After Pennsylvania, Hillary Clinton insists only she is electable. FLYP runs the numbers that show how Barack Obama can beat John McCain in November.

After 15 months of campaigning, Hillary Clinton’s argument for the Democratic nomination comes down to insisting that Barack Obama can’t beat John McCain in November.
However, a state-by-state analysis of the latest poll results shows that either Democrat would beat McCain in the Electoral College by a margin of at least
35 votes.
If the only reason for superdelegates to overthrow Obama’s lead in pledged delegates is concern that he would be a weak candidate in November, then Obama is on track to be the Democratic candidate—and probably the next president.
Clinton argues that her wins in big states like Pennsylvania (with a 10 percent lead), California (8 percent) and New Jersey (10 percent) mean she will do better than Obama when the Electoral College votes—not the popular vote—matter. As George Bush’s win over Al Gore in 2000 reminded the country, big states get more votes than small ones, and it is possible to lose the popular vote and still win
the presidency.
Watch the political guru and leading Democratic pollster Doug Schoen as he analyzes the future of the race.Speaking on the morning of the Pennsylvania primary before her win, Clinton summarized her case to the LA Times: “What does that say about his ability to win the big states that a Democrat has to win in order to win the White House?”
There are two flaws with this.
First, McCain has virtually no chance to win the big blue states on the East and West Coasts. Both Democrats lead him by more than 5 percent in recent polls in California, New York and Pennsylvania—and by even larger margins among some of the voting groups McCain would need to break the longstanding Democratic advantage.
In California, for example, the McCain campaign has argued that the Republican could attract enough Hispanics to give him an underdog victory. Unfortunately for the argument, recent polls show Obama leading McCain among registered Hispanic voters by 62 to 33 percent.
Second, despite all the drama of the campaign so far, the endgame of this year’s presidential election is likely to be played out against a broadly stable electoral background.
All the political polling suggests that more than four-fifths of states are likely to vote the same way they did in 2004, with the Democratic candidate running well in the Northeast, industrial Midwest, California and the Pacific Northwest.
A Democrat probably can’t win in the Deep South—even Obama who will produce a high black turnout—and a Republican can’t lose in the Plains states.
However, Clinton’s candidacy would put a few more states in play. Because of her appeal to so-called Reagan Democrats—evident once again in Pennsylvania—she could win Florida, Ohio, West Virginia and Missouri.
But these gains would be partially offset by losses in Michigan and Wisconsin, where McCain’s appeal to independents might mean he would carry those states.
Obama seems likely to do a better job of holding almost all the states won by John Kerry in 2004, and win enough new ones to gain the White House. His appeal to the youth, blacks, liberals and higher-income voters could swing Colorado, North Carolina, Iowa and Nevada into the Democrat column.
All in all, the projected Electoral College outcome looks to be remarkably similar for either Democrat. Clinton might win 289 Electoral College votes (out of a total 538) and Obama could secure 284.
In short, paint the White House blue, cue “Hail to the Chief” and forget the arguments about electability.
Discover our exclusive interactive map of how the Electoral College might vote come November, in both Clinton vs. McCain and Obama vs. McCain contests.