The president looks set to be able to lose swing states he took in 2008 and still win the necessary electoral votes, writes CHRIS CILLIZZAin Washington
WHEN THEN-SENATOR Barack Obama won the race to the White House in 2008, it was widely regarded as a landslide victory over Republican John McCain.
Two years later, though, many analysts and observers have forgotten the breadth of Obama’s victory in the wake of the devastating and across-the-board (not to mention down-the-ballot) losses which the Democratic Party suffered in the 2010 midterms.
And yet, a detailed examination of the national map heading into 2012 suggests the president still sits in a strong position for re-election – able to lose half a dozen (or more) swing states he carried in 2008 and still win the 270 electoral votes he needs for a second term.
To understand the relative strength of Obama’s upper hand, let’s compare his electoral performance in 2008 with that of his two most recent Democratic predecessors.
In 2008, Obama carried 28 states and the District of Columbia. John Kerry won just 19 states plus the district in 2004, and Al Gore carried 20 (and DC) in 2000.
Obama’s 365 electoral votes in 2008 were 114 more than Kerry won and 99 more than Gore received. The total marked the highest number for a Democrat since Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election, when he won 379. Clinton took 370 electoral votes in his 1992 defeat of President George HW Bush.
Before that, the last Democrat to garner more electoral votes was President Lyndon B Johnson, who claimed 486 in 1964.
Such a large margin gives Obama significant room for error – or loss – as he and his team begin plotting the path to 270 electoral votes in 2012.
Take Florida and Ohio, for example. Florida was the hub of the 2000 contest, while Ohio was the definitive swing state of the 2004 race.
Let’s assume Obama loses them both – plausible, if not certain, given where he stands in polls in each state.
If he managed to hold the 26 other states he won in 2008, Obama would be re-elected with 318 electoral votes – 32 more than George W Bush won when he was re-elected in 2004, and 47 more than he won in 2000.
Of course, given Obama’s slippage in traditional Republican redoubts at the presidential level, it’s hard to imagine he would hold together the rest of his state-by-state coalition if he lost those two states.
So let’s add Indiana (11 electoral votes), North Carolina (15) and Virginia (13) to his potential 2012 losses. (He was the first Democratic presidential nominee to carry Indiana and Virginia since 1964 and the first one to win North Carolina since 1976.)
Take those five states from Obama and give him the 23 others he won in 2008 and he will be re-elected with 279 electoral votes.
Throw Nevada – a true swing state at the presidential level – into the Republican nominee’s category, and Obama will still win, with 273 votes.
(If Obama manages to win Ohio or Florida – while not losing Pennsylvania or Michigan – he also could lose considerably more states with smaller populations.)
Couple Obama’s advantages in the electoral college, his bump in popularity of late and the continued uncertainty regarding the Republican field, and there is reason for optimism coming from the White House.
Of course, a still-struggling economy could be the great equaliser, but Obama’s built-in edge won’t be easy for any Republican nominee to overcome.