lying to the Red States he won yesterday, telling them he will have Universal Health Care by the end of his first term. How does he expect to have Universal Health Care, when his own Health Care Plan doesn't offer it leaving millions uninsured in the first place. As usual, Obama is blowing more smoke and making promises he's incapable of keeping, saying anything he can to Win the nomination.

As far as the "blue" states. The facts, as in Donna Brazile's CBC agenda, haven't been brought out to the Blue States as of yet what the AA agenda entails. Brazile has threatened to leave the Dem Party if Obama doesn't receive the nomination. I doubt "blue" states will take her threats lightly.

Here is a brief overview of the CBC plans for AA should Obama get the Nomination:

Apparently the CBC is mounting an agenda of it's own ... Not only may this hidden CBC agenda offend Red states, it may force the "blue" states into voting McCain to thwart Brazile's CBC agenda..

The CBC agenda will dovetail perfectly into a natural defense for the GOP and the "Great White Hope McCain".. to thoroughly dismiss Obama as a Racist in the General Election. .Do we really want to go there? I know, I don't!


Donna Brazile is saying: the African American community will outraged if Hillary wins the nomination

"Donna Brazile"

You may not be understanding the implication of that statement and what she means. She is saying that African American community will outraged if Hillary wins the nomination due to Super Delegates.

This is about the Congressional Black Caucus. Back on September 29, 2007, It was a CBC sponsored round table on CSPAN in which Donna Brazile, Arthur Davis and about three others were in a panel discussion. We didn’t get to see the whole thing but saw and heard enough. Unfortunately there is neither a video (even though it was obviously on tape) or transcript from the event.

It was the same weekend event to which Hillary was an invited speaker but which caused an uproar because Obama supporters in the CBC objected.

http://www.thehill.com/leading-the-news/cbcs-event-for-clinton-prompts-grumbles-2007-09-20.html

Davis’s speech at the weekend event was pretty much the same one he had delivered at other annual events about the “glass ceiling” (see the problem coming here?)

http://www.house.gov/arturdavis/2004press/glass_ceiling...

Artur Davis RW Power Broker

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=886

The particular round table was about the future of African Americans in politics.

Not to stretch the details in the discussion beyond memory, the gist was this — everybody just couldn’t wait, including Donna and Artur, for Barack Obama to be president so that FINALLY AAs would be able to enact all the plans waiting so long for “the one” to lead.

It was a chilling undercurrent coming from Brazile and if you can't see the implication coming from Brazile on an Obama presidency, then take a step back and think a minute..

CBC’s BrainTrust’s Mission: Strangely enough, it's not about a better Life for the general AA population..

http://www.slepton.com/slepton/viewcontent.pl?id=891

[returnable]

43. Gee. You're right. In fact, if a Dem has no chance of carrying a state in the GE...

...they shouldn't even be allowed to vote in the primaries/caucuses. :eyes:

[Carrieyazel]

44. Of Obama's 18 winning states, only 2 are battlegrounds.

Winning primaries in lock Dem states and lock Repuke states won't make a difference in the general.

[Honeycombe8]

47. He's winning. ding ding ding ding ding. dt

[Honeycombe8]

48. Let me 'splain it to you, child. You see, the Republicans don't have as much money...

as the Democrats do for the general election. Okay? Okay.

Now, consider that the Republicans never have to spend much money in their "red" states, because those states are sewn up already. Okay? Okay.

Now, consider that Obama brings out the people (Democrats AND Independents AND new voters) to vote for him in red states. Okay? Okay.

I'm sure you can see the advantage to the Dem. Party. The Republicans would probably be forced to spend some of their low-already money just defending what they normally could count on, just to hang onto what they already have.

This would put the GOP at an extreme disadvantage in campaigning in the more competitive states.

Got it? I knew that you would, once you put your little thinking cap on.

[Tellurian]

49. hahaha! You've got to be kidding...if $$$ is the reason Repubs will fail..hahaha!

[Honeycombe8]

50. Get online and look at the numbers. The gop is far far behind the Dems in $$$$.

They will have trouble competing, money-wise, in the G.E. with the Dems, as it is. If they are forced to spend money to defend their sewn-up red states, they will be at an extreme disadvantage.

You would know this, if you were following politics. It is generally well known and understood.

[Tellurian]

51. The RNC has big bucks for the GE. To think otherwise, is a fools errand..

[AP]

52. We're not going to lose the base blue states. It'd be nice to run a democratic who's liked in red

states. It would be nice to make republicans spend money and time in the red states.

[Carrieyazel]

55. When you say "liked in red", Obama has won blue voters in those red states

in caucuses and some primaries. These are NOT red voters in red states.
General elections in these states are vastly different than Dem caucuses and primaries.

Even in the reddest of states there are always some true blue voters who reliably vote Democratic. That Obama is winning these voters is not earth shattering.

Obama has won these strongly leaning Dem voters in caucuses etc., but these voters are unlikely to go Repuke anyway in a general. Not that it matters in their states. We are not going to win these base red states in November, whether its Obama or Hillary.

[AP]

57. You don't win 2:1 in LA without picking up a few Dems who might have voted for Jindahl.