Hillary only 227 electoral college votes despite winning more votes than President Obama did in 2012. Granted that was four years earlier and there should, in theory, be more voters each new cycle, but that may be a surprising fact for some. Electability (who is most likely to defeat Donald Trump) is according to a plurality of Democratic primary voters, the most important criteria that we are using to determine our candidate. On Daily Kos, perhaps at least as many voters care about progressive policies as electability. Electability, at this point, seems unclear. The guy most people say is most electable has failed miserably his last two attempts at presidential runs, has already overall lost about 16 % since before he announced, and is so weak that he is drawing in new candidates to the race by the day.
Right now, which candidate is most electable is a question without a certain, objective answer. Head to head general election polls against thing are not necessarily reliable this early in the primary. Less well known candidates may do better as the primary goes on because of victories or simply more exposure. Partisans may not want to admit that they will vote for a different Democratic candidate than their personal favorite because they do not want to strengthen the argument for that candidate or because they are not yet forced to fully consider the consequences of failing to vote for our party’s nominee. There is another factor, however. There are numerous ways to get to 270 electoral college votes. One path may be easier for candidate A than any other candidate. Another path may be easier for candidate B. So, we may ask a question for those who are speaking about electability: which path to 270 electoral college votes are you thinking of ?
Most of us are aware of the best website to examine this question. Hillary Clinton, again, won 227 electoral college votes. We shall view her as our minimum and her states are ones that we should win again. We know that we will have to work to retain them and not assume them, but if we are to get to 270 electoral college votes, then we in all probability will have to win these same states. Importantly, they include Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, and Virginia. We lost by a misplaced 80,000 votes needed correctly spread across three states: Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.
Let us add in Wisconsin and Michigan. Since we lost these states by less than we lost any other states, then they should presumably be the easiest to win back. Furthermore, their history suggests that they are ones that typically a Democratic candidate should be able to win. Let us all suppose that we win all of Maine’s electoral college votes. We are at 259 electoral college votes.
This means that we only need 11 electoral college votes. Any state or combination of states that gets us 11 electoral college votes gets us to 270 electoral college votes.
Arizona 11 electoral college votes — perhaps called the How the West wins .
Pennsylvania 20 electoral college votes — Rebuilding the Blue Wall
North Carolina 15 electoral college votes -— The East is the Beast
Georgia 16 electoral college votes — The South Rises
Ohio 18 electoral college votes — Tradition or The Rust Belt
Florida 29 electoral college votes — Sunshine is here again
The argument for Biden and Buttigieg seems to be that they can win the rust belt states — so this would mean Ohio and/or Pennsylvania and maybe Michigan. Probably, Biden would be stronger in Pennsylvania. Biden might be able to make an argument for North Carolina and Georgia with his ties with the African American community. Senator Klobuchar seems like she stronger in the Upper Midwest that we already included — Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin. She also may have a natural home court advantage in Iowa. Beyond that, it is unclear how she would have an advantage over other candidates in the other states listed above. I am not sure where Senator Sanders would be stronger than other candidates . Senator Harris seems to have pulled out of New Hampshire which disappoints me because I am concerned that she is contemplating dropping out when outside of this whole electability thing, she has been my first or second candidate since day one (mostly she has been my first choice). However, let us hope that she improves and does well in South Carolina, then she would be strong in North Carolina and Georgia. It is not immediately obvious where Senator Warren would be strongest. She has been gaining support for communities of color. Secretary Castro seems to be overshadowed by the number of strong candidates. However, he would seem to be strong in Arizona and Florida among other states. Senator Booker seems to be struggling in the polls. Perhaps North Carolina and Georgia would be strong states for him, but Pennsylvania might be a good state for him as well. Rep Gabbard might connect the most in Pennsylvania with her strong emphasis upon her faith. Andrew Yang might do best among the rust belt states because of his universal basic income.
The relatively good news is that if we can simply win back WI and MI and get all of Maine’s electoral college votes, then we are at 259 . So, if we win any of the other states, then we get past 270 electoral college votes. There are six plausible states that we have a realistic chance of winning that get us to 270 electoral college votes. We still have to actually win MI and WI and that last vote out of Maine, but we were really close in those two states.
I do want to point out that head to head general election polls against Thing are not necessarily completely reliable this early in the primary. Any argument that is really dependent upon those polls at this point in time is not necessarily a strong one. Furthermore, there are other ways of looking at who is most electable. We want the candidate who will most strongly excite the base since their voters are going to, in the end, always go home to their candidate. If a candidate ran for president previously, how did they do ? Is the candidate losing his train of thought often ? Is s/he a good campaigner or speaker or explainer ? Is s/he good at retail politics ? Do they appear like they are in the kind of shape that they would need to be in order to successfully serve out two terms ? This is a brutal job and if endurance favors females, that cannot be simply be ignored. Just sayin’