That map was a bunch of crap!
What was the Obama map on June 5?
This:
McCain wins, 286-252.
It was crap only to the extent that it underestimated Barack Obama as a campaigner ...
It was crap for the fact that no one with real experience of looking at the nature of given presidential elections truly believed the Republicans were going to survive with their bid [John McCain or anyone else nominated] to hold the White House after two terms of George W. Bush.
The 43rd president's party lost both houses of Congress in his Year #06 (the first since a 1918 Woodrow Wilson, whose party lost the White House in 1920), had an aggregated polls' showing of job-approval percentage number which never shot over 40 percent after 2006 (and was frequently in the upper-20s).
It was insulting for there to still be these never-dying proclaims that a state like Michigan—which, like a host of others that carry same-party outcomes as Michigan, left the Republicans after the 1980s (it boasted margins in 1984, 1988, and percentages received by the three candidates in 1992 very close to national results—hence its overblown "swing state" label by outdated media estimates)—was persuadable to flip Republican in a year where
that party had the White House and a wave election moving overwhelmingly against them. (
Detroit Free Press or
Detroit News ran some b.s. thing by Todd Spangler about McCain contesting Michigan because the state was 3.42 percent for John Kerry in 2004.
No problem! Never mind the mathematics and context of what it meant for Michigan to have carried by 3.42 on the losing Democratic side and that losing Democrat having been defeated in the popular vote by 2.46 percent. The article talked up McCain's
potential to
win over Michigan in 2008.)
Anything presented, during the 2008 presidential election year, showing a Democrat failing to hold a John Kerry-carried state (part of the "Blue Firewall"), was absolute b.s. That's why I said it was crap.
