Electoral College Map: Obama 264, Clinton 284

[Yossariant]

Obama 264, McCain 259 (15 tied)
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/Apr24.html


Clinton 284, McCain 244
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Clinton/Maps/Apr24.html

Will the Democrats, as usual, grab defeat from the jaws of victory?

[cali]

1. First of all, both beat McCain, secondly

this is just one snapshot and hardly written in stone. I've long said that both O and C can beat McCain. The nominee is almost certainly Obama and if he continues to have the most pledged delegates and more of the popular vote, then he's earned it. This is like saying, it should have been Dean or Edwards. That's just not how it works.

[aquarius dawning]

48. Not according to the current polling data which compares the two dems against McCain

[Gore1FL]

74. actually

both dems are ahead of McCain.

Notably, however, Hillary has an awful lot of "barely Dem" in her totals, and McCain has a lot of barely GOP in his totals.

To dig deeper, There are 132 electoral votes worth of swing states on Hillary's map. Of those 71 went republican last time.
Additionally, it shows her losing MI,and NH. (while picking up WV) (of those state not counted above)


There are 144 swing state on Obama's map. Of those 96 went republican last time.
Additionally it shows him losing no states that went blue last election (of those state not counted above)

What is a better scenario, 172 base electoral votes with 132 in play or 211 base electoral votes with 144 in play?

The second looks stronger, and that is where Obama stands currently.

[McCamy Taylor]

2. This has been the electoral vote for a while. Thanks

[OzarkDem]

76. Obama can't win w/o the Electoral College vote

He's thrown so many battleground states overboard, I don't see how he can win.

[davidpdx]

3. Another Obama can't win thread

First of all the polls are all over the place and are constantly changing. Second, there is a good chance whomever the nominee is will get a bounce when the nomination is decided. Third, assuming a nominee is decided by May 21st the day after Oregon and Kentucky(which there is a good chance will happen) the nominee will have three months before the convention. Fourth, if it is Obama, he will be able to raise a large amount of money (say another $100 million min in three months) to spend before the convention.

[Gore1FL]

75. See my post above -- this is an Obama is a better candidate thread

whether or not it was intended to be so.

[dkf]

4. Clinton is on her way to making herself a pariah to African Americans.

Maybe you should redo the electoral vote without that important segment of our party.

[Yossariant]

6. The Dems lose more votes if Obama is the nominee than if Clinton is the nominee.

"43% of Clinton supporters won't vote for Obama if he's the nominee.

29% of Obama supporters won't vote for Clinton if she's the nominee."
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/04/clintonobama_im/

You may want to re-think your position.

[cali]

9. What people say in the heat of the contest

is hardly reliable. I know some people would like to see the most evanescent things as written in stone, as long as they reinforce their positions, but they aren't. Fact: We are 6 months from the general election. That pretty much is written in stone. Fact: Things change in a period of 6 months. Lots of things. That fucking well is written in stone. It's just absurd not to factor in that nothing remains static.

[Yossariant]

15. Maybe you'd like to make your point to dkf who says that African Americans won't vote for Clinton.

One problem is that too may Obama fans don't see their own hypocrisy.

It's the "heat of the contest" when Clinton voters say they won't vote for Obama, but cause for great alarm when Obama voters say they won't vote for Clinton.

:think:

[cali]

52. I've made that point repeatedly

to people on the Obama side. I think most dems will back the nominee, and I think it for a myriad of reasons which I've expounded on in other posts.

[Pawel K]

81. You really think that black people will vote for Hillary?

Why would they? This is the first black man in history to be elected by the people as a nominee (both in pledged delegates and popular vote) for the general election. If the super delegates over turned the will of the people I strongly believe those black people, as well as many white Obama supporters, would stay at home. This kind of coup by the democratic party would cause riots, it will never happen. If it did we would lose seats in congress and there would be no way in hell Hillary would be elected.

The only rational way Clinton could win this nomination and still have a chance at the GE is if tomorrow Obama was caught in a mens bathroom tapping his foot.

[dkf]

11. Clyburn's words are going to start making an impact in the AA community.

It is such an appalling idea and when one realizes how selfish and self serving a person would have to be to do this, it is absolutely eye opening.

Just watch...

[chimpymustgo]

44. Who's being selfish and self-serving? Sounds like Clyburn, who "claimed" to be neutral.

[rodeodance]

86. Clyburn is being divisive--not neutral as he claims

[Blondbostonian]

13. Try some critical thinking

What do you think will happen with Obama supporters if Clinton is given the nomination and she's behind in delegates, states won and votes?

[XemaSab]

73. Especially if it's the African Americans

who have been screwed over REPEATEDLY in the last 8 years and two elections.

[ima_sinnic]

32. I suspect a lot of those Clinton "supporters" wouldn't vote for Clinton either

the knuckle-dragging dittoheads have been out en masse trying to mess with the Democratic primaries in Operation Chaos.

Many of them post here on DU.

[TTUBatfan2008]

63. That question is being asked...

with Obama leading the race. Now imagine the question being asked if Clinton gets the nomination while losing the popular vote and pledged delegate race. The answers would be reversed. Clinton voters are bitter right now because their candidate is losing and Obama voters are a little more casual right now because their candidate is ahead.

[JoFerret]

18. Are you saying "they" are that stupid and fickle?

I think most of us (democrats) can get over our personal pique and vote for the nominee.
The same people who are now for Obama voted twice for Bill Clinton.

[UALRBSofL]

38. plleeeaasssseeee the AA will vote for whoever is the nominee

If they don't vote they realize what would be at stake. Putting a republican in office, they lose funding for schools, local government jobs, and the list goes on. They would not vote against there best interests and set back the people another 30 years.

[woolldog]

60. yeah, like you have your pulse on the AA community.

.....NOT. :rofl:

[redqueen]

70. Before all this racist bullshit, sure.

Now?

:think:

[BklnDem75]

80. I won't

Neither will my family. Nobody I know will. Maybe it's time for Hillary to ponder what's at stake here.

[goclark]

88. I talked to two AA friends last night

they both said the same thing ~ they trusted the Clinton's so much but now that they know for sure what they are made of they both said, they WILL NOT vote for her.

I have had others say that as well.

That is a strong statement from dedicated voters that have never missed an election, volunteered in just about every election cycle, and donated heavily from Kennedy - Kerry.

It's not just because of what she has said about Obama.

Please understand that part.

Remember that our votes have always come at a heavy toll --- long lines, suppressed votes etc.

So,African Americans have always taken voting very seriously. We fought too hard to be counted in this country so politics is important to us. We are not uninformed voters. We CARE about who gets elected and we CARE about the Supreme Court.

So why would we not vote for Hillary?
She will not get our vote because we now view her as a Republican as one who wants to carelessly BOMB IRAN and take down the Democratic Party and all that it stands for etc.

She has used the Rove play book through out this election,why would she instantly change while in office? :puke: She will not change,in fact,once in office she will be even more in the pocket of the Republicans because they have helped her get in office.

My friends were saying last night that we would vote down ticket but not for Hillary-never.

[bowens43]

5. not this shit again.

listen, listen closely no electoral votes have been won or lost by anyone yet. This is nothing more then baseless speculation.

[Uben]

17. I guess I'm nutz then

...because I thought the same thing last election. There will be a bloc of people who will not vote for Obama for a variety of reasons, and there will be a bloc that will not vote for Clinton. That number is sharply reduced with a combined ticket.

[goldcanyonaz]

87. Most rational people agree.

[Atman]

7. Anyone who thinks America will vote for anohter Republican is just nutz!

Especially a Bush clone. I really cannot fathom how some of you people think. Just because the corporate media is telling you McCain stands a chance, it ain't so. They WANT you to think that, because a) Republicans are good for corporations and wars and b) wars are good for General Electric's shareholders, and news ratings in general, and c) a horse race is always good for ratings. Period.

America is in the toilet, and McCain and the Republican party put us there, and pushed the flusher. McCain will only give it a second flush. We're getting sucked into this fallacy that just because some Dems don't like the other candidate seeking the nomination it means they'll suddenly become Republicans and vote for more war and more hate and more waste and more Bush. It's utter nonsense. McCain doesn't stand a chance in hell of getting elected without massive, blatant, unmitigated fraud.

.

[JoFerret]

14. I can't fathom how you can't fathom it

Although I understand the absurdity of such an idea. the notion of voting GOP after all they have done is beyond reason. However - hope springs eternal and McCain will be a strong opponent for all his obvious flaws and weaknesses.

[Atman]

24. No he won't be a strong opponent.

He's already a laughing stock in terms of his being a doddering old war monger. As silly as it may sound to some, late night comics are always a good barometer. They all turned on Kerry, too. McCain never got out of the starting gate and he is the constant butt of jokes. That doesn't help rally people around him, because of basic group psychology; people don't want to be the one who hangs out with the loser kid everyone else is making fun of. Mind you, that is far from my only benchmark for McCain's chances, just one of many good indicators. Once his flip-flops and Bush-loving record are thrown in his face by Obama in the GD, once he forgets the names of a few more of our supposed enemies, once the pace of the job he is seeking starts to really take it's toll, his flaws as a candidate (and potential president) will become even more apparent. Nobody likes the cranky old man in the neighborhood who is constantly yelling "GET OFF MY LAWN!" McCain is just a cranky old man, and a BushCo loyalist to boot. America ain't gonna buy that crap. No way.

.

[JoFerret]

26. That is what you believe.

Fine.
Numbers, history and political awareness suggest that he will run a strong campaign. there will always be many who will find the McCain candidacy safe, reliable, better. Bush should have been total toast in 2004. Whether we argue the election was stolen or not it was a very close race. Crazy. McCain can be beaten but not by a candidate who can't rack up the electoral college votes needed to win.

[Atman]

29. I don't even believe 2004 was "a very close race."

I believe it was a very massive fraud by a group of very powerful, very wealthy individuals backed up by the media they purchased to help them sell their bullshit. I don't, though, believe McCain has that same machinery in his court. BushCo got what it wanted, McCain was a dispensable strategic piece on the chessboard, but they're done with him. It will be damned near impossible to undo the damage done, regardless of whether Obama or Hillary or Sponge Bob Square Pants is in office. The nation is collapsing, and the power families which caused the collapse all make even more billions and amass even more power under the North American Union.

.

[JoFerret]

34. Given that scenario

Obama is not your answer.

[Atman]

36. Unfortunately, this is a multiple-choice quiz.

I don't think "None of the Above" is correct, and it's not logical to choose McCain because I can't bring myself to HELP the bad guys. Pretty much ditto with Clinton, but my concern with her is more about the divisiveness and endless distraction her presidency will create. Therefore, Obama is my only answer.

.

[JoFerret]

91. If you agree with the logic of the op

there is only one choice now and one choice in November.

[Mist]

31. Atman, your incisive comments are refreshing. Thanks for stating so

succinctly all the problems McCain, and the Repubs, have in winning. I've also felt that the corporate media are the ones injecting the idea that McCain has a strong chance. However, another stolen election may be in the offing if the Repubs really get scared.

edit: I was responding to Posts 7 and 24.

[Atman]

33. A little "Post 29 is nutz!" disclaimer?

LOL. Yeah, I don't blame you. But thanks for the comments!

:hi:

.

[Mist]

41. No, Post 29 was well-said too! I had the idea of keeping the timeline of

responses in order a bit. Everything you say is what I've been thinking.

[dbmk]

8. Those number require a little more scrutiny

Because Obama presses McCain a tad more all over the map, and his strong base is bigger than Hillarys.

And given Hillarys high negatives, that is a problem.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/24/113851/565/912/502497

But regardless, once a nominee is chosen, everyone agrees that whoever it is (and it will be Obama, btw), will see get bump a bump in the numbers. McCain is toast either way.

[JoFerret]

10. I have been waiting for someone to work that out

Thanks.

[Uben]

12. This is why Clinton is still in.....

....she knows this is the kind of data that the SDs will be considering. In a race this close, it's not who has a few more delegates or a few more votes, it's the one with the best chance to win the election. This is also why Obama supporters want her to drop out, so they won't have to worry about the outcome, which is ridiculous. You don't spend the money Clinton has and drop out of a race this close just because your opponent has a few more delegates and cannot win the primary with pledged delegates.

DU is not representative of the country, the country is much, much, closer. If either of them make a huge blunder at this point, it may cost them the nomination. We will go to convention, and the only reasonable solution is a combined ticket. It's a sure win. Anything else is a big maybe. Egos will come into play, but let's hope common sense and party loyalty will win out.

[Atman]

16. If the American people have yet another election decided for them, watch out...

It truly will be a turning point, and it will immediately tar Clinton's presidency. Millions of new voters have been brought into the process because of Obama, and no matter what type of Bush-style fuzzy math Hillary Clinton supporters use, she is NOT the winner of this contest. To have another very small cadre of super-rich old white guys tell America that they know better, regardless of who we've chosen to be our president, is courting major disaster. I can't even understand why Clinton supporters could begin to want her "installed" instead of elected. It's baffling. What possible good could come of it????

.

[JoFerret]

20. Watch out indeed. They will stop voting altogether.

Old white guys like Kerry and Kennedy should not be picking our candidate.

[Uben]

22. The winner of this contest ....

...will be decided by the SDs....that we know. Obama has failed to win by pledged delegates. That is the parameter set forth for one to win the primary outright. This isn't horseshoes, close don't count. Whichever candidate is nominated, they will be "installed", as you put it, because they could not win the primary outright.

[Yossariant]

23. Many think that the MSM is attempting to install Obama as the nominee and the impressionable

are falling for it --- again.

[ima_sinnic]

35. MSM "trying to install Obama as nominee" after Wright, "bitter," flag pin, A&F, etc. ad nauseum??

if the "MSM" wanted Obama as nominee, they'd be giving his policy positions and feelings about the issues a lot more credence and airtime, instead of spinning bullshit about nonissues like Wright, bitter, "elitist," flag pins for days on end.

They would also report the truth about Hillary: she's broke, her "win" in PA wasn't that big a deal considering it was a loss of 11% from a couple of weeks ago, she is hemorraghing superdelegates, she won't answer questions about deals with Uribe in Colombia, etc. etc.

but feel free to push your deceitful, dumbass limboughian talking points.

[Atman]

37. Give 'em a break...it's all they've got.

It their version of "politics of hope." HOPE for a freakin' miracle.

:shrug:

.

[Yossariant]

39. The miracle we're HOPING for is a Democrat in the White House.

It won't happen if Obama is the nominee.

OTOH, I survived 8 years of Bush and I'll survive President McCain, too.

[Mist]

45. "MSM trying to install Obama"--are you kidding? Hillary's been the MSM

candidate since last spring, when a "Hillary Presidency" started being bally-hooed by the likes of Chris Matthews. I knew then the fix was in. TPTB have been thrown a bit by "the black guy" being so popular and bring so many new voters in. They didn't see that coming.

[Yossariant]

47. Get back to me if you ever touch down on Planet Earth:

"Hillary Clinton is getting the worst press and Barack Obama the best press of any major presidential candidate...

Since mid-December, when the presidential candidates turned their full attention to the Iowa caucuses, Sen. Barack Obama has led the race for good press and Sen. Hillary Clinton has lagged the farthest behind. From Dec 16 through Jan 27 five out of six on-air evaluations of Obama (84%) have been favorable, compared to a bare majority (51%) of evaluations of Mrs. Clinton...

NBC’s coverage has been the most critical of Clinton – nearly 2 to 1 negative (36% positive and to 64% negative) Conversely, ABC’s coverage was most supportive -- nearly 2 to 1 positive (63% v. 37%). CBS and FOX were more balanced – 50% positive comments on FOX and 56% positive on CBS."

http://www.cmpa.com/election%20news%202_1_08.htm

[Mist]

50. Yes, the Obama support has thrown them, and Obama is NOW getting better press

than before, and Hillary more negative. I don't think the plan was to openly dis Obama, they just assumed (as Clinton did0 that she would be the candidate. However, her negatives with voters are very high, and I think there's some scrambling around and discombobulation behind the scenes. It seems to me that Obama gets more "gotcha" questions than Clinton, and Clinton is still scrambling around for delgates, etc. It's hard to tell what TPTB are going to do with the groundswell of support for Obama, and Hillary's increasing negatives.

[goclark]

90. You must not have been watching the same channels that

I watch.

It is a love in for Hillary!

Granted, when it started out it was slanted for Obama but now that Rove is her unpaid consultant,the MSM is still believing that she was Double Digits in PA and on and on.

[Buzz Clik]

19. It's Friday! Time for the electoral map

[JoFerret]

25. It IS the electoral map

that settles the election.
Obama's campaign has done a marvellous job racking up delegates in states that will almost certainly NOT vote democratic in November.

[NJmaverick]

21. Only if Hillary continues to destroy the party's chances

[datopbanana]

27. Neither of them are winning FL. So take 27 off from HRC.

[UALRBSofL]

42. I beg to differ about Florida

Hillary can and will win Florida. The way Florida is coming down on the "count our vote" meme, she has drawn so much attention in our state they believe by her pushing the vote issue she would come through for them in the future. I'm in Florida and I know what's going on. Were having a huge rally and petition drive in 10 cities tomorrow and going to DC tuesday to rally and protest at the DNC on wednesday because they are fed up and are not taking this lying down. Now, the people pushing this are Hillary supporters, and, Obama supporters. We call this a unity of people pushing for our votes to be counted.

[Vinca]

46. Hillary can't win Florida - neither could the Pope if he was running as a Dem.

The Republicans have the machines - remember Christine Jennings? Do not count Florida in the Democratic column for any candidate.

[datopbanana]

53. Don't waste your time. Okay waste your time but you should know

FL will be counted and seated but only the race is already settled.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

59. Meanwhile, the Obama campaign is embarking on a 50 state mission to help downticket races

That's pretty illustrative of the difference between Obama and Clinton. He's helping Congressional and local races across the country and she's fighting for herself. Don't kid yourself that it's because she cares that you're being disenfranchised. She didn't care a few months ago when she agreed with the DNC rules. Her buddy McAuliffe didn't care about you back in '04 when he forbade Florida to move its primary up.

[avrdream]

28. Sounds about right.

Thanks for bringing it into the lion's den.

[rucky]

30. There's numbers involved, so it must be factual.

[BryMan]

40. Weird

I seem to remember my home state (Alabama) being 56-44% in '04 for Bush....not 63-37% like the Obama link has it.

I smell something funny here on this.

[Yossariant]

43. You "seem to remember" wrong:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2004

Your sense of smell ain't all that, either.

[BryMan]

66. Maybe I do...

But I also didn't see an actual percentage shown on wikipedia that you used.

So sorry I seemed to offend your sense of superiority by daring to even think I remembered it differently.

Your sense of smug is rather strong, atleast my sense of smell got that part right.

[U4ikLefty]

92. Your sense of smell can't do division.

According to the Wiki atricle, the total votes in Alabama = 1,883,415

The votes for Kerry = 693,933. Which, when divided by the total # of votes = 693933/1883415=0.368444 which rounded up is 37%. You are WRONG!!!

You can try to use the "you are an eLitiSt!11!!" argument, but at least get your fucking math straight!!!

[zulchzulu]

49. The Primary map is irrelevant to the General Election

Apple. Meet Orange.

[mckeown1128]

51. wow that is an amazingly bad analysis of the current polls..

It is stupid to take the literal results of ONLY the last poll taken. If you go by poll averages which is slightly more accurate...slightly.... you get completly different results...

Obama should be winning NV, NM, NH putting him at 278.


Hillary's averages have her losing OR, WA, MO, and FL... putting her at 229



So there you have it. Obama would win at 278 and Hillary would lose at 229.

Let's hope the Democratic Party don't snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by overturning the results of the primaries and giving the election to Hillary.

[OzarkDem]

54. Thanks for the reality check - Obama can't win the GE

Obama can't carry enough states to win the GE. He's burned bridges to so many important ones.

I'm not even sure he could carry PA.


His Wyoming, Montana, Guam strategy isn't going so well. Is Obama really naive enough to think he can win the GE or does he realize it, but wants to keep running anyway for some other reason?

[Gore1FL]

77. Look again

Hillary's support is mostly "Barely Dem"

Obama actually is stronger if you look closely at the two maps. More states are in play with him as a candidate, and he holds the ones he has at stronger levels.

Once you get past the totals listed, and actually analyze them, Obama shows as a stronger candidate.

On edit: see post 74.

[CTLawGuy]

83. according to the ALMIGHTY map

he IS carrying PA, therefore he WILL carry it!

[onenote]

55. GE polls at this stage aren't worth the paper they're printed on

No running mates, no convention speeches, no debates betweene McCain and the Democratic nominee. The list of things that could/will influence the actual outcome goes on and on.

And just as importantly, polls taken now are skewed by the fact that the two Democrats are in a very heated race which inevitably leads partisans for both candidates to adopt an "anybody but the other guy/gal" posture. But when all is said and done, and the choice is between a candidate who won't appoint the justice who casts the deciding vote to overturn Roe v Wade and the candidate who will appoint that justice, between the candidate that won't veto a bill to bring the troops home and the candidate who will, and the candidate who will support legislation to roll back the bush tax cuts and the candidate candidate who wont, a lot of those anybody but partisans will swallow their pride and decide that protecting the right to choose, ending the war, and setting the country on a path towards fairer treatment of the poor and middle class is what matters.

[OzarkDem]

67. That's not what you said

When Obama was ahead on the electoral map.

Seriously, Obama isn't going to carry states like Missouri, Florida, Ohio, and probably not even PA. He had a chance of carrying MI but blew it when he refused to negotiate their primary.

He can't win on California (which is also questionable for him) New England and a few small western states. Not gonna happen.

[onenote]

82. link? where did I say that?

I have consistently said that I think both HRC and Obama can win. I think Obama is stronger candidate because as voters have gotten to know him, he has tended to do better.

[Alexander]

93. Obama does better than Clinton in California. Where are you getting this "CA is questionable" stuff?

Are you Hillucinating again?

[gmudem]

56. I believe Kos did an analysis of this map

She has 112 as "barely Democratic" and another 98 as "weak Democratic." And only Kentucky and New Mexico are "barely Republican."

Meanwhile with Obama only 53 are "barely Dem" and 144 are "weak Dem." While Texas, New Mexico, Nebraska, and Ohio are "barely Republican.

Hillary's glaring weakness in Washington, Oregon, Connecticut, Minnesota, and Wisconsin are very scary. If she can't win those states, she needs to become much much stronger in Florida than she actually is.

Also does anybody else notice how much better Hillary does in Survey USA polls than any other ones?

[OzarkDem]

Wake up

Obama isn't going to win Texas, Nebraska or Ohio. :rofl:

[Orangepeel]

57. Who will make McCain defend red states?

If Obama is the nominee, McCain will end up having to spend money, time and resources defending North Carolina, Virginia and Indiana to name three. McCain will probably still end up winning those but time spent there increases the odds that Obama will win swing states.

[Hippo_Tron]

58. What part of it's APRIL do you not comprehend

Electoral maps in April don't look like what they do in October.

Also, if that really is a decent projection, I'd rather Obama because he puts Texas in a statistical dead heat. Republicans would shit their pants if they had to compete for Texas.

[SoCalDem]

61. obama map..conservative map

[SoCalDem]

62. Hillary map..generous

[redqueen]

71. That is scary.

[Indenturedebtor]

64. Bleh

It's April. When Clinton finally admits defeat and we can start focusing on the enemy things will change. Though in any case it doesn't matter. She's done. Sorry she lost. Lets get to work on McDeath already.

[AtomicKitten]

65. This is 2008. The 2004 game plan is obsolete. Boys, pull the truck around:

[OzarkDem]

68. You still have to win the electoral vote

and Obama can't get the job done.

[kwenu]

69. Hillary will not be the nominee. This is irrelevant.

[Hope08]

72. I have been going on electoral-vote.com . . .

for months now (discovered the site last election cycle), and I can assure all of you that these numbers change practically on a daily basis. About a week or two ago, the site had Obama winning against McCain and Clinton losing (not by much). Now, she is also winning, by a bit more. If the point of linking to this site is to show that Senator Obama can't win the general election, then I think the effort is a failure -- precisely because the site linked to shows that, if the polls are to be believed, he **can** win. If the point is to show that Senator Clinton can "win more," as it were, than that effort fails too because, as I have noted, the map changes almost daily and, given the small spread between the two candidates, they are just as likely to change places tomorrow.

As to what will happen if Senator Clinton obtains the nomination even if Senator Obama wins the pledged delegate count -- which some other posters on this thread have discussed -- I don't know. I suspect that Senator Obama's supporters would walk out of the Convention, that you'd see a 1968-style debacle (sans violence), that the $40 or $50 million Senator Obama is raising every month would dry up, that large swaths of the African-American community would choose not to vote in the general election, and that -- as a consequence of all of this -- we would wind up with a Republican president (but probably still a Democratic Congress). With a divided government, President McCain would be forced to play ball with the Senate and could not nominate radicals to SCOTUS. That means (probably) that Roe would be preserved, although we'd still see gradual erosion in the decision.

Hate to say it but with the divisions on this Board and in the Party, I am beginning to see this as a probability. I believe Senator Clinton will take her case to the Convention no matter what. Indeed, it would not surprise me if **her** followers walked off the floor.

[OzarkDem]

78. That's why we have to focus on the GE

Which is the real battle that must be won.

[windbreeze]

79. McCain is nothing......DEM and REP alike

need to recall how he and * were eating cake at McCain's birthday bash, while Katrina bombarded New Orleans...or IS that going to be swept away like the city was?? wb

[Medusa]

84. Can we stop the fairy tales and great tales of fiction?

The election isn't today. It isn't even tomorrow. You cannot predict the outcome of a general election by the outcome of a primary or caucus. It's like trying to claim an orange is really a tomato. The sheer desperation that is the Hillary Clinton campaign can weave these pretend tales all they want but it has absolutely zero to do with the outcome of a GE untl we have the GE.

[Orsino]

85. FUD. Fake FUD.

The Electoral College non sequitur was debunked a long time ago. Applying it to the primary is apples-and-oranges.

[Politicub]

89. No one really knows how either of them will do against McCain

Really. There are polls, but the only poll that matters is election day. I'm committed to working my boot-tay off for either Hillary or Obama - whoever wins the nom. It won't be a cakewalk for either of the dems. We've already seen the MSM reveal its ugly face during the recent ABC debate. That was a preview of what's to come - namely changing the subject from issues that really matter to useless triviality.