Using the Electoral Vote Metric

by mefck, Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 03:28:30 PM EST

Losing in delegates, popular vote, states won, etc, etc., Sen. Clinton's surrogates have been pushing the Electoral College metric.

In sum, they claim that we should choose a nominee based upon who won states with the most aggregate electoral votes.

Now, this argument is deeply flawed for one basic reason.  Sen. Clinton won California and NY, but is there any doubt that Obama could easily win those two states in the fall?  On the other hand, Sen. Obama won Illinois easily, but there is any doubt that Sen. Clinton could win it in the fall?

But maybe there is some merit to the argument, but not in the way the surrogates anticipated.....

Look at the trusty mydd 2008 poll watcher in the upper left and right hand corners of the screen (which I hope is more up-to-date than the mydd delegate counters).

The electoral votes based on all the latest polls would be:

Obama: 261
McCain: 262
with 15 undecided....

McCain: 313
Clinton: 225

By the way, Obama's count includes giving NY to McCain which will absolutely not happen.

So what does that say about electability?




Tags: Electoral College, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 29 Comments :: Post a Comment


Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (2.00 / 4)

Tips for numbers, facts and reality.


by mefck on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 03:29:03 PM EST

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (2.00 / 1)

Did you even bother to read the next sentence?

On the other hand, Sen. Obama won Illinois easily, but there is any doubt that Sen. Clinton could win it in the fall?


by mefck on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 03:40:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (none / 0)

The sad thing is I know your comments are not a snark.  You are a parody of the worst of Sen. Clinton's supporters.


by mefck on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 03:41:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (none / 0)

So on the one hand, you hope the delegate counter is up to date, yet on the other, you trumpet the electoral votes on the other side of the page?


"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."
by VAAlex on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 03:51:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (2.00 / 1)

Speaking for my sexist elitist state, polls for the last three months show Obama beating McCain and McCain beating Clinton. Same pattern in Iowa, Wisconsin, Oregon and Washington, and probably a couple of other states that Hillary Clinton and Mark Penn were too insignificant to count.


by BlueinColorado on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:02:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

using disrespectful terminology (2.00 / 0)

Just b/c someone supports Obama over HRC doesn't mean they think he's the second coming of JC... Lincoln, FDR or JFK, maybe, but not the human third of the Trinity.


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:05:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (2.00 / 3)

Here's the big shift;

MI-Pres
Apr 14 EPIC-MRA Obama (D) 43%, McCain (R) 41%
MI-Pres
Apr 14 EPIC-MRA McCain (R) 46%, Clinton (D) 37%

Still wanna have a revote in MI?


by BlueinColorado on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 03:30:12 PM EST

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (2.00 / 1)

As a New YOrker I can assure you that there is plenty chance of Obama losing here. Or in any case, it can be close enough that he will have to expend more resources here than he would otherwise expect.


by alvic63 on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 03:32:06 PM EST

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (2.00 / 3)

As a NY'er, I can assure you that you are wrong.


by mefck on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 03:33:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (2.00 / 2)

Or in any case, it can be close enough that he will have to expend more resources here than he would otherwise expect.

The poll that shows Obama losing NY also shows McCain within 2 points of HRC.


by BlueinColorado on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 03:37:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (none / 0)

Her "home" state.

I guess she will also have to "expend more resources here than he would otherwise expect"


by mefck on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 03:42:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (1.16 / 6)

Clinton and her cronies are losers!


by Hope Monger 2008 on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 03:56:57 PM EST

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (2.00 / 2)

Please, CITE every poll you included in your count, then we can talk.

According to electoral-vote.com, which is the most up-to-date site out there, it is:

Clinton: 240
McCain: 298

Obama: 220:
McCain: 298
Tie: 24

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Ob ama/Maps/Apr14.html
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Cl inton/Maps/Apr14.html


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:03:00 PM EST

He is refering to the (2.00 / 2)

electoral map that MyDD maintains. Which supposedly has the most up to date polling availible.  Though, I do find it silly that we are talking EC in April.


by SocialDem on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:05:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He is refering to the (none / 0)

Agree. But, I never use the numbers from MyDD anyway. I only use the counts from electoral-vote.com. Plus, I have a count of my own.

Clinton: 278
McCain: 236
Tie: 24

Obama: 227
McCain: 275
Tie: 36

Basically, they way I figure this is I use the Survey USA poll from the last 45 days, since they are the best polling firm out there. If there is no numbers from Survey USA within the last 45 days, then I use the most recent poll.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:27:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I do the same thing (none / 0)

But this early those polls are completely meaningless. I mean come on, Hillary loses WI? Barack loses NY?


by SocialDem on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:35:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I do the same thing (2.00 / 1)

I completely agree. Considering that McCain "only" beats our candidates by 1-5 points nationally when we are duking it out, I can't wait until the Democrats have a candidate and see the shock on the Republicans faces when the polls begin to shift our way as we get into general election mode. McCain is easier to beat than most people think. I actually believe, Romney would have been a better Republican candidate. He would have raised the cash and rally the Republican base.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:38:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Romney the (none / 0)

plastic man.  That man can change his position just like melted plastic. I actually disagree. I think the Rethugicans picked their best possible candidate.


by SocialDem on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:42:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Romney the (none / 0)

Oh, don't get me wrong, McCain is the most electable Republican, but Romney, considering where he was and what he ended up with right up to Iowa, he was able to fool many Republicans. I just believe Romney would have been a "better" Republican candidate. McCain is certainly the most "electable."


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 05:08:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are probably (none / 0)

right in the sense that the wingnuts seemed to like him and he could probably raise lots of cash.


by SocialDem on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 05:16:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (2.00 / 1)

Your comment that he easily wins New York is wrong. He's polling 46% to McCain's 48% in NY right now. By all means, let's nominate someone who loses us New York!


by yogi41 on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:12:39 PM EST

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (2.00 / 2)

what is Hillary polling in NY?

because do we really want to nominate someone who isn't up in the HOME state where they are currently a sitting senator by at least 10 points?


Obama said, as Bill beamed. "Thank you, President Clinton."
by TruthMatters on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:18:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (2.00 / 1)

Well, the chart currently gives Ohio to Obama (RCP average = McCain +5.2) but not to Hillary (RCP average = Clinton +2.8)


99% perspiration
by DaveOinSF on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:23:00 PM EST

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (none / 0)

It'll be fun to look at this again after the PA primary.


by nikkid on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:24:45 PM EST

I appreciate this (2.00 / 1)

Mostly, I appreciate it for refuting a bad argument from the Clinton campaign-- that losing a California primary means losing California in the general. That's a stupid argument, and Senator Clinton knows it. Unfortunately, it's all she has left.

However, trying to use state-by-state polling at this point doesn't necessarily give you accurate results. I have no doubt that both Obama and Clinton will be well over the 270 mark sometime in July, when we have a nominee. Right now, the state polls are rare (except PA, IN, and NC, I'm sure) and have wild shifts from pollster to pollster. Once state-by-state polling begins in earnest (August, I'd guess), it might mean something more.

Still, I appreciate that this isn't another non-issue diary.


Walberg Watch - Following Radical Conservative Rep. Tim Walberg in MI-07
by Fitzy on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:26:48 PM EST

Re: I appreciate this (none / 0)

I don't like the argument either, but the OBama camp has used it plenty too. Claiming that wins in red state caucuses prove that Obama is viable there.


by Mayor McCheese on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:50:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Using the Electoral Vote Metric (2.00 / 1)

Anybody who tries to claim either Democratic candidate would lost New York is a fool.


by DeskHack on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:34:59 PM EST

This changes daily (2.00 / 1)

It is absurd to take a one day snapshot and pay so much attention to it. Sometimes Obama is up, sometimes Clinton. I've looked at days when his electoral prospects were downright grim.

You can also look here for a good electoral vote predictor / map (quite different than the one you cite for today):
http://www.electoral-vote.com/

Obama 220 / McCain 294
Clinton 240 / McCain 298


"Life is too short, time is too precious, and the stakes are too high to dwell on what might have been." Hillary Rodham Clinton - June 7, 2008
by twinmom on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 04:50:36 PM EST

Two good EV sites (none / 0)

As others have mentioned http://www.electoral-vote.com is a good site that combines various head to head polls. The front page is particularly interesting with a map of which candidate polls better then McCain in the states.

Both Dems beat McCain by 5 or better in: CA MD IL PA ME DE VT RI

McCain beats both Dems by 5 or better in: AK AL AR AZ GA ID IN KS KY LA MO MS MT OH OK SD TN UT VA WY

Clinton polls better then Obama in: FL MA NY WV

Obama polls better then Clinton in: CO CT HI IA MI MN NC ND NE NH NJ NM NV OR SC TX WA WI

If you look inside at the head to head maps Clinton looses to McCain 240 EVs to 298 while Obama looses to McCain 220 to 294 with CO and NC tied exactly (24 EVs).

But digging deeper if you add states rated strong and weak together for each side and consider the tied and barely leaning states as the battleground in a Clinton v. McCain matchup you get 141 EVs for Clinton, 265 for McCain, and a battleground worth 132 EVs which means Clinton would have to run the table to win.  In Obama v. McCain there are 153 EVs for Obama, 195 EVs for McCain, and a battleground of 190 EVs. McCain starts in a much much weaker position against Obama then Clinton with a larger battleground which given the strength of Obama's fundraising that's a significant advantage.

Another good head to head site is http://fivethirtyeight.com which has been cited here before. He does some sort of statistical analysis on polls and also weights the polls based on the record of the outfit doing the poll. He shows both Dems loosing to McCain right now, though Obama less so. He also did a post a few days ago on a "Unity bounce", trying to determine how things would move once the Dems have a nominee.

The Obama unity bounce projection is here: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/04/c ontemplating-unity-bounce.html

The Clinton unity bounce projection is here: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/04/c lintons-unity-bounce.html


Proudly joining the legions of people and states that don't matter on May 20th.
by Obama Independent on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 06:08:18 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.

Login
Username:

Password: