Well, it worked. Ever since the McCain campaign put Arizona in a festive pink on its electoral map, Democratic blogs are starting to pick up and run with the notion that Arizona is a swing state. The warrant for the claim is pretty thin -- an internal poll leaked by a Democratic congressional candidate showed McCain ahead by just 5 points in an R+6 district. Against that, we have a relative abundance of statewide polling showing Obama no closer than 9 points (and often down by more than that) and the fact that it's McCain's home state.
The home state effect seems generally to be on the order of 6-7 points, but can vary a lot from candidate to candidate and state to state. It might be weaker for McCain than for some other candidates, as he tends more to be a United States Senator than someone who porkbarrels for his home state.
Still, even without that home state effect, Arizona would lag a few points behind pickup opportunities like Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada, largely because of its large retiree population. Is it possible that Obama could win Arizona? Sure (although our model assigns him only a 4 percent chance). Is Arizona likely to make the difference between winning and losing the election? Probably not.
Just for our collective edification, however, you can construct some pure Western strategies for Obama that come up with winning electoral margins. Let's say that Obama loses Ohio and Michigan, but wins Iowa, and everything East of the Mississippi goes as it did in 2004. If Obama sweeps the small "sorta, kinda, maybe" Western states that are polling in the single-digits -- these are Montana, Alaska, and North Dakota -- plus the more talked-about Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico, that would get him to 271 EV. So would Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Arizona. But we're a long way from being able to declare the state competitive.
6.11.2008
'Zona Defense
@ 11:15 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments
Obama may not win Arizona, but I think if we can make McCain campaign with his time and money here, then he spends less time and money in NM, NV, and CO. That is more important than actually counting on Arizona as a win. Just my two cents.
There needs to be another statewide poll of Arizona done now, so we can see how close Obama has closed the gap after the primary ended.
Obama wasting money in Arizona would be akin to Bush in California in the final days of the election, a waste of money. Sure, you might get within 10 points or so, but you still lose heavily, so it's a definite waste of funds. Losing by 1 vote is still a loss, and it won't even be near that.
This is a McCain rope-a-dope strategy designed to get Obama to waste resources in AZ that could be spent in CO,NM,& NV. I would even put MT in play before AZ. If AZ became competitive somehow then that would indicate an Obama landslide of major proportions and he wouldn't need AZ to win. Either way -- $$ is still finite even with a 50-state strategy.
Just a general question on polls. Everyone analyzes these major polls, but who commissions them? Do the campaigns pay for them? News organizations? If some are commissioned by campaigns, can we learn anything of their mindsets by analyzing which places are bing polled? NY, TX and WA are fine places to poll, but why were those some of the more recent ones? I think everyone wanted to know about MI, PA, OH. We now have a glimpse at the former, but what about the other two- its been three weeks.
As Nate has established, the loss of all three drops the winning scenarios to less than 1%. If I am either campaign, the first chance I get I commission the largest, most accurate poll I can on those three states. And if they seem to be going my way I make sure it is a publicly accesable poll, and control the message that the opponent doesn't have a chance.
I have a feeling that Obama's campaign is smarter than to fall for such a transparent ploy. Anyone who seriously thinks McCain slightly underpolling in one district is indicative of anything should get their hope-meters checked.
In other news, a poll from WisPolitics.com has Obama +13 in the Badger state.
http://www.wispolitics.com/index.iml?Article=128513
Considering that Obama's campaign was savvy enough to know exactly how many delegates they could get in almost every district that voted on Super Tuesday and beyond, I doubt highly that it will commit an unreasonably large amount of resources to a super-long-shot state. However, don't claim that Obama opening offices and expending effort in AZ is a waste. Any defense McCain plays is a success for Obama (assuming McCain deigns to play defense in his home state), and a lot of the Obama organization is self-starting and volunteer run. If Obama manages to, say, visit every state during his campaign (especially if he can do so before a debate), he's got a powerful addition to his being a uniting figure.
Obama is definitely an underdog in AZ, but I don't think it is outside the realm of possibilities to make it somewhat competitive.
Arizona is a lean Republican state, but the Republicans there on average are much different than the socially conservative ones in the south and midwest. McCain has gone far to the right to get the nomination and that has alienated a large portion of his base in AZ. On Super Tuesday, McCain received less the 50% of the vote in the AZ primary against Romney and Huckabee.
McCain does not represent the views of AZ on illegal immigration and the housing crisis. These are going to be hot button issues in the state. Telling homeowners that you are going to do nothing to help them save their home will not reasonate well with voters. It will also bring up past memories of the Keating Five and the Savings & Loan scandal of the early 90's.
I can see 527's having a field day with Arizona becoming the last state to make MLK a holiday. Even when they finally decided to do obsevere the holiday, it was only to become part of the Super Bowl rotation.
So basically, if Obama can get a string of polls to say that he is within 10 points, then this contest could become very interesting.
yeah, the problem with going after Arizona isn't that it's impossible to swing but that the opportunity cost is too big for the number of electoral votes you can get out of it.
For about the amount of effort it would take to lock up Arizona he could lock up Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, he could lock up Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado, he could lock up Ohio, or he could lock up Michigan. I feel it's pretty safe to assume that Obama isn't going to let himself lose enough ground in CA, OR, WA, MN, IA, IL, VT, NY, DC, MD, DE, CT, RI, NJ, MA, or ME (all already over 85%) to lose any of them, so he has 203 EVs to start with. If Obama focuses on locking up PA and WI instead of AZ, then he'll only need any two of the other three groups above to win, and that means that he's likely to win by expending only three times the effort necessary to get AZ, with four times as much effort nearly guaranteeing it.
It would be pretty foolish in my opinion to expend nearly a fourth of the entire offensive effort needed of his campaign to win only 10 electoral votes (or lose 7 if you look at it my way), no matter how significant the symbolism of the victory would be.
Anon at 1:05 - you need to think long-term. How has Tennessee behaved since Bush beat Gore there in 2000? It's been a solid red state. It wasn't even close in 2004, and in 2006 it was the only state with a close Senate race that went to the Republicans.
Every state is unique politically, but states in the same region often vote in similar ways. It helps to look at Arizona not just as a single state, but as part of a region (the Southwest). Yes, the tremendous effort that Obama would have to put in to win Arizona is hard to justify for just 10 electoral votes. But as part of a comprehensive strategy aimed at turning the entire Southwest into a long-term Democratic stronghold? It might just be worth it.
I think the point here is that if Obama is within spitting distance of Arizona, he doesn't have to worry about winning it because his appeal will have broadened to such an extent that he will have a solid majority in the rest of the country.
That is the point that I was making. Democrats have been guilty lately of trying to win with a 50% + 1 strategy. That is very flawed because so many bad things can happen that will cause you to lose. The strategy should be geared on how to get 300+ electoral votes so that you have mulitple ways of winning.
I would campaign in Arizona mostly for the purpose of bringing out McCain's dismal voting record. In 1983, he voted against creating a MLK holiday! Do you really think that isn't going to become a wedge issue in the fall? Republicans have done the same thing with flag burning and school prayer in the past, so it is time for them to get a taste of their own medicine for a change.
New poll in Wisconsin.
http://www.wispolitics.com/index.iml?Article=128513
Sure, sure, work in fifty states. The Obama team is well aware of the dominating strategy: put Bill and Hill on a bus around in a loop PA-OH-MI-OH-PA. Maybe tack WI on in some loops. This is so appealing because they're close, tons of votes, there's a well-developed machine from the close primary, and HRC polls so well there. Meanwhile Obama is working VA with the governor, senator, and senatorial candidate. Western states would be nice, but resources should go to the cleanest victory scenario.
Politics Trader has this right. If Obama wins Arizona or even gets close, he only does so because he is so far ahead of McCain nationally that he will win enough electoral votes anyway.
The strategy is now clear. On offence, Obama targets three red areas: 1. The western trio of CO, NM and NV 2. The east coast trio of VA, NC and FL 3. The midwest quartet of OH, IN, MO and IA. You have right there, 10 red states carrying around 115 EVs which is more than enough.
On defence, Obama appears already to have made the west coast states of CA, WA and OR safe so I think he only needs to worry about MI, WI, PA and NH.
I haven't even mentioned states like MT and ND on which I would only expect Obama to devote material resources if he is more than 10 points clear nationally.
This provisional field puts Obama at a massive advantage in that Obama has 11 reasonable pick up prospects and McCain only has 4. I think we will see state polls going his way over the next couple of weeks and the pressure increasing on McCain. If McCain is unable to put more blue states in play (eg OR, MN, NJ) I just don't see how his financial resources can compete with Obama.
AZ isn't even the cherry on the cake for the Democrats. It's the after dinner petit fours. Totally unnecessary but a nice luxury if it's available.
Since Obama trusts volunteers to take independent action more than any GOP campaign, he can invest a "symbolic" level of resources in AZ and still potentially make a less efficient McCain campaign waste more, including tying down surrogates who could otherwise go elsewhere. Plus, the overhead costs can be shared with the DNC, since it serves the longer-term goals of the 50-state strategy -- recruiting activists and building up their experience to keep pushing toward blue.
Campaigning in AZ is not a waste of resources. It is a national strategy. The national press has been much, much easier on McCain than the AZ press. Personally going to AZ is a highly effective way to get some of that bad news about McCain, and some of his hometown failures, into the national dialogue. Even if all your effort only gets you a 5-point instead of 10-point loss in AZ itself, the effects nationally are well worth it.
Making Arizona competitive would be an image thing that could help Obama in other more important states. It would make McCain look weak.
I really think this is why the "50 state strategy" is a good idea. It's the ripple effect. People are very herd like. If they see Obama polling ahead by 10% on election day then they may go ahead and vote for him as they don't want to vote for the loser.
I suspect the only reason Arizona was pink rather than red is the prospect of Janet Napolitano as Obama's running mate, which might cut into the favorite-son aspect. That pink is (from McCain's standpoint) a worst-case scenario.
Let's put it this way: If Obama has a serious shot in Arizona, it means that McCain has collapsed anyway. I'd think that puts AZ quite low on the list for Obama, although I'm sure he'll go to Tucson (the Democratic stronghold) and tweak McCain by having a rally attended by 50,000 people.
It helps to look at Arizona not just as a single state, but as part of a region (the Southwest).
This is right on the money IMHO. There are several other factors that suggest a modest investment in AZ is worth it.
- Logistics of travel. Obama needs to hit NM and NV, I think everyone agrees these are swing states which can expect more than their fair share of campaign stops. AZ is in between them, so why just fly over it when he can make some quick stops without distorting the travel schedule excessively.
- Media markets. There is some bleed over from major AZ media into adjacent states, and a substantial amout of both business and vacation travel to/from these neighbors. People who live in NM especially pass thru Phoenix airport all the time because it is the regional hub for SW Airlines, so a large percentage of flights from ABQ to other parts of the country pass thru PHX. An investment in AZ will help with adjacent states.
- Build for the future. If Obama wins this year, there are midterm elections in 2010 and a re-election bid in 2012 to look forward to. Chances are that the GOP opponent in the latter will not be from AZ, and McCain is getting old and may retire soon after an exhausting run at the Presidency, which means his Senate seat will be up for grabs. Start the work of turning AZ blue now, it will pay off down the road.
The warrant for the claim?
Aha, you're one of us.
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,
^^ nice blog!! thanks a lot! ^^
徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 離婚, 外遇,離婚,
徵信, 外遇, 離婚, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 征信, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,
^^ nice blog!! ^@^
徵信, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 感情挽回, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 女子徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 外遇沖開, 抓姦, 女子徵信, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 女人徵信, 外遇
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信網, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 女人徵信, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,
艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差、打工,兼差,或者八大行業,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的,還是想去制服店當上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作、兼差打工、假日兼職、兼職工作、酒店兼差、兼差、打工兼差、日領工作、晚上兼差工作、酒店工作、酒店上班、酒店打工、兼職、兼差、兼差工作、酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作和特種行業內容,想兼職工作日領、假日兼職、兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!
艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚，無業績壓力，無脫秀無喝酒壓力，高層次會員制客源，工作輕鬆，可日領、現領。
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已，對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有！艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪，不需擔心！只提供最優質的酒店上班,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。心動嗎!? 趕快來填寫你的酒店上班履歷表
水水們妳有缺現領、有兼職、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學缺錢嗎?妳是傳播妹??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,假日兼職賺錢的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??
艾葳酒店台北酒店經紀招兵買馬!!徵專業的酒店打工,想要去酒店的水水,想要短期日領,酒店日領,禮服酒店,制服店,酒店經紀,ktv酒店,便服店,酒店工作,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀人,
等相關服務 幫您快速的實現您的夢想~!!
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment