Category Archives: Hillary Clinton

Hillary Releases Mapping Memo Touting Her Electability

Hillary Clinton joined a long list today of candidates touting their electability with maps — Rudy did it; McCain followed; and Obama released his own strange map recently. In each case, the candidates released a series of maps with carefully selected polls showing that they were the strongest general election candidate.

In Hillary’s new memo, which was sent to super-D’s and first reported by Mark Halperin, the maps have her amassing 329 electoral votes to John McCain‘s 209. Barack Obama can only cobble together 246 EV’s to McCain’s 292.

What strikes us as interesting about this memo, however, is that she released the series of maps that were produced by Karl Rove. These are the same maps that Jake Tapper acquired about a week ago and The Electoral Map posted.

It’s classic Clintonian triangulation that one day Hillary would tell the Super-D’s that she’s the toughest candidate to face attacks from the likes of Rove and the next day use Rove as a credible source.

Pivoting from the Rove maps, the memo also uses averages from Electoral-Vote.com. Interestingly, the maps have Clinton winning a string of hillbilly states from the Ozarks to the Alleghenies; claiming two out of three of the Mountain West battlegrounds and even bagging the big prize of Florida.

Clinton Memo: Clinton vs. McCain Electoral Map

Clinton vs. McCain Electoral Map

Clinton Memo: Obama vs. McCain Electoral Map

Obama vs. McCain Electoral Map

Advertisements

Obama Wins Oregon, Clinton Takes Kentucky

As we expected, Hillary Clinton racked up huge margins of victory in Appalachian Kentucky and along the Ohio River Valley, and Barack Obama won the urban center of Louisville and the college town of Lexington.

Kentucky Electoral Map (New York Times)

Kentucky Electoral Map

In Oregon, a state that the Politico declared was “tailor-made” for Obama, the Illinois senator beat Clinton by tens of thousands of votes in key counties like Multnomah (Portland) and suburban Washington on his way to a statewide 17-point rout.  Clinton, for her part, won most of eastern Oregon’s 2nd District, but in counties like Harney in the southeast, that only amounted to a paltry 365 votes.

Oregon Electoral Map (New York Times)

Oregon Electoral Map

Karl Rove Thinks Clinton is More Electable Than Obama

Jack Tapper acquired two interesting maps today from the consulting firm of Karl Rove & Co. The first measures John McCain against Barack Obama, and the second pits McCain against Hillary Clinton. Some of the battlegrounds are the usual suspects, but Rove has a few surprises for us.

In the McCain-Obama matchup, Rove has Obama taking 238 electoral votes to McCain’s 221, with 79 up for grabs. McCain has strong leads in New Hampshire and Wisconsin, but Obama is up in Colorado and Virginia. McCain edges Obama in a few key states such as Michigan, Ohio, Virginia and New Mexico, but Obama has resounding leads in the Pacific Northwest battlegrounds of Oregon and Washington.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect in Rove’s matchup, however, is that McCain barely gets by Obama in North Dakota and Nebraska. It’s striking that the Architect would include these two states. When the Obama camp mentioned North Dakota in a campaign memo, most pundits scoffed despite polling that indicated he could compete there. And don’t forget that Obama does better in whiter states.

As for the Cornhusker State, I wrote last week that Obama should make a run at NE-01 and NE-02 (Nebraska divvies electoral votes by congressional disrict), and after scanning Poblano‘s data on these CD’s, I’m even more convinced that Obama could take Omaha. Also keep in mind that Warren Buffett has all but endorsed Obama.

For her part, Clinton doesn’t need red prairie states. Rove has her taking the big enchiladas of Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio by solid margins and racking up 259 electoral votes to McCain’s 206. As for the other 79 electoral votes up for grabs, he has Clinton winning the blue collar states of West Virginia and Arkansas, and even putting Missouri into play.

Rove has her loosing the prime Obama targets of Virginia, Iowa and Colorado by solid margins and also letting Wisconsin slip. His scenarios suggest that Clinton would also get wiped clean in the Plains and in the West, and would give McCain an opening in the Pacific Northwest.

But before we enshrine Rove’s political predictions as the gospel, Tapper points to too every important caveats:

  1. “States are allocated in Rove’s exercise based on an average of public polls, which many pollsters would tell you is a rather unscientific way to look at the data.”
  2. (Paraphrased by Teagan Goddard) Rove is not exactly a neutral observer in the presidential race.

Rove & Co.’s Obama vs. McCain Electoral Map

Rove & Co.\'s Obama vs. McCain Electoral Map

Rove & Co.’s Clinton vs. McCain Electoral Map

Rove & Co.\'s Clinton vs. McCain Electoral Map

How the Clinton Campaign Sees the Electoral Map

Rocky Mountain TimesEd Stein has an interesting take at how many armchair pundits see the electoral map.

But isn’t this really how the Clinton campaign sees it? First, Bill dismissed South Carolina because, well, even “Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in ’84 and ’88.” And then Hillary trumpeted her success with “hard-working Americans, white Americans.”

Black White Electoral Map

Obama’s North by Northwest Success

Meng Bomin at Daily Kos has a series of phenomenal maps tracking Obama vs. Clinton nationwide. In the map, Obama is blue, Hillary is red and Edwards is green (Edwards appearing only in early primary states).

Some of the demographic trends we know about are apparent — Hillary has dominated Appalachia and Obama has rolled in the Southern Lowlands. But one thing that struck me was how well Obama has done in the north and northwestern part of the county.

Josh Patashnik at TNR also noticed this and pointed out that “If you draw a line from Monterey, California, eastward to (approximately) Evansville, Indiana, and then north to Canada, you have an enormous chunk of the country in which there’s very little red.” He also suggested that perhaps regionalism was key or that there was lingering resentment of Clinton’s presidency in these states.

But I think it comes back to race — the whiter the state, the less polarized the results of Democratic primary. In fact, Obama dominated in lily white, Northern states like Minnesota and Idaho. In states with high percentages of minorities — in both the North and the South — the results were more mixed.

Also: In the movie “Blow,” Johnny Depp’s character asks a judge, “what did I really do? I crossed an imaginary line with a bunch of plants.” The “imaginary” state lines in the U.S. are often arbitrarily drawn, especially in the case of sprawling Western states that span multiple ecosystem.

But check out how Clinton’s support ends at Arkansas’ border with Oklahoma or at New York’s border with Vermont. Or how about the Indiana-Illinoins split. Looks like home court advantage still matters.

National Obama-Clinton Electoral Map (Daily Kos)

Obama-Clinton Electoral Map

Super Tuesday Obama-Clinton Electoral Map (Daily Kos)

Super Tuesday Electoral Map

Wild, Wonderful and Without Many Electoral Votes

Hillary Clinton dropped an interesting stat today. Per Memoli, she told a Clear Fork, W.V. crowd, “Democrats don’t get elected president unless West Virginia votes for you. And everybody knows West Virginia has picked presidents pretty accurately over the last years.” She went on to give John F. Kennedy as an example as a Democratic who “had West Virginia behind him.”

But here’s another stat: When JFK ran for president, the Mountain State had eight Electoral College votes. Today it has only five. And he’s an even more stark stat: Lyndon B. Johnson won 538,087 raw votes in West Virginia in 1964 but John Kerry took only 326,541 votes there in 2004. So, obviously the state and its impact has decreased.

Not to be outdone, Bill Clinton also dropped his own outlandish stat on Monday. Rallying a crowd in Logan, he said: “You think this crowd’s noisy. Just wait til we win like 80-20,” quickly added, “We’ve got to give her a vote tomorrow of 80-20 or 90-10.”

Hillary (Power) Points to Electability

Hillary Clinton‘s still trying to convince the super-D’s that she’s more electable.  The latest example is a Power Point presentation that her campaign released on Friday arguing that she is more competitive in battleground congressional districts and would have stronger coattails.  Here’s the full “Winning in the Tough Districts” memo (Internet Explorer only).

Among her points:

  • Conservative Districts: In 2006, the Democrats retook Congress by picking up 31 new seats.  20 of those freshman Democrats are in Republican-leaning districts that voted for President Bush in 2004.  Of those 20 districts, Hillary has now won 16, most by large margins.
  • The 16 districts that Hillary has won: AZ-08, CA-11, FL-16, IN-2, IN-8, IN-9, NC-11, NH-1, NY-19, NY-20, NY-24, OH-18, PA-10, PA-4, TX-22 and TX-23.
  • Rural Districts: These districts are heavily rural.  Half of them are more than 40% rural: IN-8 (42%), IN-9 (48%), NC-11 (56%), NY-20 (55%), NY-24 (50%), OH-18 (57%) and PA-10 (55%).
  • Nationally, Hillary has won rural voters by 8 points, 50-42.
  • Hispanic Districts: Hispanics make up more than 10% of the voters in 6 of the districts: AZ-5 (13%), AZ-8 (18%), CA-11(20%), FL-16 (10%), TX-22 (20%) and TX-23 (65%).
  • Nationally, Hillary has won Hispanic voters by 30 points, 64-34.
  • Competitive Districts: Hillary has also won 10 of the 15 districts rated “toss up” for 2008 by the Cook Political Report.  Of Cook’s 80 “competitive” districts, Hillary has won 40 to Sen. Obama’s 31: AL-05, PA-10, TX-22, AZ-1, MS-1, NJ-3, NY-25, NY-26, OH-15 and OH-16.

Good points.  Too late.

Winning Tough Districts