Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper
RECENT POSTS
- Today's Q's For O's White House
- Afghanistan Offensive and Iraq Withdrawal: Obama's National Security Advisor Discusses Both with ABC News
- Who Makes the Big Bucks at the White House?
- Obama Quizzed at Health Care Town Hall: On Taxing Benefits, Single Payer System, and Costs
- Today's Q's for O's White House
- Spotlight on Non-Profit Work, Obama Calls on “Deep Pockets”
- Obama says Iraqi People Right to Celebrate
- Today's Q's for O's White House
- POTUS to LGBT: "Welcome to Your White House"
- Obama Gives Biden Iraq Assignment
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Rove's Latest Electoral Maps Have Clinton Stronger Than Obama Against McCain
May 19, 2008 1:48 PM
Electoral maps put together by the consulting firm helmed by Karl Rove, and obtained by ABC News, show Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, to be a stronger general election candidate in a hypothetical general election match-up against Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., than Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois.
Click HERE to see the maps and charts from Karl Rove & Co., obtained by ABC News.
States are allocated in Rove's exercise based on an average of public polls, which many pollsters would tell you is a rather unscientific way to look at the data.
Still, for political junkies the information is interesting.
In the first map from Karl Rove & Co., McCain leads Obama in a hypothetical match-up, winning states totaling 238 electoral votes to Obama's 221 electoral votes.
There are 538 total electoral votes. At least 270 are needed to win the presidency.
The trend is positive for Obama -- he is up 14 electoral votes from May 11, and McCain is down 13 electoral votes.
The map shows McCain winning Florida, New Hampshire, West Virginia and Wisconsin. States with 79 electoral votes -- Connecticut, Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, and Virginia -- are toss-ups, within a margin of error of +/- 3 points.
In the hypothetical Clinton-McCain match-up, Clinton leads with 259 electoral votes to McCain's 206 electoral votes.
States totaling 73 electoral votes -- Connecticut, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, and New Mexico -- too close to call.
Clinton, too, is trending upwards, with a gain of 11 electoral votes since May 11.
The big differences between Clinton and Obama, beyond the her larger number:
Clinton would make competitive some states that Obama would lose -- such as Missouri and New Hampshire -- and she would win others outright, such as Arkansas, Florida, Ohio and West Virginia.
On the other hand, McCain would handily win beat Clinton in some states that Obama made competitive, such as Colorado, North Dakota, and Virginia. Some states that Obama would win, such as Minnesota and Nebraska -- Clinton would lose to McCain.
Occasionally this election cycle the electoral maps of Karl Rove & Co. have reared their heads. In March, McCain adviser Mark McKinnon was spotted holding some of these maps, as reported by Texas Monthly.
- jpt
UPDATE: Clinton referenced this blog post (kinda) in a campaign appearance today.
May 19, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (602)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
You folks are FINALLY getting it! Hillary is the stronger candidate against John Mccain this Fall. That is why we voted for her and that is why we continue to support her.
Despite the negative image the media has been portraying. We all know and believe Hillary is the best candidate.
Today's gallup polls 5.28 clearly state this again
Posted by: rlc | May 28, 2008 11:56:39 AM
One major thing to consider re those fence sitters. Will they want a right wing Supreme Court or one that keeps Roe vs. Wade, etc I think when push comes to shove they will realize that they can't afford having a right wing president make the next 1 - 3 Supreme Court appointments.
Posted by: yes08 | May 23, 2008 11:13:21 PM
The Rove map says Clinton is leading with 259 electoral votes, however when you add up the individual states on the map, she gets 274. According to the map, Hillary is already over the top.
Posted by: Monica | May 21, 2008 10:03:10 PM
Obama's supporters assume if you're not in the tank for their guy, it's because of some latent racist motivation. His race is not the problem. It's his lack of a record. I'm interested in some demonstrated competence in actually governing. Is that too much to ask? Obama speaks of a "post partisan" and "post racial" future. What's that mean? Has Obama been a hardworking senator willing to take risks and give others credit to get things accomplished? No. Has he been working on projects and proposals to bridge the racial divide in this country? No. Has he done anything with his time in office other than run for President? No. Those are the reasons I will never support Obama for President. Not because I'm a racist, not because I'm a Republican (I've never cast a vote in my life for anyone with an (R) next to their name), and not because I'm just a bitter Hillary supporter. I'm only interested in competence and Obama can't demonstrate he's able to competently run the federal government.
Posted by: sgt. lebow | May 21, 2008 2:31:14 PM
Fanatic Hillary supporters= pathetic sore losers= self-destructive idiots= Hillary supporters for McCain.
May you get what you deserve. I feel sorry for your children.
Posted by: stacey | May 21, 2008 1:46:12 PM
Obama has a huge electoral problem, and anyone that thinks he is going to win Virginia (much less NC or Indiana) is nuts. McCain will sweep the south without even trying- not having to bother campaigning in Florida will allow him to concentrate on places like Ohio and Nevada, as well as try to pick off Wisconsin and NM. Obama HAS to play defense in those places (particuarly the West) and then HAS to either sweep them or take Ohio (which McCain has a nice lead in). If Obama takes the advice i see here and tries to go on the offensive by winning in the South, McCain is going to win in a walkover.
Posted by: Mark Buehner | May 21, 2008 11:34:44 AM
Northern Observer said: PS US Vet: counties with military bases have voted overwhelmingly for Obama. I think yer out of step with your fellow vets.
You do realize that most military people vote absentee ballots from their home state, not the state they are based in.
Posted by: Rob | May 21, 2008 10:59:13 AM
this country has never had a black president and i believe this scares people, for only a white person has ever set in the white house. what gives white people the right to make decisions for the entire world, as if they are the only ones with any sense. when will everyones vote truly count. why all of the negative remarks about Senator Obama, this man has layed his life on the line for americans just by running for the presidency, why cant white america give him the benefit of the doubt, i believe he would make a great leader. what would surely guarantee the democrats the white house would be Obama/Clinton ticket. They both have had record breaking turnout to vote in these primaries.a lot of people say it wouldnt work,but i say if they truly love america and its people they would make it work
Posted by: Al | May 21, 2008 2:33:57 AM
*Connecticut* a swing state? CT's gonna go for Obama OR CLinton by at least 10. Same with NH, particularly w/ Jean Shaheen campaigining. Iowa's also going blue, as is New Mexico w/ the Hispanic vote and Richardson campaigning for either candidate. And anyone claiming McCain is going to win Wisconsin is just ridiculous.
But hey, if the Republicans are stupid enough to listen to the guy who lost them 30 House seats and 6 Senate seats, I won't argue with that.
Posted by: Greg | May 20, 2008 10:18:18 PM
Anybody who looks at this( legitimate) data, notices what many of us have intuitively sensed, that as the racial and gender-based polarization of this race has heightened, Appalachian and Rust Belt whites have run from Obama, probably because of the patriotism/Wright questions, and older white women have continued to flock to Hillary, because she's an older white woman whith a legitimate shot at the presidency; note the difference in anti-Obama versus pro-Hillary motivations. The reason her numbers have shot up in Florida and Ohio is that those two aforementioned groups of voters who have shifted, who were previously 1) mostly McCain supporters (whites) or 2) mostly undecided (women) since March are now saying that they'll vote for Hillary in November, but will continue to be undecided or for McCain if it's McCain vs. Obama. The question I have is, how many of those whitesd who were previously McCain supporters but are now "pro-Hillary" will go back to McCain if Hillary were to win the nomination? If that were to happen, say goodbye to Ohio and West Virginia, Hillary supporters. And she never had a chance in Colorado or North Dakota or Virginia or Iowa, so she doesn't have anything to fall back on if she loses Ohio or Michigan, unlike Obama.
Posted by: AR | May 20, 2008 9:31:37 PM
This is what makes this country so sad and short of being the great country it could be...
(1) Karl Rove is a repub (Bush gangmember)
(2) Obama is not Muslim he is Christian but why should that matter, Bush is an atheist, what does a person religion has to do with it as long as he or she believes in GOD and have this country's best interest at heart
(3) Obama speaks of having a dialogue with this country's enemies, what is so wrong with that if peace can be achieved and accomplished and the saving of lives on all sides, that is an act of a man of GOD, why must the USA always choose to use violence to meet its goal of peace without ever considering discussion or exchange of ideas or channel of communication or conversation or dialogue
(4) Some view Obama as a black candidate; remember his mother is white, Obama is both black and white, but many in this country fail to accept this because they are short minded and are affected by the color of a persons skin verse that person character, why would a person skin color makes the difference for a person to serve this country if they have a chance to bring it back into the fold that represent high morals and value, peace and democracy for the world to see and follow
(5) Many excuses are being made to hide the racism in this country, excuses of tides with the reverend Wright (what of Jerry Farwell, Pat Buchannan, reverend Hagen), excuses of his name Baraka Hussein Obama, excuse of having no experience in the White House (Most Presidents didn't either; Hillary doesn't have any she was the wife not the President or VP), etc.
(6) Why not elect a person who is Black, White, Red, Brown, Muslim, Jewish, Catholic, Hispanic, Oriental, or even female, what ever; this country is a mix of all people from around the world that is what is so special and how this country has the potential to be so great, but to vote because someone doesn't look like you is stupid and dumb. This is why this country has so many problems (racism, sexism, all the –ism ever thought of)
Many not all who are expecting to vote against Obama is doing so not because of any difference in policies or programs but because of the -ism that is like a cancer in this country, but they will deny it.
All that is asked is let's find peace and prosperity and harmony together. Let's start voting for the best person be it man or woman, black or white, republican or democrat or green party or independent, Christian or Muslim or Judean, and not because of any hang-ups.
Let's start a new revolution of peace by moving away from the old ways of politics and take control of our government not have them continue to control US…
Posted by: PBOARD | May 20, 2008 9:30:13 PM
So...if McCain wins the GE, he will have a heavily Dem congress to work with. With a Dem quorum, he'll have to "cross the aisle." He's not averse to that anyway.
If Hillary heads the Dem ballot in the GE, I vote for her. That would ensure practical changes as quick as possible and the restoration and advancement of the programs and issues I care about. Best option.
If the Dems don't have the brains and foresight to run with her, then why should I not go with McCain? The prospect of such a junior politician as NObama handed that much power on a plate is far scarier than his JM's temper.
Posted by: indy in MD | May 20, 2008 7:36:32 PM
Obama won Wisconsin by nearly 200,000 votes. 58% to 42%. He won every age group on almost every country.
Yet Rove wants us to assume Wisconsin will go to McCain.
Posted by: Mr. Unite Us | May 20, 2008 6:29:28 PM
I knew it had to be Rove that's been egging Hillary on; talk about dirty tacts why else would she win certain areas that are Republican dominated according to certain study groups; sure isn't independents, and what about the tracking polls (people say anything and everything against what they do, I know of some in New Hampshire --Lindbaugh's law of confusion and Roves tactics just may come back and bite them -- especially noticeable in Pa, where you could vote and then change back to Republican all at the same time.
Wonder what happens when all these Republicans who voted democratic in the primary decide to stick with the winners and give Obama the vote!! Yes, He Can!!
Posted by: Paulet | May 20, 2008 6:06:22 PM
LATEST SUFFOLK POLL OUT OF OREGON TODAY: Obama's lead drops from double digits to 45% to 41%. Kentucky looks to be a blow out for Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: Patriot | May 20, 2008 3:47:22 PM
Karl Rove is the last advisor the Democratic Party would want. Anything he says, believe the opposite.
Posted by: lisa | May 20, 2008 3:35:54 PM
Is there any reason why Democrats should put any stock in anything from Karl Rove? I sure can't think of one.
Posted by: Kenneth Fair | May 20, 2008 3:35:52 PM
I can not afford another McBush…I simply CAN NOT. McCain is not only continuing Bush’s policy, but he is got anger problem. I am afraid he might use nuclear bomb, he is got soft skin. People who work with him know this fact! I cannot let angry person in the white house.
Posted by: John Elias | May 20, 2008 2:11:47 PM
Dear Fellow Democrats. Regardless of who the Democratic nominee will be, WE MUST UNITE. The next president will make very important choices. Obama and Hillary are inches apart; but they are both miles apart from McCain. THE NEXT PRESIDENT COULD APPOINT AS MANY AS THREE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES. These are appointments for LIFE, and they will radically affect us. The Supreme Court is who has given us women rights and who has given Blacks rights (as well as allowing us freedom of choice and basic civil rights). If you do not believe me, find out for yourself what these new appointments will mean to you. Please do not get mad if your candidate does not win. Instead, think. Think about what your vote will mean to you, your children, each other, and the planet. VOTE DEMOCRATIC. We cannot withstand another four years with McBush!
Posted by: Marilyn | May 20, 2008 1:59:00 PM
Dear Fellow Democrats. Regardless of who the Democratic nominee will be, WE MUST UNITE. The next president will make very important choices. Obama and Hillary are inches apart; but they are both miles apart from McCain. THE NEXT PRESIDENT COULD APPOINT AS MANY AS THREE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES. These are appointments for LIFE, and they will radically affect us. The Supreme Court is who has given us women rights and who has given Blacks rights (as well as allowing us freedom of choice and basic civil rights). If you do not believe me, find out for yourself what these new appointments will mean to you. Please do not get mad if your candidate does not win. Instead, think. Think about what your vote will mean to you, your children, each other, and the planet. VOTE DEMOCRATIC. We cannot withstand another four years with McBush!
Posted by: Marilyn | May 20, 2008 1:57:41 PM
Post a comment

