Electoral Map- 2012

[MystikWizard]

Time to break out the ol' Electoral Map from CNN. It will allow you to play around and select scenarios which will allow either side get to the magic number of 270.

Looking at the map, we seem to really have seen a political shift in favor of the Left in the past few years. I think now that Pennsylvania no longer seems to be considered a swing state, that this has really given the Democrats a tremendous advantage.

Given the Gay Marriage issue and given the Battleground states that are dead even (according to the CNN map as of now, at least)

1) Arizona
2) Colorado
3) Florida
4) Iowa
5) Missouri
6) New Hampshire
7) North Carolina
8) Ohio
9) Virginia

Obama can afford to lose all of these states and can still win:
1) Arizona
2) Florida
3) Missouri
4) North Carolina
5) Ohio
6) Virgina

He can not afford to lose:
1) Iowa
2) New Hampshire
3) Colorado.


On the other hand, if Romney does not win every single one of the previously listed 6 states, then he has lost the election. I do think Romney will win:
1) Arizona
2) Missouri
3) North Carolina
4) Ohio
5) Virginia

But I think Florida will be very questionable for Romney to win. Even if Romney does manage to get all of those states and Florida, he will still have to win either Iowa, New Hampshire, or Colorado.

I definitely think Romney has an uphill battle.

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Obama vs. Romney Create Your Own Electoral College Map

 

[White Eagle]

All I have to do is change Texas to Likely Obama and he gets 291 and Romney 132.

 

[hotatlboi]

I'm curious as to why you think Romney has a better shot at Ohio than Florida when the current polls show Obama with a greater lead in Ohio vs a much tighter race in Florida.

 

[JayHawk]

I was thinking the same thing. With Ohio Florida can easily go to Romney.

 

[hotatlboi]

I definitely think Romney has an uphill battle.

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Obama vs. Romney Create Your Own Electoral College Map

The RCP map puts 115 electoral votes in the tossup category as of now, with Obama needing to win only 17 out of 115 of them to win, and Romney needing to win 100 out of 115. Definitely hard math for Romney unless there is a significant shift in his direction nationally.

 

[Lostlover]

I'm not worrying about any of this. Bush lowered the bar so much in getting reelected, it will take a miracle for the POTUS to lose it.

 

[hotatlboi]

given that Obama's publicly supported gay marriage since 1996, I'm incredulous to think that his recent statements would have a significant impact on the General Election.

Well, that's not really sound logic. He hasn't publicly supported it since 1996. He supported it once then (in a not that public/well known way) and has since publicly opposed it since then until yesterday.

 

[Orlandude]

I was thinking the same thing. With Ohio Florida can easily go to Romney.

Florida is as divided as the nation. Almost cut in half, politically. The Hispanic vote here will sway the election one way or the other, although the elderly vote will have great impact. The retired community are not particularly happy with republicans. Rubio has been a huge disappointment down here, not to mention having a near-criminal republican governor. Florida is also the third largest gay-populated state in the nation. All factors in this election.

 

[JayHawk]

The RCP map puts 115 electoral votes in the tossup category as of now, with Obama needing to win only 17 out of 115 of them to win, and Romney needing to win 100 out of 115. Definitely hard math for Romney unless there is a significant shift in his direction nationally.

that is assuming the conclusions drawn are how the states go... that isnt necessarily true all the time.

I'm not worrying about any of this. Bush lowered the bar so much in getting reelected, it will take a miracle for the POTUS to lose it.

Bush aint running and has zero to do with this election... except supporting civil unions that is... lol

Florida is as divided as the nation. Almost cut in half, politically. The Hispanic vote here will sway the election one way or the other, although the elderly vote will have great impact. The retired community are not particularly happy with republicans. Rubio has been a huge disappointment down here, not to mention having a near-criminal republican governor. Florida is also the third largest gay-populated state in the nation. All factors in this election.

Oh I didnt mean to imply it would necessarily. Just that Obama will likely win Ohio IMHO so then Florida doesnt matter IF you accept the states as listed on the map...

This is all simply mental masturbation with no warm tingly feeling at the end.... you do get a mess though.

 

[CoolBlue71]

Playing Their Hand
Will hard times allow Mitt Romney to breach the Democrats’ formidable “blue wall” in November?

By Ron Brownstein
National Journal | May 10, 2012

@ Playing Their Hand - Ronald Brownstein - NationalJournal.com

In the six presidential elections from 1968 to 1988, Democrats effectively competed for so few states that their own strategists lamented that the party needed to draw an “inside straight” to reach the 270 Electoral College votes required for victory. But since then, the parties have played very different hands.

In that earlier period, Gerald Ford in 1976 was the sole Republican presidential nominee to win fewer than 301 Electoral College votes. Jimmy Carter, who beat Ford, was the only Democratic nominee during those years to win more than 191. Republicans dominated the map so thoroughly that in the three presidential elections of the 1980s, Democrats received a smaller share of the available Electoral College votes than in any three-election sequence since the formation of the modern party system under Andrew Jackson in 1828.

But since 1992, no Democratic nominee has garnered fewer than 251 Electoral College votes; behind Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996 and Barack Obama in 2008, the party captured at least 365. In turn, the ceiling has lowered for Republicans, even in their best years. George W. Bush won 271 and then 286 electoral votes in his 2000 and 2004 victories. The former was the second narrowest Electoral College victory ever; the latter was the smallest share of the available electoral votes won by any reelected president since 1804, except Woodrow Wilson.

1968 was the beginning of a realignment for presidential elections when Republicans won 7 of the 10: 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, and 2004. (Woodrow Wilson was the only elected Democrat during the Republicans' previous presidential realignment of 1896 to 1932, with the GOP having won 7 of 9.)

The first Democratic winner during this period, Jimmy Carter, prevailed mostly the way his party used to: through the south. The ex-Georgia governor carried every state of the Old Confederacy except Virginia. (He also missed Oklahoma.)

The second Democratic winner, Bill Clinton, began the realignment. Every state in his column combined for 1992 and 1996—there were 34 individuals—also carried for the only winning Republican from the previous realignment. From 1932 to 1964, Democrats won 7 of 9 presidential elections: 1932, 1936, 1940, 1944, 1948, 1960, and 1964. The sole elected Republican, Dwight Eisenhower, won more states than Clinton; but the point is that he too won the same states carried by Clinton. Well, except for two: Georgia and Clinton's home state of Arkansas.


Point is that the map has realigned.

Democrats used to have their base states in the south and Republicans had theirs in the north. (Franklin Roosevelt, beginning a presidential realignment for the Dems in 1932, flipped my home state of Michigan by 7.92%; compared to winning nationally, while unseating Herbert Hoover, by a margin of 17.76%.) Now, Republicans' base states are in the south and Democrats' base states are in the north. (Barack Obama, possibly beginning a presidential realignment for the Dems with 2008, carried my home state of Michigan by 16.44%; compared to his national margin, over John McCain, of 7.26%.) For the current GOP to get a state—here or there—in the north…they are going to have win nationally by a substantial margin strong enough to pull in select states which are no longer naturally their base. And after George Bush Sr.'s 1988 election, when he beat Michael Dukakis by 7.73%, the strongest margin the GOP mustered was when George Bush Jr. got a second term, with 2004, fending off challenger John Kerry by a historically low 2.46%.

 

[CoolBlue71]

1968 was the beginning of a realignment for presidential elections when Republicans won 7 of 10: 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, and 2004. (Woodrow Wilson was the only elected Democrat during the Republicans' previous presidential realignment of 1896 to 1928, with the GOP having won 7 of 9.)

^ Correction/clarity

 

[MystikWizard]

Forgive my ignorance on a couple things I stated above, as that was based simply on instinct without looking at recent polling or being aware of the extent of same sex marriage opposition in Florida. I knew it was a factor in Ohio, but I was not aware of the ban on both Same Sex Marriage and even Civil Unions in Florida in 2008. Not sure where I was or if it was just a lapse in memory. I thought Florida was becoming more progressive and that the Seniors were being drowned out ... but at the same time we obviously have some very staunch Social Conservative Hispanics who are there to carry on the traditions.

Virginia is definitely in play. I see Obama is up 3 points at the moment. But if he gets either Ohio or Virginia, then it's game over for Romney.

This election may not be so bad, after all ... even with the Same Sex Marriage issue.

I think the strategy should be to maintain a presence and ensure he does not lose:

Iowa
Colorado
New Hampshire

And then focus on Ohio, Virginia, and Florida.

If he can take one of those three states, then Romney is done.

 

[Kulindahr]

I get Obama 295, Romney 214 -- with 29 from Florida left out because I can't make up my mind.

Though assuming the effects of Obama's gay marriage statement go as I think, I come out 342 to 196.

And if some big event occurs and gives Obama a big boost, flipping all the "leaning Romney" states to Obama, 407 to 131.


Fun to play with.

 

[CoolBlue71]

MystikWizard,

Florida and Ohio vote like each other. Given Fla. is in the south, the northern part of the state votes like the south and the southern part of the state votes like the north.

Both are huge bellwether states. Ohio has backed all winners since 1896 but two: 1944 and 1960. Fla. voted with all winners since 1928 but two: 1960 and 1992. They're usually no greater than five points from the national margin. (In 2008, Barack Obama flipped both from the 2004 Republican and into the 2008 Democratic column, winning Ohio by 4.59% and Fla. by 2.81%. He won nationally over John McCain by 7.26%. The cycle before, 2004, saw incumbent George W. Bush retain both, from 2000, as he carried Ohio by 2.11% and Fla. by 5.01% while he beat John Kerry nationally by 2.46%.)

Virginia and Colorado, I've observed from other sources, have been voting like each other since 1996. Meaning, their margins have been tightly connected. Since the first post World War II election of 1948, they voted the same in all of the last 16 cycles but with the exception of 1992 (when Bill Clinton won over Colo. but missed Va.). In 1996, losing Republican challenger Bob Dole, of Kansas, flipped his immediate neighboring state to the west and from that point forward—and given the two states, of course, have colored the same—the spread in their margins were as follows: 0.58% (1996), 0.33% (2000), 3.53% (2004), and 2.65% (2008). Considering that 3.53% the highest spread, these two are likeminded. And in 2008, Va. and Colo.—flipped from the 2004 Republican and into the 2008 Democratic column—were the two best states in coming closest to Obama's 7.26% margin over McCain. (He flipped Va. at 6.30% and Colo. at 8.95%.) Given the states were 0.96% and 1.69% in relation to the national margin, it's more than 95 percent likely these two—which may have emerged as the newest bellwether states—will vote the same. And vote once again for the winner of Election 2012.

 

[Sammie13]

I find Obama winning 308-230. How I slotted the "battleground" states:

Romney -- Ohio, North Carolina, Missouri, Iowa, Arizona
Obama -- Florida, Virginia, New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Nevada

I do think Florida could be interesting with the housing crisis; Romney used that issue to knock out his GOP counterparts during the primary there. Between housing and medicare, Obama will have some work to do in the Sunshine state.

Virginia is the most socially conservative state that I gave Obama. I think gay marriage and Obamacare could hurt him there. Most of the other bubble conservative states, I tossed to Romney.

 

[chrisrobin]

I find Obama winning 308-230. How I slotted the "battleground" states:

Romney -- Ohio, North Carolina, Missouri, Iowa, Arizona
Obama -- Florida, Virginia, New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Nevada

I do think Florida could be interesting with the housing crisis; Romney used that issue to knock out his GOP counterparts during the primary there. Between housing and medicare, Obama will have some work to do in the Sunshine state.

Virginia is the most socially conservative state that I gave Obama. I think gay marriage and Obamacare could hurt him there. Most of the other bubble conservative states, I tossed to Romney.

This post is grounded in reality. National polls are a waste of time because they don't really tell you much. The "battleground" states will be good predictors.

 

[chrisrobin]

I get Obama 295, Romney 214 -- with 29 from Florida left out because I can't make up my mind.

Though assuming the effects of Obama's gay marriage statement go as I think, I come out 342 to 196.

And if some big event occurs and gives Obama a big boost, flipping all the "leaning Romney" states to Obama, 407 to 131.


Fun to play with.

Who (if anyone) will have an "October surprise"? Stay tuned...

 

[hotatlboi]

This post is grounded in reality. National polls are a waste of time because they don't really tell you much. The "battleground" states will be good predictors.

Disagree with this. If there is any separation in the national polls, it's a VERY solid statistical probability that the one on top wins the electoral college.

In 2000, the difference was only 0.5%, when it flipped. It basically has to be extremely close in the popular vote for that to happen.

 

[JayHawk]

Romney -- Ohio, North Carolina, Missouri, Iowa, Arizona
Obama -- Florida, Virginia, New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Nevada

I gave Obama Ohio and gave Romney Florida otherwise we agree.

 

[CoolBlue71]

I find Obama winning 308-230.

How I slotted the "battleground" states:

Romney — Ohio, North Carolina, Missouri, Iowa, Arizona
Obama — Florida, Virginia, New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Nevada​

…

If President Barack Obama gets re-elected, Iowa will be in his column. He won nationally, over John McCain, by 7.26 percentage points and flipped Ia. by a margin of 9.54. The state has had five presidential cycles (1992, 1996, 2000, 2004, 2008) of closely connecting its statewide margin (for carriage) to the national result. In those five elections, one Democrat won the Popular Vote but not the Electoral College. And Ia. carried in 2000 for Al Gore. In 2004, George W. Bush won it over by a margin of 0.67 but, as a re-elected incumbent, nationally beat John Kerry by a historically low 2.46. So, Ia. has a slight Democratic tilt. (If a Democrat wins the presidency, Iowa carries. Please note: Along with New Mexico, Ia. was one of just two states that voted for the popular-vote winner of both 2000 and 2004. And that means it is one of two states having carried for the popular-vote winner with each of the last five elections. On the flip side, the Electoral College, there have been just two states with such distinction: Nevada and Ohio.)