I'm convinced no other Democrat could change the electoral map like Obama

[BluegrassDem]

Obama winning N.C., VA, and IN and has totally demoralized the Repugs! It was a dagger in their heart. This was one of the best things about the election. It's just not that Obama won, but HOW he won. He went deep in their backyard and took some of their biggest prizes. States like N.C., VA, and IN are the heart of the Republican electoral base. That's 39 EV's that they can never count on being there for them again.

Sure, Bill Richardson would've flipped New Mexico and probably Colorado too.

Sure, Hillary would've flipped Arkansas and would've been competitive in West Virginia.

But those states don't strike fear in the Republicans like Virginia, North Carolina, and Indiana. The fact that they lost those states are driving them batshit crazy. They basically cannot win without those states.

So I'm just proud that the Dems nominated Obama. I'm proud of the campaign he ran. I'm glad he didn't listen to the critics, like Rachel Maddow and the Clinton supporters (Carville, Begala, etc.), who thought it was a nutty idea to compete in places like North Carolina and Indiana. Obama stood his ground and look at the beautiful we map we have today! Obama may have put the final nail in the GOP electoral coffin.

So what's up next? In 4 years, we might find Georgia and South Carolina added to the mix.

[tabatha]

1. Absolutely.

We would have lost with anyone else.

[angee_is_mad]

2. Paul Begala said the same thing

basically tonight on Real Time. Bill Maher asked him if Hillary could have beat mccain. He said of course, and any of the other democratic candidates could have beat him also. But only Barack Obama could have changed the map like he did. Hillary would not have won NC, Va, and Ind.

[democrattotheend]

6. I always said Hillary would win or lose narrowly. Obama could have won or lost in a landslide.

Hillary would have started out with more states and more votes solidly in her corner, but with fewer people willing to consider voting for her. A Clinton-McCain race would have started with a lot fewer undecideds, giving her a higher floor but a lower ceiling, both in terms of states and popular votes. During the primaries I met some Democrats who said they might not vote for Obama if he were the nominee, but I also met some Republicans and independents who were at least considering voting for Obama but said there was no way they'd vote for Hillary. So I knew that if things broke Obama's way he could win the soft Democrats and the crossover votes, but if it turned against him he could lose both. Bill Clinton wasn't wrong in January when he said nominating Obama was like rolling the dice. I just believed that it was a roll of the dice worth taking, because I thought Obama could win a more sweeping victory and that his election had more potential to be transformational. I also think it was a roll of the dice in terms of what kind of president each would be: Hillary would have been a good president. Obama has the potential to be a great president, but there is also the possibility that he won't be successful, either because he makes a rookie mistake that the press never lets him recover from or because people have their hopes up so high he can't possibly live up to them. But I always felt it was a risk worth taking, because he has such potential to be great.

[fujiyama]

8. I think she probably would have taken OH and FL

as well as AR and WV (well it would have been close).

After seeing the margins for KY, TN, and LA, I don't think she could have quite pulled those states back from Clinton's '92 and '96 maps. I'm somewhat skeptical about MO. They look like they are really trending away from us. Sure the race factor wouldn't have quite been there (though if BO were her VP that may have driven some away), but those states (including WV) started trending away from us in '00 at the presidential level (even earlier probably due to the religious right's influence).

I wonder if she would have even bothered making a play at IN. And I also don't know if could have quite mobilized NC and VA the way it was done. CO and NV would have likely been more iffy.

What Ifs are amusing but pointless. I think their paths to victories would have differed somewhat but she would probably have won too. Overall, a very impressive victory. David Broder should eat crow for claiming IN and NC wouldn't matter in the general election. I'll admit, I'm still freakin thrilled that those two states (especially INDIANA) went blue!

[Awsi Dooger]

10. Hillary definitely would have taken Florida and Ohio

One thing that is overlooked this cycle: Obama indeed had comparative weakness in states like Ohio and Florida. That was not a myth. His partisan index (state relationship to national margin) is much worse than we should have fared in Florida and Ohio. Hillary would have managed far superior in that regard.

Obama's strength was always the potential to blow open the national margin, beyond anything Hillary could rightfully expect. That's what allowed the narrow victories in Ohio and Florida, and forays into North Carolina and Indiana. Hillary had no chance in those two states. But she absolutely could have won Virginia. I agree, Missouri was iffy. Hillary would have had more rural strength but not quite the pull in St. Louis and Kansas City.

The nuts who say Virginia was out of play for Hillary are similar to the goofs who claimed Obama had no chance in Florida. Like Florida, Virginia has become a true swing state. I predicted years ago that in 2008 the Virginia partisan index would be between dead even with the nation and 2 points red. That's exactly where it finished. The reason is very simple: The state now has typical swing state numbers of liberals and conservatives, 21% liberals and 33% conservatives.

Hillary could have won Arkansas and West Virginia, although neither would have been certain. Most likely her national margin, even with the economic collapse, would have peaked at closer to 4 than Obama's 6. However, I'm not fully convinced she couldn't have managed 5 or 6, after Obama lost the white female vote by a ridiculous 53-46 yet still won handily. Hillary had potential to do much better with that white female block.

[democrattotheend]

11. She might have won Virginia, but I am not sure she would have tried for it

And thus she probably would not have won.

[xchrom]

3. yeah -- i don't believe that for a minute. nt

[Indiana_Dem]

4. All Indiana needed was a little love and attention!

We Dems have been so isolated and ignored in Indiana. Our thumbs were held down by the vast Republican machine and roots that we didn't have any power on our own. The ground game of the Obama campaign helped us where our local parties could not. A lot of disgruntled Republicans also cast their ballots for Obama. We had/have a lot of fiscal Repubs around here. Sure, we also have a lot of right wing fundies, here, but it was the fiscal Repubs who voted for Obama (and would not have voted for Hillary because of the Clinton name) that helped. If Hillary would've won and been the nominee, I didn't know a single Repub that would've voted for her. In fact, it would've motivated them more to come out and wallup us. I can guarantee this. No offense to the Clinton lovers. I love them, too, but they would've brought out the Repubs in droves against us here in Indiana.

[democrattotheend]

7. Also, she probably wouldn't have tried for Indiana

or North Carolina or Virginia. She would have won PA, OH, and FL without too much trouble (and probably without spending as much as Obama did), and she probably would have won Arkansas and maybe West Virginia. But she wouldn't have even tried for some of the states Barack won, and she might have had to spend more time defending places like Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa that were competitive in 2004 but that Obama was able to pull away in early.

[ROh70]

5. I agree. And we should include Pennsylvania

Even though it's a blue state, the repubs thought they had a chance with all those white racist voters there. The fact that Obama won BIG, bigger than any democrat in recent elections, was a big dagger in the southern strategy.

[CreekDog]

9. Obama had a special appeal in the West that most Democrats didn't, but there's more:

he had an appeal to the educated (North Carolina and Virginia are brimming with professionals). Combine that with large African American populations in those states (and their enthusiasm).

But there is another reason Obama won, he had help the others wouldn't have had and he had help because not only did he ask for help, but he asked people to be a part of what he was doing.

It was the difference as I've said before:

others would say: "elect me and I will..."

Barack would say: "join with me and let US..."

all things being equal, which appeals more to you? i dare say the latter is what put me in Nevada on Election Day rather than at home in the Bay Area.

[No Elephants]

12. Another primary thread. Please move on.