Politico is a right wing rag. It repeats right wing talking points. It does seem to drive much of the mainstream media. Jonathan Martin is not the most rabid right winger there, but he does commit the same folly that many of his colleagues commit: he confuses being fair with adopting a neutral position in the middle of the policies proffered by the two parties.
More below the squiggle:
He does thishere with regard to race relations, President Obama, and the Republican Party.
Ever since his national debut at the 2004 Democratic convention, Barack Obama’s calling card has been that he practices consensus-oriented politics that transcend traditional divisions. But four years after his historic presidential election, the country he sought to bring together is even more divided than when he launched his candidacy. And no place is more polarized than the South.
Any hope that the nation’s first black president would usher in a period of reconciliation in the old Confederacy has crashed on the rocks of a harsh reality: African-Americans overwhelmingly support him and whites make up much of the opposition. Far from being a transformational figure in the South, Obama has instead reinforced the region’s oldest and sturdiest divide.
The primary reason why most white men do not support the President is racism.
How can the President be faulted in race relations ? To the dismay of many, President Obama sought to find middle ground and compromise with the Republicans repeatedly. He found that their idea of compromise was to get him to agree to their positions. And too often, simply to avoid catastrophe and to get something passed, he acceded to their views, giving them most of what they wanted and getting little in return, certainly little of what he got was supported primarily by Democrats.
However, it gets worse. This, to me, hints of intellectual laziness :
He asserts the following :
The South, like the rest of the country, is a complicated place. It’s at once the heart of the Obama resistance but also a region that is crucial to his reelection hopes. If he loses Florida, North Carolina and Virginia, it’s a virtual certainty that he’ll be a one-term president. Look for no further explanation as to why the Democratic convention is being held in Charlotte, the prototypical New South city, than the importance of North Carolina to the Obama White House.
Huh ? What ? Can the man not even add ?
Direct evidence to support the claim would be to simply add up the electoral votes of other plausible states for President Obama.
He can't do that. So, he reasons thusly :
A: President Obama wants to win reelection
B: He is having the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte North Carolina
Ergo :
C: President Obama cannot win without Florida, North Carolina, or Virginia.
What a poor example of reasoning. And it turns out to be completely false.
www.270towin.com
Nevada has 6 Electoral Votes
New Mexico has 5 Electoral Votes
Colorado has 9 Electoral Votes
Iowa has 6 Electoral Votes
Ohio has 18 Electoral Votes
Pennsylvania has 20 Electoral Votes
If President Obama wins the Kerry states and the states above, he wins 290 Electoral Votes.
Thus, President Obama could lose Ohio, win the others except NC, VA, and FL and still win reelection.
Or President Obama could lose Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado, win PA, and OH, lose NC, VA, and FL and still win reelection.
In other words, there are many realistic and probable paths to 270 without winning VA, NC, and FL.
At this point, I believe that we will win Florida, Nevada, New Mexico, Iowa, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Colorado, and Virginia. We are favorites in all of them, although not huge favorites in Florida. And we do not need to win all of them. So, even without VA, NC, and FL, President Obama would be likely to win reelection.