Posted on 06/05/2008 9:39:47 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Based on this map, CO, OH, NM, PA, MI and NH are battleground for McCain.
And defend NV, MO, and VA. I dont see any other Bush state in danger unless 3rd party split effect is big, IMHO it wont be.
We should be focussing on these key Senate races as well:
Sununu in NH,
Shaffer in CO,
http://www.bobschafferforsenate.com/
Gilmore in VA,
and winning in LA and SD.
If you are in Colorado, this is a big year! Take some time to help Shaffer this summer and fall.
PS. Obama will lose NH, IMHO, for the reasons explained here:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/can_mccain_win_massachusetts.html
... Deval Patrick is a warm-up of Obama, and his administration is a MISERABLE FAILURE.
He lost, but the level of enthusiasm was nowhere near this, the candidates were about equal in appearance and stature (and age), and it’s a totally different environment. I could go on and on about how it’s so different now... you get the picture... Plus... Bush had the conservatives rally for him... JM doesn’t.
“3. In OH, PA, and MI (and WV as well) there are a lot of Democrat-leaning blue collar whites who won’t vote for a black man, let alone one with Muslim roots.”
Let’s stop being queasy about an inexperienced over-promoted elitist black extreme leftwinger with a muslim father and stepfather who went an exclusive private school before he got affirmative action slots at Ivy league schools not appealling to blue collar whites as if it is the white man’s fault or that race can be factor when picking ‘diversity’ candidates, it can be a wonderful factor when 94% of blacks voted for Obama over Clinton, but his polygamist Muslim Kenyan socialist Dad cant be a factor for those white doubting that Obama has clue 1 in representing us Typical White Persons.
Faulkneresque rant over...
“Actually the Republican leaders that I spoke to were pessimistic about the Presidential election by late 1995. “
Correct. Clinton had clinched his re-election by Q1 1996 through his triangulation of the Congress and the budget blowup. Clinton spent early ‘soft money’ to bash the Congress. Dole=Newt=too extreme was their template.
We Republicans were fools to nominate Dole, we needed a strong executive type but we didnt have a good “outsider/change” candidate either. Forbes and Buchanan were boutique names, and we didnt have enough governors to draw on (pete wilson bowed out early). Senators make lousy nominees, as this miserable cycle will remind us.
I’m all for helping in the House and Senate this year, as long as I am helping Conservatives. I will not blindly support Republicans any longer, even under the threat of “the other one is worse.”
“Like it or not significant numbers of under 50 suburban Republicans will crossover to vote for Obama. That’s a major reason why Virginia, Colorado, Georgia, etc. are in play. Prepare emotionally, support solid candidates for the Senate and House, and hope for short coattails.”
And what pray tell do these morons for Obama see in this recycled Cartesque inexperienced elitist extreme leftwinger?
Is it the rabid pro-abortion positions?
Is it the proposal to raise capital gains taxes, and bizarrely still wanting them even if they don’t even increase revenues?
Is it the desire to lose in Iraq after all the sacrifices made? They really want to play kissy-face with Hamas and Achmed-need-a-job?
Or is it a vacuous, empty and plagiarized (from Deval Patrick’s campaign) “Change and Hope” campaign message that anyone born before yesterday (aka 1976), would know is just Carter redux, and is a complete political swindle?
Maybe they’ve just been bamboozled by the Mendacity of Media Hype about this sub-par bad-judgement candidate with radical friends and racist pastors.
I like your map too!
“I agree with everything you say but the likelihood of a McCain squeaker. That seems to me to be less likely, ironically, than an Obama blowout. This is a purple election. McCain wants to win with Democrat/Independent votes, and Obama did better against Hillary in red states than in blue ones. So the election is actually purple; if, Heaven forefend, Obama catches fire he could take quite a few red states.”
The most Marxist senator in the U.S. Senate (National Journal rated Obama the most liberal senator in 2007) will ‘catch fire’ in red states. Again, this can only happen if the biggest and most dishonest campaign in the history of this country hides the truth about Obama from the voter.
It is bizarre that some Freepers insist on a McCain blow, others on an Obama blowout. How about a novel concept: The campaign will matter and neither outcome is pre-ordained.
review of Obama’s law school record.
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/05/obama-mythical.html
I disagree with your map. I think Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan will go for McCain.
Think of all the blue collar workers.
Colorado is such a loser. Prayers needed here folks!
Kerry was an elitist fool. Obama is leftwing elitist with a lifetime history of associating and agreeing with radicals, communists and socialists. His anti-American pastors are just expressing the views of the church he belonged to for 2 decades. Obama should scare freepers much more than Kerry.
He is the least qualified and most outside-the-mainstream nominee the Democrats have ever put forward. Worse than Mcgovern for sure.
The entire enthusiasm for Obama is based on a pack of LIES. Lies about how different he is as a politician (he aint); lies about his ‘service’ (he did nothing as a community activist worthy of note); lies about his bipartisanship (he’s a tiresome and trite typical leftwing partisan Democrat, just a bit nicer than other leftwing partisans in their expressions, with zero record of ‘reaching out’). He promises a ‘change’ but he has NO NEW IDEAS. Expose the lies and Obama’s campaign will crash and burn like the Hindenberg.
“My” map is just showing the odds from tradesports. My map is actually much worse. You would really disagree with it.
Bush was outspent in 2004 if you count all the 527s for Kerry ... but he still won.
The Dems had a ‘dream ticket’ in 2002 in Texas. A black, a hispanic, and woman on the ticket. The hispanic was Sanchez, who blew $50million on a very expensive race, and outspent Rick Perry. Perry still won by a landslide.
So it will be here. Money wont matter. Candidate core capabilities will.
Obama is a great campaign. He will have more money. He will have better organization. BUT A CAMPAIGN IS ONLY AS GOOD AS THE CANDIDATE. Obama is simply unfit to be President. Go through my posts for the points - he lacks the judgment, experience, knowledge and track record to be President. He is too far extreme left, and his associations prove it. At some point the money will be irrelevent. Voters will have made a decision.
The same NYC that rejected Dinkins for Guiliani can see that Obama is not fit for the White House.
“Every social program will pass cause the GOP doesn’t want to be seen as rac. Most economic programs, for the same reason... He’s far, far more dangerous than Hillary would have been... at least, we would have challenged her at every step... not with this guy...”
I dont disagree. It would be a disaster for America if Obama wins - a President worse than Carter. But it is not inevitable. If we band together and fight the Media Borg on this, McCain will win.
Share this link:
http://no-bama.blogspot.com
Not a threat, just a statement of reality. Obama is far far far far worse than McCain on a number of issues.
They'll fawn over him as long as they are in front of a camera. When that curtain closes behind them it will be a different story. PC will be unheard of then.I just don’t think people are going to fawn over the Recycled Black McGovern as much as the media thinks they will.
That is the scenario I expect to unfold. Which will not be comfortable for us, prospectively, when McCain it down in the polls in October.
Colorado solution: Help Bob Shaffer.
That means local walk-the-blocks, tell your friends and neighbors, write letters to the editor about how Shaffer is right and Udall is wrong on taxes, energy independence, life issues, immigration, and the govt budget, etc.
Why do you say that. Is it because the media will lie and have Mcpain losing by a mile and those who were going to vote for him just won't bother to go to the poll and vote?
And McCain is far, far worse than Obama on a number of issues.
The most Marxist senator in the U.S. Senate (National Journal rated Obama the most liberal senator in 2007) will ‘catch fire’ in red states. Again, this can only happen if the biggest and most dishonest campaign in the history of this country hides the truth about Obama from the voter.“I agree with everything you say but the likelihood of a McCain squeaker. That seems to me to be less likely, ironically, than an Obama blowout. This is a purple election. McCain wants to win with Democrat/Independent votes, and Obama did better against Hillary in red states than in blue ones. So the election is actually purple; if, Heaven forefend, Obama catches fire he could take quite a few red states.”
It is bizarre that some Freepers insist on a McCain blow, others on an Obama blowout. How about a novel concept: The campaign will matter and neither outcome is pre-ordained.
I said that I didn't expect Obama to win, or even come close. But you are right, I expect the campaign to matter - and either bury Obama early or, less likely by far (I certainly hope!) bury McCain. I just don't see the likelihood of a close contest, because I think that the Rust Belt is likely to go to McCain - or, just possibly, Obama - en bloc.Basically all I'm saying is that the Electoral College tends to inflate the margin between the winner and the loser of the popular vote - and that the 2000 and 2004 elections are anomalous in producing not only close popular vote totals but close EV totals as well - such that a single fairly large state flipping against the victor would have turned the result. And the appeals of McCain and Obama are sufficiently different from those of Bush and Gore/Kerry that I doubt that the EV count will come out that close even if the popular vote isn't a blowout. And it's possible that the popular vote could be a blowout.
There are issues where he’s quite similar to McCain, but don’t lie to me.
Name three issues where Obama is “better” than McCain. I challenge you.
Heck, name ONE.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.