Election 2016: Keith Ellison: ‘I would love to see Elizabeth Warren’ run
**Posted by Phineas
Normally I’d call whoever said that crazy, but it is Karl Rove, after all:
A lot of the political analysis you hear from partisans is predictable. But sometimes they surprise.
That was the case when Karl Rove spoke at a Politico breakfast event in Tampa this morning. Two examples:
(1) When asked what state, now that Wisconsin and Michigan seem to be in play, would emerge next on the target list, he cited Oregon. He noted correctly that the state House is ied 30-30, Republicans almost captured the governorship in 2010 and tha[t] there’s a left wing constituency disappointed in Obama. He surely remembers that in 2000 Ralph Nader won 5.04% in Oregon and tha[t] Al Gore carried it by only 46.92% to 46.52%.
To be honest, I’d expect Oregon to flip about the same time as California, which would also be when the sun goes out. But, much as I thought of the possibility of Obama losing Illinois, the fact that these questions are being raised at all indicates the depth of the problem Obama faces in his reelection race: he may have to spend a lot of money defending what should be his core states, rather than in the battlefield states where Romney is genuinely competitive. Given that Obama is already having trouble raising enough money to keep up with Romney, spreading what cash he has more thinly could cause a real problem come election day. While I’d love to see a “Red” breakout on the West Coast, I’ll settle for making Team Obama scramble to patch a leaky dam.
Read the rest; there are some interesting observations about the Hispanic vote, too.
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)