Wargaming the Electoral College: The Final Edition
November 5th, 2012 - 4:26 pm
If I’m wrong in Romney’s favor, PA will be the first to go blue, followed in order by MN, WI, OH — and then Obama wins and the rest don’t matter. If I’m wrong the other way, MI is the next state to go red — and after that it becomes such a landslide that there’s no telling. And no need to.
Happy voting.
<- Prev Page 7 of 7 View as Single Page
Romney will take Colorado.
I’ve been saying that for weeks. You might want to click through for all seven — yes, seven — scenarios, including my final picks .
You are assuming this will be a fair election.
It will not be. Obama has spent 4 years on voter fraud mechanisms…
Romney has to win 52% in each swing state to win. 50% will not do it.
I don’t know what is worse…. a party that conducts voter fraud, or a party that is unable to stop opponent voter fraud even though they know it is happening…
Um, yeah… {rolls eyes}
Try googling “Patrick Moran.”
Casey,
That type of response, which is not even English, is typical of those who are intellectually outclassed.
You are not very bright, are you? Then you are who I am talking about.
It is unfortunate that an election that Romney would win (if fair) will go to Obama due to vote fraud – vote fraud that Republican Caseys are too dull to obstruct.
Vote fraud ensures that Romney has to win 52% in a swing state, rather than just 50.00001% or less. If you care about the outcome of this election, how can you be OK with lefty vote fraud?
You must be one of those more intelligent, nuanced, voters that we hear makes up the Democrat party is.
Steve, what’s with the last minuet abandonment of Nevada, I only see you have Romney winning it in his Ronald sweep. Why the sudden doubt?
I think you are right and it won’t be a “squeaker” either.
Noooooo…………
I think you’ll want to click through, Lily.
C’mon – this is like me saying on Oct. 3 I think Atlanta, Baltimore, Cincinnati, Detroit, New York, Oakland, St. Louis, San Francisco, Texas, or Washington would win the World Series.
Well, no it isn’t. Not at all. I ran through a variety of scenarios, then presented the exact one I think is most likely. Did you not read the entire column?
Nope, and I’m man enough to be able to admit how much of an idiot I am.
Carry on.
We all make mistakes, me more than most.
Stephen,
You mean to tell me all 8 of the liberal jurisdictions that passed a law mandating that their electors cast their votes for the popular vote winner will reneg? They wouldn’t dare! They were only thinking of the common good.
I guess those laws came with expiration dates, just like Obama’s promises.
MJ – The national majority vote voiding the amend the Constitution process laws contain a provision that only makes them effective when states comprising a majority of the Electoral College votes have passed similar laws. The required number of states have not passed the law so it is not in effect.
This is the type of article where the ‘View as a single page’ option should be the default. That way, people can see all 7 maps at once.
I would prefer that to be an option we can set for the whole site – reloading pages or having to load the next page on every article I read on my cell phone is irritating and data-consuming.
“First up is the map Democrats tell you is far too conservative, since The Chosen Won will win so big and so early that the Rocky Mountain states like Montana will simply suspect their elections and succumb to the inevitable. ”
I’ll bet that the “suspect” in that sentence was meant to be a “suspend”….
I’ve said for about a month that R/R would win VA, NH, CO, lose OH, but win WI to put them over the top with 271 EV (272 if MN CD-2 comes through), so I’ll stick with it. However, if you’re correct about PA, I can go to bed early and happy.
::pause::
Who am I kidding? If Romney wins PA, I’ll start recording MSNBC and replay it daily whenever I’m feeling down for the next four years.
– back in 1980. Tomorrow it will be MSNBC, but expect Maddow to excuse herself at any break following a call for Romney in the swing states. Matthew will have to go it alone.
I would be happy to send them some coils of rope to keep at the studio…
Cyanide, get your cyanide here.
You can’t check out of the new Romney led USA without your CYANIDE.
Cyanide, get your cyanide here!
For the first time in years, I, too, would watch MSNBC after the first wave of election results are in, just to see them hyperventilate! Yayyyy! President Mitt Romney, VP Paul Ryan!
If it is in fact a Romney blowout — and I’m not saying it will be — the alphabet network election coverage will be off the air faster than you can say “Goodnight ladies and gentlemen and now back to our regularly scheduled programming.”
Oh, I don’t expect the lapdog media networks to be at all polite about a R/R win. They’ll pass on stories about the New Black Panthers, who will likely be at it again this year, and instead focus on states where the race was closest, setting up betting pools on where the first lawsuit will be filed by Obama.
What was it the New Black Panthers were supposed to have done, other than looking like Scary Black Men? Was there ever a single voter found who claimed to be intimidated by them?
Um, there’s just VIDEO of them menacing people with weapons, and people turning around and leaving the polling area with out voting… no big deal.
Seriously, do they have to actually kill people before you have a problem with it? This was the most open/shut case of voter intimidation in my lifetime, and probably yours.
Holy Cow Ron, are you really that dense? Intimidation, which was obviously their intent, is against the law. Plain and simple. How is that point beyond your reasoning skills? How is it not offensive to you? Why is any degree of hair splitting necessary or appropriate in this context?
Ron White encapsulated you perfectly with the term “You can’t fix stupid”. Remember you only need one round in the pistol to commit suicide.
You can’t really be that thick can you? Didn’t you see the video of those two BP’s at the polling location in PA WITH WEAPONS IN HAND? I hope all your family and friends are more astute than you are or there will be a bunch more votes for obaMAO the moron than we really need.
Ron,
Part of the injunction brought against them after the last election included the prohibition of “carrying WEAPONS in a polling place” in the future.
Thats right, WEAPONS, the injunction against them specifically acknowledges the FACT they had WEAPONS with them, while they were intimidating voters.
Put the shoe on the other foot, and imagine the following News Report:
“Racist Klansman who have posted You Tube videos calling for the murder of all “chocolate babies” were in polling stations with WEAPONS, intimidating voters, saying to all blacks they suspected were going to vote for Obama “You think so, huh, well youre about to be ruled by WHITE MEN now, Brownie”
Stop apologizing for them.
I’m with you on the ‘smart money’ map. except for NH. That’ll likely go blue. Add a probable Ohio recount, and I’ll be refilling the wife’s Xanax prescription on Wed.
If we have to go through another post election like 2000, they’ll probably be rationing Xanax.
If Obama wins, they’ll be rationing all medicine.
I know I’m posting late, because, well, I actually have a job. And because I work in a secure facility, I can’t read the news all day. But…on my way home I stopped to refill my wife’s Xanax Rx at a well-known national pharmacy. They told me I’d have to come back and pick it up on Wednesday evening. They were out of Xanax. Evidently the metldown has begun.
By the way…I drove on for a few blocks and bought a bottle of Hendricks Gin. That will have to get my lovely bride through election night. My personal choice is Balvene 15 year old cask-aged single malt. We’re ready. We’re voting early and often, and we’ve each taken a vacation day on Wednesday. God’s speed everyone. Pray that this nightmare will end.
Except contraceptives. Cuz some drugs are a right. Or something like that. But keep pot illegal.
It all makes sense if you’re stoned enough.
Agreed, the “smart money” map looks most likely.
The “Ronald Wilson Romney” scenario would be damned nice, just so’s I could rub it into rude proggie faces the next day…
AMEN BROTHER
I’ve got to disagree on NH. I grew up there and my family still lives there. The huge influx of Massholes from the Boston area is – and always has been – made up of primarily liberals who are in the process of being mugged by reality. NH didn’t so much go FOR Obama in ’08 as it went AGAINST McCain (seen as wanting to continue the Bush agenda) and Palin (seen as not-quite-ready-for-primetime). Expect NH to swing back solidly Red in ’12.
Unless the Johnson voters hit 4-5%…
NH voting is already done and tallied. It was split evenly so the electoral will be split evenly. Result? ZERO!
Yes… the voting in Dixville Notch, NH (population = approximately 10) finished this morning and was split evenly. There are however, 1.3 million other people in the state. I’m not sure where you are getting your news.
And in any event, since NH is a winner-take-all state, the EC votes will go to whoever wins a state-wide plurality. Result: 4 EC votes to the winner.
It’s never evenly split. There’s always one more than the other. Also NH does not give out electoral votes based on apportions of voting. NH is a winner take all State.
Please let your “Ronald Wilson Romney” map come to fruition. I want repudiation tomorrow.
from your fingertips to God’s ears. Romney may not be our salvation, but he is our last, best hope (in this round!!)
Now, can we please replace Boehner and get some REAL work done?
“Now, can we please replace Reid and get some REAL work done?”
There. FIFY.
They both need to be shown the door IMHO.
p.s. are you drunkblogging the returns? (whew, loooooong evening!)
Of course.
Okay, but if Mitt wins early, (before 9) I’m going to be knocking at your door half an hour later, for some alcohol, on our way to Denver for dinner. (The 17 year old is driving!)
NERVOUS and not sure how to spend late afternoon, since I am set to leave the polls at 3:30, since they had too many volunteers.
Also, I only phonebanked a couple of hours. They were swamped with volunteers and had people on cell phones, and I figured I should come home and write barn burners, instead.
Rasmussen party ID is +6 Republican. Which is to say, roughly 20 percent more R than D. My prediction is basically your Romney Near Sweep but if Raz has that right it could easily be the RW Romney.
Here in Central Florida we are looking at 60-70 percent chance of rain along the I-4 corridor after 8 a.m. tomorrow. That could work to Romney’s advantage.
I read somewhere recently that in ’08 McCain actually got about 100,000 more votes than Obama on election day in Florida. That was after Obama built up a huge lead in early voting. This time around early voting was much closer. I am hoping for a larger than expected margin for Romney, one large enough to retire Bill Nelson.
That’s all I want for Christmas, Santa.
My liver has informed me that if it is 269-269, it is going to serve me with divorce papers. I too want Ronald Wilson Romney. May Gary Johnson & Jill Stein do well in Oregon.
I wouldn’t bet on Pennsylvania: Philly and Pittsburgh will give Obama the needed advantage.
106% turnout, in order to squeak out a win?
If Romney wins with PA but not Ohio, expect a “storm damage voter suppression” plea to be made on behalf of The Won.
Open talk talk among the commies here (public school teachers)about signing a petition attesting to that, and voluntary extra Union Due/ payroll deductions for DNC legal fees to support a “re-balloting initiative” among the “disenfranchised” who couldnt make it to the polls due to storm damage.
They have money to burn…they average 100K with no out-of-pocket bennies, and just came of a STRIKE where they got even more. But they arent going to forfeit a dime for a “cause” unless they think its worth a dollar in return, so I take them seriously…
Romney winning with PA and NOT with more like Ohio etc, count on an Obama refusal to accept the PA verdict, short of gunfire.
They will not go quietly.
Then I guess, they’ll have to go loudly, won’t they?
If we see an “Obama refusal to accept the PA verdict, short of gunfire”. We Pennsylvanians will provide it. After all we’re still clinging to our guns, etc.
I had surgery today and WILL vote Romney/Ryan Tuesday even if I still have the catheter!
I am one of the few Reps in Super-Blue Delaware, but I WILL vote. (DE–where our only two nationally known political figures are Joltin’ Joe Biden and Christine “I Am Not A Witch” O’Donnel)
Count me as another Rep. in the Delaware wilderness. God speed with your recovery and getting to the polls tomorrow.
It’s nice to see the entire non-officeholding Republican electorate of Delaware is here.
We’re pullin’ for ya, guys!
Stood in line at the Romney Rally in Bucks County PA chatting with a whole family that drove up from Delaware…
Mom and Dad with several little ones still in diapers braving long lines and cold winds several hours from home…
Still some good folks in Delaware!
I’m thinking it’ll be the “Smart Republican” map but w/o NH and MN. However, I suspect that PA will be such a near run thing for Obama that’ll it’ll be apparent he’s done when that state closes. So… 271 Romney.
But I’d so love to see PA go Romney. Then it really is over.
Romney has a Media Implanted Achilles Heel in Pennsylvania…
If Romney wins a squeaker with PA, but NOT with extra padding like Ohio, expect some ferocious DNC Lawfare in the form of “storm disenfranchisement” to overturn it.
We already have Local News personalities talking about whether a narrow Romney win can be “valid” because of the storm.
“…just what size of a margin of victory do you think he’ll need in order for it to be accepted by the Democrats?”
They are setting the stage for a recount, or worse.
Look. They don’t have any legal basis. Let ‘em howl themselves hoarse. Then laugh at ‘em.
Bingo. Also, Reps won there big in 2010. Be harder for Dems to do anything TOO illegal to try to pull Obama across the finish line.
Legal shmegal,
Its all about their version of “justice”, actual concrete rule of law means nothing to these people.
If a law prevents “social justice”, than they are free to ignore it, you see.
Their smug sense of moral superiority IS the law, and they and their Media enablers will enforce it.
Ah, I have a suspicion we’ll be surprised by NH. Still a lot of Republicans there, and they resent the hell out of the Democrats – many of whom are transplants from Massachusetts.
I grew up in western NH when it was ‘rock ribbed Republican’ and was genuinely surprised to see on the county by county maps of the 2004 election that the south eastern part of the state nearest Boston voted Republican and the rest of the state was blue. My theory is that a lot of those people in the Boston suburbs are refugees from Taxachusetts.
Yes, that’s true, but they aren’t necessarily refugees without a political agenda. Many of us here in this tax paradise (Our state motto, “what’s in YOUR wallet?”) not only fled there, they brought their very Left politics with them, and knew for a fact that if enough did so, they’d be affecting the voting demographic there. I recollect many a Liberal telling me years ago that they were moving there and hoped they would ultimately make NH another “Blue” state.
My favorite is “The Smart Republican Money”.
I hate Nazi metaphors. I’ve read a lot of stuff about the real thing, the guys who ran Germany back in the ’40s, and these clowns are the Keystone Cops, and not as nasty either, frankly, as the other guys. There is one way, however, in which things are similar.
Watching the Presidential Polls for the last few weeks has been like living in Berlin and reading Volkischer Beobachter to get the news about how the war is going, say in 1942-4. Back then, if you read that paper, you’d read that Germany defeated the Soviets in this battle and then that one, and then they defeated England and the U.S. here and there. The only clue that the Germans were actually losing the war was that Germany’s victories got gradually closer to their own borders. In the polls I read on HuffPo (because I have an Aol account and that’s where the news is) show Obama surging into the lead constantly…but that lead keeps dwindling. So Obama surges from this lead to that, and they try and spin it as an increase in the lead when it goes from 8% to 5% to 2% to Romney now leading by several points.
I always in my head subtract a couple of points from any Democrat poll numbers, and at the same time add a couple of points to any Republican, to figure out how things are really going to go, just on general principles. However, the country’s so polarized now that just winning the General isn’t good enough…you have to win the Electoral also, and I gather the Dems are counting on that to save themselves from defeat…
You mean to say that when pollsters report that Obama leads by a huge margin in NY, they’re actually reporting his campaign is in retreat?
I can’t resist:
It’s called “leading from behind.”
“No. They’re not going to see this coming.” — Malcolm Reynolds, “Serenity”
I truly believe we’re looking at a 300+ EC victory for Romney. Contrarily, I truly believe that if Obama wins, the US will be on an irreversible path to Europe-level unemployment and standard of living, without the benefit (and low cost) of living close enough to everything to be able to walk/bike/bus/train. ..bruce..
If Obama wins it’ll be like Frank Herbert’s “Golden Path”; people will be so scarred in 4 years they won’t vote Dem again.
If Hussein wins there won’t be any more elections.
If Obama wins there won’t be anymore elections.
Probably better to assert that there will not be any more fair elections — they will try to convert the country into a giant version of the Chicago Democrat machine.
We used to say “it’s the economy, stupid” – well, now “it’s the fraud, stupid.” The Chicago machine/regime has already fundamentally transformed America to a Third World country, where fraudulent elections are the norm. Radical leftist regimes, history tells us, have never given up power through fair elections.
I agree with a commenter above who said that Romney needs to have at least 55% of the votes, to effectively counter the expected large scale fraud that will occur in all so-called “battleground” States’ inner cities.
And without the benefit of the good ol’ US of A’s armed forces to protect us. Vestigial military will mainly militate for “social justice” under Four More Years regime.
One thing at least seems highly likely: assuming no vote-counting problems, as soon as the polls close in California, they’ll be able to call the winner. All the states in play are in the Eastern Time Zone, except Wisconsin. And if it comes down to Wisconsin, it will be a squeaker indeed.
There are red states, there are blue states, but there are no purple states. The president promised us purple states.
A little more seriously, if the states within themselves split their electoral votes, i.e. county by county, then you war mappers could have conniptions, the popular vote would level, and we would have purple states.
Ohio, Colorado, and the other swing states would not rule the elections with their undecideds. The bad news is that the other states would have to suffer through more political advertising.
You misunderstand the nature of the “winner take all” method. This ensures that (normally) relatively centrist candidates come from both parties. The more you fragment the vote, the more influence splinter factions and extremists gain. Pure democracy isn’t always the optimum solution.
Our founding fathers were pretty damn smart men.
Romney has no viable electoral college pathway to the presidency. It’s simple math.
Thank you for that well-reasoned assertion.
’bout this time tomorrow you will wish you had taken off your shoes to help with your math.
With Bronco Bama, you not connecting the dots so much as connecting the lies.
There is no simple math, only simple mathematicians.
(Yeah, I know. It just sounded too good in my head not to post it.)
Well, shucks. I guess I ought to get my butt down to the welfare office, then.
Yep, that’s where I am going if Barack Obama wins. Learn to live off the government tit and love it. Their not getting anymore taxes out of me. Always wanted to be a beach bum anyway, to bad I don’t look that good in a bikini.
Sorry Walter, there’s no way on God’s Green Earth Obama can break 300. Romney has several paths.
Make sure to keep your gun cabinet (Oh wait you’re a lib, hate guns) and your liquor cabinet locked up toomorrow. night.
That would be the math you use to tax your way to prosperity?
Scheeesh
Walt, if you’re going to troll, at least make a serious argument. BTW, it’s not too late to join the kids at recess.
As a side note, I think Romney will do better than any Republican has done in CA since Reagan.
er…. GHWB actually WON CA in 1988. Yes, won the state.
He probably would have won in in 1992 if not for Perot.
So you are actually predicting that Romney would win CA. You don’t know your history kiddo.
I’ll go with “Last Call” except I think MI may go red but MN stays blue. Those Labor ballot measures in MI I think have really fired up people. MI swung pretty hard right in 2010, like WI did. MN, even though it is the DFL hometown, has elected R senators, congressmen, and Governors – but often with the Fruitcake feel. I just don’t see it going. I do think PA is in the bag though.
Now if we can elect R senators in OH, MI, PA, MO, IN, ND, MT, and MA.
Don’t forget an R senator in CT. Linda is a tough lady.
Given that Republicans only win elections by moving leftward, I don’t see that as much to be happy about.
In 1984, Reagan won 59% of the vote. Today, that same platform would net just 39%.
Obama might win 50% this time. In 1984, that platform would have have won just 20%…
The left wins by dragging the GOP leftward. Hence, the left always wins. That is why Democracy has a life-cycle, rather than being a permanent type of governance.
We have the winner here. ^^^
You are right in your conclusion that Democracy has a “life cycle,” but wrong as to the basic reason “why” it is so – at least, in my view.
Democracy has a structurally built-in life cycle dynamic. In spite of its inherent complexity, it is rather simple to describe its dynamics, and it goes roughly as follows: the politicians’ role is to buy off votes through proposed or actual “public spending.” When politicians run out of taxed money to spend on “public goods” (a dynamically inevitable outcome, as political parties compete for voters trying to outbid one another in “vote auctions” called “elections”) then they borrow the money to buy the votes to acquire or maintain political power. Pretty soon society as a whole goes belly up and the social structure collapses. Quite simple actually, and quite apt in analyzing Europe at present (see Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, France etc), not to mention a bunch of Third World economies (past and present), and a possible future of this country.
Democracy is a good “method”, if you keep it as a “method” for choosing representatives, not as a method to “do whatever is popular”. Hence, the Republic is the true stable system to defend: Rule of the Law amounts to Rule of the Principles, not Rule of the mob.
Democracy is also a “way the mob discharge social pressures”. As vague as it sounds, it’s precise because the “mob” is always vague, the “public opinion” is always a vaguely defined thing, just as “common good”. This has been so since the times of Athens and ostracism.
Hence, Democracy needs a check/balance system, but, hold on a minute, Founding Fathers masterfully found some system putting a check on the pure mob/popular rule. Its name is “Electoral College”. Every time you hear the outcry against the EC and the vowing to go to “direct, universal, voting”, you are attesting attempts to destroy one of the Republic pillars. Just as in the election of Senators.
The mob wants to vote? Give them the vote… but vote to choose representatives (Congressmen, Electors, etc) who in turn, will vote to choose the real thing. The primeval instinct of the mob rule is satiated, the representative still goes on to act on behalf of the mob, but some checks and rules has been instituted during the process.
I am a freshman in high school in Minnesota and I have some money riding on this election with some friends, and if Romney wins MN. Lets just say I will be looking forward to collecting those winnings come Wensday.
You have a 50-50 chance! Thank you for being concerned at a very young age! Your future is at stake here!
There’s another 270 scenario, a more likely one, I think. CO goes Red, as does ME-2, but WI stays Blue. 9+1=10
That would be a long shot on MN and NH and a very LONG, LONG shot on PA. Coming down to the line and if Rasmussen’s accuracy holds as well as it did in the last presidential election (pretty much spot on), it will come down to win Ohio or win Wisconsin and Iowa or go broke.
It was nice to hear Wisconsin come into play, it gives us another opportunity when combined with Iowa (a likely Romney state).
I just looked over the numbers again at Rasmussen and–if I added it up right–I come up with the following on the swing states:
Likely Romney: Florida, Virginia, Colorado. Giving him 257.
Likely Obama: Nevada, New Hampshire. Giving him 247.
That leaves Wisconsin (10 votes), Iowa (6), and Ohio (18) up for grabs and with Ohio and Wisconsin currently running dead even and Iowa with a one point advantage to Romney. So if the most accurate polling organization continues its streak for this presidential election, Obama has to win both Ohio AND Iowa to take the presidency. That would mean overcoming the current one point deficit in Iowa. Ohio alone won’t do it for him nor will Wisconsin and Iowa.
On the other hand, Romney could take either Wisconsin and Iowa or Ohio along and pass the threshold.
So if there is a “safe money bet” on this election, I suppose it would objectively have to go with the most accurate polling organization, which seems to be indicating that Romney has a slightly better chance at this point.
Thanks, Wisconsin.
Smart Republican Money? Oxymoron. I read that as Smart Stupid Party Money.
Obama blowout should include NH and IA for 10 more EV’s.
If OR goes Red, so does WA. WA is a bit less Blue than OR, but with much the same “thinking”.
No matter how far Red WA goes, King County will find enough votes.
Am am SO hopeful that MN might actually go red this time around. I’d be a whole lot more fed up with every other ad alternating between Romney and Obama messages, if it weren’t for the fact that that sudden level of intensity means they’re actually seeing a real fight here.
Planning to get going early tomorrow to vote first thing, and then will likely be watching five kids for one of the moms from church while she gets out to vote.
I pray you are right with any of the “Romney Wins” maps…I am so nervous about the election…I dread what will come to pass if Obama wins a second term.
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/11/05/internal-polls-romney-up-one-in-oh-two-in-ia-three-in-nh-tied-in-pa-and-wi/
Wow, Steve, you and I both on the mark, along with Dick Morris, who said 325, not counting Maine’s one split vote.
I still have this hunch that if Romney takes Ohio and PA big, and I mean big, he runs the table in the upper midwest and Michigan comes on line as well.
Uncle Steve, What cocktail goes with a Josh Mandel win?
Please Ronald Wilson Reagan for my 18 anniversary tomorrow. I do believe NJ would go Blue before Connecticut but nit picking here. I predict MSNBC holds out with the too close to call at midnight ET with a surprise rerun on Lockup for the rest of the night.
Steven:
Your map is Michael Borone’s map as well.
Good Company!
That IS good company.
I had an embarrassing brush with greatness at CPAC almost four years ago. There was a group of us having a smoke on a corner on the way to some Irsih pub for lunch, when Barone walked by, and we said hello and he stopped to chat. He pulled out a smoke, I pulled out my lighter — which failed to light after four or five tries.
that’s what you get for trying to be charming. funny story.
Now that made an impression! My guess is he’s not forgotten your name (for better or for worse).
Voting in Massachusetts in the AM. Voting Romney/Ryan, Scott Brown, Sean Bielat (running against Joe Kennedy III(spit!!)). A drop of red in an ocean of blue.
Talked to my father-in-law over the weekend; a Democrat who has never voted for a Republican. No, he’s not voting Republican this time either. He said that Elizabeth Warren was not socialist enough for his tastes, but at least she was a Democrat.
Pray for me!
I got to interview Bielat last time around for PJTV, and I came away very impressed. I hope he pulls it off this year. The man’s got balls like church bells.
EA,
Greetings to a fellow comrade from the Commonwealth. I haven’t heard much about the Kennedy/Bielat race so I figured Kennedy had it locked up. Maybe Tisei can pull it out over Tierney. After the Repubs picked up no state offices in 2010 I try to keep my hopes in check.
Got some mixed news this weekend about Warren/Brown:
The Bad: The Dems have cranked up the machine here in the 8th district, and registered thousands in the last month (non English speakers & students) in my city alone. Since it’s MA no doubt they’re all legit!
The Good: Strictly anecdotal, but there’s strong support among union members, blue collar & government, for Brown. Publicly they need to back Warren, but privately they’re backing Brown.
I agree with the last map – Romney takes over 300 EVs. However, should Obama win, I will cash out my IRA and pay off the mortgage, and hunker down for a lost decade.
Why pay off the mortgage? Is it a float? Given the massive inflation The One’s free money policy is sure to ignite (maybe even if he loses), I’d think you’d want to buy more houses at with free fixed-rate money.
FYI, those union-backed proposals here in Michigan are going down in flames. Latest polling has them ~20 points in the hole.
Wow. I hadn’t seen that. Gives me hope for MI in general, and for Romney in MI tomorrow.
I’m VERY hopeful my state goes the right way for a change, though the MEA still has a lot of power, as does the SEIU…I think 1-2 of the proposals will sneak through due to confusion on what the props mean, but I think overall it’s going to excite turnout on our side.
That’s a “big f*cking deal!”, to quote someone kinda (in)famous.
Actually, it is. I’ve been really concerned about those measures, and their impact on the top of the ticket. Let alone the sh*tpile of a mess they turn MI into.
If they’re failing that badly, it means either the red wave GOTV effort is paying huge dividends, or the blue stonewall is crumbling badly from lethargy and neglect. Or both!
That’s, honestly, probably the best news I’ve heard from that region in weeks.
I’m my Lansing neighborhood, a large number of yards bear signs promoting the various liberal propositions — but no Obama sign. I wonder if this means Dems are going to come out to vote for the propositions, and then vote against Obama while they’re at it?
“I wonder if this means Dems are going to come out to vote for the propositions, and then vote against Obama while they’re at it?
It tells me they’ll vote for Obama, but not enthusiastically.
Hmmm, president of the UAW blasts Dear Liar, and a lot of the rank & file in OH & MI are hunters who like to cling to their guns.
If Obama wins Virginia and loses Ohio, I’ll eat my dog.
What has your dog ever done to you?
Now, now, Mister Obama. You’ve been warned to stop with the sock-puppeting.
Fascinating stuff.
I think Wisconsin is the key, and with Colorado and either Iowa or NH, makes Romney a winnner even without Ohio. I see it as an “easy” path to victory.
Obama started the last day in Wisconsin. Shows he realizes trouble. Most important, there have been three highly contested Wisconsin state wide elections in last two years and republicans won each time. Now there is the kicker of Ryan as VP candidate. I know VP’s are often unimportant, but here, the choice of Romney over Portman could have been decisive (either way – if R loses Wisconsin, then she should have picked Portman).
Everyone needs to remember that in 2010 Maine went Republican across the board at the state level, the Governorship and both houses of the legislature.
My final prediction is “Ronald Wilson Reagan” minus Connecticut and Maine.
Romney: 354, Obama: 184.
In reading through this, a thought occurs to me.
Given the option, which candidate would willingly switch places with the other one right now? Given his record, I humbly suggest Obama would prefer to be in Romney’s shoes tomorrow.
That being said, I’m hoping for a blowout of Reaganesque proportions.
I bet Obama would not mind losing, as long as it’s reasonably close. He must know by now that if he gets re-elected, the next four years are sure to rub his face in the fact that he hasn’t a clue how to do the job — for that matter, the rest of the country would acquire a lot of those raw facial skin burns also.
LOL…no doubt due to excessive face palming!
“if Obama really is Carter II, then there’s some small chance Romney is Reagan II.”
I know that is a comforting thought for lots of people but Romney is no Reagan. Reagan, while a serious policy guy when the doors were closed, had a charm and smile that could disarm even the most violently partisan of liberals. Hence his ability to win MA twice(!). Romney is all business and is “serious as a heart attack”, to borrow a phrase. Even people who agree with him can find he rubs the wrong way. I think “Dwight David Romney” might be a more appropriate marque, although neither Barry nor Joe will ever be confused with Adlai Stephenson.
You’re right, Romney is “serious as a heart attack.” And earnest, as only a Mormon boy in France trying to convince them to give up wine could be. In that seriousness and earnestness is the determination that has served him well in business. He knows what to do to get the job done. If that means being charming, I’m betting he’ll figure out how to loosen up enough to be charming. He’s already got a good sense of humor and killer comic timing…much better than Obama, who sounds like an egotistic law professor trying to sound humorous. Contrast them at the Al Smith dinner.
He’ll tackle this as something to fix. If charm is needed, he’ll make sure it’s in his toolkit.
“although neither Barry nor Joe will ever be confused with Adlai Stephenson”
Nope.
The only A. S. they could be likened to would be Al Sharpton.
Gruff-n-fluf, ignorant as f*ck
(Say THAT three times fast!)
With that easy path – Wisconsin, Colorado, Iowa and New Hampshire – that provides Romney with 277. And he still could lose either Iowa or NH.
Tomorrow also is intersting. Romney campaigns in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Obama goes home to Chicago and plays basketball. One take – Obama confident. Another take – Obama taking a chance that Romney wins Ohio or Pennsylvania with last day of campaigning. If I was Romney, I would sneak into Wisconsin as well. It has same day registration and he could secure a few thousand more votes.
On O’Reilly show tonight, there was strong feeling that Sandy killed momentum and, optimistically, it has started to turn back to Romney.
That show made me shudder. Over at the lefty sites, they are unreservedly confident.
It’s so sad that people are going to vote for Obama because he ‘seemed’ presidential for a couple of days when he went around Sandy-hit areas in the northeast. In Las Vegas, where I’m from, it’s truly tragic and disturbing because unemployment and foreclosures are rampant and at all-time highs and several days ago, the state was leaning towards Romney so I thought we can finally and TRULY move forward. But then Eva Longoria comes over with Obama and rallies the people, and now the state’s going Obama. A-MAZING!!! These people are so ignorant. They’re mesmerized by celebrities who will not, and cannot, do anything to fix the misery around them and whose agenda is to be cool and hip because you’re keeping a black man who is also cool and hip, in power. They can’t honestly say that Obama has been great for this country (and Nevada) the past 4 years. Heck, even Biden said the past 4 years have been horrible under Obama, and that gaffe really wasn’t one. Rather than thinking and voting based on logic, historical facts, reality and opting for change to get out of this economic mess and high unemployment by someone who has a proven, successful record of creating jobs and balancing budgets, they instead pick the guy who manufactured a health crisis in order to ram Obamacare down our throats and get it passed into law despite the majority of the American public’s aversion to it. Look at what Obama DIDN’T do for the Southside of Chicago, where he’s from and first represented as a state senator. He DID NOTHING FOR ILLINOIS – remember, he famously voted ‘PRESENT’ on all those state bills because he didn’t have the balls to say ‘yay’ or ‘nay’, and to this day, his home turf in Illinois is still the cesspool of crime, poverty and misery that it was when he represented it.
I have an African-American who works for me who is extremely bright and talented – a West Point graduate — and I asked him last night who he was voting for, and he said, “Well, I think I’m going to help out the brother.” So, I told him, “Imagine if a white guy said he’s going to vote for Romney because he’s white. Wow, you’d quickly say the white guy is racist.” This is what has happened to America. Even the most educated don’t get it, and they’re fooled by the ‘hope and change’ loser.
LVC – Why is Nevada blue? Doesn’t seem to make sense to me.
Wrong response to him. It’s okay for them to be racist, is how the thinking goes. No, you have to point out how Blacks are suffering the most in this economy. If he really wants to help out the brother, he would vote this bum out.
As for Ohio, the people in that state need to give Ohio Republican Governor Kasich credit for whatever good is happening to that state (e.g., job creation and decreasing unemployment numbers). None of what’s happening there is because of the federal government and Obama, but the mainstream media, Obama surrogates and Obama himself, have been lying left and right to change the facts and reality to try to steal the credit from the Republican Governor and win Ohio for ‘the anointed one’.
The same is true in Wisconsin — it is Republican Governor Walker who’s fixing that state and saving jobs, including the jobs of those brainwashed teachers and school administrators who were fooled by the powerful unions to try to get rid of Walker. It has NOT been Obama who is bringing Wisconsin back to prosperity and financial/economic stability.
First, THANK YOU to all the good people on this Board giving me hope tonight before election!
Second, hope the Wisconsin dems remember that O never bothered to go and support the Unions in their fight with Gov. Walker! Honesty among thieves:-)
38. KC Oracle: re Wisconsin. Bart Starr, Green Bay legend, strongly endorsed Romney the other day. In Packerland, that is a really big deal. Plus, the Republican GOTV machine got streamlined and oiled really well in those never-ending recall elections. I think Wisconsin is a real possibility to go red – finally and fittingly, since it is the foundational home of the Republican Party.
Stephen, you say you’ve been coveting Alberta for a while. It’s probably the only unadmitted State up here that would go Red. Your Last Call map seems entirely plausible. Hope it’s not just wishful thinking.
Trade you for California. Then you can have two insufferable provinces full of boneheads.
Alberta would be like getting a second Texas!
Nice! oh wait….that would make me Canadian, I’m not sure I want that. Although….if Obummer wins……
If either of the last two maps come to pass, then MSNBC is must see TV.
I think Romney wins 52% to 47% so I will go with brother Green’s last map.
My 13 year-old went for Halloween as Romney (his #1 hero) to a degree of unpopularity in our Nor-Cal school. His teachers got revenge by selecting him for debates – representing the Democratic platform. Now I heard that today he won the debate… and told my wife not to tell me out of embarrassment!
This race has completely absorbed my kids, and they insist on being in the booth with me tomorrow morning. What a great day it will be for us all, even if we lose.
On my Facebook friend feed, my Teacher sister-in-law’s daily Obama-fest was hot among her Berkeley friends. Her comment was “Tomorrow we get to vote Romney off the island”.
Since it appeared on my page’s feed I added a comment among the 30 other Obama raves in her thread: “But the island will need jobs, food and clothing”.
She texted me saying:
“I love you as a friend and relative, but I removed your Pro-Romney comment from my thread. Please be respectful.”
I haven’t responded. Any suggestions?
Yep; (politely) reply that respect works two ways.
Reply with: I understand the need for propaganda, we obviously cannot confound the simple minded with an alternative world-view.
DEMOCRAcy in action – no soup for me I guess.
FORWARD over the cliff – no parachutes.
I will respect your wishes to remain walled off from a diversity of opinions.
Um….how is your comment any less respectful than hers?
Funny how she assumed that your observation that “the island” will need jobs, food, and clothing to be a pro-Romney comment – sounds like even she, at least sub-consciously, sees the Dear Leaders failures.
Censorship is kinda harsh, but it’s her facebook. If she thread-craps on a pro-Romney post on yours, then you can ask her is respect is a two-way street …
Every single time she attacks President Romney for the next four years, say “please be respectful”.
Call her what she is…a pathetic fascist creep…and get on with your life by ignoring hers.
You absolutely can never, ever, be nice to these people, and I use the term ‘people’ loosely.
Please be respectful and allow my post to stand, unless, of course, you think that I am not entitled to have a different opinion from yours.
That sounds utterly maddening. It would be hard for me to keep it in, but I think the best route is to be firm and to absolutely, steadfastly refuse to make explanations or excuses:
“I stand by every word I said and will continue to express my opinion honestly.”
You could add “Please be respectful” if you’re in a lousy mood, but be aware, that really means the battle is joined.
If you’re getting riled and you’re the type who can tolerate a fight and who likes to escalate and you want to smack this fly before she stings you again:
“I love you as a friend and relative, which is why I must point out to you that disagreement can be respectful. Please be respectful.”
Or:
“You seem to be unaware that disagreement can be respectful. Stubbornness in discourse never is. Please be respectful.”
Failing all those and given a fifth of vodka, you could just kill the relationship:
“I know you love me. It’s really something, the way you look at me sometimes. Please be respectful.”
Defriend her. Publicly. Then drop your facebook account. It’s just s**t, anyway.
: )
Since when Obama-censorship is “love” or “respect”?
Wow, so you admit government can’t provide those things? (but I tend to be sarcastic on Facebook which is why I quit it long ago.)
The more I see California’s 55 electoral college votes, the more I think we ought to divvy it up into two states.
We could also go the MAINE route – separate districts – more equal representation.
Easier to accomplish I would think.
When Sacramento falls completely into the fiscal abyss I suspect you will see a few new states emerge. I envision New Haight-Ashbury (the S.F. Bay area and the coastal plains heading north and south), Fruitbowl (the Central Valley), Norcal (Napa Valley northward to OR), Socal (L.A. and the Inland Empire) and El Norte (San Diego and the counties along the Mexican Border, likely to merge with southern AZ and NM). That should shake up the disposition of those 55 EVs.
This is a real question, not smart-aleck: what is the matter with New Mexico??
I believe the answer is “lots of hipsters and academics in Santa Fe.”
Thanks for the nerve calming prediction, Steve. Today was day eight of the ninth novena I have done this year to remove SCOAMT from office. When the news is good I feel silly invoking Saint Jude for something that shouldn’t need any help. With the news STILL saying that Il Douche is tied or leading in the polls, I wonder what could possibly lance this boil from the body politic.
I’m staying sober until I get home from the polls (we’re voting at church, so I go straight from the voting booth into the sanctuary for last-minute prayers). Then maybe dinner at Chik-fil-A.
C’mon, Saint Jude, there’s some sick kids waiting for that check!
Gutsy call, Mr Green.
Everything depends on whether you believe 2010, Republican enthusiasm, Repubublican early voting, rally sizes, yard signs, turnout models that reflect all that, the wapo poll that shows a 13% decline in the Fraud’s support …or the top-line of the university and newspaper polls putting everything on the line for their love object.
The answer to that question is clear, but there are two other indicators that are unnerving. 1) Rasmussen and Gallup call it much closer than all the signs should say. Why? and 2) in those two seemingly honest polls, the Fraud has closed the gap a couple of points since Sandy gave him the opportunity to play president instad of curled lip attack dog.
I believe the signs and say the polls are just extensions of the sniveling media. But Rasmussen’s and Gallup’s conservative view of the numbers probably means it will be close.
Romney 291.
Remember that O always enjoys a weekend bounce in the polls. I expected the last set to show him up a point or two.
Also remember that polls are lagging indicators. The current figures may reflect the positive impression of Obama strolling around looking presidential, but not yet the negative impressions of all the FEMA screwups afterward.
Whatever the case, polls no longer matter. Get your ass out there and vote, and when you’re done with that, go to the Romney or FreedomWorks site and start making calls.
‘We’ve been coveting Alberta for a while now.’
Not a chance. Alberta’s a lock for Romney.
Well that was a fun read. Sandy seem to have given Obama a small be significant bounce in the polls. I don’t know what to make of all this from my perch in Perth Western Australia. I sent my vote for Romney into West Palm Beach weeks ago, but at this distance the polls loom large. Every morning I get up and Obama small lead has crept up. It comes down to turnout they say and it certainly feels that Republicans sense they can win this election and are determined to turn out. Glenn Reynold’s ‘Don’t get cocky’ sums up the right attitude and bespeaks the determination I feel to do my bit to stop the rot. ie the ruinous economics. I thought Biden’s scoffing at Ryan perfectly represented the complete denial that the only person with a credible plan to save the situation had anything worthwhile to say. Like the readers here I find it hard to credit that an electorate that was aroused enough to stop the president in 2010 will confirm him in office in 2012, particularly when they can sense victory is possible. Are these polls real or just the last gasp of the MSM trying to reduce Republican turnout?
OK, Stephen, if one of your “Romney wins” maps is correct, it will be my screensaver for the next four years!
Some enterprising programmer could make a screen saver that starts with the 2008 electoral map, and morphs into the 2012 map. And then a picture of a chair.
After four very long years, I get to go to the polling place tomorrow and proudly cast my vote to fire our first Communist President! I will do this and you will do this and with the help of God we will be shed of this great threat to the dignity of all freedom loving Americans. Mitt Romney will prove to be a great President because he is both a capable and an honest man. ABO2012
I agree with you, Stephen, and have felt this way for months — this isn’t even going to be close. The polls are confusing, but one thing that has been consistent has been Romney doing extremely well with indys, center-right enthusiasm, blue states turning purple, and the apparent reversal in party identification.
I think it all makes for a reversal of 2008 in which Romney/Ryan win comfortably. I am, however, extremely disappointed that the GOP did not nationalize this ticket. Looks like we’ll have to be dealing with Disgusting Harry Reid.
And the other threads above are correct — this will be worth DVR-ing MSNBC (and other MSM Obama allies) to savor on a rainy day or to put on as background noise when doing house work. It’ll be like me and my Super Bowl 42 and 46 Giants DVD’s — always being able to relieve glorious victories that many never saw coming.
Thank you, Mr. Green. It is good to have some perspective on the numbers before the waiting begins. We are hoping that America averts the socialist death, but we are unsure there are enough of us to make it happen. If it does happen, it will not be a celebratory event. We’ll just be glad to be alive the next morning, and then we’ll begin tallying repairs to be made.
I have booze to drown my sorrows if need be. I suspect I will be doing a snoopy Dance!!
Then I will need to develope a drinking game to watch MSNBC. Say 1 shot each time a host opines Obama should win-a shot when a blue state goes red-and a shot for each on-set STROKE!!
I am gonna get hammered. No worries I have wed off, as I have been out of work for 18 effing months!
C’mon magic underwear!!
Your actual most-likely prediction involves Romney taking Minnesota? I think what we have here is a bit too much vodka and not quite enough pundit.
Mr. Green has been speculating about Minnesota for quite a while now. I live in Minnesota and I have chosen to agree to disagree with Mr. Green’s speculation.
Romney has a better chance of winning Minnesota than Obama has of winning Wyoming.
Between slim and none, I’ll take slim.
As I’ve been saying since July;
Obama will win, California, New York, Illinois, Vermont and the District of Columbia.
Obama May win Washington, Oregon, Maine, and Hawaii.
All other states will vote Romney.
The republicans will gain 12 in the Senate and hold the House with 7 to 11 seats gained.
The Popular Vote Split will be – Romney 54 Obama 45
“It’s too close to call!”
-MSM 1980
It’s already over.
“DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN” — MSM (via Chicago Tribune), 1948
Probably the biggest political “whoops” in history.
NH is ‘way behind VT. The state in which I grew up doesn’t exist anymore. Kids from the NY and Boston metro areas have been attending UVM (state school with >65% of the freshman class from out of state) and staying in VT for decades. Naturally, they brought their lefty-greenie ideas with them. You really can’t go home again.
I’ve decided that since I’ve already voted and I don’t have much to do before the returns come in that I’ll try for the silliest comment award.
1. This is not 1980. Romney is not Ronald Reagan and Obama is not Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter carried Georgia in 1980. Obama won’t. So there!
2. You shouldn’t covet Alberta. I worked there several years ago. Although they have plenty of oil, a Canadian conservative is somewhere to the left of an American liberal. Just like Angela Merkle.
Romney 52-46, 305 Electoral Votes.
Anecdotally, in my district in GA (District 3, Rep. Hank Johnson, God Help us), many more Romney signs than Obama. In 08, there were plenty of Obama signs, and few McCain/Palin signs. This year, Obama signs are nearly absent. I think Romney wins Ohio, Wisconsin,but loses MN. PA is up for grabs. I grew up there, and the rural areas are solid Rd, but Philly and Pittsburgh can pile up dead voters 20 deep. I still think Romney wins PA. I hope.
Tito’s tonight to watch the returns. Best buy out there.
I’m going with a)Voter enthusiasm (which leads to high turnout) and
b) Mitt’s consistently high Independent numbers (14-18 points)
Mitt will surprise the world in the same way that the GOP surprised the world in 1994, and Reagan did in 1980. Mitt will capture 330+ electoral votes. His coattails will propel 6 new GOP Senators and 8-12 new GOP House members into power. Watch the Moonbats’ heads explode.
Was just looking at Mr.Green’s electoral maps and discussing the voting system with my 14 year old daughter; that being the electoral college vote vs the “why not” popular vote. Seems to me a better way would be to tally the number of votes per candidate in each state and each candidate would receive that % number of the electoral vote in that state. Anyone see why this would not more fairly represent the voters in each state? It just doesn’t seem truly representative or fair when states like California, New York, PA, Ohio, WI, IA, etc have such a huge effect on the outcome of the election but their state populations have huge numbers of votes going to the opposing candidate. What do you think of this logic?
In theory this is a good idea Seraph, but in practice it couldn’t work.
I think I got the gist of what you were saying, if a state has 20 electoral votes and candidate A has 60% while candidate B has 40% then candidate A would only get 60% of the electoral votes (12) while candidate B, who would get zero right now, would get 40% (8).
The problem is that reality never splits as nicely as the example I gave. What happens if the candidates don’t win nice round easily divided percentages? What happens when a electoral vote has to be split? Who decides who gets the extra fractions? If the state is run by Republicans do they give the extra to the Republican candidate and vice versa if it’s a Democratic state?
Would there be a threshold that has to be met? If Gary Johnson wins 5% of the vote does he get 5% of the electoral vote? Does the Communist Party get 0.002% of the electoral vote for their fringe candidate?
I’m not saying that your idea couldn’t work, but it would take an awful lot of fine tuning and the devil could be in the details in a very close race.
I may have been a little critical of your idea, but I am always open to suggestions about fixing the system. If you say that the millions of Republicans in California should have a voice in picking the President I agree with you 100%. We just have to hammer down those details before a bunch of lawyers and judges get their hands on it.
NorthernLight: Yes, seems like there would have to be a lot of tweaking. However, I think this could be done on a state by state basis. And yes, why not, of course other parties getting a percentage should be acknowledged. Perhaps if they only get so much percentage? Perhaps you have to acrue enough to make it even viable? Don’t they have to do as much to even get on the ballot?
Percentage-of-electors to match percentage-of-voters? That IS a national popular vote, just with way more problems.
Generally, it has a bunch of roundoff error due to dividing the population by the number of electors. Specifically, it makes 90% of the states useless, and always the same 90%… at least winner-take-all makes different states important every time.
It makes the states with 3 EVs almost useless. They go 2+1 unless one candidate takes 83.3% of the vote, so who’s campaigning in North Dakota for 1 vote? Not me. States with 5 or 7 votes are almost as bad.
And it makes any state with 4 EVs entirely useless. They’ll go 2+2 unless one candidate takes 62.5% of the vote. So who’s campaigning in Maine for no votes? Not me. States with 6 or 8 (or even 10) votes are almost as bad.
So now you’ve got a system where Cali might be worth 5 votes in a 55/45 landslide, a handful of other states might be worth 2-4 (TX, NY, FL), and about 20-23 states each are worth either 1, or 0.
Example: if every state splits 52%/48%, here’s how many net votes they give their winner:
CA; 3 votes
TX; 2 votes
FL NY OR AK AZ MT WY CO NM OK NE ND SD IN TN AL SC NC VA WV DE DC CT MA VT; 1 vote
WA NV ID UT KS MN IA MO AR LA MS IL WI MI OH KY GA PA ME NH RI NJ MD HI; 0 votes
A system that gives 3-EV states like ND/SD more effective votes than 20-EV states like IL/PA, and disenfranchises 24 states entirely, probably won’t be accepted by the States.
Mikeski you said, “A system that gives 3-EV states like ND/SD more effective votes than 20-EV states like IL/PA, and disenfranchises 24 states entirely, probably won’t be accepted by the States.”
But how would their votes be more effective if the percentages break down first to the number of electoral votes according to population, and second, those electoral votes being cast according to how each particular state’s population votes?
Thanks for replying, you guys/gals. As for the fraction of percentages, I’m sure that could be worked out mathmatically though I will say I’m no math wiz. I agree with each state having its electoral voters being split along the lines of the percentages being awarded per electoral vote. Or perhaps, it would be more like popular vote, but only on a state by state concensus to better able detection and isolation of vote tampering/fraud. The problem with the states that have the highest number of electoral votes is that they are 1) very liberal leaning because of unions, educational institutions which tend to hold sway over the general academia in the area, 2) welfare states to such a degree that half the population there is on some sort of government handout, and 3) states that are attractive to emigrants and illegal aliens who are drawn by more diverse culture/slackness of the rule of law where they can more easily assimilate. So you see that as long as these states with the greatest number of elctoral votes according to population can easily decide for us (the majority of the other states) who becomes president.
Just do nationwide what ME and NE already do. Whoever carries a congressional district gets that electoral vote. The two “at large” EVs go to whoever carries the state as a whole.
New Mexico could have been turned with a Romney campaign starting on Albuquerque TV two weekends before today. Show him as a reasonable man, moderate conservative Mitt. No way can we allow the most hopeful map have Oregon go for Romney and still leave New Mexico blue. If Oregon votes Romney, so will New Mexico!
One more thing to celebrate: let’s destroy the current color scheme between now and 2016! Make the neo-coms be Commie Red and us be True Blue Republicans!
Thanks Stephen and all the above posters.
Hell of a prediction!! I’ll – at least in my heart – go with your final tally map.
But sometimes I think I’m “whistling past the graveyard”.
All the professional pollsters are terming this one “too close to call”. Somewhere, someone (or lots of someones) is/are flat out wrong.
Higher than normal turnout means what? If it is true that:
1. actual independents break for the challenger
2. that the republicans will have a larger than normal turnout and that none of them vote for the left
3. the democrat voters turnout is slightly less than normal and that some of them actually vote for Romney…
then for sure, Romney will win the popular vote…and perhaps by a wider that polled margin.
But as we all know…it is only – repeat ONLY – the Electoral College that matters.
As I said, I’m going with your final map all the way (walks away whistling…)
Latest (last?) dirty trick out of the Obama campaign today is for him to declare victory early in the evening as a way to suppress Romney voters in the other 3 time zones (central, mountain and pacific – nobody cares about Alaska or Hawaii).
Remember that we are all BGVs (broken glass voters). Get out and vote.
Remember the voter suppression by the media calling Florida for Manbearpig in 2000 before the polls in the western part of the state closed. Don’t do it again. Cheers -
Stephen – In the wildest pro-Romney scenario he could not take Minnesota.
For what it’s worth, I just gamed some numbers based on Gallup’s recently released numbers for voter self-identification (35 R, 34 D; sample size over 9K) and the “ticket participation” or some such in yesterday’s CNN (99 R, 95 D). Other assumption is Indies breaking 52 R 48 D. Working all that through, the popular vote comes out
52.5% Romney/Ryan
47.5% Obama/Biden
How it shakes out in the EC deponent sayeth not.
How does it feel to be absolutely full of shit?