Obama Still Safe in California

Safe in California? (1.00 / 1)

Not the dumbest article ever written, but the dumbest thing I've read today!

What is your point?

Obama CANNOT win relection without California.

It is electorally impossible.

No scenario exists for a Democrat to win the presidency without California.

Having said that, what is the point here?

Obama will get between 52-54% in a two-person race and 47-49% in a three-way race. Either way he sweeps all the electoral votes.

If Obama loses California, that means he'll have won Hawaii and DC and that's about that.

---

by: Demsanddonts @ Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 21:53:47 PM UTC

Find some joy... (1.00 / 1)

Demsanddonts has been particularly ornery recently.  Whether you are working, or collecting a check, do you really want to call out the site's owner for the "stupidest thing I've read today"?  

Obama has certainly disappointed several constituancies here in California- no comprehensive immigration reform, slow to kill DADT, continuation of Bush tax cuts, very little to show for Education and Arne Duncan, etc.  But the Repubs have nuttin' honey.  Obama will carry California but it unfortunately may be because the opposition will be seen as worse.  Obama was so strong in 2008 because he could say "I'm not Bush" and people genuinely were sick of Bush.  Much harder to run on your own record.... as Obama must do now.

My call is BHO loses to Romney or Cain, but beats all others (in the electoral college) [although I do not see a path for Cain to get the nomination].

Have a cup of tea and be nicer to Brian... he's earned that.

---

by: nomorewebvan @ Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 07:19:54 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Disappointment ? (1.00 / 1)

To say Obama is a disappointment is an understatement

Obama is an 'empty suit'
A COMPLETELY INCOMPETENT SELF PROMOTER
By next February at the latest, he'll have reached an 'Historic Compromise' of 'Bi-Partisan Leadership' and
EXTEND BUSH'S TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH

Wait for it

That said, Gingrich, Perry, Cain or Romney as President would be a CATASTROPHE of BIBLICAL PROPORTIONS

A choice between CANCER or POLIO ??
Choose your POISON

---

by: frisco @ Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 16:14:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

My apologies (0.00 / 0)

In the spirit of Christmas I will tone down my remarks. But it's hard to gather why such a post about Obama's chances is even relevant to any political discussion.

Yes, even the owner of said site says some things that are in fact stupid.

Doesn't make him stupid, as I've lodged my foot in my mouth too many times to remember.

---

by: Demsanddonts @ Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 21:30:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Did you read it? Try reading beyond the headline... (0.00 / 0)

I think?

---

by: Brian Leubitz @ Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 16:47:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I did. (1.00 / 1)

It was a stupid post.

---

by: Demsanddonts @ Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 21:32:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No, it definitely was not. (5.00 / 1)

But your response was way over the top.

The only factual presentation was the result of new poll.  Newsworthy.  The only opinion offered was the author's thoughts on the likelihood of an enthusiasm gap.  You implied everything else.

You can remove the stick at your convenience.

---

by: nslander @ Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 21:53:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Obama California (4.00 / 1)

Polling in California for a Presidential race is unnecessary. If the race is close enough in California to make polling remotely interesting, the Republican is going to win.

What is interesting is how many resources will be exported from California in the form of money and volunteers on phone banks identifying Obama supporters throughout the country.  I have no idea how you measure that, but it isn't through a poll.

Obviously 2012 will be a different campaign than 2008.  I think there will be far fewer volunteers, much more paid staff and paid advertising and fewer inspirational rallies.

As I watch the clown show called the Republican Primary, I realize that one of them will be running against Obama. They are all so horribly flawed that Republicans will long for the days of the strength and power of the McCain campaign.

---

by: smoker1 @ Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 06:29:32 AM UTC

It depends on the nature of the question (0.00 / 0)

A two dimensional question (such as "Whom do you support?  How intense is your support?") when compared to December 3, 2007 might be of value to estimate the likely flow of money and volunteers from California.

And, regardless of whether or not the small contributors return, the size of the ground game on election day itself still matters, and the enthusiasm gap may make a difference there, particularly if the Obama Campaign is going to rely on California supports to assist with turnout in Nevada and Arizona.

---

by: CaliforniaCondor @ Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 17:05:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

the new maps may draw more in-state support (5.00 / 1)

than in 2008 as well. to say nothing of if a couple of major initiatives get on the ballot. which is, IMO, a Good Thing. california has not benefitted on the whole from being the rest of the country's fundraising colony.

---

by: wu ming @ Sun Dec 04, 2011 at 20:39:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]