50 State Electability Arguments: Clinton vs. Obama
by Ignored and Disgusted, Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 04:46:22 PM EDT
Since Senator Hillary Clinton's achieved her much needed win last night in the perennial swing state of Pennsylvania, the focus has shifted to the uncommitted superdelegates. Many pundits have theorized that a significant number of these delegates may come to Obama in the coming weeks for no purpose other than to end the agonizingly long primary fight. This conclusion is best supported by Senator Obama's receiving the support of Governor Brasd Henry as well as that of a previously uncommitted Nebraska superdelegate. However, the numerous superdelegates who are simply vacilating in their decision may be contemplating how exactly to make their decision. Though Senator Obama argues against this idea, Senator Clinton claims that the superdelegates were created so that in the event the contest was extremely close, neither candidate could clinch the nomination without the support of party elders. While this could be interpreted as political expediency, Senator Clinton brings up a valid point when she says that the superdelegates should consider electability as a major factor. With many polls producing results across the entire spectrum in terms of results (i.e. major disparities), this analysis will endeavour to determine which of the Democrats will fair the best in each state. This first part will deal only with the Southern states. Comments are appreciated but please keep any vitrolic slander against either candidate or even Senator McCain to yourselves.
Florida- Yes, we all know that Florida is not part of the "South" but its Republican trend over the past few years has led to its inclusion in this traditional conservative stronghold. That said, it is clear that in this state at least, Clinton stands a far better chance than Obama of receiving a majority of the vote, in part due to the many retirees who are her core consituancy but also because of Senator Obama's refusal to allow a compromise to be reached on the Florida Delegate problem. While this is not particularly friendly territory for either Dem (I live there), recent polls give Clinton a distinct advantage over Obama when matched up with McCain.
Georgia- Despite having gone for Bill CLinton in 1992, this state has continued its trend away from the Democrats, as exemplified by the loss of the legislature, both senate seats, and the governor's mansion. While Obama may win a large share of the Black vote, this state will remain Republican against both candidates.
South Carolina, Missippi, Alabama- See Georgia comments. (very similar situations with neither candidate likely to win)
Louisiana: Bill Clinton's twin victories in this state may give Democrats some hope but the state has become quite conservative in recent years. Clinton would probably be somewhat competitive here due to her popularity with the so called Reagan Dems. but Obama would likely lose big, due to the dwindling A.A. population in New Orleans.
Arkansas: This is simple. If its Clinton, Arkansas goes for her. If its Obama it goes for McCain. (Please do NOT cite Rasmussen polls in your comments, as they have been terribly innacurate in recent primaries.)
Tennessee: Neither is likely to win (unless Clinton selects Bredeson as her running mate)but Clinton would probably receive a vote percentage in the mid to upper forties while Obama would be lucky to mantain a majority even among Democrats. A large margin in Memphis and Nashville cannot carry the state.
Kentucky: Normally this state would not be competitive but with the primary looming as an important opportunity for Clinton to amass delegates, pundits have revisited this stae as a potential pickup. Obama would never win this state (see recent SUSA poll) but Clinton, if turnout is high enough, might be able to carry the state. Again, one candidate has a distinct advantage.
South Carolina: Obama would fare better than Clinton but not by much, as the Black vote cannot take the state by itself.
North Carolina: An interesting case, this state is dominated by Republicans on the Federal level and Democrats on the state level. Clinton appeals to the Reagan Dems and Obama to the African Americans. If one disregards Rasmussen's historically innacurate polls, neither candidate has mich of a chance here.
Virginia: This is probably the Dems best opportunity outside of Florida but McCain has made up ground in the state. With the core constituancies of both Obama and CLinton unlikely to vote for the other candidate, McCain will likely eke out a relatively narrow win.
West Virginia: This working class state would likely go to Clinton, largely to to the relatively conservative nature of the Dem electorate. However, Obama would face a daunting task in earning support from this integral part of Clinton's base.
Texas: I would love to see this state go Democratic but as a large cache of electoral votes it will be heavily defended. Both Democrats would fare better than candidates in past elections, but Clinton's more conservative views would probably aid her in this moderate to conservative state while Obama's support would likely be limited to the big cities (an unsuccessful strategy in past elections).
Obviously, the South is the hardest nut to crack for either Democrat despite its Democrastic roots. However, it appears that, at least in this region of the country, Clinton is poised to capture 2-4 states while Obama would probably not win any. This is likely due to the prevelancy of Clinton's relatively conservative Democratic supporters in the South. More on other regions in another diary but please feel free to share your views!!! (This is my first diary.)