Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com
Full Post
Posted Friday, October 03, 2008 11:04 AM

Why McCain is Leaving Michigan--and What It Means for Nov. 4

Andrew Romano

Last night's debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden may not have "altered the basic contours of the race." But that doesn't mean nothing important happened yesterday. It's just that it was happening 365 miles to the northeast, in the great state of Michigan.

Lost amid all the Beltway blather and bloviation about the Showdown in St. Louis Thursday evening was one of the most significant revelations since the start of the race. John McCain, it seems, has decided to pull out of the Great Lakes State. As Politico's Jonathan Martin reported first, "McCain will go off TV in Michigan, stop dropping mail there and send most of his staff to more competitive states." The information leaked after McCain, who has watched Barack Obama surge to a sizable lead in national and swing state polls over the past few days, canceled a local event scheduled for next week. "It was always a long shot for us to win," said an aide.

That's probably accurate. But the truth is, without Michigan--which the campaign has now all but admitted that it will lose--it's very difficult to see how McCain can emerge victorious on Nov. 4. For months, McCain has made Michigan the centerpiece of his electoral offense, and with good reason. Iowa, a state that George W. Bush won in 2004, is almost certain to swing to Obama; he currently leads there by more than 10 points on average. Same goes for New Mexico, where Obama's ahead by 8. When combined with John Kerry's 251 electoral votes, those two states alone would put Obama within seven of the magic 270 mark; a single, additional win in either Colorado, Virginia, Ohio or Florida--all of which currently favor the Democrat--would put him over the top. Which is why McCain, desperate to make up ground, has long pinned his hopes on Michigan. The Arizona senator was polling within 2 points of his Illinois opponent as recently as Sept. 10.

Unfortunately, the recent avalanche of distressing economic news--especially impactful in a state with the nation's highest level of unemployment--seems to have moved the expensive Great Lakes State out of McCain's reach. The two polls released since Sept. 24--PPP and the Detroit Free Press--show Obama ahead by 10 and 13 points, respectively, and his average lead has more than tripled (from 2 percent to 7 percent) over the past three weeks. McCain's internal polling likely confirms these margins (otherwise, he'd be staying put). As a result, Republican strategists I spoke to last night in St. Louis said that the Republican nominee would now reinvest his Michigan resources in a quartet of Kerry states: Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota and New Hampshire. "He could take any one of them," an RNC bigwig told me.

But while the GOP is outwardly optimistic, a closer look at the numbers shows that McCain is no stronger in these states than in Michigan. McCain's strongest pick-up possibility is probably the unpredictable Granite State, where Obama now leads by an average of 4 points but where McCain has a long history of electoral success. Still, the senator would need more than New Hampshire's four electoral votes to make up for likely losses in Iowa and New Mexico--and neither Wisconsin, Minnesota or Pennsylvania is currently leaning his way. In Wisconsin, he trails by 5 points; in Minnesota, he lags by 5.7; and in Pennsylvania, he's behind by nearly 8. According to FiveThirtyEight.com, a site that blends current polling with demographic statistics and past electoral results to generate remarkably accurate Election Day projections--see its primary season record here--the only Kerry state that McCain has a better chance of capturing than Michigan (13 percent) is New Hampshire (37 percent). Pennsylvania, at 14 percent, is a wash; Minnesota and Wisconsin (8 percent each) are probably out of reach.

Ultimately, then, McCain's Michigan withdrawal underscores how limited his electoral map has become. In confirming the news, McCain field director Mike DuHaime was quick to note that the campaign would move staff to Maine, which awards its electoral votes by congressional district. The announcement was revealing. Apparently, the McCain campaign is now staking its path to victory, at least in part, on Obama winning Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado and losing New Hampshire, which would result in a 269-269 draw--at which point McCain would turn to Maine's Second Congressional District (where Kerry won 52-46) for the tie-breaking vote. The problem with this scenario, though, is that's there's no room for error. For Maine to matter, Obama would have to lose his 4-point lead in New Hampshire; his 2-point lead in Ohio; his 3-point lead in Florida; his 0.5-point lead in Nevada; his 0.5 lead in North Carolina; and his 2.4-point lead in Virginia. Not one of them--all of them. Meanwhile, Maine's second district would have to break sharply with the rest of the state, which currently favors Obama by 7.6 percent. Could it happen? Sure. These stats are based on current polling, and as September showed us, voter preferences still fluctuate in response to events. It's just that at this point, Obama has a 7 or 8 plausible paths to 270--and McCain has only one. So for now it doesn't look likely.

Advertisement
Tag(s):
You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: subsalicylate (October 31, 2008 at 1:29 PM)

As someone who is a real-life American Socialist, who will I be voting for? You know, don't you? Every crazed left-wing nutjob with a blog or a poll seems mighty pleased with this Barack Obama guy and his supposed lead in the race.

I'm NOT voting for Obama. And I'll tell you why.

Barack Obama is no more a "socialist" than John McCain. Hanging out with dangerous terrorist types who proclaim the virtues of anarchy and violent revolution does not make him anything other than a hypocritical fool. His "redistribution of wealth" rhetoric that scares so many hardcore capitalists is nothing more than old-school left-wing jargon that never amounts to anything. Wasn't Clinton a Republican all but in name once in office? Didn't he sign the welfare bill that threw thousands off it's rolls while conducting the same little wars here and there that every other president has? What will make Obama and his team of self-impressed egoists any different? Well, his anti-American friends, for one.

We know nothing about Obama except he knows too many loons. That is essentially ALL we know. He is dangerous, friends, and not to capitalism and certainly not to Republicans. Some, who have seen past Obama's crowd pleasing but empty sounds-good-but-means-nothing rhetoric and steady mugging assume he'll make the transition from capitalism to Whatever Comes Next smoother than McCain. He will not. In fact, if Obama is elected, the economic woes destroying the country will only get worse. Why? Because his ever-defensive administration will do so much vapid posturing and senseless

muttering that the GOP will grow stronger in opposition and, in four years, we'll be right back to an all-Republican government. And do you really want an administration that - forget all the nutjobs he'll have in for a moment - will spend a lot of their time calling opponents "racists" and censoring real debate on the grounds that, well, if you don't like Obama and his ideas (if there are any) you must not like blacks? I'm sure someone reading this will think I'm a racist for saying that. And here we go, don't we? is that what you want? Think about it...DO YOU?

McCain should win. We know him, we trust him about as much as we've ever really trusted any of them in four decades; we know that his administration will not bring forth any real progressive ideas for change but also won't stall at every crisis to "understand" the problem; they'll just deal with it. And a McCain administration will manage the death throes of capitalism a lot more efficiently, allowing for *real* ideas to develop. With Obamarama in full circus, there will be nothing of the sort coming from the progressive thinkers.

Just more defensive bull---- and handwringing. And just to be clear, Frank, McKinney, Gore, and yes Obama are *not* progressive thinkers. Just angry pessimsists who love the ol' blame game. Who to blame if Obama wins?

I'd like the GOP to keep the White House because only if they do will anything approaching socialism be possible. They are not the boogiemen the Democrats say they are. They are capitalists who at least aren't hypocritical about it.


Posted By: Nowforthetruth (October 9, 2008 at 7:44 PM)

From:  http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/rnc-obama--acorn-fact/story.aspx?guid=%7B29569FA1-136D-4B95-9D51-4EF9E87ED547%7D&dist=hppr

Obama's Campaign Paid Over $800,000 To ACORN For Get-Out-The-Vote Efforts, But "Mistakenly Misrepresented" Their Work To The FEC:

Obama's Campaign "Paid More Than $800,000" To ACORN For Get-Out-The Vote Efforts; The Campaign Originally "Misrepresented" The Group's Work To The FEC. "U.S. Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign paid more than $800,000 to an offshoot of the liberal Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now for services the Democrat's campaign says it mistakenly misrepresented in federal reports. An Obama spokesman said Federal Election Commission reports would be amended to show Citizens Services Inc. -- a subsidiary of ACORN -- worked in 'get-out-the-vote' projects, instead of activities such as polling, advance work and staging major events as stated in FEC finance reports filed during the primary." (David M. Brown, "Obama To Amend Report On $800,000 In Spending," Pittsburgh Tribune Review, 8/22/08)

The link  below describes how some in Congress tried to use the original version of the bailout bill to divert money  eventually recovered  to groups like ACORN, a group Obama has a long association with. See:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122247015469280723.html?mod=googlenews_wsj


Posted By: Nowforthetruth (October 7, 2008 at 5:20 PM)

ACORN Vegas Office Raided in Voter Fraud Investigation

ACORN's Las Vegas headquarters has been raided by Nevada authorities looking for evidence of voter fraud.

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-politics/20081007/Voter.Fraud.Probe/