2004 was a close race. It came down to one state, Ohio. Bush was given a gift from the Massachussetts Supreme Court with the same sex marriage decision. Getting the same sex marriage ban on the Ohio ballot helped lock up Ohio for Bush. Not to mention having Karl Rove’s help.
Obama is quite smart to use some of his extra funds in some of the red states. Remember, not only local races are at stake, but also control of state legislatures which means control over redistricting. Obama does not want to spend 6 years with a Republican controlled congress. He’ll also be more likely to get congressional support for his agenda. Clinton had a terrible time with the Democratic congress during his first year and the budget passed by only one vote.
Shodan certainly it is impressive that McCain has managed to bring the national popular vote to a tie and is even nominally in the lead in one tracker for the first time in a long time. This thread however is about the actual electoral vote count. As you know, a close popular vote can still have one or the other win the electoral count. It all depends where those votes are.
Obama is right now solidly in the lead there and McCain has to virtually run the table of contested swing states, pull out an Obama lean or two, and not lose any that currently lean his way.
I understand the logic that he needs to focus on the big swings and hope that his “safe” states stay safe despite not answering Obama moves there. He runs the risk however of winning OH and MI at the cost of losing because he lost some that should have been gimmees. Obama for his part is aiming less for major poll moves in those states than for turnout in his demographics enhanced by a massive ground game. He aims to have the likely voter screens be very faulty predictors in those states.
I would never expect Obama to lead by a wide margin. I think most people make their minds up along partsan lines early on. I don’t think there’s really all that much flexability in the electorate. I think it’s about turnout. Obama’s got a much more motivated following than McCain does. I was pessimistic about Kerry last time and pretty much assumed he would probably lose. I don’t have that sense of inevitable loss this time. I think Obama will take it decisively in electoral votes, but only by 2 or 3 points in the popular vote.
I wouldn’t start placing any bets on McCain just yet. In the only area that matters, the electoral college, McCain is getting beat pretty badly, as seen here. Two hundred and thirty-eight to one hundred sixty-three in Obama’s favor, with one hundred thirty-seven a toss up. Obama would need just 24% of the toss ups to win.
I often look at elections in other countries and shake my head, wondering how he (or oftentimes she) could possibly get elected anywhere. The voters, though, don’t seem to care what I think and go about their business.
American voters are the same way, and care about as much how their candidates are viewed in Glasgow or Buenos Aires as Scots and Argentines care how their candidates are portrayed in American newspapers.
So I wouldn’t put too much stock in this. Foreigners might hate our president, but they’ll cut deals with us just the same, if it is in their interest to do so.
I went on over to Electoral Vote and saw the current EV polling data. The usual battle ground states were apparent (Ohio, Florida, etc.) but there were surprises like Obama currently ahead by 1% in Indiana (as already mentioned upthread). Does that mean Indiana is “in play”? What makes a state “in play”? How close does the race have to be for it to be considered, at least on the margins, to be in play?
Further, I’d be curious to know which states do Dopers think are “in play” in the 2008 presidential race?