Karl Rove’s New Math

From ABC NewsJake Tapper:

Electoral maps put together by the consulting firm helmed by Karl Rove, and obtained by ABC News, show Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, to be a stronger general election candidate in a hypothetical general election match-up against Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., than Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois.

Karl Rove & Co.’s maps show McCain leading Obama by 238 electoral votes to 221. Connecticut, Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, and Virginia (with a total of 79 electoral votes) are toss-ups (within a margin of error of +/- 3 points).

Clinton leads McCain by 259 electoral votes to 206; Connecticut, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, and New Mexico (with a total of 73 electoral votes) are toss-ups.

Just for fun — and especially in view of Rove’s well-earned reputation for peddling delusional math — I compared Rove’s math with that of SurveyUSA, who came out with a similar analysis (based on a state-by-state horse-race) in the first week of March.

SurveyUSA had Obama beating McCain 280-258 and Hillary beating McCain 276-262. Rove’s first-week-of-March results show Obama beating McCain 252-216 (with 70 toss-up votes) and Hillary getting trounced by McCain 172-282 (with 84 toss-up votes).

The Obama results can be said to be similar; the Clinton results are poles apart. But Karl Rove is now a respectable journalist. He has no incentive to do anything other than present an objective analysis. His numbers must be fair and balanced.

Hillary Clinton has certainly rushed to embrace this new, objective incarnation of Karl Rove. She has been straining to claim she leads Obama by some metric. The best she has been able to come up with (the only thing, actually) is the claim that she leads in the popular vote—if you squint just so, and count the votes from the mock elections in Michigan and Florida that so many voters didn’t bother to vote in because everyone (including our Hillary) had unambiguously agreed they shouldn’t and wouldn’t count. This argument of hers doesn’t exactly have much traction outside the circle of die-hard Clinton supporters.

So naturally Hillary loves the Karl Rove & Co. analysis. She’s not only brandishing it already on the campaign trail as proof that she is (or should be) the anointed one, it took her just a few hours to climb on board. Jake Tapper’s post is timestamped 1:48 pm. Clinton was quoting it later the same afternoon. So “rushed to embrace” is exactly right.

Comments

  1. Howard says:

    The math is not the point. The point is that we are going to allow a ridiculous election system, where a candidate can lead the entire United States, and the entire free world, with votes from only 48 states, meaningless caucus wins, and less popular votes than their rival. That’s why, like millions of other democrats, if Obama gets the nomination, I’m voting for McCain!

  2. sarabeth says:

    What part of this do you really not get: when you declare before an election that the results won’t count, the vote counts in that election are meaningless. Because so many people who would have voted if their vote was going to count stayed away.

    And it’s hilarious, isn’t it, how Hillary Clinton cheerfully agreed up front, with no reservations whatsoever, that the FL and MI results shouldn’t count, and then suddenly got religion only when she found herself trailing?

    When she didn’t think it would affect her chances of winning the nomination, it was perfectly okay for the nominee to be based on the votes of only 48 states.

    What Hillary Clinton and her campaign exemplifies at this point is the most pathetic kind of intellectual dishonesty.

  3. john says:

    Hillary knows she lost THE RACE AREADY! even if she wins the rest of the state and Florida she still will be behind OBAMA so WHY DOES SHE STILL WANT TO STAY IN THE RACE? I heard 2 reasons, one she might want a position as the top head honcho in the democratic party or she want to build as much negative against OBAMA , divide the party so when November comes OBAMA loses to McCain and she can look like a hero with the says ” I TOLD YOU SO” What about Michigan she won there too? Really? OBAMA was not even in the ticket, so how can she claimed she won. That’s like me playing golf with TIGER WOOD. He does not show up and I continue playing and say that I won. You will be looking at me like I’m crazy. What about Florida Obama was on the ticket and she won there too? Really? Florida broke the rules so Hillary and Obama didn’t campaign in Florida. That’s like The Lakers playing against Miami for the finals, the game is tide 100 to 100 in the 4th quarter with 10second to go and Miami do something that break the rules so the referee charge Miami with a technical stop the game but The Lakers continue playing and score and then say that they won the final. SUPERDELAGATES UNLESS YOU WANT THE REPUBLICAN AND MCCAIN TO WIN IN NOVEMBER HURRY PICK THE WINNER “OBAMA” MOST DELEGATES, MOST STATES, AND POPULAR VOTES BEFORE IS TOO LATE. The hardcore republicans is not going to change their mind they will vote for Gaddafi if he was running as a republican but the young people, independent and young republican will vote for OBAMA. What about white working class, I know Obama raised more than 100 MILLIONS! IN 4 MONTHS AND YOU KNOW ALL THAT MONEY DIDN’T COME FROM AFRICAN AMERICAN ONLY. COME ON LETS WIN TOGETHER BEFORE IS TOO LATE!!!!!!!!!!!!

  4. Greg says:

    First of all, that SUSA map is very old, before Wright, Ayers, Bittergate, etc.

    If you wanted to see a current map, visit http://electoral-vote.com

    Unlike the SUSA map, this one averages the major polls (kinda like Rove).

    She is winning vs. McCain 284-237, and Obama is losing to McCain 242-285.

    I guess Rove does know what he is talking about, if Obama is the nominee then it will be President McCain, guaranteed.

    Obama has offended too many Americans, and doesn’t even try to get their support (West Virginia and Kentucky).

    Clinton 2012!

  5. sarabeth says:

    I compared the SurveyUSA and Karl Rove maps from the same point in time (the first week of March). How does it matter if that was before “Wright, Ayers, Bittergate, etc”? The fact is that there was a huge difference in the Clinton-McCain results.

    I guess Rove does know what he is talking about, if Obama is the nominee then it will be President McCain, guaranteed.

    Even Rove wasn’t stupid enough to give guarantees.