Electorally Speaking

We interrupt these American Idol posts for some brief political/election chat...

As you well know, I am a Hillary supporter, so I was pretty pleased with last night's results... and thus you should not be surprised to trip over some pro-Hillary bias below and beyond.   A week or so ago, I was figuring last night would probably be the end... but this election's motto certainly echoes that beloved Big Brother mantra of "expect the unexpected." 

No surprise, I think Clinton should continue on in the race.  I will have to respectfully disagree with anyone who says otherwise...  my wallet is currently empty at any attempts to buy the "for the good of the party" argument. 

It's like being at the 19 mile mark in of a marathon and thinking... hmmm, Runner A is about 3/4 mile ahead of Runner B... we like Runner A and it looks like Runner A is going to win anyhow, so why don't we just call the race here... the people at milepost 22 and beyond won't mind...  that way we can rest up for the next race against the 71-year old. (BTW, those numbers are "real" ballparks of where we are in the Dem delegate race and the gap... have I mentioned I kinda like to crunch numbers?!)

That said, I am not being that Pollyanna about Clinton's status either... and was pretty surprised to see articles this morning of Clinton hinting about Obama as VP... what a difference a day makes... but again, whoa nelly!

The other night I wondered aloud... delegates schmelegates super-califragilisticexpialidocious-elegates (go ahead say it aloud, it's really quite fun... tho' a friendly warning, it's also something quite atrocious)...

What would the numbers look like between Clinton and Obama based on the presidential "winner takes all" electoral college?  Too much free time Curiosity got the best of me this morning... so here it is:

Obama: 193
(Wins in AL, AK, CO, CT, DE, DC, GA, HI, ID, IL, IA, KS, LA, ME, MD, MN, MO, NE, ND, SC, UT, VT, VA, WA, WI)

Clinton: 219
(Wins in: AZ, AR, CA, MA, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, RI, TN, TX)

I know TX is still being hashed out... but let's pretend it's only a primary as the general election is (thankfully) caucus-free... and alas what of the 44 electorates from FL (17) and MI (27)? 

Again, it's just all numbers... and even with the Clinton's "big state" wins, going in I still expected Obama to have a slight lead... and needless to say, some states are going to go "blue" or "red" (regardless of the nominee)... but still an interesting little exercise.

UPDATE:  Just want to clarify/address Scott's comment what I meant when I said "regardless the nominee" is that I am certain Clinton would win states Obama won (or vice versa)... and likewise am confident that many states that would go "red"... my home state of Arizona being a prime example.  I am quite sure our Senator will not face too much much of a challenge securing AZ's electoral votes.

Comments

[Scott-O-Rama]

As a Hillary-supporter-turned-Obama-supporter-for-strategic-reasons, I had to take a moment of pause this morning. I was secretly happy Clinton did as well as she did, and I don't think she should quit now. I do think her and Obama should talk about a combined ticket though. If they were to come up with an agreement for a combined ticket soon, they could stop attacking each other and go after McCain.

Hillary seems like she's open to the idea, but Obama seems like he's just being stubborn. Too bad.

My preference would be to see a Clinton/Obama ticket rather than the other way around, but I would accept either.

I did notice that already the press is attacking Clinton's win last night. MSNBC is especially notorious at anti-Clinton/pro-Obama stories. Even when a story they carry (from the AP for example) is neutral in tone, MSNBC.com gives it a anti-Clinton headline.

One bit of flawed logic in your electoral vote count: They are not running against each other. Your example makes the assumption that because Clinton won a particular state like Ohio, Obama would not and vice-versa. It could turn out that both of them could carry the state against McCain (or neither of them).

[kenneth]

MSNBC is bad, but check out Dan Abrams' show. He's the only one on there who's fair -- and he's not afraid to call out either of them when they hit below the belt.