Who is more likely to win red states...Obama or Hillary?

Some background information....

Barack Obama in recent days has sprinted ahead in the endorsement derby against Hillary Rodham Clinton when it comes to a certain breed of Democrat - politicians who have won statewide in places where Republicans dominate presidential politics.

Among a barrage of prominent statewide elected officials to back Obama publicly this month is Arizona governor Janet Napolitano, and U.S. Sens. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Tim Johnson of South Dakota.

What all three politicians have in common is that they are Democrats who have cracked the code in getting elected in states where Republicans historically have triumphed at the presidential level. George W. Bush won these states both times.

So did most of his Republican predecessors. In fact, these three states have each voted for a Democratic presidential nominee only once since 1948.

The string of recent Obama endorsements seems to be more than a coincidence.

During extensive interviews in recent weeks in Republican-leaning states, Politico found widespread belief among current and former Democratic statewide officials that Obama is the more electable candidate with their electorates. These politicians also frequently registered a fear that Clinton’s personality and past history make her too polarizing to win independent and Republican-leaning voters.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/15/politics/politico/main3714465.shtml

Trust me. They aren't as dead as we think they are.

They'll be lucky just to keep the blue states blue.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It has been rampant this election cycle.

A lot of these blue states are blue by 51-49 and 52-48. Some red states are red by the same margins. Finding racism in geographical areas is a stereotype that needs to end. Massachusetts is a blue state - is there anyone here who would argue there's no racists in Boston?

But I think Obama will be strong enough to help out down-ticket in red states, where I believe Clinton costs us our majority.

:shrug:

"we don't need no stinkin' red states" in fact. The Gore-Kerry states plus Ohio is all it takes electorally. Simple math. Of course it would always be better to have a broader win but this is what we need. The better question is who runs better in Ohio?

To win: New England, the Mid-Atlantic, the Upper Midwest plus Ohio, the Pacific Coast

Not needed: the Confederate States, the Border States (WV, MO, TN, KY, IN), the Plains States, and the Rocky Mountains

It'd be great to add in some Border States plus IA, NV, NM, AZ, CO, VA and FL but not necessary

Electoral College calculator here: http://grayraven.com/ec/

over Obama thats been clear for a while now. Strickland has practically delivered it for her already.

People aren't trained to hate Strickland since 1993. Sherrod Brown and Ted Strickland aren't Hillary Clinton.

I love how people who don't even live in my state make such grand assumptions on the voting propensities of it's dark red counties.

Those ones would rather burn him on a lawn first.

supported by a Fundie Family or a Veteran's Family:

Red State winners will be:

Shuckabee or McCain.

Thats the word from SC at the moment.

why are dems not getting this?

I got a real thrill today. I got to meet Senator Obama this afternoon at a campaign rally held in my home town, Elko, Nevada.

In the 2004 election, Bush got 76% of the votes in Elko County. Elko is about as red as you can get. Yet there was a mob scene at the Obama rally held at Elko High School. A lot of people weren't able to get in. So based upon this anecdotal evidence, maybe Obama can win in red Stares.

BTW, John Edwards was in Elko last night and according to the local newspaper he only drew about 200 people to his rally. I haven't seen any figures on Obama yet, but based upon what I saw there had to be a couple of thousand there at least. And this was in a town of 16,500.

Here is picture that I took at the rally.

I'm in California, and hope to get a chance to see and shake hands with Obama someday.

Please encourage everyone you know to vote!!!!!!

Terrific news :hi:

thank you

Obama seems to have forgotten what a Democrat is.

Clark and Obama were the two most wanted surrogates in 2006 red state campaigns.

... unless that was a different John Edwards who was on the ticket with John Kerry.

(Oh, wait - it was a different John Edwards! Sorry, my bad. Continue on.)

i mean, yeah, I know it's an embarrassing gaffe, but dude, admitting that one is wrong is not an admission of inferiority. Take it easy.

To try and get some red states to go in his electoral vote column. It never happened. Nobody really knows where Edwards true base really is... does he even have one?

So glad you're not teaching my kids. You'd leave out a big chunk of the truth, just like Hannity. What would possess you to leave out the guy, that two states in, has beat Hillary in one state, and despite the media rarely mentioning him (a la you) he's around 15-20% nationally, and in contention in the 3rd state on the primary list?


Hannity, Coulter, and O'Lielly love you.

but Obama seems to have a very strong organization here, and he is generating a lot of excitement among his followers.

http://www.idahoforobama.org/
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/joeybristol/CxKm

such as New Mexico & Missouri & capture the truly blue Florida and Ohio.

If she runs with Wes Clark she can be very competitive in border states like Virginia, Kentucky and Arkansas.

The polls have consistently shown Hillary with an unfavorable rating in the high 40's to low 50's. No one has ever been elected president with unfavorable ratings that high a year before the presidential election.

for this statement? Or just wishful thinking?

Republicans and their media allies giving them free Kool-aid:spray: Well, actually there are commercials for Reaganism while you drink the Kool-aid.

Give up on Virginia, Ohio, Arkansas, Florida, New Mexico, Kentucky, Nevada, Worst Virginia and probably even Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan and yes, Iowa.

ignorant of history. VA elected an African American Governor, and it's much bluer now. Mark Warner is on the ticket and that in itself will bring out a lot of dems and indies. There is no reason to believe that NM would be any more or less favorable to Hill than Obamba. In fact, going on her sky high negatives, Obama has a better chance. And claiming that Iowa would be more favorable to Hilly than to Obama? That's just bullshit in light of the results of that race. Hilly is the one who would fuck us in Iowa.

:+bama only got 38% of the Democratic caucus vote in the Iowa caucus. Hardly any proof he has any strength there.

but it's true that the South is very conservative and the deep southern states won't be giving us any EV's anytime soon.

that was spread early on in the 92 campaign about Bill Clinton. Clinton could not win in the general. He was too polarizing and a womanizer etc etc etc.......But go back and take a look see at the states won by Clinton.....He ran the river and I would suspect those states would more likely be won by hrc then an obama.....

if you take the states gore won in 2000 and those states kerry won in 2004 and oh say with HRC you add Arkansas, West Virgina uh huh oh and say you add back New Mexico and Nevada......252 was the total in 2004 and with just these 4 states you have 21 for a total of 273 and therin lies the presidency.....but then again in early polling vs any republican HRC wins ohio and florida.....

against a Republican unless the GOP nominates Rudy and they're probably not that dumb.

So, to the extent Republicans "become a democrat for a day" to use Obama's language - he has an advantage. Amongst Democrats - Hillary. I was talking open primaries here.
As for GE - I believe either of them as most voters have had enough of GOP-ers.
If they count the votes, that is.

I haven't posted here for awhile, except for a few times here and there. All you people are talking about is color, red, blue, black and white (OK black and white really aren't colors, I know). You sound like a bunch of defeatists and losers. Forget about color and remember twice as many democrats are making it to the polls than republicans. The democrats have never been so united so why doesn't everyone quit trying to divide us? The candidates we have running are only miniscule in their differences. It's going to be easy for all of us to vote for which ever candidate runs in the general election. All of those colors mean nothing this year, so STFU and enjoy the primaries. The republicans are so messed up this year the only thing they will be able to do is sweep and clean the floors when we get done. Edwards, Hillary or Obama WILL be our President, and possibly our Vice President, this year and nothing is in our way but our negative attitudes. Democrats will rule Washington in November so please, quit with all the verbal shit!