Obama/Siegelman

[Brittain33]

How about Phil Bredesen? He's had 17 years in public service, is from a weak region for Obama, and is a moderate governor that could balance out Obama being a Senator.

Now that's an excellent pick.

Yeah, as excellent as McCain/Morella or McCain/Chafee...

[Brittain33]

Hey, it's your party that suffers the most from being regarded as too extreme. We don't need a liberal on the ticket to win as much as you guys need a conservative.

It's not 2004 any more. The longer it takes you guys to figure that out, the more time we'll have in power.

[Brittain33]

I hate to tell you this but the ideological battles don't cease to exist because the President is unpopular or because the GOP lost Congress.

Yes, yes, you're absolutely right. It's still red vs. blue and southern conservatives have the upper hand. Couldn't agree more.

[Brittain33]

Hate to break it to you but Kansas, Missouri, North Carolina, Montana, etc. aren't "purple" states just because the Obama fanatics say they are.

Missouri? Solid Republican? Really?

Anyway, I agree with you on the rest, and the fun part is, we can lose each of those states and every state like it and still get 320 EVs. The 2004 mentality is thinking that North Carolina, Wyoming, Utah, etc. are somehow definitive of the mainstream.

[Brittain33]

No, you can't.

Yes, you can.

Go take a look at the 1992 and 1996 electoral maps.

Kerry states plus Florida, Colorado, Missouri, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, and Iowa is 334. With Virginia and West Virginia, it's 352. You may well feel that he won't win all or any of those states but "solid red" they ain't. Look at the last four elections. People think Florida is safe Republican when it's voted Democratic in two of the last three Presidential elections, and is in a full-fledged recession.

We just had a long debate on another thread where Missouri, Florida, and Ohio were functionally equivalent to Utah and Mississippi for Obama's electoral possibilities and if you think so we'll just have to agree to disagree.