Candidates May Draw New Map

[Tigermike 3,078]

CAPITAL JOURNAL

By GERALD F. SEIB

Candidates May Draw New Map

April 8, 2008

To Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign, the race for the Democratic presidential nomination has come down to electability: I can win, she argues, because I can carry the big states necessary to get Democrats over the top.

That implies that her rival, Sen. Barack Obama, can't win those states, a notion certainly open to debate. But the argument misses a bigger point: The entire electoral map could be redrawn in 2008.

The nation is uneasy, and the economy is in turmoil, providing kindling for a realignment. Any of the three remaining candidates, each distinctly unconventional, could be the one to set the fire.

Sen. John McCain is a maverick Republican who appeals as much to independents as to some in his own party. Sen. Obama is an African-American who has shown he can lure independents and moderate Republicans. Sen. Clinton has notable strength both with women and her party's base.

The idea that these candidates -- especially Sens. McCain and Obama -- could alter the U.S. landscape is hardly lost on the campaigns. They are plotting to change the conventional general-election map, which has shown Republican strength in the South and Mountain West, Democratic strength along the coasts and a relatively small group of swing states in the upper Midwest and Southwest. Based on conversations with strategists in both parties, here is how to look at that map with fresh eyes:

• The McCain openings. In a down year for Republicans, the McCain campaign takes seriously the need to build a new coalition of states. Its regional directors met in New Mexico late last week and began plotting strategy, campaign aides say.

The two advantages Sen. McCain has over other Republican contenders is that he has crossover appeal to independents and some Democrats, and that his more-open stand on immigration has left him in fairly good standing with Hispanics.

McCain advisers think a wide independent streak in Minnesota and Wisconsin could put those states in play, and that the McCain crossover appeal to more-conservative Democrats will help put economically strapped Michigan and Pennsylvania within reach. In their view, that same McCain profile brings into play Oregon and Washington in the Northwest, as well as New Hampshire in the Northeast. New Jersey is another big target; it is home to lots of moderate Republicans and conservative Democrats who could gravitate to Sen. McCain.

The giant question is California. Although most Republicans are skeptical, Sen. McCain's strategists are convinced he has the potential to put the nation's most populous state into play. They note that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has shown that an independent-minded Republican can prevail in the Golden State, and are counting on the McCain appeal to Hispanics, particularly if his foe is Sen. Obama, who hasn't done as well as Sen. Clinton has with that group.

• The Obama openings. Sen. Obama has shown the ability to bring new, independent and younger voters into his tent; the question is where he could do the same in a general election.

The Obama appeal worked in his big primary victory in Wisconsin, an important state Democrats won by the narrowest of margins in 2000 and 2004. Perhaps more important, the Obama camp thinks his appeal to new kinds of Democratic voters means he can bring back into the party's fold states such as Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada, all of which President Bush carried in 2004, and hold Washington state.

The more intriguing question about an Obama candidacy in the general election is what the impact of the nation's first nomination of an African-American presidential candidate would be. It would work to his disadvantage in some states, but could bring into play some Southern states with big black populations. Chief among those is Virginia; the Obama camp thinks even such Republican strongholds as Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama could be among them if there is an outsize turnout by blacks.

• The Clinton Openings. Sen. Clinton's emphasis on big states is understandable: Her strength is with the Democratic base in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Michigan and California. So far, her principal advantages over Sen. Obama have been in the industrial Midwest and among rural and small-town Democrats, and women. That suggests she will play better in places such as southern Ohio, and parts of Missouri, both crucial in the national picture.

The Clinton name, plus her appeal to rural and small-town whites, also makes her the more popular of the two Democrats in Arkansas, a state that has slipped away from Democrats in the past two general elections. In addition, her camp hopes, she could have a shot at Tennessee.

And she polls better than Sen. Obama in the Northeast, which means she would pull hard for New Hampshire, which the parties split in the past two general elections by exceptionally narrow margins.

The big question hovering over the Clinton and Obama campaigns is whether she does, in fact, have a better shot at winning some big states than he does. There is no certain answer at this point, but here is good bet: It wouldn't make much difference which Democrat is nominated in such Democratic strongholds as Illinois, New York and, probably, California; she might have a somewhat better shot at Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida.

Write to Gerald F. Seib at jerry.seib@wsj.com

link

[RunInRed 16,528]

McCain won't win in the Great Lakes and Obama won't win in the deep south. There will be some states in play but none that this writer noted. States most likely to flip are:

Iowa, Missouri, Virginia, Colorado, and New Mexico.

I think McCain takes Florida. What worries me is Obama's ability to win in Ohio and Pennsylvania.

[Tigermike 3,078]

McCain won't win in the Great Lakes and Obama won't win in the deep south. There will be some states in play but none that this writer noted. States most likely to flip are:

Iowa, Missouri, Virginia, Colorado, and New Mexico.

McCain won't win in the Great Lakes and Obama won't win in the deep south. There will be some states in play but none that this writer noted. States most likely to flip are:

Iowa, Missouri, Virginia, Colorado, and New Mexico.

I think McCain takes Florida. What worries me is Obama's ability inability to win in Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Fixed that for you.

[WinCrimson 61]

What a error filled article. California in play? Conservative Democrats in New Jersey? Clinton winning Tennessee? There's so much BS, you can smell it.

It's true that the map will change from the previous two cycles, but the three states I just mentioned will not.

FWIW, here are the maps of current polls. States that are bright red or bright blue vote for their candidate by 10% or more. A lighter shade is 5-9% while outlined states are less than 5%.

McCain leads Obama by 9 electoral votes, with the winner of Colorado deciding the election.

McCain leads Clinton by 8 EVs, 273-265

[au2004ece 30]

What a error filled article. California in play? Conservative Democrats in New Jersey? Clinton winning Tennessee? There's so much BS, you can smell it.

It's true that the map will change from the previous two cycles, but the three states I just mentioned will not.

FWIW, here are the maps of current polls. States that are bright red or bright blue vote for their candidate by 10% or more. A lighter shade is 5-9% while outlined states are less than 5%.

McCain leads Obama by 9 electoral votes, with the winner of Colorado deciding the election.

McCain leads Clinton by 8 EVs, 273-265

Where did you get these maps?

[WinCrimson 61]

Electoral-Vote.com