Florida -- not so darn important

Note to Clinton supporters. Stop extrapolating your experience with Florida in 2000 into the 2008 -- Florida is not a key state this time. Kerry didn't need FL; he needed OH, and anything further would have been sugar on top of the electoral victory. Clinton's map looks a lot like Kerry's, so the situation is the same: She would need, and probably could get, Kerry's states plus OH, and anything else including FL would be superfluous. Obama's map is more flexible, but it also doesn't rely on FL; he wins with the Kerry states plus EITHER Ohio OR a majority of IA, MO, CO, NM, and NV, and anything else is superfluous.

I just noted how FL was not an important state in 2004 and is not in 2008. In addition to that, other than in 2000, FL has not historically been a must-win state for Democrats since the Civil Rights Era except maybe in 1976 for Carter (a conservative southerner with a much much different base of states than either Clinton or Obama).

So Hillary people, stop fretting about FL so much. Whether Obama wins has little to do with whether FL wants to come along for the ride.

Just to be clear, although there is some ill-informed stuff (FL's importance) and downright ludicrous stuff (WV's importance) coming out of the Clinton camp, I do agree that MI, PA, and OH are important states for Obama, though OH is not as important for him as it is for Clinton. Given that Obama is probably slightly weaker than Clinton in those three states and maybe MO and VA, but stronger in WI, IA, CO, NM, and NV, I don't agree that Clinton is clearly the more electable candidate, particularly now that the Wright nonsense has blown over. Nor would I assert that Obama is clearly the more electable candidate. They both have great chances against McCain.