Actually, I think that any Democratic candidate, with the possible exception of Hillary Clinton and all her baggage, could have beat McCain. Oh, and another exception would be John Edwards, had he got the nimination and then had the affair go public shortly before the election.
Even saying this, I think Obama was indeed the best candidate.
And I have to snicker at what some Republicans must be thinking about McCain – “sooo bad a candidate that even a black guy beats him.”
Obama was in the right place and backed by Oprah. Hillary would’ve won had Obama not ran. If John Edwards didn’t run, it’s even possible that Hillary would’ve won Iowa and kept the momentum throughout the campaign.
Obama LOST all the huge state, (except his own Illionis) to Hillary. Hillary won, NY,CA,TX,OH,PA,MA, etc, etc
He wasn’t popular up there. Obama won by getting the little states.
The economy is what really drove the election. You can look at almost every presidental election. In bad times the party holding office gets thrown out.
Add to that GW Bush’s unpopularity. Just look at 1968, it was a replay. Johnson was so unpopular that a vote for Humphrey was like a vote for him.
If the economy was stable and GW Bush in the same position he was in 2004 (in 2008) it would’ve been another repeat of 2000, 2004. With the nation about equally divided.
The economy was the worst since 1980 so that was the real key. If it doesn’t get better by 2012 Obama will be out.
Obama lost those states by small margins, but won Virginia and Georgia (both of which are more populous than Massachusetts) by much larger margins. In the Democratic primaries, it doesn’t matter if you win or lose in itself, but how many delegates you gain, since it’s not winner-take-all.