Now What?

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,134
38
91
It looks like, with Biden, Obama made a direct play for Pennsylvania, less so for Ohio and Michigan. With Palin, McCain made a direct play for the Western United States. Ironically, McCain was not doing as well as expected in that region, his region. Even the states that neighbor him (e.g. California, Nevada, New Mexico) were leaning towards Obama. He may now have a shot at the other Western states, but that leaves a huge window of opportunity for Michigan and Florida.

Any thoughts on how Michigan and Florida will play out? I can only assume that the elderly in Florida have enough money for retirement but it wouldn't hurt for Obama to target them with his healthcare plan. I would also hope he'd campaign there more aggressively.
 

winnar111

Banned
Mar 10, 2008
2,847
0
0
Personally, I never thought McCain had all that much of a shot in PA, or that Obama had a shot in Florida.

I think its pretty clear that if McCain wins, it'll be a 27x - 26x victory, while Obama has the upside of 325 EV or so.

Which is why I think he should have picked Romney. If he loses IA/NM, he needs to win all the rest of Bush 2004 states; NH doesn't matter either way, and all your money is on CO. If he could pick Romney and win MI it creates quite a few problems for the Obama camp.

Either way the eggs are all in 1 basket.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,134
38
91
Originally posted by: winnar111
Personally, I never thought McCain had all that much of a shot in PA, or that Obama had a shot in Florida.

I think its pretty clear that if McCain wins, it'll be a 27x - 26x victory, while Obama has the upside of 325 EV or so.

Which is why I think he should have picked Romney. If he loses IA/NM, he needs to win all the rest of Bush 2004 states; NH doesn't matter either way, and all your money is on CO. If he could pick Romney and win MI it creates quite a few problems for the Obama camp.

Either way the eggs are all in 1 basket.
:thumbsup:I definitely agree. Romney would've gone a long way helping him, not only in the West, but Michigan as well. Add his governance and business credentials, and he would've been the best person for McCain.

BTW, why is Florida a lost cause for Obama?
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
5
0
Despite all the noise about how Obama was going to expand the battle field and all it looks like we are heading for a replay of 2000 and 2004. Supposedly Obama has gone so far as ending his advertising in several 'red states' that he thought he had a chance in.

It is going to most likely come down to Ohio again with perhaps a few other battle ground states.

It is still too early to get a clear picture though. We need to wait for another week after the Republican convention and see how/if that changes the race. Palin is still an unknown and her big speech Wed could make a big difference if independent women decide to line up behind her and McCain.

By this time next week all the post convention polls should be out and we should get a real clear shape of the battle field.
 

winnar111

Banned
Mar 10, 2008
2,847
0
0
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: winnar111
Personally, I never thought McCain had all that much of a shot in PA, or that Obama had a shot in Florida.

I think its pretty clear that if McCain wins, it'll be a 27x - 26x victory, while Obama has the upside of 325 EV or so.

Which is why I think he should have picked Romney. If he loses IA/NM, he needs to win all the rest of Bush 2004 states; NH doesn't matter either way, and all your money is on CO. If he could pick Romney and win MI it creates quite a few problems for the Obama camp.

Either way the eggs are all in 1 basket.
:thumbsup:I definitely agree. Romney would've gone a long way helping him, not only in the West, but Michigan as well. Add his governance and business credentials, and he would've been the best person for McCain.

BTW, why is Florida a lost cause for Obama?
Well, its a state that's been treading red, with a lot of Cubans and old people, neither of which are Obama's prime constituencies.

Maybe not a lost cause, but if Obama wins Florida, he probably didn't need to.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
5
0
Originally posted by: Dari
BTW, why is Florida a lost cause for Obama?
I don't think the demographics of Fl favor Obama.

He is weak with the Jewish voters.
He is weak with hispanic voters.

McCain is strong with older voters since he is one of them.
McCain is also strong with vets and Florida has a TON of them.
Liberman should also help McCain with Jewish voters. One person suggested that they just have Liberman drive up and down between Miami and West Palm beach until election.

Bush also won Florida by a decent margin in 2004.
Plus the Florida economy is still in pretty good shape.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,134
38
91
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: Dari
BTW, why is Florida a lost cause for Obama?
I don't think the demographics of Fl favor Obama.

He is weak with the Jewish voters.
He is weak with hispanic voters.

McCain is strong with older voters since he is one of them.
McCain is also strong with vets and Florida has a TON of them.
Liberman should also help McCain with Jewish voters. One person suggested that they just have Liberman drive up and down between Miami and West Palm beach until election.

Bush also won Florida by a decent margin in 2004.
Plus the Florida economy is still in pretty good shape.
lol, really? The reason why he's doing so well in New Mexico is because of the Hispanic vote. In fact, I've heard that he leads McCain in the Hispanic vote by a large margin. The Hispanics have abandoned McCain.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
5
0
^ Perhaps I was wrong then. I have not seen any recent polls on the subject and was relying on the old 'common wisdom' that black candidates don't do well with hispanics, my bad.
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Originally posted by: winnar111
Which is why I think he should have picked Romney. If he loses IA/NM, he needs to win all the rest of Bush 2004 states; NH doesn't matter either way, and all your money is on CO. If he could pick Romney and win MI it creates quite a few problems for the Obama camp.
Romney again? Definitely, the Republican ticket needs two Rich, Out-of-Touch Old White Guys who have both made major political turn-abouts in the last few years.
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Topic Title: Now What?

I think it's going to get really, really ugly (if that's even more possible)

McCain's VP pick was 'Rovian'.

It was meant to energize the base and take care of the 'core' GOP vote. NOW you go ugly and try to piss-off enough of the electorate to make them stay home.

The Rovian choice for BHO would have been Hilarity. They went with a 'safe' choice in Biden.

Each campaign will whine and complain the other is going 'negative' when in fact each will fight dirty to simply survive. 527s will have a field day, the push-polls will get really ugly in targeted areas and the BS will fly.

Welcome to Politics USA.
 

winnar111

Banned
Mar 10, 2008
2,847
0
0
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Originally posted by: winnar111
Which is why I think he should have picked Romney. If he loses IA/NM, he needs to win all the rest of Bush 2004 states; NH doesn't matter either way, and all your money is on CO. If he could pick Romney and win MI it creates quite a few problems for the Obama camp.
Romney again? Definitely, the Republican ticket needs two Rich, Out-of-Touch Old White Guys who have both made major political turn-abouts in the last few years.
Not disagreeing with you about the turn-about, and that was probably his downfall, but Romney is at least a self made man.

So called Rich old white guys have been winning elections for 200 years.
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Originally posted by: winnar111
Which is why I think he should have picked Romney. If he loses IA/NM, he needs to win all the rest of Bush 2004 states; NH doesn't matter either way, and all your money is on CO. If he could pick Romney and win MI it creates quite a few problems for the Obama camp.
Romney again? Definitely, the Republican ticket needs two Rich, Out-of-Touch Old White Guys who have both made major political turn-abouts in the last few years.
Not disagreeing with you about the turn-about, and that was probably his downfall, but Romney is at least a self made man.
So called Rich old white guys have been winning elections for 200 years.
Ah, yes. I forgot about the vast inherited wealth of Senators Obama and Biden.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
346
126
The south has McCain with a 16 point lead, and the deep south with a 25 point lead - who'd a thunk, the south is the most opposed to a black candidate.

According to the guests on Bill Moyers this week, Obama likely only has a chance in the souther states of VA and FL, and a slight chance in GA.
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,914
3
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
^ Perhaps I was wrong then. I have not seen any recent polls on the subject and was relying on the old 'common wisdom' that black candidates don't do well with hispanics, my bad.
Yes I can't give you specific numbers but I know people were throwing numbers around like McCain needed 40% of the Latino vote to win and he is far short of that. I think he is making up ground in other areas but it will lose him New Mexico for sure.

As for McCain in the west, he has not given up Washington I can tell you that we get ads all the time from him. Seems as though Obama never comes on TV.
 

winnar111

Banned
Mar 10, 2008
2,847
0
0
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Originally posted by: winnar111
Which is why I think he should have picked Romney. If he loses IA/NM, he needs to win all the rest of Bush 2004 states; NH doesn't matter either way, and all your money is on CO. If he could pick Romney and win MI it creates quite a few problems for the Obama camp.
Romney again? Definitely, the Republican ticket needs two Rich, Out-of-Touch Old White Guys who have both made major political turn-abouts in the last few years.
Not disagreeing with you about the turn-about, and that was probably his downfall, but Romney is at least a self made man.
So called Rich old white guys have been winning elections for 200 years.
Ah, yes. I forgot about the vast inherited wealth of Senators Obama and Biden.
Well, neither of them are wealthy, are they? Biden's been living off the government his entire life.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
346
126
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Originally posted by: winnar111
Which is why I think he should have picked Romney. If he loses IA/NM, he needs to win all the rest of Bush 2004 states; NH doesn't matter either way, and all your money is on CO. If he could pick Romney and win MI it creates quite a few problems for the Obama camp.
Romney again? Definitely, the Republican ticket needs two Rich, Out-of-Touch Old White Guys who have both made major political turn-abouts in the last few years.
Not disagreeing with you about the turn-about, and that was probably his downfall, but Romney is at least a self made man.
So called Rich old white guys have been winning elections for 200 years.
Ah, yes. I forgot about the vast inherited wealth of Senators Obama and Biden.
Well, neither of them are wealthy, are they? Biden's been living off the government his entire life.
It's remarkable for a man who isn't wealthy to get elected to the US Senate, quite an accomplishment for Biden, because of his talents.

You want our Senators to be 'getting wealthy' on the side? Or we should only elect CEO's to the Senate to represent the public? Gee, what policies will that get us?

Biden's the solution, you are the problem (referring to your political views), IMO.
 

winnar111

Banned
Mar 10, 2008
2,847
0
0
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, neither of them are wealthy, are they? Biden's been living off the government his entire life.
It's remarkable for a man who isn't wealthy to get elected to the US Senate, quite an accomplishment for Biden, because of his talents.

You want our Senators to be 'getting wealthy' on the side? Or we should only elect CEO's to the Senate to represent the public? Gee, what policies will that get us?

Biden's the solution, you are the problem (referring to your political views), IMO.

When did I say otherwise? I have no idea why the topic of the GOP VP nominee was diverted, but there are people who admire those successful at business.

My governor, Jon Corzine is among those, even if his policies suck.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
346
126
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, neither of them are wealthy, are they? Biden's been living off the government his entire life.
It's remarkable for a man who isn't wealthy to get elected to the US Senate, quite an accomplishment for Biden, because of his talents.

You want our Senators to be 'getting wealthy' on the side? Or we should only elect CEO's to the Senate to represent the public? Gee, what policies will that get us?

Biden's the solution, you are the problem (referring to your political views), IMO.

When did I say otherwise? I have no idea why the topic of the GOP VP nominee was diverted, but there are people who admire those successful at business.

My governor, Jon Corzine is among those, even if his policies suck.
You deny that you were criticizing them for not being wealthy and Biden for only having his Senate salary, and then discuss how the wealthy are admired by some? Confusing post.
 

winnar111

Banned
Mar 10, 2008
2,847
0
0
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: winnar111
Well, neither of them are wealthy, are they? Biden's been living off the government his entire life.
It's remarkable for a man who isn't wealthy to get elected to the US Senate, quite an accomplishment for Biden, because of his talents.

You want our Senators to be 'getting wealthy' on the side? Or we should only elect CEO's to the Senate to represent the public? Gee, what policies will that get us?

Biden's the solution, you are the problem (referring to your political views), IMO.

When did I say otherwise? I have no idea why the topic of the GOP VP nominee was diverted, but there are people who admire those successful at business.

My governor, Jon Corzine is among those, even if his policies suck.
You deny that you were criticizing them for not being wealthy and Biden for only having his Senate salary, and then discuss how the wealthy are admired by some? Confusing post.
No, I simply pointed out a fact about how he lived his life. I actually like Joe Biden a lot more than the rest of the Democratic squad; he seems to flipflop less than most politicians.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,676
136
Barring some miracle, McCain won't take my state, Colorado. We've been a trendsetter in the move away from repub politics- first the legislature and 1 senator, next the governor, and now we're poised to have both senators and pickups in the HOR...

McCain's recent remarks about renegotiating the 1922 water compact didn't gain him any friends here, either... it's a very touchy subject, with "renegotiate" pretty much being interpreted as "Bend Over!" statewide... particularly the way he put it...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY