[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by dontlookdown

Obama will win the general election and for one simple reason:

Hillary Clinton has not been able to get a big enough chunk of the independent vote.
Independents have come out in lop-sided margins for Barack Obama - and that is why he will be elected in November with some surprising new swing states in play. Watch Colorado, Virginia, Oregon, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Missouri, Michigan, and possibly Indiana.

I think it's hard to quantify exactly how much the Independents will factor into this. If the past is any indication, based upon the votes that Nader has gotten previously, they are perhaps 5-10% of the electorate . I think it's hasty to assume that they will all go Obama's way since McCain, in all is bearing-losing flip-floppery, is actively trying to distance himself from Bush and trying to take more moderate positions on the economy and the environment. Meanwhile, Obama may be perceived as being too liberal and inexperienced next to McCain. It's anyone's guess how they will factor in, but in my opinion, I think they may be split evenly between Obama and McCain.

His support has been broad - not unlike that of Reagan's when he was running for his first term.

You've got to be joking! It's that very demographic, the so-called "Reagan Democrats," that are coming out strongly for Hillary and shunning Obama.

The yellow pants suit express may have the poor/white/uneducated vote locked up, but elections aren't won with that bloc for Democrats.

You can also add to that the elderly, the Latinos, white women and Catholics. I would dare say that since she is perceived as being more right leaning than Obama, she may appeal to moderate Republicans who are just sick of Bush policies.

They are won by educated urban people in big cities along with swing voters.

What is a "swing voter?" If you are referring to swing states, current polls indicate that he is losing these states to McCain. Also, I disagree- the majority of adults in this country are not college educated, and the majority of people live in small towns and suburbs. Take a state like New Jersey. Not a single big city, yet it's one of the most densely populated and populous states in the country.

All of the Appalachian states that Hillary is priding herself in winning will go to McCain anyway.

West Virginia is actually favoring Hillary at the moment, and went blue for Bill Clinton for both of his terms. However, they were red in 2000 and 2004. Kentucky is a potential upset for Clinton.

Educated Americans make the world go 'round. I find it pathetic to think that such a smart candidate like Clinton would alienate them from "day one".

In what way has she specifically alienated educated Americans? Because she is showing pathos for working/lower middle class people? I guess you could say the same thing about John Edwards, whose entire raison d'etre is about abolishing poverty in the U.S.

Given her background and education, it's hilarious to watch her call Obama elitist. He's worked his ass off and became the editor of the Harvard Law Review - credentials that are not unlike her own.

I think his comments about guns speaks volumes about his disdain for bigoted white hicks. I'm not saying what he is saying is untrue, but it does come across as being decidedly self-superior. Obama says it all without Hillary having to say a word.

You will also find, my fine fellow political historians; that most of our presidents who we think of as "great"
did not go into office with what you define as experience. Often the most "experienced" first termers have ended up miserable failures.

And there are also numerous inexperienced presidents who were horrendous. Carter? Grant?

I'm sure Lindsey Buckingham voted for Obama - but not so sure about Stevie.

I'll bet he is a registered Republican! Stevie was probably too busy performing on Super Tuesday (seriously!), but I am sure Stevie would have voted Hillary. I am sure the fact that she has been invited by the Clintons to perform on multiple occasions has something to do with that.