Hey! I think I managed to be both sexist AND racist!! :)

Like 2004 this election should be a lead pipe cinch for the Democrats, even more so since Bush is finishing his second term. They may figure out a way to throw the election yet.

Look at the proposed "advantage states".
Clinton advantage states: AR, FL, MO, NH, OH, PA, WV (94 total)

PA (21 EV) was in the dem column in 2000 and 2004 (and presumably starts there for 2008 to stay or be moved as the election unfolds).

NH (4 EV) bounces back and forth by small margins. The state being under total democratic control with the logical consequence of a ballooning state tax and debt is more likely to influence the state than the democratic candidates name,

AR (6EV) is obvious. Arkansas was the only state that actually had a majority who want Bill Clinton to be president in 1992.

MO (11EV) is the bell weather state. If Clinton really has an advantage with this states population, that gives her an advantage in a lot of places.

WV (5EV) is not likely to actually go to a liberal democrat in November. But it is also far from a lock for a republican.

The big prizes are OH (20 EV) and Fl (27 EV). If she could really take those out of the GOP hands (and hold on to PA), then she wins. Its that simple.

So using the 2000/2004 as a base line and assuming these are the states she can really make competitive, she is looking to take 69 EV out of the GOP column, hold 21 EV in the dem column and pull 4 EV that go back and forth to the dems.

Obama advantage states: CO, IA, MN, NV, NM, NC, ND, OR, SC, VA, WA, WI (103 total)

MN (9 EV), OR (7EV), WI (10 EV) and WA (11 EV) are in the dem column for 2000/2004. You can make a case that MN might flip (especially with Pawlenty in the number 2 slot), but OR and WA aren't likely to flip.

CO (9 EV), NV (5 EV), NC (15 EV), ND (3 EV), SC (8 EV) and VA (13 EV) are in the GOP column for 2000/2004. CO and VA have been trending towards the dems and could very well flip.

IA (7EV) and NM (5 EV) have both bounced around in 2000/2004 and could go either way.

So Obama with the same assumptions as above would take 53 EV from the GOP column, 37 EV that are in the dem column and put in play 12 EV that go back and forth to the dems.

So Hillary takes 61 GOP EV vs Obama taking 53 GOP EV. Obama is in smaller packets vs Clinton has 47 EV resting on just two states. Diversify or concentrate. There are advantages to both approaches.

Hillary keeps 21 vs Obama 37 EV in the dem column. But what isn't stated is the colliery. Does Obama put PA (21 EV) in play for the GOP. If he does and the 53 GOP EV split 50-50, then he is a net wash (and likely loses). If on the other hand, Hillary puts the 37 EV in the dem column listed for Obama in play, then if those go 50-50 and she splits Ohio/Florida, then she is about a net wash (and likely loses).

Bottom line is that the GOP is in a better position than the political tea leaves would say they have any right to be, but are still facing an up hill battle.