The Electoral Map

If you're a Democrat, this NYT map is a little scary. It's a map of solid Democratic states, solid Republican states, and the "Battleground States."

To win the Presidency, Obama would need to take all the states Kerry won in 2004, plus take 18 electoral college votes from John McCain. States that Bush won in 2004 that Obama will want to try to flip are Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Iowa, Ohio, Virginia and Florida, while still maintaining Pennsylvania and Michigan in the blue column. Is that going to be hard for Obama? It's certainly not going to be easy.

I do think that, with this electoral layout in mind, there is one really good choice for an Obama VP--Bill Richardson.

He neutralizes any inroads McCain might make in Cali. He brings out the Hispanic vote in Colorado, Nevada, hopefully Florida and he guarantees New Mexico (not a big coup, it only has 5 electoral college votes). He might even be able to help with the Catholic vote, something Obama needs a bump in. He has foreign policy credentials, he has energy credentials ... and he broke early for Obama when it was still politically risky to do so.

I think Obama/Richardson could be the winning ticket.

Why Clinton should stay in it

Marc Ambinder has7 reasons why Clinton should stay in the race, despite the fact that Obama is pretty much the nominee at this point. It's a good list, I think.

UPDATE: I didn't see it earlier, but he also has 7 reasons why she should quit.

Perception

Whether she wins or loses in Indiana, Clinton is going to have to deal with a major perception issue that she's finished. Tim Russert, other major anchors, a huge swath of liberal bloggers, Pat Buchanan, and Erica C. Barnett (one of the Slog's adamant Clinton supporters) either called the race for Obama or threw in the towel and said that their favored candidate should step down.

I'm not entirely sure she will, although ...

Her speech tonight felt like the start of a concession speech. Marc Ambinder posted an e-mail from her fundraising team that reads to me like she's dropping out (save for this last line: "Thank you so much for making this campaign possible. Let's keep making history together" although even that could be read a variety of ways.) And Politico is reporting she just canceled morning show appearances.

I'm not willing to go out on a limb and say she's dropping out, but I do know she's going to be facing some tough questions from reporters very soon.

Update: the NYT and others is calling Indiana for Clinton by 1.9%. 22,000 votes.

Also Marc Ambinder has her schedule for tomorrow:

She'll spend time meeting with senior staff, with key supporters, and with undecided superdelegates. She may make a surprise visit to her campaign headquarters in Arlington. She'll attend a fundraiser in the evening that is open to the press.

Aaarggghh.

Pat Buchanan is driving me crazy. He just said on MSNBC that on the night of the Pennsylvania primary, Obama was up by 7 in Indiana and now he might lose the state by double digits. I can't find anything close to that on Pollster, which tracks the polls. With the exception of a few outliers, he's been trailing in Indiana for awhile.

But Obama has won "decisively" according to MSNBC in North Carolina, a state Clinton apparently hoped to put in play. Indiana hasn't been called yet.

Friedman's Back!

After getting a pie in the face, Thomas Friedman is back to writing regularly for the New York Times. I'm glad to see him back, especially since he's backing up a post I made yesterday:

"Hillary Clinton has decided to line up with John McCain in pushing to suspend the federal excise tax on gasoline, 18.4 cents a gallon, for this summer’s travel season. This is not an energy policy. This is money laundering: we borrow money from China and ship it to Saudi Arabia and take a little cut for ourselves as it goes through our gas tanks. What a way to build our country."

This was disheartening, however:

" ... when Congress passed the 2007 energy bill last December, it failed to extend any stimulus for wind and solar energy production. Oil and gas kept all their credits, but those for wind and solar have been left to expire this December."

Dang.

Kudos to Obama

I'd like to tip my hat to Obama (yeah, yeah, big surprise).

McCain and Clinton are both calling to drop the federal gas tax for the summer. That would take 18.4 cents off of each gallon of gas for the summer.

This is in the Times: "Mr. Obama derided the McCain-Clinton idea of a federal tax holiday as a “short-term, quick-fix” proposal that would do more harm than good, and said the money, which is earmarked for the federal highway trust fund, is badly needed to maintain the nation’s roads and bridges."

And then this: "Mr. Obama said lifting the gas tax for three months would save the average consumer no more than $30, a figure confirmed by Congressional analysts. ...“Half a tank of gas,” Mr. Obama told his audience. “That’s his big solution.”

I think this is a case where Obama rising above the obvious political move is a net gain for him. First, it allows the New York Times to write things like "McCain-Clinton idea," something Clinton probably doesn't like. And he gets back to his message that paints Clinton as "same old Washington." He's also taking the high road on an easy choice. If lifting the gas tax really only saves everyone $30 over the entire summer, then I think that's argument he can win. It would also likely cost 300,000 construction jobs (also according to the article).

Regardless of what you think of the gas tax, I'd venture that Clinton's position isn't consistent with her stated goal of weening the US off foreign oil, where Obama's position is consistent with his energy policy.

The Long Primary

An interesting post on Andrew Sullivan today (which I shared in my sidebar) reminded me of that leaked spreadsheet back on February 6, in which the Obama campaign was projecting forward to the upcoming primaries. Their margins have been a little off here and there, and they guessed Clinton would take Maine, but other than that, their predictions were right on the money, including a loss in Pennsylvania.

The New Republic piece on Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, had this interesting tidbit: "Where most underdog campaigns bet everything on a quick upset in Iowa or New Hampshire, Plouffe constructed a meticulous plan to turn the race into a long, drawn-out delegate slog."

It reminded me that the Atlantic political reporter Marc Ambinder has called "not planning for and contesting the caucuses" the "major strategic error" of the Clinton campaign. The just didn't see it coming. Last night Clinton picked up 12 - 16 delegates ... less than what Obama picked up in Colorado (17 delegates) or Kansas (14). Plouffe was apparently the one who foresaw that the small mostly red states could be huge gains for the campaign because Clinton wouldn't think to compete there.

I recommend the TNR piece. It's interesting that Obama, with the help of Plouffe, were able to out-politic two of the best politicians ever. I made the point in February, but I'd like to make it again: Obama is a very canny politician. That's one of the things about him I really like.

Dang.

Obama lost. It was expected, but that's no excuse, since that was what Clinton tried to say after every primary and caucus she lost in February.

By my count, Clinton has had two "must-win" scenarios so far: Ohio/Texas and Pennsylvania and she won them both (I don't count New Hampshire as a must-win, I think she could have survived even after losing it and it's worth noting she lost the delegate count in Texas). Obama, for his part, considered Iowa a must-win, and it probably was. At the very least he probably had to win Iowa or New Hampshire.

But since then it's hard to say he's had many "must-win" states. Super Tuesday ended with roughly the same number of delegates going to both of them and he certainly couldn't afford to get blown out of the water ... but there wasn't a single state that day that was a must-win for him (save perhaps Illinois).

My point is that Clinton is now on to another "must-win" state: Indiana. Polling is spotty. No one's really sure who has a strategic advantage going in.

Both campaigns are in a tough spot right now, but I don't think it's too hard to say that given the two options, I would rather not be the candidate who keeps having "must-win" primaries.

Clearly there are going to be questions like, "Why can't Obama put this away?"--questions Clinton has already raised. As an Obama supporter, I have to say I don't have an easy answer to that question. It seems like after some of these contests the argument is "look how much he narrowed the margin ... if he only had more time." That's partially true, but at the same time, he can't say that come November if he loses to McCain.

On the other hand, it kind of is put away. Unless something major changes, she likely can't overtake his delegate lead, and I believe he's winning the popular vote (as much of it as we know; not all caucus states release the popular vote tallies). The question superdelegates have to ask is "If overturning the popular vote and pledged delegate lead is politically risky [as I think it would be] then what cover can Clinton give me for doing it?" Put another way, I'm just not sure I see the rationale yet for why the superdelegates would break for Clinton in the end.

Nationally, Obama is up 10 points on Clinton according to Gallup. That's after everything he went through over the last two weeks--the "bitter" thing, Wright, a bad debate performance. He still polls just as well against McCain as Clinton does, too.

I very much want Obama to win, so perhaps I'm being biased here. But without a blowout in Pennsylvania, the Clinton road to the nomination seems to be just as hard tonight as it was before the primary.

The Pennsylvania Primary

I'm watching MSNBC and CNN tonight but the best on-line resource is the New York Times' Pennsylvania page. Play around with it. There's interesting stuff in it.

Dust it off

As I said in the comments to the last post, I'm not really that upset about the ABC interview because Obama's so danged good at turning the tables, and this played right into his hand in many ways.

Witness. About 2 minutes into the video he makes his supporters go wild.

ABC's Debate

If you're not a regular follower of political blogs, you may not know that a lot of people--and I do mean a lot of people--are pissed as hell at ABC for the debate they ran last night. Facile questions, no policy questions in the first half of the debate, attempted "gotcha" moments and apparently even George Stephanapolous taking notes from Sean Hannity to prepare for one question.

Visit some of my shared links in the sidebar if you want a sense of how upset people are. It will be interesting to see what happens.

It was also apparently one of the most watched debates to date. Alas, I didn't see, I was walking on Ruston.

Chabon on Obama

Michael Chabon compares Obama to Jackie Robinson and Roberto Clemente:

I saw grace, the grace of Robinson and Clemente, in the way Mr. Obama balanced a steadfast refusal to surrender to anger with an equally staunch refusal to deny or repudiate its enduring legacy, for good and ill, in the history of race in America. There was grace in the intelligence and abandon of Robinson running the bases, in the fatal arc of a Clemente throw to home from deep right field, in the steadiness and candor that Mr. Obama brought to bear in making his difficult speech on race in America.

I recommend the whole article. If you've read Summerland, you know Chabon's love of baseball, so it's a natural his mind would go there.

Obama weathers the worst

Judging by the most recent NBC poll, Obama fared the tough week last week very well and Clinton dropped to the worst positive ratings she'd had since 2001. That's gotta hurt. It's going to play well in the media these next few days, I'm guessing.

Obama in Mississippi

So Obam won Mississippi today. That's all good, and it gives him another boost in delegates, just like the Texas caucus, which released another round of results today that puts Obama up in delegates over Clinton for the state.

Here's what's interesting. Look at the map and you realize how far we've come since Iowa. The Democrats have only 11 contests left, and that counts Guam and Puerto Rico. 9 states, 2 territories ... after Ohio and Texas, Clinton had to take more than 63% of all the remaining delegates to tie. It's just looking very unlikely that that's going to happen.

On the other hand, Pennsylvania is six weeks away ... we've got a lifetime of stuff that could happen before then. Good luck, Obama! Keep it up!

The "3 am" Girl

The Clinton "3 am Girl" in her ads has been all over the news recently because it turns out she is a Barack Obama supporter. Not only that, but she's a precinct captain for him.

The Tribune's Political Buzz has a good summary of all the media attention she's getting. Maybe she'll get to meet Obama sometime soon. And maybe Obama will call me sometime to thank me for LeftiesforObama.com. I can hope.

This is also a good time to give you Obama's response to Clinton's talk of a "dream ticket" with her and Obama ... how many times has the 2nd place person offered the VP slot to the person in the lead? Cracks me up.

What is this woman holding?

Holy cow. Check out the woman on the right. I think that's 6 recorders she's holding in her hands. That's got to create some killer feedback.

Obama's 2 Minute Argument

Clinton's been doing better recently. She's had a habit of making game-changing moves at the last minute that worries me going into Tuesday's election. Of course, if you visit the poll pages at Pollster you'll see how quickly Obama has closed the gap.

I find the idea that the press has been hard on her a little difficult to swallow. If Obama had lost 11 primaries or caucuses in a row, do you think the press would you treating tomorrow's primaries the same way? Of course not. The truth is, Huckabee has done better since Super Tuesday than Clinton has. But the "media" hasn't really touched that one.

Marc Ambinder over at the Atlantic has a very good look at Hillary's numbers. His conclusion is that the only way she could become the nominee to close the delegate gap with Obama is to seat Michigan and Florida delegates. Which would, of course, tear the Democratic party apart.

Anyway, here's Obama's closing video. God speed, sir.

Obama's Open Letter to the Gay Community

It's worth calling attention to Obama's "open letter" to the gay community. He's in a fight with Clinton for the last states. He's been called "too liberal." And he's got a whole lot to lose right now.

But he's still willing to write this:

I talked about the need to fight homophobia when I announced my candidacy for President, and I have been talking about LGBT equality to a number of groups during this campaign – from local LGBT activists to rural farmers to parishioners at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, where Dr. Martin Luther King once preached. Just as important, I have been listening to what all Americans have to say. I will never compromise on my commitment to equal rights for all LGBTAmericans. But neither will I close my ears to the voices of those who still need to be convinced. That is the work we must do to move forward together. It is difficult. It is challenging. And it is necessary. Americans are yearning for leadership that can empower us to reach for what we know is possible. I believe that we can achieve the goal of full equality for the millions of LGBT people in this country. To do that, we need leadership that can appeal to the best parts of the human spirit. Join with me, and I will provide that leadership. Together, we will achieve real equality for all Americans, gay and straight alike.

My hat is off to him.

Obama: Hype vs. Substance? Can he have both?

There's a growing backlash against Obama as an over-hyped candidate (this post was in fact inspired by an e-mail to join a facebook group that's against Obama as all-hype). His reputation for that comes from a couple places:

• He has focused on process over issues (the ways of Washington do not work, etc)
• He is a good speaker and inspirational to many and so the policy arguments get lost
• He is a "cool" candidate right now and is helped by YouTube videos made my celebrities but also hurt by them at the same time.

This criticism is becoming more common. Erica C Barnett at the Stranger's Slog (a Clinton supporter) disparages Obama because of his glazed-eyes supporters. Matt Bai at the NYT Caucus Blog talks about a friend who was dissuaded from voting for Obama because of the hyped will.i.am video. Etc, etc.

I tend to thing the criticism is baseless (but, then, I would). As Bai points out Obama is working hard right now to be more policy focused in his recent speeches. Here's Matthew Yglesias on Obama's policy-driven speech on the economy in Wisconsin. I'd also like to add that a quick gander at Obama's issues pages on the website should hopefully do away with the myth that he's got no ideas or proposals. Disagree with the proposals or not, they're there, and they're pretty wonkish. Here's his energy plan, for example, which gets pretty danged specific.

I think what's important going into Texas and Ohio is to emphasize that not only can Obama but be an inspirational speaker, but he's got the substance behind it.

UPDATE: Here's Andrew Sullivan on this same issue today.

Obama has a host of policy positions, on taxes, healthcare, Iraq, Afghanistan, immigration, climate change, and this blog has mentioned or debated many of them. There seems to be a meme that because someone is inspiring, there has to be no substance. But they are not mutually exclusive categories. In the Democratic race, the only real substantive difference is healthcare mandates, which I've aired a great deal. And compared with McCain, Obama is a wonk.

Ouch.

Virginia Exit Polls

Here's CNN's Exit Polls. Obama won everyone. Really. Women, churchgoers, whites, blacks, college grads, non grads ...

Also, he won 16% of people who thought Hillary would be a better Commander in Chief. ... Really? So out of everyone who thought Hillary would be a better CinC, Obama still took 16%? (In contrast, Clinton got 1% of the people who thought Obama would be a better CinC.)

That's quite a victory.