Obama/Siegelman

[specific_name]

I knew somebody would bring that up.

I lol'd

[Keystone Phil]

How about Phil Bredesen? He's had 17 years in public service, is from a weak region for Obama, and is a moderate governor that could balance out Obama being a Senator.

Now that's an excellent pick.

Yeah, as excellent as McCain/Morella or McCain/Chafee...

Hey, it's your party that suffers the most from being regarded as too extreme. We don't need a liberal on the ticket to win as much as you guys need a conservative.

[Gravis Marketing]

Hey, it's your party that suffers the most from being regarded as too extreme. We don't need a liberal on the ticket to win as much as you guys need a conservative.

It's not 2004 any more. The longer it takes you guys to figure that out, the more time we'll have in power.

[Keystone Phil]

Hey, it's your party that suffers the most from being regarded as too extreme. We don't need a liberal on the ticket to win as much as you guys need a conservative.

It's not 2004 any more. The longer it takes you guys to figure that out, the more time we'll have in power.

I hate to tell you this but the ideological battles don't cease to exist because the President is unpopular or because the GOP lost Congress.

[Gravis Marketing]

I hate to tell you this but the ideological battles don't cease to exist because the President is unpopular or because the GOP lost Congress.

Yes, yes, you're absolutely right. It's still red vs. blue and southern conservatives have the upper hand. Couldn't agree more.

[Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred]

This must be Boss Tweed's April Fools joke.

[Keystone Phil]

I hate to tell you this but the ideological battles don't cease to exist because the President is unpopular or because the GOP lost Congress.

Yes, yes, you're absolutely right. It's still red vs. blue and southern conservatives have the upper hand. Couldn't agree more.

I didn't say who had the upper hand. I'm saying that we haven't undergone some realignment in just four years just because the President is unpopular and the Dems have the Congress.

Hate to break it to you but Kansas, Missouri, North Carolina, Montana, etc. aren't "purple" states just because the Obama fanatics say they are.

[Gravis Marketing]

Hate to break it to you but Kansas, Missouri, North Carolina, Montana, etc. aren't "purple" states just because the Obama fanatics say they are.

Missouri? Solid Republican? Really?

Anyway, I agree with you on the rest, and the fun part is, we can lose each of those states and every state like it and still get 320 EVs. The 2004 mentality is thinking that North Carolina, Wyoming, Utah, etc. are somehow definitive of the mainstream.

[Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred]

Anyway, I agree with you on the rest, and the fun part is, we can lose each of those states and every state like it and still get 320 EVs.

No, you can't.

Go take a look at the 1992 and 1996 electoral maps.

[Gravis Marketing]

No, you can't.

Yes, you can.

Go take a look at the 1992 and 1996 electoral maps.

Kerry states plus Florida, Colorado, Missouri, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, and Iowa is 334. With Virginia and West Virginia, it's 352. You may well feel that he won't win all or any of those states but "solid red" they ain't. Look at the last four elections. People think Florida is safe Republican when it's voted Democratic in two of the last three Presidential elections, and is in a full-fledged recession.

We just had a long debate on another thread where Missouri, Florida, and Ohio were functionally equivalent to Utah and Mississippi for Obama's electoral possibilities and if you think so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Keystone Phil]

Hate to break it to you but Kansas, Missouri, North Carolina, Montana, etc. aren't "purple" states just because the Obama fanatics say they are.

Missouri? Solid Republican? Really?

Anyway, I agree with you on the rest, and the fun part is, we can lose each of those states and every state like it and still get 320 EVs. The 2004 mentality is thinking that North Carolina, Wyoming, Utah, etc. are somehow definitive of the mainstream.

Missouri isn't solidly Republican but it's definitley a likely Republican state.

[JSojourner]

Hate to break it to you but Kansas, Missouri, North Carolina, Montana, etc. aren't "purple" states just because the Obama fanatics say they are.

Missouri? Solid Republican? Really?

Anyway, I agree with you on the rest, and the fun part is, we can lose each of those states and every state like it and still get 320 EVs. The 2004 mentality is thinking that North Carolina, Wyoming, Utah, etc. are somehow definitive of the mainstream.

Missouri isn't solidly Republican but it's definitley a likely Republican state.

I agree with Phil.  I will have to see more than a single Senate seat change to convince me.  At present, it does appear Democrats will capture the Governorship, right?  I've been so busy, I haven't had a chance to follow up.  But even so, what happens in statewide elections for Senate or Governor is often very different than what happens for President.

Missouri is still very likely to vote McCain in 2008.  Less likely than North Dakota or South Carolina, certainly.  But I'd put Missouri in the LIKELY R category, assuming ratings that range from CERTAIN - LIKELY - LEAN - TOSSUP and back again.

[LINCOLN REPUBLICAN]

Obama and Siegelman, as a Republican and a McCain supporter, I very much support that choice.

Now if McCain would only pick footsie Craig, that would really level the playing field considerably.