McCain Could Win More Electoral Votes But Lose Popular Vote

The Politico examines the possibility of Sen. John McCain winning the presidency while not winning the popular vote.

Here's the scenario: "Obama racks up huge margins among the increasingly affluent, highly educated and liberal coastal states, while a significant increase in turnout among black voters allows him to compete -- but not to win -- in the South. Meanwhile, McCain wins solidly Republican states such Texas and Georgia by significantly smaller margins than Bush's in 2004 and ekes out narrow victories in places such as North Carolina, which Bush won by 12 points but Rasmussen presently shows as a tossup, and Indiana, which Bush won by 21 points but McCain presently leads by just 11. "

Here's the result: "Even as the national mood moves left, the 2004 map largely holds. Obama's 32 new electoral votes from Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado and Virginia are offset by 21 new electoral votes for McCain in Michigan and New Hampshire -- and despite a 2- or 3-point popular vote victory for Obama, America wakes up on Jan. 20 to a President McCain."

However, TNR says this scenario is very unlikely to happen.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/06/19/mccain_could_win_more_electoral_votes_but_lose_popular_vote.html

McCain winning Michigan? In what universe?

McCain could just lose. Period.

Not just unlikely, but very unlikely to happen. How much time could we spend, and waste, on things that are very unlikely to happen?

and become president. i would fully expect he'd have to do it without winning the popular vote.
also while i don't think mccain can win michigan, i don't think obama can win nevada and imo new mexico and colorada are going to be close.

He will win NM with Richardson's influence. I believe these things because the demographics are different and this isn't like the Elections of 1992, 1996, 2000, or 2004. We cannot compare because there are so many major factors playing out here that weren't apparent before.

McSame has a lot of problems, exascerbated by the fact that he cannot raise enough money.

We work hard and get the vote out, we win. It's as simple as that.

This entire scenario is bullshit.

and he's ahead in NH too. Michigan was close in both 2000 and 2004 why would it be any different this year? Obama will win.

Black people don't all live in the South. An increase in black turnout will carry MI.

Plus, isn't New Hampshire a highly educated coastal state such as the article says Obama will win? Then why would you think McCain has an advantage there?

That being said I think the chances of McSame winning Michigan are doubtful...

whose a fucking Republican...Rasmussen probably has Obama barely winning in California & New York....Obama will win those 2 states by 15% or >...

has actually been pretty darn good over the years. Pretty much everyone is either a democrat or Republican. That's no reason to automatically disavow their polling- particularly when history shows they've been accurate.

JMHO

Obama winning California and New York by 15-20% each.

Apparently they have weaseled their way right into the so-called MSM, and are now being legitimized as a factual site..just like how Joe Scarborough has been repackaged as a "fair & balanced" bi-partisan "newsman":puke:

Can you site some examples of Politico fabricating material?

Newsmax isn't a "factual" site, Politico just is dumb sometimes.

Politico is just a right-wing propaganda site.

"could" is not making much of a bold statement.

Of course he could. Al Gore did it in 2000, and we are all well aware that its always a possibility to win the popular vote and lose the election.

Where does this place on the BS meter, folks?

Plus of course the far West.

And maybe Virginia. North Carolina is a longshot.

Tiny chance that Barr could Nader him in Georgia, but most likely not.

The South is lost, but he'll win the election.

It may be biased toward Democrats.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

Florida is not on my confidence list.