As Mr. Kleiman is a smart (but unpleasant) fellow, I can't imagine that he believes the BS that he's peddling here.
I looked up the matter concerning the unconstitutionality of the Michigan vote
, as I wasn't aware of it, but it had absolutely nothing to do with any disadvantage to Barack Obama. Rather minor parties complained that only Democrats and Republicans got voter lists. Furthermore, it seems that Obama's advantage comes from caucuses and allocation rules that would never pass Constitutional muster were they applied in a general election.
He also can't seriously be arguing that blue collar white voters are not the crucial swing voters. The members of Obama's coalition are not.
While Wisconsin was a close swing state in 2004, are Virginia and Washington "swing states" in the mold of Pennsylvania and Ohio? No.
For 2004, Washington was Bush 1,304,894 or 45.6%, Kerry 1,510,201 or 52.8%, Virginia was Bush 1,716,959 or 53.8%, Kerry 1,454,742 or 45.6%.
Ohio was Bush 2,859,764 or 50.8%, Kerry 2,741,165 or 48.7%, Pennsylvania
Bush 2,793,847 or 48.5%, Kerry 2,938,095 or 51.0%.
Democrats will have to have 130,000 (ca 4% of the total) votes to switch to gain Virginia's 13 electoral votes, where Republicans have to switch only 72,000 or about 1.3% of the total to get Pennsylvania's 21 votes, the state iin which Kerry was born. While it is not inconceivable that either Washington or Virginia (24 electoral votes total) will vote the other way, these states are not in the same "swing state" category as Pennsylvania or Ohio (41 electoral votes total).