Go West, Young Party

[Matt]

Tom Schaller on the Southwestern strategy:

Because both John McCain and Barack Obama have been touring the Interior West, I’m getting a lot of calls this week about regional strategies for the Electoral College and reaching the magical 270 threshold. I’m relieved analysts are finally discovering that, among other things, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico combined have almost the same number of electors (19) as Ohio (20) and that adding those to John Kerry’s 252 total from 2004 would put Obama over the top, however narrowly.

This is really what's exciting about Barack Obama having raised a ton of money. John Kerry perceived a need to really choose between a focus on Ohio and a focus on that Southwestern trio and decided in the end that Ohio was the more promising choice. But a flush Obama campaign has money to do both and some left over to play in Virginia and the big (cheap) empty square plains states where Democrats have elected a lot of governors and senators.

Comments

I'm amused at the description of the plains as a collection of "empty square" states, and you made me take another look at the map. Curiously, only Wyoming and Colorado are truly rectangular. But the point still stands: if Obama can capture those states with multiple right angles (be they ideological or geographic), he'll be in pretty good shape in the general election.

Posted by cbu | May 30, 2008 1:44 PM

This is really what's exciting about Barack Obama having raised a ton of money.

But Obama's going to run his campaign solely on public funds. Like he promised. Right? Right???

Because, you know, the Messiah can't be a liar.

Posted by Al | May 30, 2008 1:44 PM

Thanks for the levity Al. Collect your McCain points and go away...

Posted by Crusty Dem | May 30, 2008 1:49 PM

big (cheap) empty square plains states

Ahem. No need to use nasty slurs.

We prefer "inexpensive rectangular mountain or high plains states."

Posted by Brian Watkins | May 30, 2008 1:53 PM

Colorado is already in the bag for Obama. The thing that made Colorado go red in 2000 and 2004 (the religious/culture war), is going to be a dead issue this year. And the state has gotten a lot more blue demographically. Plus there will be an anti-abortion initiative on the ballot which will just highlight the fact that McCain is out of the mainstream on that issue.

And the GOP has already lost New Mexico altogether on the illegal immigration question. Look for a sweep there.

Nevada is the one I worry about.

Posted by Doug-E-Fresh | May 30, 2008 1:59 PM

Doesn't that mean that those states are getting way too much attention? I mean, he should make a play for them and all, but he's more likely to split them than sweep. It's no joke that Ohio, Florida, Michigan, and Pennsylvania are the big game when it comes to solid wins. Win 3 of those 4 and it's pretty much a KO.

Posted by Mike | May 30, 2008 2:00 PM

Keep an eye on the voter registration push over the next month or so. It looks like a relatively cheap and quiet way to assess whether states that would otherwise be considered bright red could be turned very much purple by increased registration and turnout.

Yeah, 'turnout' is the great hope every election season, but looking to get half a million African-Americans in Georgia registered is a bit more than just hope.

It's no joke that Ohio, Florida, Michigan, and Pennsylvania are the big game when it comes to solid wins. Win 3 of those 4 and it's pretty much a KO.

Florida's a mirage, in the same way that NJ has been a mirage for the GOP. It's trending ever further red, in part thanks to relatively moderate Republican governors to go with the actual Southern bit of the state (i.e. the Panhandle).

What's the fucking point of throwing the kitchen sink at Ohio? You end up with the Kerry strategy -- and what would have been the Clinton strategy -- of spending millions to convince a bunch of people who, in being unable to decide between McCain and Obama, would probably base their final decision on a coin-toss or a brainfart? Ohio's a textbook case of diminishing returns: you compete there, but you don't compete only there.

Done well, the fifty-state strategy has knock-on effects. If Obama makes enough progress in the rest of the country to make undecided Ohioans think it's worth backing a winner, that's probably better than saturating the state with ads (and enriching the network bosses).

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | May 30, 2008 2:22 PM

Empty I'll give you, but square? We take pride in the fact that the Mississippi River gives eastern Iowa a vague pig-shape.

Posted by Trevor J | May 30, 2008 2:25 PM

Pseudonym in NC:

50 state strategy? Give me a break. While the Obama campaign is going to have plenty of money to compete in the fall, don't fool yourself into thinking he's going to outspend the GOP by 2-1 or anything near that level. There are still going to have to be choices made about where to compete harder and where the most realistic chances of picking up electoral votes lie.

Remember that McCain will have approximately $80 million for the general election by staying in the public financing system. If Obama forgoes those funds he will have to raise on average approximately $1.3 million per day in order to equal that stipend, let alone surpass it. In March , Obama record fund raising month so far, he averaged almost exactly $1.3 million per day; In April he only averaged just over $1 million per day. I wouldn't be surprised if the Obama campaign decided to stay within the public financing system for the general election, given that the primary campaign has shown that even 3-1 financial advantages over Clinton have not shown to overcome poll deficits.

There are at least a dozen states that Obama won't win, and won't force McCain to expend considerable resources in, no matter how much he spends there. Remember that George Bush and Karl Rove attempted that strategy by buying ads in California in 2000, hoping to entice the Gore campaign to waste resources there; the Gore campaign wisely refused to take the bait. Had the Bush campaign spent those resources in Florida the recount probably would never have happened.

A 35 state strategy - or thereabouts - makes good sense, but not a 50 state strategy. If Obama spreads his considerable resources too thin then it will allow McCain to concentrate resources in protecting states like Ohio, Missouri and Virginia, so Obama won't be able to claim a financial advantage in there. Since Florida is not likely to be in play for Obama, McCain may even have resources left over to take a real shot at Pennsylvania or Michigan in the final weeks.

I would suggest the Obama campaign take advantage of their extra financial resources in July and August to flood the air-waves of the dozen most likely swing states (Ohio, Missouri, Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Wisconsin, Colorado, Virginia, New Mexico, New Hampshire, and Nevada) with biographical ads re-introducing Obama to the voters, and attacks re-defining John McCain. After that they should just stay within the public financing system and deprive McCain of a "political reform" talking point.

Posted by Tim K | May 30, 2008 4:18 PM

psuedo/nc: 100% correct.

Tim,

1) It's not just about the EVs, it's about the downticket races.

2) The 50-state strategy is a party-wide strategy centered on logistics and infrastructure.
It's not about ad buys.

3) Obama has a much larger volunteer base than McCain, and a much more decentralized organizational structure, so it's likely he'll be getting plenty of labor for free than McCain will have to pay for.

4) McCain's currently in violation of FEC public financing regs. His campaign may face charges arises thereof. If McCain wants to make that a talking point, I would suggest he's more than welcome. But thank you for your concern!

Posted by scythia | May 30, 2008 4:30 PM

The big prize this year is Texas. It's a lot more likely to go Democratic than Florida.

Obama and McCain will attempt to solidify their bases this summer, and I'm taking it for granted that Obama will be the more successful of the two. Obama should have solid leads in every Gore/Kerry state by the convention and he already has a good lead in Ohio. If he keeps it through to the Republican convention, he will be the prohibitive favourite to win.

If he can keep Texas close in the polls until then, McCain will be on the defensive the entire campaign. If he loses Texas (and there is no reason to expect him to win, really) there aren't enough electoral votes out there anywhere to cobble together a win.

As for why Texas will go blue this year, the demographics in that state are becoming more and more favourable to the Democrats, there was an insurgent movement mobilizing there before Obama arrived on the scene (due to Tom Delay's gerrymandering), and taking George W. Bush's home state from them will be humiliating for the Republicans. All of these things make it a priority for Obama, so expect him to campaign hard there this summer.

Posted by Splitting Image | May 30, 2008 9:19 PM