Why 270 is the magic number and Ohio is the magic word

This isn't a post about the electoral college (I assume that all readers get why, in the most literal sense, 270 is the magic number), but since I keep bleating about how overridingly important Ohio -- and this magic 270 number -- are for candidate selection in 2008, I really feel I should draw attention here at SF to the reason that it looms particularly large in my thinking. You must, must must read Where the Votes are: The Electoral Geography of the Coming Democratic Majority, by Todd Estes. I got quite up-close-and-personal with his thesis while writing a criticism of that paper, Electoral tectonics for statisticians: a reply to Todd Estes, but my criticism was focussed purely on what happens after the 2010 census and reapportionment - I didn't, and don't, question Estes' thesis as it applies to 2008, which all of a sudden is a concern that looms large (when I wrote Electoral Tectonics, I assumed - perhaps arrogantly, and probably stupidly - that we had '08 in the bag). Obviously, one can dispute Estes' thesis, but one has to face it.

Post facto:
270 (08/13/07)
McCain at college (2/12/08)