Originally Posted by joshbaumgartner

To address the OP, I do think it is interesting to watch which states vote for which candidate. I note with interest that 'pocket' states (those in the party's pocket) tended to vote for one candidate while 'lost' states voted for another with it generally Hillary for blue states and Huckabee/Romney for red states, while in lost states it was Obama for red states and McCain for blue states.

Part of this is that loyalists who are behind enemy lines so to speak (republicans in blue states or vice-versa) tend to be very conscious of the idea of needing to get voters to cross party lines, while those in more friendly states are more attuned to promoting ideas favored by the 'base'.

What I think is clear is that Obama has several clear advantages in the general election:

1) The Republican nominee will need to bring the RP back together behind him. The easy first step to doing that will be invoking the name 'Clinton' and Obama denies them this opportunity.

2) Obama does very well amongst independents, and I think he will do better amongst them than even McCain.

3) Obama is not reviled by any significant number of Dems the way several Republicans feel about John, and some independents feel about Hillary.