Presidential election 2008

  • News
  • Thread starter Evo
  • Start date
In summary: Neither Obama nor McCain have stated that they would select a VP based on theirpanic votes, but I think it would be a safe assumption to say that the VP would have a significant impact on Latino voting. More polling data, giving electoral vote predictions:1. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/Currently: Obama = 228, McCain = 190, Toss ups = 120 EVs2. Electoral-vote.comCurrently: Obama = 287, McCain = 227, Ties = 243. http://www.electionprojection.com/index.shtml Currently

Who will win the General Election?

  • Obama by over 15 Electoral Votes

    Votes: 16 50.0%
  • Obama by under 15 Electoral Votes

    Votes: 6 18.8%
  • McCain by over 15 Electoral Votes

    Votes: 4 12.5%
  • McCain by under 15 Electoral Votes

    Votes: 6 18.8%

  • Total voters
    32
  • #1

Evo

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
24,017
3,337
Ok, we have Obama and McCain. I've been hearing about Hispanic votes and New Mexico as a key State for Obama to win with Hispanics. Uhm, New Mexico only carries 5 electoral votes. Also, has anyone looked at the numbers of eligible black and Hispanic voters?

They're negligible.

Total eligible Hispanic voters in the US 17,315,000

Total eligible Black voters in the US 24,115,000

Total eligible White Voters in the US 151,110,000

52% of white eligible voters are women

48% of white eligible voters are men

http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/34.pdf

I want to throw out the numbers and see what everyone thinks will be key to a victory for Obama or McCain.

Electoral votes by state.

http://www.fec.gov/pages/elecvote.htm

Another good website for reference as we head to November is

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/throw_out_the_maps_in_2008.html

Lots of good statistics. All of the best polls shown and most up to date. Not biased.

I'd like to see this thread as a reflection of what is happening in the following months and as a way to help us all make informed choices. So much happens, many of us simply cannot take the time we'd like to stay on top of everything and wade through the "mud" that will no doubt be slung. Feel free to post political speeches, articles and things of interest.

You are welcome to add your views, but please NO TRASH TALK. I WILL delete posts that are just venemous spewings or that have no merit.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
More polling data, giving electoral vote predictions:

1. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/

Currently: Obama = 228, McCain = 190, Toss ups = 120 EVs2. Electoral-vote.com

Currently: Obama = 287, McCain = 227, Ties = 243. http://www.electionprojection.com/index.shtml [Broken]

Currently: Obama = 293, McCain = 245

To see the individual polls that go into the composite in all of the above, click within any state on the map.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
Evo said:
Ok, we have Obama and McCain. I've been hearing about Hispanic votes and New Mexico as a key State for Obama to win with Hispanics. Uhm, New Mexico only carries 5 electoral votes. Also, has anyone looked at the numbers of eligible black and Hispanic voters?

They're negligible.

Total eligible Hispanic voters in the US 17,315,000

Total eligible Black voters in the US 24,115,000

Total eligible White Voters in the US 151,110,000

52% of white eligible voters are women

48% of white eligible voters are men

http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/34.pdf

The numbers for blacks will very likely go up and are probably already higher than when that data was gathered. Unfortunately blacks and latinos don't necessarily get along well. Unless Obama has a hispanic running mate or he starts taking on immigration policy (which would likely be a shot in the foot) I don't see him rallying the hispanic vote in any significant way.
 
  • #4
TheStatutoryApe said:
The numbers for blacks will very likely go up and are probably already higher than when that data was gathered. Unfortunately blacks and latinos don't necessarily get along well. Unless Obama has a hispanic running mate or he starts taking on immigration policy (which would likely be a shot in the foot) I don't see him rallying the hispanic vote in any significant way.
But would it be worth it for Obama to take on a VP just for the Hispanic vote? How much would it gain him overall?
 
  • #5
Gokul43201 said:
More polling data, giving electoral vote predictions:

1. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/

Currently: Obama = 228, McCain = 190, Toss ups = 120 EVs


2. Electoral-vote.com

Currently: Obama = 287, McCain = 227, Ties = 24


3. http://www.electionprojection.com/index.shtml [Broken]

Currently: Obama = 293, McCain = 245

To see the individual polls that go into the composite in all of the above, click within any state on the map.
Thanks Gokul!

Poll added for Gokul.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
Evo said:
But would it be worth it for Obama to take on a VP just for the Hispanic vote? How much would it gain him overall?

I don't think it would really help. More than likely the rabid anti-illegal alien people will see a hispanic in the white house as a sure sign of impending open border policies and turn out in force to vote "against" Obama. It would possibly be even worse than if he had Hillary on the ticket with him. But it's one of the only ways I can see him rallying hispanics. I think he'll just have to settle for making them comfortable and not pissing them off. Maybe workers' rights would be a good platform?
 
  • #8
Don't know how reliable this is, but these articles have some maps and data on the primaries & caucuses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_2008

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2008_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries
Includes discussion of popular vote with various ways to compute it.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_2008

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2008_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries


I think the VP candidates will be fairly, perhaps strong, influence on the election.
 
  • #10
I don't really know enough about the electoral college, or even how the US elections work, but I think it'll make a difference who Obama chooses as his VP won't it?
 
  • #11
Each state is assigned a certain number of electors to the Electoral College, based on representation in Congress (House + Senate).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Electoral_College
The Constitution allows each state legislature to designate a method of choosing electors. Although not originally the case in a majority of states, at present, 48 states and the District of Columbia have adopted a winner-takes-all popular vote rule–– . . . . Two other states, Maine and Nebraska, use a tiered system where a single elector is chosen within each Congressional district and two electors are chosen by statewide popular vote.

So a VP may affect the popular vote in anyone state.

CA (55), TX (34), NY (31), FL (27) are the Big 4, followed by PA & IL (each 21), OH (20), MI (17), NC (15), . . . .
 
  • #12
I'll wait until November to vote. In my opinion, McCain's chances of winning are about 000000000000000.6
 
  • #13
cristo said:
I don't really know enough about the electoral college, or even how the US elections work, but I think it'll make a difference who Obama chooses as his VP won't it?
Yes Obama's VP will be critical, not so much for McCain.
 
  • #14
Evo said:
But would it be worth it for Obama to take on a VP just for the Hispanic vote? How much would it gain him overall?
That's too narrow a reason to pick a VP, but added to Bill Richardson's diplomatic credentials, his experience as secretary of energy, his record of bipartisan cooperation, and his popularity amongst governors, he would be a VERY good choice. He might pull some Hispanic votes that might otherwise have gone to McCain, but his heritage alone should not be the deciding factor. The guy is smart and experienced and would bring a lot to the table. He's no flashy extemporaneous speaker like Obama, but that's not a negative in my book because Obama has that covered and Richardson would add age and experience to the ticket. The fact that Richardson has negotiated the release of captured soldiers and political prisoners held by some of the very nations that Bush refuses to talk to would put some teeth in Obama's claim that he wants to beef up US diplomacy and pursue diplomatic channels to resolve problems instead of rattling swords and applying sanctions as first options, as the Bush administration tends to do.
 
  • #15
Evo said:
Yes Obama's VP will be critical, not so much for McCain.

I think McCain's choice will be equally as critical. Not to be morbid, but his age is a factor. From the Social Security actuarial tables, for men:


Age Chance of Chance of
Dying in 1 year not dying

72 0.033 0.967
73 0.036 0.964
74 0.040 0.960
75 0.043 0.957

Chance of not dying in 4 years = (0.967)(0.964)(0.960)(0.957) = 0.856

Chance of a 72 year old man dying within 4 years = 14.4%

(I included the math because it's been a while since I've taken statistics - please check for accuracy.)

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4c6.html

Of course, SS stats are based on the larger population, and include the infirm. He's a tough guy, no doubt about that, and his chances are likely better than what's calculated here.
 
  • #16
lisab said:
I think McCain's choice will be equally as critical. Not to be morbid, but his age is a factor.
Good point.
 
  • #17
lisab said:
I think McCain's choice will be equally as critical. Not to be morbid, but his age is a factor. From the Social Security actuarial tables, for men:


Age Chance of Chance of
Dying in 1 year not dying

72 0.033 0.967
73 0.036 0.964
74 0.040 0.960
75 0.043 0.957

Chance of not dying in 4 years = (0.967)(0.964)(0.960)(0.957) = 0.856

Chance of a 72 year old man dying within 4 years = 14.4%

(I included the math because it's been a while since I've taken statistics - please check for accuracy.)

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4c6.html

Of course, SS stats are based on the larger population, and include the infirm. He's a tough guy, no doubt about that, and his chances are likely better than what's calculated here.


DOH! Sorry, my post got sort of garbled! It looked fine in the edit window...

First column: age
Second column: chance of dying in one year
Third column: chance of not dying in one year
 
  • #18
I don't wish to be morbid, either, but both presidential candidates need to pick someone who can slide right into the top spot if needed. There are white-supremacist groups loaded with people who will bear an irrational hatred against Obama just because of his skin color, and that's got be giving his SS detail fits. Obama would be the ripest target since Lincoln.
 
  • #19
turbo-1 said:
I don't wish to be morbid, either, but both presidential candidates need to pick someone who can slide right into the top spot if needed. There are white-supremacist groups loaded with people who will bear an irrational hatred against Obama just because of his skin color, and that's got be giving his SS detail fits. Obama would be the ripest target since Lincoln.

I agree. There is still enough of a racist undercurrent in this country that this is a valid concern. This is going to be an election where the VPs really are going to be a factor in the voting decisions.

Obama doesn't need to worry so much about the Hispanic vote in this election as he does the blue collar labor groups as a whole. He's ticked off a lot of them during his campaign, and those votes are ones he needs to win the swing states. While the media plays that off as a "white" population, I think that's an error too. The person working for housekeeping down at the Motel 6 can have any color skin and they're going to have trouble relating to someone who is worried about the price of arugula at the Whole Foods store. They're worried about the price of ordinary bread and milk at the Safeway.

I think Obama may run into the same problems Kerry ran into with those populations, and some of it may have nothing to do with his positions on issues, but just how he comes across in demeanor. He has that tall, thin, good posture, aristocratic look that will leave the working class distrusting him. McCain has more of the soft, rounded, jovial, let's listen to Grandpa talk about his war stories look.

I do think it's going to be a close election again, mainly because neither of them really inspires great confidence in a large enough segment of the population to stand ahead as a clear leader.
 
  • #20
Evo said:
But would it be worth it for Obama to take on a VP just for the Hispanic vote? How much would it gain him overall?
The way I see it, close elections (assuming this will be one) are won on the margins. A few tens of thousands of votes gained or lost in key places is what swings them from one to the other.

Hispanic votes are key in a key state (Florida), so yes, they are important.

This is also why I see Obama's race as an electability problem. The democrats are virtually guaranteed 90+% of the black vote, regardless of who they put up for office, so there isn't much benefit to appealing to black votors unless they can increase black votor turnout. But if his race is a problem for some (and Hillary was right - lower class whites liked her a lot better than him), the democrats stand to lose a lot of votes in their core constituency.

This is also why a half-decent or better black republican would be virtually guaranteed a landslide victory against a white democrat.
 
  • #21
jimmysnyder said:
I'll wait until November to vote. In my opinion, McCain's chances of winning are about 000000000000000.6
So... that's 60%, then? I think McCain's chances are even better than that. I think the laundry list of electability problems that Obama has are going to be a serious problem. The most important is the militant black nationalist image.
 
  • #22
McCain's ratings among Clinton's core constituency has fallen of late, though, and if he has to stand up to Obama in town-hall type discussions, he is likely to drop like a rock. His lack of understanding of the complexities of the societies, alliances, religions, and traditional rivalries in the middle east is going to make him look pretty flat-footed compared to Obama. He makes at least a gaffe a week on this one subject alone, and now that it's a general election race, the press may stop giving him free passes on these.

Edit by Evo: The Huffington Post is a biased blog and is not acceptable per the guidelines.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #23
Moonbear said:
While the media plays that off as a "white" population, I think that's an error too. The person working for housekeeping down at the Motel 6 can have any color skin and they're going to have trouble relating to someone who is worried about the price of arugula at the Whole Foods store. They're worried about the price of ordinary bread and milk at the Safeway.

I think Obama may run into the same problems Kerry ran into with those populations, and some of it may have nothing to do with his positions on issues, but just how he comes across in demeanor. He has that tall, thin, good posture, aristocratic look that will leave the working class distrusting him. McCain has more of the soft, rounded, jovial, let's listen to Grandpa talk about his war stories look.
You may be right, but I don't know what would make Hillary seem more down-to-earth (if that's the right term) than Obama. That's the main reason I think there must be somewhat of a race issue there, but I'm really not sure - I tend to be a little more optomistic about the [lack of] pervasiveness of racism than that.
 
  • #24
russ_watters said:
So... that's 60%, then? I think McCain's chances are even better than that. I think the laundry list of electability problems that Obama has are going to be a serious problem. The most important is the militant black nationalist image.

I think that's very optimistic. McCain has some advantages, but he's also following a Republican President that hasn't seen job approval ratings over 40% since Sep 2006. This should be a landslide for any Democratic candidate vs Republican candidate. I think McCain's individual advantages just make the election reasonably close (and not even close if things in Iraq go south).

If McCain does win, it's going to be a victory in another incredibly close election.
 
  • #25
russ_watters said:
So... that's 60%, then? I think McCain's chances are even better than that. I think the laundry list of electability problems that Obama has are going to be a serious problem. The most important is the militant black nationalist image.
I hope the election will hinge on something more substantial than that.
 
  • #26
Moonbear said:
I think Obama may run into the same problems Kerry ran into with those populations, and some of it may have nothing to do with his positions on issues, but just how he comes across in demeanor. He has that tall, thin, good posture, aristocratic look that will leave the working class distrusting him. McCain has more of the soft, rounded, jovial, let's listen to Grandpa talk about his war stories look.

I agree. And Obama has this funny lip thing going that makes him appear snooty in profile. But Obama has two things going for him as compared to Kerry: Firstly, he can excite a crowd to a lather in stump speaches. Unlike Kerry, Obama is inspirational. Kerry was completely uninspirational - a piece of stale bread. Also, Kerry was a dork, but Obama can be cool as long as he doesn't bowl. :biggrin:

Probably his strongest suit is his ability to get-out the vote. He has an army of youth that have probably already hit the streets.

And of course he is a Democrat who has among others, the Clintons campaigning for him.

Poor people generally don't vote for Republicans, and those that did have probably been transformed for life by Bush.
 
Last edited:
  • #27
I never knew this until just the other day, but when LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act in 1964, he predicted that he has just signed the South over to the Republicans for the rest of the lives of everyone present.

This may be the first election since not bound by LBJs prediction.

Another factor: Displaced Katrina victims may have shifted the demographic in Texas enough to throw the election there. But, likewise, it is argued that New Orleans could swing Republican.
 
Last edited:
  • #28
Favorability Ratings:

Obama, Fav - Unfav = 11.8%
McCain, Fav - Unfav = 6.5%

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/favorable.html

Note: While Obama's numbers are pretty consistent across polls, there is large variance in McCains numbers.
 
  • #29
Ivan Seeking said:
I agree. And Obama has this funny lip thing going that makes him appear snooty in profile...

And, if we are to be completely honest about appearances, everytime McCain smiles and bears those yellow teeth for the camera, it puts a smile on my face. And although his posture results in part from the torture that he sustained while a POW, his hunched profile makes him look old.
 
Last edited:
  • #30
I thought this quote from RFK was rather timely:

There's no question about it,' the attorney general said. `In the next 40 years a Negro can achieve the same position that my brother has.' ... Kennedy said that prejudice exists and probably will continue to ... `But we have tried to make progress and we are making progress. We are not going to accept the status quo.'"
- Robert F Kennedy, 1968
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25044937/page/6/

In spite of the apparent contradiction, it would seem that LBJ and RFK could both be proven right; almost down to the day.
 
Last edited:
  • #31
Evangelicals Are Still Wary Despite McCain’s Outreach
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/09/us/politics/09mccain.html
By MICHAEL LUO, NY Times, June 9, 2008
Lori Viars, an evangelical activist in Warren County, Ohio, essentially put her life on hold in the fall of 2004 to run a phone bank for President Bush. Her efforts helped the president’s ambitious push to turn out evangelicals and win that critical swing state in a close election.

But Ms. Viars, who is among a cluster of socially conservative activists in Ohio being courted by Senator John McCain’s campaign through regular e-mail messages, is taking a wait-and-see attitude for now toward Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee.

“I think a lot of us are in a holding pattern,” said Ms. Viars, who added that she wanted to see whom Mr. McCain picked for his running mate.

Ms. Viars’s hesitation illustrates what remains one of Mr. McCain’s biggest challenges as he faces a general election contest with Senator Barack Obama: a continued wariness toward him among evangelicals and other Christian conservatives, a critical voting bloc for Republicans that could stay home in the fall or at least be decidedly unenthusiastic in their efforts to get out the vote.
Would McCain pick Huckabee?

And who will Obama pick?

Anyone catch Clinton's speech over the weekend?

Clinton Ends Campaign With Clear Call to Elect Obama
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/08/us/politics/08dems.html
By ADAM NAGOURNEY and MARK LEIBOVICH, NY Times
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton made an emotional and unequivocal appeal for her voters to get behind Senator Barack Obama.
 
Last edited:
  • #32
russ_watters said:
The way I see it, close elections (assuming this will be one) are won on the margins. A few tens of thousands of votes gained or lost in key places is what swings them from one to the other.

Hispanic votes are key in a key state (Florida), so yes, they are important.

This is also why I see Obama's race as an electability problem. The democrats are virtually guaranteed 90+% of the black vote, regardless of who they put up for office, so there isn't much benefit to appealing to black votors unless they can increase black votor turnout. But if his race is a problem for some (and Hillary was right - lower class whites liked her a lot better than him), the democrats stand to lose a lot of votes in their core constituency.

This is also why a half-decent or better black republican would be virtually guaranteed a landslide victory against a white democrat.

Increasing black voter turnout could be a pretty significant factor. In 2004, turning out the evangelical base, especially in a few key swing states, was critical to Bush's victory. McCain's not going to be able to reproduce that kind of turnout. Obama could create the same effect, except with black voters.

Obama will turn out a larger than normal number of anti-black voters, as well, but I'd be surprised to see that segment be as significant as the increase in black turnout. Being strongly opposed to a given candidate rarely increases the likelihood of turning out to vote as being strongly for a given candidate.

Labeling Obama as a Muslim could be more damaging than his race. http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2004/04/27/9453 [Broken]. Part of that could be substituting "Muslim" for "non-white", but I doubt that's the most significant portion of the anti-Muslim crowd.

I admit that survey has to be suspect, but I found it amusing. I have to wonder if the sponsorship of the David Edelstein Family Foundation of Minneapolis affected how the survey was conducted. Three members of the Edelstein family are alumni of the university that conducted the survey and the Edelstein's experiences with anti-Jewish discrimination and intolerance promped the project.

It seems pretty hard to find an objective study of the relationship between religion and racism (wondering if racism could provide motivation to prop up the pro-evangelical vote). The studies seem to always be done by religious groups trying to show the positive side of religion or atheist groups trying to show the negative side of religion (studies like the Edelstein's aren't that atypical). It almost seems the issue of religion has replaced the issue of race as the most divisive force in US attitudes today, even if race surely has to follow close behind.

I still just don't see "anti-something" turning out the vote as effectively as "pro-something" does.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #34
BobG said:
Increasing black voter turnout could be a pretty significant factor.

Increasing the black vote could give a good part of the South to the Dems for the first time since LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act in 1964.
 
  • #35
Ivan Seeking said:
Increasing the black vote could give a good part of the South to the Dems for the first time since LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act in 1964.
Do you foresee Obama taking any southern state other than MO, VA or NC (not counting FL as "Southern")?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top