United Ticket Is The Way To Go (Please rec this diary)

Let me first say that I am a supporter of Senator Obama. I voted for him and I will in November if he wins the primaries. However, I will also vote for Senator Clinton if she clinches the nomination and I will do so happily.

However, these primaries have been closer than most of us have expected. The difference between the two candidates is small: about a hundred pledged delegates, a few dozen of super-delegates and a little more than two or three hundred-thousand in popular vote. To me, no candidate has won clearly, categorically, and overwhelmingly to claim that he or she has a popular mandate from the base of the Democratic Party (polls don't mean a thing when you have clear results from the primaries).

Both candidates have weaknesses and strengths and the weaknesses of one are complemented by the strengths of the other. Each candidate by him/herself will have a hard time winning in the general elections. Thus, a combined ticket of both candidates--the order does not matter to me right now--is the way to go. Bear with me for a second and let me explain my rational. If you care about winning the White House like I do and your bottom line is victory, you will agree with me. However, if you care more about some childish skirmishes that took place during this campaign and your feelings got hurt and bruised by what one candidate said/did or did not say/do, you have no business being, following and/or participating in electoral politics. The bottom line to me--and must be to every democrat out there--is to see a Democratic President sworn in January 2009. The rest is news junk and fodder for stupid talking-heads to fill the 24-hours cable news cycle of nonsense to distract us from our ultimate objective.

In order for us to win in the fall, the democratic ticket has to carry 3 or 4 out of the 5 following states: Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, and/or Virginia.

Of course, on the top of these 3 states, the democratic ticket has to carry the traditional democratic electoral map composed of Maine, Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, District of Columbia, Michigan, Illinois, New Mexico, California, Oregon, and Washington. The sum of the electoral votes when we add all the traditional states of the democratic electoral map is 212 electoral votes.

If we add Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, Virginia and Florida, the democratic ticket reaches 304.
If we add Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, Virginia, the democratic ticket reaches 277
If we add Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, Florida, the democratic ticket reaches 291
If we add Pennsylvania, Missouri, Florida, the democratic ticket reaches 271
If we add Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, the democratic ticket reaches 280
If we add Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida, the democratic ticket reaches 273
If we add Missouri, Florida, Ohio, the democratic ticket reaches 270
If we add Missouri, Florida, Ohio and Virginia, the democratic ticket reaches 283

As you see, in all these scenarios, the democratic ticket reaches 270 electoral votes and wins the presidency. However, in all these scenarios, the democratic ticket has to win a combination of 3 or 4 states from the states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, Virginia and Florida. What is common in these states is that they have a diverse combination of demographic groups: elderly voters, rural voters, urban center voters, African-American voters, Latinos/Hispanic voters, college graduate voters, non-college graduate, blue collar voters (low income), white collar voters, and young voters.  Senator Obama has consistently showed that he could not carry the blue collar/non-college educated, rural, elderly, women, and Latinos/Hispanic demographic groups with any substantial margin. Senator Clinton has also showed that she could not carry the young, white collar, African-American, urban center, and college educated/white collar demographic groups with any substantial margin either.

Let us take Missouri as an example to illustrate what I am saying and put it in stark terms. Senator Obama won the urban centers, the African-American and the youth vote. Senator Clinton won every single rural county (some with huge margins of more than 30 points), the women votes and the elderly. The result of that primary was almost a tie. Senator Obama squeezed a win by less than 1 percentage point. In the general elections, this scenario is most likely going to happen again and Senator McCain is going to be very competitive in the urban centers like St Louis and Kansas City. If Senator McCain could narrow the margin of victory of Senator Obama in the urban centers, he could carry the state; and he could do that if women, the elderly and the blue collar voters in the urban center stay home. A small drop in the turn out of women and the elderly (because Senator Clinton is not on the ticket) will be lethal for Senator Obama. The same thing could happen to Senator Clinton. If there is a small drop in the turn out of African-Americans in urban centers (because of Senator Obama is not on the ticket) and she would lose Missouri to Senator McCain.

What happens in Missouri could happen in Pennsylvania and Ohio. The job of Senator McCain is to narrow the margin of victory of Senator Obama in urban centers and sweeps the rural counties if he faces Senator Obama. If he faces Senator Clinton, he would try to win some urban center by banking on a low turn out of the African-American voters and be somehow competitive in the rural counties and he could win those states too.

Let us look at Florida, which is a very tricky state for Senator Obama. In order to win Florida, Senator Obama needs to have a high turn out among women, elderly, Latinos/Hispanics, and African-Americans. Senator Obama can win Miami-Dade, Broward, Collier, and Monroe County (although Collier and Monroe counties are not heavily populated counties). He could be somehow competitive by narrowing McCain's margin of victory in Palm Beach, Martin and St. Lucie counties. He will lose by a large margin the pan-handle and the corridor because those areas are populated by conservative, bible thumbing, and gun-carrying demographics. So the battle in Florida will be in Hillsborough County, Pinellas County, Pasco County, Manatee County and Sarasota County. If you know anything about Florida, you would know that these counties are heavily populated by the elderly. The elderly electorate in Pinellas County, that is the city of St. Petersburg, is around  45%, in Hillsborough County it is around 39% (these are numbers from the 2000 campaign so I expect them to go up a little bit). The majority of the elderly population in Florida is women. Women represent more than 60% of those who are 65 years old and older. Again, Senator Obama's numbers with this demographic have been consistently awful. If there is not a heavy turn out of the elderly demographic in Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco, Manatee and Sarasota Counties, Senator Obama will to lose Florida. Moreover, Senator Obama's numbers with the non-Cuban Latinos/Hispanics have not been that great either, and Senator McCain carried the non-Cuban Hispanic group by a margin of 4 to 1 in the Florida republican primary. Thus, based on these numbers, Senator Obama cannot carry Miami-Dade and Broward countries with a huge margin, which would complicate the math even further for him and facilitate a McCain win in Florida.

Why am I not talking about the youth vote? Well, based on previous studies of electoral turn out, the youth vote has never been a serious factor and it has never materialized. I worked in the 1988 campaign and everyone  was expecting a huge turn out of young folks; it did not happen. The same thing was said about the 1992 campaign and it did not happen again. However, the only demographic groups that have always turned out and faithfully handed victory after victory to the democratic candidates have been the women's vote and the African-American vote followed closely by the elderly. Check the National Election Survey that compiled and study turn out by income, age, gender, race and so forth and you would notice that the so-called gender gap has been the saving grace for the democratic party.  It handed the presidency to Clinton in 1992 and 1996. It limited the victory of the republican in 1994 and defeated Newt Gingrich in 1998. It handed the Congress to Nancy Pelosi in the last elections and so forth. Women vote has always been the vote that pushed the democrats over the finishing line.

In conclusion, we need a presidential ticket that would turn out women, African-Americans, Latinos/Hispanic, elderly, and blue collar voters to the polls by the truck loads. Obama-Clinton or Clinton-Obama is the only way to do it. No disrespect to Senator Webb or Governor Richardson or Kathleen Sebelius. There is no track record that they can deliver the states that I cited above. Senator Webb can deliver Virginia, but he cannot deliver Missouri or Florida or Ohio; plus he has problem with women. Governor Richardson can deliver Florida, but I don't think he can deliver Pennsylvania, Missouri, Virginia, and Ohio, plus he is awful on the stump. Governor Kathleen Sebelius is just not up to task. I am pretty sure that she cannot even deliver her own home state of Kansas, never mind bring Missouri, Ohio or Florida to the democratic column; plus she suffers from a severe case of lack of charisma and as my wife puts it "she has as much charisma as a zucchini."

I want to win the White House and I want to see a democratic president in the Oval Office. I think both candidates are great. I think both candidates have their strengths and weaknesses. I think the strengths of one candidate cancel out the weakness of the other. I think that Mario Cuomo is absolutely right. He knows more than anyone here the dynamics of electoral politics and what is necessary to win in November. I think that the only way to put the bad blood behind us and seriously unit the party to bring about a SURE victory in November is to have both candidates on the same ticket.  

For those who are against this and not happy about it and for the naysayers, I will tell you, urge you, encourage you, to go vote for McCain. I will even pay for the cab that would drive you to your polling station on November to vote for McCain because I know that victory will be ours with such a ticket. If you do not want to vote for McCain and still bitch about such a ticket, I will tell you to grow up because this is politics.



Display:


Re: United Ticket Is The Way To Go (I (none / 0)

There are other candidates who can be Obama's VP who would be better than Hillary and would have less negatives than her who could get the blue collar workers.  One of them comes to mind which is Webb of Virginia.


by Spanky on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:55:28 PM EST

did you even read the diary before (none / 0)

you utter total nonsense.


by likelihood zero on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:10:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Ticket Is The Way To Go (I asked you to (none / 0)

Clinton will make a fine governor of NY.
by grasshopper on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:00:16 PM EST

Re: United Ticket Is The Way To Go (none / 0)

No. She's a huge liability. Webb would be good, or Richardson. I don't want to see her anymore after this election.


by Becky G on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:37:41 PM EST

With all due respect to Webb, he cannot deliver (none / 0)

Florida, Ohio or Pennsylvania. Look at how he was elected and look where/what/how he won in Virginia and you would realize that outside Virginia, he is pretty much limited.


by likelihood zero on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:54:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Ticket Is The Way To Go (Please rec thi (none / 0)

I am 100% certain Obama would not invite Hillary on the ticket.  Why on earth would he want to defend her baggage?  If you are the change candidate, you don't choose the business as usual VP.  Whether or not it would have advantages in the GE, it isn't going to happen on principal.


by interestedbystander on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:39:21 PM EST

Re: United Ticket Is The Way To Go (Please rec thi (2.00 / 1)

Lyndon Johnson hated the guts of JFK. And JFK thought that LBJ was a redneck jerk. LBJ lied about JFK and spread rumors about him in the convention hall and JFK through Mayor Delay twisted arms and legs of some super-delegates until he broke them. But the electoral map spoke louder than principles and the rational of winning is more powerful than rational of losing and they both got on the same ticket. This is why


by likelihood zero on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 06:00:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Ticket Is The Way To Go (2.00 / 1)

I am starting to be concerned that without a united ticket, neither of them will be able to win in the fall.  There is too much passion and voter allegiance behind both candidates now.  I don't want to get into the blame game and start pointing fingers as to which candidate started the flame wars.  

One of the reasons people are getting so impassioned about this primary (I believe) is that the American people believe THIS is the election that really matters.  They're treating it with the same passion as the GE.  But it is NOT the GE, and those same passions are creating a lot of hostility...helped along and fed by some very irresponsible bloggers at the big orange place and other sites.  Clinton fans need to quit spreading the "BO is unelectable" meme, and the Obama crowd needs to quit pretending that Clinton is a liar who will "do/say anything" to get elected.  

Unless we get our messages under control, I don't think either candidate will have a chance in HELL come the GE, unless the other one is on the ticket.  

We are creating our own schism.

Caveat: I'm a Clinton supporter.


The universe is a casual place, not a suit-and-tie affair.
by mtnspirit on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:53:37 PM EST

Re: United Ticket Is The Way To Go (2.00 / 1)

I am an Obama supporter and i second every word you said.

To win elections, you need to have the math straight. Neither of them by him/herself have an easy road to the WH. Both of them on the same ticket, and i will pop the champagne in August after the acceptance speech in Denver.


by likelihood zero on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:57:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

fundamental problem (1.00 / 1)

Accepting the other would weaken the fundamental case for each of their candidacies.

Privately and publicly, Hillary has made it clear she doesn't believe Obama is competent or experienced enough to be President or commander in chief.

How will she answer the inevitable question of why she would choose to have someone who has not met the candidate's own "commander in chief threshold", to be one heartbeat from the presidency?

On Obama's side, he has very clearly stated that the Clinton's represent the past, and that they are part of a generation of leaders that have failed to move this country away from bitter partisanship. How is it then that a candidacy based on "change" and "higher" politics, would pick one of the most divisive figures in modern political history?


by highgrade on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 06:04:13 PM EST

Re: fundamental problem (none / 0)

Did you happen to miss her answer when she was asked whether or not he can and she answered, " Yes, Yes, Yes. he can win"

This is as categorical as an answer can be.

Everyone understand that during the primaries, every candidate tries to make the case for him/herself and lower the expectation for the other candidates. Romney said several times that McCain cannot win because he is just like the Democrats, do you seen any republican repeating that? NO, WHY? because they know how to WIN and we are a bunch of cry baby. Convention are the spot everything gets hammered.

LBJ said over and over and Herbert Humphrey said over and over that JFK cannot win. Herbert Humphrey said it on meet the press that that boy is too young to win against sitting VP, Nixon.

So, this is politics. No one is going to weaken the case for the other rational of candidacy. A nice speech at the convention. A platform that they both agree on and Voila...you got a united ticket.


by likelihood zero on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 07:26:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hill yes!!!!! (2.00 / 1)

I was going to write this diary tonite.  Thank you for doing so!  I couldn't agre with you more.  They need to suck it I'll and get on a ticket together.  I'm an HRC supporter but at this punt I don't care who is on top of the ticket.  We should be spending our time taking out McCain instead of squabbling about bittergate and cookiegate.  I'm tippoing you....I would rec this diary but I can't seem to make it happen using my blackberry.


Unity Ticket: The best damn way to kick John McCain's Ass in November!
by aurelius on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 06:04:41 PM EST

Re: Hill yes!!!!! (2.00 / 1)

Just got the rec function to work. Everyone please recommed this diary!!! Let's get together and have a love fest instead of a slugfest!


Unity Ticket: The best damn way to kick John McCain's Ass in November!
by aurelius on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 06:14:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

please rec this diary (none / 0)


Unity Ticket: The best damn way to kick John McCain's Ass in November!
by aurelius on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 06:15:43 PM EST

Re: United Ticket Is The Way To Go (Please rec thi (none / 0)

Hillary supporter here and I'm in totally agree!!

Rec'd


by nikkid on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 12:37:28 AM EST

Re: United Ticket Is The Way To Go (none / 0)

Of course, on the top of these 3 states, the democratic ticket has to carry the traditional democratic electoral map composed of Maine, Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, District of Columbia, Michigan, Illinois, New Mexico, California, Oregon, and Washington. The sum of the electoral votes when we add all the traditional states of the democratic electoral map is 212 electoral votes.

You've forgotten the three states of the Upper Midwest:  Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa--all of them went for Gore, and two of them went for Kerry.  Obama polls well in all three without Hillary as a running mate.  He's also doing fairly well in Nevada and Colorado.  If he carried all five of these states, he would have a total of 253 EVs, and would require only Penn or Ohio to win.  Winning both PA and OH would give him breathing room to lose a couple of the Upper Midwestern or Mountain states.


by Captain Bathrobe on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 11:11:04 PM EST

Re: United Ticket Is The Way To Go (none / 0)

I did not also count Arkansas and Tennessee (17 EVs) where Hillary is polling extremely well and that's because i would rather win OH, PA and FL for 68 EVs than spend money and resources on 3 states NV, CO, and IA for 21 EVs. Plus, the demographics and the economics favor us in OH, PA and FL.

Granted Colorado and Virginia and Nevada have been trending blue recently. However, i wouldn't really gets my hopes up about Nevada. McCain comes from a next door state and he is polling well with the Latinos/Hispanics and it is a state that has a high rate of veterans.

Granted also, i could have included WI and MN since they were reliable democratic states. Yes if we do include, we would need a combination FL, PA and OH.

I just think that the electoral map becomes easier with Hillary on the ticket rather than off the ticket.


by likelihood zero on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:18:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.