Over at Equitable Growth: Lunchtime Must-Read: Mohamed El-Erian: US Midterm Elections Offer Limited Prospect for Economic Change
Lunchtime Must-Read: Roger Farmer: NAIRU Theory--Closer to Religion than Science

Bloomberg Politics: Dead on Arrival or Just in Intensive Care?: Mark Helperin: Clinically Insane, or Phoning-It-in Con Man?: Live from the Roasterie...

As Nation and Parties Change Republicans Are at an Electoral College Disadvantage NYTimes comMark Halperin: The Truth About Jeb Bush's Presidential Ambitions: "Finally, the most macro significant question...

...for any Republican putting him or herself forward to beat Clinton is this: what states can you win that Romney lost?  For [Jeb] Bush, the easy answer includes Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and Virginia. If he runs a strong campaign, Bush could perhaps compete in California and possibly New Jersey and Michigan.

In response to this:

  1. Is there a reason why Mark Halperin thinks that Jeb Bush could not take Pennsylvania? Or is Halperin just a bullshit artist who couldn't be bothered to consult his notes? Any Republican who runs strong against a Democrat will in all likelihood win Florida and Ohio, and make Virginia, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and Wisconsin competitive. How--aside from this omission of Pennsylvania--is this list of additional states that Jeb Bush could win different from the list of states that any Republican nominee could win if things broke their way?

  2. California? A Republican who takes California in all likelihood has 474 electoral votes. If you are going to claim that Jeb Bush could compete in California, why not claim Massachusetts, Delaware, and Maryland as well? If you are going to claim that Jeb Bush could compete in New Jersey, why not claim Connecticut and Illinois too? And why Michigan rather than Minnesota and New Mexico?

  3. Bloomberg Politics has managed a remarkable launch: a day-one declaration of analytical and intellectual bankruptcy...