Posted on 09/09/2012 12:42:46 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
After a week when the American media gave saturation coverage to the Democratic national convention, Mitt Romney has responded by buying his own air time. His latest television ad buys, totalling $4.5m, is targeted at the states of Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia. No one can fault Romney for going on the air in these states. They are all winnable for either candidate, and they were won by George W Bush at least once.
The issue is that Romney is leaving himself with little room for error. If you assign the states to the candidate who is leading in the polls outside the ad states, you get a map that looks like this.
(GRAPHIC AT LINK)
By that map, President Obama holds a clear advantage – with 247 electoral votes to Mitt Romney's 191. Obama has 18 ways to reach 270 electoral votes, while Romney can name only 11 winning combinations. The arithmetic also dictates that Romney must win the state of Florida. If he doesn't, Obama has won a second term.
If we assign Nevada, where Romney hasn't led in a poll since April 2011, to President Obama, the math becomes even less forgiving for the Republican nominee. Now, Romney must win both Florida and Ohio. And that leaves Romney with only five ways to thread the needle.
Such a game-plan is nothing new in presidential campaigns. Michael_Dukakis tried the "18-state strategy" in 1988. Dukakis, of course, didn't come close, and lost 40 states. John_Kerry's swing-state effort in 2004 is another analogue. Kerry needed to win two of the three upper midwest states (Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin), plus Pennsylvania and either Florida or Ohio. Kerry managed parts one and two, to get to 252 electoral votes, but failed to take either Florida or Ohio...
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
So, to figure out what that means you need the best possible polling state by state to see what's really happening to the demographic voting ~ you actually can't go backwards from demographics at the national scale and predict individual state votes.
There are some other mistakes in this analysis but I'm surprised Romney has 11 different ways to get up to the required number of electoral votes ~ I suspect he has only 1 way to do that, and his support team has assumed he will pull all heavily Mormon areas ~ Idaho, Utah and Nevada ~
You have to remember that on DAY 1.
That was forgotten this year which means you have people still bleating and crying for Republicans to get behind "the" candidate as if they have some obligation.
You can't run a primary series and leave behind a majority of your base in a dissatisfied emotional state ~ even if you win you will NOT enjoy your time in office.
The Guardian is a Leftist mouthpiece from London. No doubt, their Halloween edition will inform Americans that the election is over and Obama is the winner so there is no need to hold the election on Nov. 6.
The Guardian is a leftist UK paper — I am sure they are so rooting for Romney... (/sarc)
Nate Silver is one of the JOURNO Listers. And he has been working overtime the past 48 hours to spew out all sorts of stuff that Romney trailing in the national polls by 2-3 points means the race is over.
I realize Nate is hard pill to swallow since he’s generally been right on polls. But at the moment people need to tune him out. He’s like Toyko Rose of late, sending out broadcasts that conservatives don’t need to bother to vote this year since supreme commander Obama will mow us all down.
I’m not going to confidently predict that Romney will win. But he’s not a charismatic candidate that people are flocking to like they did the messiah in 2008, thus he isnt going to be showing tons of polling strength. Nonetheless, come November 6, there are going to be millions and millions of us marching to those voting boths and casting a ballot for him.
The Nate Silver’s of the world don’t quite understand the depth of frustration with Obama out here in fly over country. I think they will in 60 days.
I believe that Romney is going to win states that the Dems thought was theirs, such as Minnesota and New Mexico. Say what you want about Romney but I believe he is running an effective campaign, unlike obama.
Silver could be right. But he could be entirely wrong as were all pollsters in 1994 except Zogby, and all most pollsters in 2004 except Ras. It's the old consensus thing: a consensus doesn't mean you're right. It may mean that you and others are in agreement, but you're wrong.
That said, I don't like the new Romney ads. They are specific and well targeted, but I don't think they hit Obama hard enough. However, I do think the Superpacs will take care of that, and Romney's strategy is to continue the "nice guy but failed leader" approach.
Folks, we have to admit that since Romney BY ALL POLLS is killing it with indies, this part of the strategy is working.
This is why I think Silver is really, really wrong: ALL the internals of almost every poll show a) higher support by GOP than Dems for their candidate; b) a 7-15 point lead for Romney among indies; c) a significant lead for Romney among men; and d) a virtual tie among women. Now, as Chris Rock once said, "Dat ain't right." Something is off here.
“Lighten up. And support our guy.”
Your Little RINO is not “our guy”.
Big difference between facts and opinions.
Just saying. We will see.
In 2010, PA also had about 8 congressional seats that switched from Dem to GOP. I’d call that pretty much a GOP sweep. Bush only lost PA by 4 points in 2004.
It’s hard for the conservstive T in PA to overcome the Philly/Pittsburgh liberal metro areas, if the urban areas come out in force. One factor in Romney’s favor is that the affluent suburbs in those metro areas may not be so enthusiastic about Obama this time and polls are showing that the urban voters are not as juiced about Obama as before.
So it could be close. Romney definitely needs to make Obama spend money in PA.
You’ll know PA is in play if Obama abandons the warm fuzzy ads he’s been running in that state, for the racist scare tactic James Byrd ones. That will be a desperation move that may turn off suburban voters, but if he sees it slipping away, it’s his Hail Mary.
“I think now 0bama will win 56% -59% of the popular vote.”
Some of your supporting points are right on.
As to your conclusion here, you are high.
This is somewhere between a 50/50 election and a 52-48 election.
We win Florida and Ohio, we win the election.
“You’ll notice from the map that this guy assumes that Mr. Obama will win Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan. I don’t know if I’d be so sure about all those.”
Of those you mention above, I believe only Wisconsin may be within Romney’s reach.
PA and MI will seem tantalizingly close, but Obama will take them.
I looked at the original article and thought the author’s electoral map looked to be about the same as I would predict.
I was hoping Romney might take Nevada, but I sense that it, too, may slip out of his grasp. On the other hand, I saw Obama winning Iowa (which is “the Vermont” of the Midwest), but Romney might edge him out there.
New Hampshire, even though it casts only 3 electoral votes, could become a major player in Romney’s victory.
Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina and Florida are “must wins” for Romney — without them, he doesn’t make it.
For these reasons, I don’t think it’s a bad idea to throw the lion’s share of campaigning and campaign money into the “battleground states”.
They will become his only pathway towards victory.
“I beg Californian conservatives to spend one weekend in Nevada — either Reno or Las Vegas — and help knock on doors & talk fiscal conservatism.”
Fiscal “conservatism”?
In Nevada? The land of Vegas?
This is a joke, right?
Thanks LS. I have suspected from the start that making a buys in certain states does not mean buys are NOT being made in other states.
chopperjc, Do you have a link to reports of money being pulled from Michigan etc?
There are plenty of places in the country where patriotism is alive and well, where teachers are still doing more than indoctrinating little Obots, where image and celebrity take a back seat to common sense, where minorities are still in the minority, and where conservatives can state their views without fear of reprisal. You need to consider making a break and moving to the heartland.
Things are not as bad as they seem to you. It is going to be a battle, but Obama is going down despite your valid concerns. The Dems knew that they couldn't draw the same crowds to their convention that they had last time... that is why they switched to a venue with one quarter the seating. So sure people are stupid and they react to fiery empty speeches but after a couple of days their common sense starts to take over again.
Romney is no Reagan, but he is currently the only realistic choice for anyone who cares about the future of their children and grandchildren. Rasmussen's latest poll shows that likely registered voters identifying themselves as Republicans rose to the highest number since Rasmussen began polling this in 2002. This is higher than even during the midterms in 2010.
This is a time to be hopeful and enthusiastic not depressed and pessimistic. How do you think your hero President Reagan would feel about your latest posts? When President Reagan came to visit our area... my friends and I stood up to liberal protesters who outnumbered us by 100 to 1. The situation created enough of a spectacle that we made the papers; and we actually stole the headlines from the communist protesters. Even our liberal local media loves an underdog story. The coverage was brought to the attention of President Reagan and he sent me two separate letters thanking us.
Do you think that these leftist idiots just appeared during your lifetime? They have been causing trouble in the United States for the last hundred years. Sometimes as in the case of President Obama they gain a real foot hold. We conservatives can never stop fighting them even when the odds are against us. Pessimism, complacency, and laziness are our real enemies. I am sincerely worried about you. Do yourself and your country a favor... find a conservative woman, move away from Southern California and raise a family in the heartland. The country is going to need a lot of strong conservative kids if it is too survive the next century.
According to the following link which lists the best and the worst states to live in as a conservative... you are living in the worst state in the country.
“The following are the best and worst places in the country for conservatives, taking a number of factors into consideration from taxes to dating opportunities, political affiliation, weather, housing prices and more.”
http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/02/06/5-best-and-5-worst-places-for-conservatives-to-live/
There’s still a (long) time to the election.
Just look at what has happened on this site. At first there was a lot, a lot of opposition to Romney here.
Romney picked a pretty solid VP candidate. Meanwhile that other guy (I forgot his name) the dems are running went further communist.
Face it, Romney isn’t perfect but he’s a million times better than that other guy.
Vote.
Having lived in Pennsylvania for the last 25 years you can write it off. This state is full of some of the most ignorant voters I have ever seen.
Not only that, but Karl Rove and the other SuperPACs have well over ONE BILLION dollars to spend between now and November 6th.
I somewhat understand about Philadelphia (Mrs. 2ndDivisionVet went to Archbishop Ryan H.S.) but I thought Pittsburg might be a bit more conservative. If the GOP swept all those races, what would make all those people backtrack and vote for an uber-liberal?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.