You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #33: Your math is way off [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Awsi Dooger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-11-08 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #9
33. Your math is way off
John Kerry managed 251 electoral votes. He needed every bit of Ohio's 20 electoral votes to put him over the top, since 270 is the magic number.

You claim Obama needs Kerry's core plus either Missouri or Virginia. Incorrect. He would need both. Missouri has 11 electoral votes and Virginia 13. Later you assert Obama could win via Kerry's states plus either Louisiana or Colorado. Wrong again. In fact, adding both would not be enough. They have 9 apiece, which would create a 269-269 tie.

The fool's gold is pretending weakness in major states doesn't matter. If you forfeit Florida and Ohio it tilts the margin for error back to the GOP, instead of where it rightfully belongs this cycle.

2008 is not a second term midterm. Our edge among independents won't threaten 2006, even if Obama is the nominee. I agree we need more states in play but it's not certain the vehicle is Obama. Hillary appears to have more demographic strength than Obama in Florida, Ohio, Arkansas, Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

And it's hardly a certainty Obama's national polling would surpass Hillary's, in relation to McCain, once a general election plays out. Newsflash: he'll have to do a hell of a lot better than hoodwinked or bamboozled. I can think of some early debates with wobbly answers, notably when asked what he would do in the event of a terrorist attack. It was like a pathetic checklist, no threat of emotion or vengeance. I guarantee that clip is already in the can at GOP headquarters.

I like Obama but my sports background always attaches skepticism to sudden risers, people who never would have been forecast for the current level just a few years earlier. It reminds me of college football players who surge in their senior year, after being rated much lower during the bulk of their career, then suddenly become hot commodity blue chip prospects entering the draft. Much more often than not, the early evaluation is truer to reality and the player is a disappointment. Horses who win the Triple Crown are phenoms at 2, like Secretariat, Seattle Slew and Affirmed. The cutesy late blooming colts are touted then falter, fans desperate to embrace and pretend. I realize these are strange analogies but there is a foundation in truth. Give me long term excellence every time. People who don't gamble are suckered by recency far too often.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC