Electoral Predictions for General Election
By every reasonable metric the Democrats should enjoy overwhelming success this November. With the economy, war, and demographic trends on their side, coupled with the Obama Campaign’s efforts to rewrite the traditional Democratic map, states that had traditionally been ceded to the Republican’s will now be in play.
Building on John Kerry’s results in 2004 and factoring in Obama’s aggressive voter registration campaigns, demographics shifts, primary polling, I’ve put together the following map as to how I see this November playing out. You’ll notice that key battleground states of Florida and Ohio are assumed to go to McCain, yet Barack Obama still emerges victorious. Such a result hinges on the Democrat successfully plucking Colorado, Montana, and North Carolina from the Republican column.
McCain’s Pastor Problem
 David Corn has a piece in today’s Mother Jones about Rod Parsely, a man John McCain has referred to as his “spiritual guide” and whose beliefs about the evils of Islam are at least as toxic as anything spewed out of Jeremiah Wright’s bigoted mouth. McCain, who has yet to renounce and reject this bigot’s support and who recently shared a stage to welcome the endorsement must at the least be held to the same standard as Barack Obama. Obama at least kept Wright at a distance before breaking all ties with the man; McCain, in contrast, has not only shown little conern over his guide’s controversial beliefs, but has publicly embraced the man.
Andrew Sullivan has an interesting point in setting up a distinction between Obama’s Pastor problem and McCain’s: the Republican party is far more influenced by its religious fanatics than the Democrats by theirs. Perhaps it is just the dynamic within the two parties that allows for hate mongers of the far right to be guiltlessly embraced by the mainstream - McCain, et. al - while such an association is like krytonite across the aisle.  If the Republican’s insist on playing the Jerimiah Wright card in the general then the Democrats have a weapon of at least equal potency; more when you factor that this zealot’s words speak to heart of American foreign policy.
Sphere: Related ContentNancy is Looking Like a Big Silly
What is Nancy Pelosi doing? First she announced that the Superdelegates should vote consistent with that of the pledged delegates, a position that infuriated the Clinton camp and elated the Obamaites. It also earned her a swift kick in the posterior by a cadre of Clinton backing Democratic money people in the form of a sternly worded letter this past week. So does the embattled Speaker of the House stand firm or explain her rationale for supporting the will of the people? That’s a big no. Instead she did a 180 degree turn, announcing that the Supers should vote in any way they see fit. How do you think the campaigns are reacting to this?
Memo to Nancy: Next time maybe just keep your opinions to yourself. It’s not the Speakers role to get involved in the elections.
Sphere: Related ContentOlbermann’s Special Comment for the Ages
“This way madness lies.”Â
Clinton has obviously calculated that the racial overtones being floated by her surrogates are more helpful to her goal than is any potential fallout. It’s The Democratic party be damned. Polls show she isn’t getting any of the African American vote in her battle against Obama, so why not polarize the whites and position this as a race war? Sure it will kill the party in the intermediate and long term, but that’s not her problem.
Keith Olbermann’s Special Comment is particularly notable as he has always been an ardent Clinton supporter.
Sphere: Related ContentNY Times runs Questionable Piece Alleging McCain’s Improper Relationship with Lobbiest
The New York Times should be embarrassed about the pitiful piece that will run in tomorrows paper accusing John McCain of engaging in an improper relationship with a lobbyist some eight years ago.  Yes, the article raises questions about the senator’s ethics and whether he provided his alleged mistress any preferential treatment or disclosed a free ride on her corporate jet, but come on; this piece is thinner than Mary-Kate Olson.
What troubles me is that even with shocking little evidence The Times are going forward with a piece they supposedly have been sitting on for many weeks. The article cites unnamed former McCain staffers who first contacted the Times at the end of 2007, well before the Iowa caucus. Who knows what axe these former staffers had to grind with McCain or what their motive would be for derailing the senators nomination, matters that didn’t seem to concern The Times.
If I were a conspiracy minded sort I would think that perhaps the anti-McCain faction of the right wing, a group that has been disgruntled with the Maverick since he sponsored the ethics reform bill–McCain Feingold, had a hand in this. At the time The Times was contacted questions about McCain’s ethics and conflicts of interest could have still derailed McCain’s candidacy.
And then there is the issue of the articles timing and why The Times kept it in the bottom drawer for so long. If this story is worth running now and to be believed why not give the voters a chance to utilize this information when placing their votes? If there are questions as to the story’s legitimacy and whether it was worth being a game changer then it shouldn’t be run now, at least not until they can get more sources to go on record.
What sort of legs will the story have? It depends on whether conservatives use this story as an excuse to sabatoge McCain’s candidacy or whether a backlash develops against The Times and the perception that the “liberal media” is once again attacking a Republican candidate, a development that would benefit McCain.  We will get our first look at the McCain war room in action as they deal with their first real crisis of this election season. It will be interesting to see how Huckabee plays this. He was waiting for an act of god to justify his staying in the race and now perhaps he has gotten it.
Sphere: Related Content
