While watching the netcast of Meet The Press this morning, I was made a bit incredulous by the electoral map Chuck Todd trotted out. This Map shows a baseline (of solid states plus leaners) for each candidate of 200 electoral votes. So I went to 270towin.com to make the Todd map and take a good slow look at it.
It struck me as being a bit optimistic for McCain. Iowa is a tossup, but Missouri leans McCain. Pennsylvania is a tossup, but Indiana leans McCain. Here are what Chuck considers to be the pure tossups:
Nevada
Colorado
New Mexico
Iowa
Wisconsin
Michigan
Florida
Ohio
Virginia
Pennsylvania
New Hampshire
Seems a bit optimistic for McCain, right? See below for confirmation of this hunch.
I consulted Poblano (I can't call him Nate). I decided to check Chuck's map against Nate's. According to Nate, Senator Obama has an 83% chance of winning Iowa. No state more likely to be won by either candidate got called a tossup in Chuck's map, so I set that as a standard.
I clicked back over to 270towin and made a new map. A state was given to a candidate if and only if they were more than 83% likely to win that state according to Nate.
Safe States for Obama (>83% chance of winning):
Hawaii
Washington
Oregon
California
Minnesota
Illinois
New York
Maryland
D.C.
Delaware
New Jersey
Connecticut
Vermont
Massachusetts
Rhode Island
Maine
This gives Obama a baseline of exactly 200 electoral votes, and is identical to the baseline Chuck Todd gave him.
Safe States for McCain (>83% chance of winning):
Idaho
Utah
Arizona
Wyoming
South Dakota
Nebraska
Kansas
Oklahoma
Texas
Arkansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Alabama
Tennessee
Kentucky
Georgia
West Viginia
This gives McCain a baseline of.......154 electoral votes. If Iowa - which Nate's combination of weighted polling and demographic analysis and PECOTA and VORP suggests Obama has an 83% chance of winning - is a tossup, then so too are:
Alaska
Montana
North Dakota
Missouri
Indiana
North Carolina
However, each of the above states was called "Lean McCain" by Todd. Now, I happen to agree that the above states lean McCain. But Iowa, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Colorado and New Mexico lean Obama, while New Jersey, Oregon and Washington are solid Obama, not leaners as Chuck labels them.
So a more even-handed map shows a baseline of 200 Obama - 153 McCain, but McCain is being given the benefit of the doubt in a number of states that will be contested in November.
I guess the important question is, is this a good thing? Normally, I would say yes, dampen expectations. In this case, I'm not so sure. If Obama actually is in a good position regarding the electoral map this November - which I think he is - that should lend credence to his run and gravitas to his decisions and actions. If he is the serious favorite, then people are forced to start thinking of him as a president. And that seems like an important first step in getting them to vote for you to become president.
Also, I am curious as to why Chuck Todd - or news folk in general - might be intentionally or subconsciously selling Obama's electoral position short. Is it just for good horse race theater? Is it because states that have been solidly republican for decades are starting to show signs of turning, and the media hasn't caught on yet? Is it because they just love talking about how every year they talk about how this might be the year that New Jersey votes republican, but that it never does? Why?
Finally, what is Chuck's map based on? I never heard him mention it. I'd kinda like to know what the peer anointed "fairest man in maps" bases his conclusions on.
Thoughts?