Posted on 04/21/2011 2:58:19 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
“And Trump would be a disastrous GOP presidential candidate, doing even worse than McCain did.”
I disagree. Donny can win. Who else on the GOP side is going up against Soetoro and the MSM?
I’ve done the same thing, grumbling about CFLs in a store aisle - with the same result! Lather, rinse, repeat.
Giuliani is the only one who could put NY in play, and he’d still lose.
I also don’t see anyway Barry loses Illinois although I don’t think he’ll top 60% again.
I’d rate HI, CA, IL, MD, DE, NY, MA, RI, VT, DC as safe for Obama/Biden. Maybe CT and the vote from Maine’s 1st district too.
He made that map using Dave Leip’s atlas
Great site. It predates 2000 so it uses Blue for Republican.
http://www.uselectionatlas.org/
Only thing is they after having it all be free now want you to pay to see certain older data (like county data pre-1960).
I concur, although I would put CT in the Obama/Biden column as well. ME-1 was been overrun by sodomites and NY’ers. Too bad.
BTW, have you ever noticed that the presidential electoral maps since 1992 are not far from the opposite of those from the 1890s and 1900s? Back then, the GOP was strong in the Northeast and industrialized Midwest, the Dems strong in the South, Plains, and Rocky Mountain West. (That thought is from Peter Robinson in his book "It's My Party.")
“Congratulations to Dave Leip for using blue for Republican and red for Democrat!”
You should also congratulate fieldmarshaldj, who has always used that color scheme for any political maps he puts on FR.
Check out the 1916 and 2000 presidential election maps—they are almost polar opposites of each other. The only states to vote for the Republican in both elections (Charles Evans Hughes and George W. Bush) were SD, IN and WV (you could win a lot of bar bets with that tidbit), and the only states to vote for the Democrat in both elections (Woodrow Wilson and Al Gore) were WA, CA, NM and MD. Remarkably, NH was the only New England state, and one of only two in the 12 states comprising Northeast as a whole, to vote for Wilson in 1916, and it was also the only New England state, and one of only two in the Northeast to vote for Bush in 2000.
I think that MA is a swing state. Since Scott Brown won, the republican presidential candidate has a chance of winning that state. Obama will easily win CO. In 2010, that state elected a democrat to the U.S. Senate, and they elected a new Democrat governor.
I think you put too much stock in the recent midterm election results.
The democrat won the CO Senate race with less than 50% over a bad Republican candidate. The Governor won with 51% against 2 conservative candidates. Better GOP candidates would have won both offices. Colorado will be a tossup.
Scott Brown is slightly favored for a second term but we have no chance at winning the State for President. We’ve lost it the last 6 elections and gotten under 40% in the last 5. In 1994 RINO Governor Bill Weld won by a huge margin. 2 years later Bob Dole got 28% in MA.
“I think you put too much stock in the recent midterm election results.”
Perhaps. I think 2012 is going to be unlike anything we’ve seen in our lifetime: a real bloodfest.
I doubt that 2010 will be as much of a bloodfest as 2010 was, and we couldn’t win *any* House seats in MA. much less the governorship. And how many state house and senate seats did we pick up? The GOP presidential candidate could win 370 electoral votes and still fail to break 40% in Massachusetts.
"I doubt that 2012 will be as much of a bloodfest as 2010 was...."
As far as this fleabag state goes, like I've posted numerous times, write MA off. Send no money, offer no support. It's as done as the Easter ham was.
Let the last schmuck to leave shut off the Cape Wind-powered CFL off.
Good map with the RED states being correctly listed as commie RAT states. Interesting to see how the numbers shift with the new electoral numbers of the 2010 census.
Obama had some huge upsets in 2008 I never assumed were possible prior to the election, for example, getting Virginia in RAT column when not even “Born again folksy Georgia peanut farmer” Carter could carry it for the RATs in 1976, and managing to carry Indiana. (I attribute Obama’s NC win to pod person Bob Barr get 25,000 useful idiot conservatives to vote for him). Fortunately, 2010 showed most of those RAT victories were one-time flukes. We must remember 2010 was a swing in the opposite direction, so I would say some other victories like Brown carrying MA were once-in-a-lifetime events are not a trend for the state as a whole. Better to look at 2002 or 2004 for ideas of how states generally vote that ‘08’s referendum against Bush and 2010’s backlash against Obamacare, those were extremes.
Living in Illinois, I would pretty much rate it as safe RAT. The combiners and Chicago machine have pretty much proven they’d be able to elect Adolf Hitler as a “D” here during a GOP-friendly year, so they’re certainly carry it for “Chicago’s own” again 2012. Now, if Illinois allocated its electoral votes by congressional district we’d have a much better shot here, as in 2010 we won 10 out of 19 congressional districts drawn under the old lines. But alas, electoral college votes are allocated by statewide “popular” vote and Chicago supplies whatever votes they need to ensure their candidates win our “statewide” elections. Pennsyvania has a similar problem (Pittsburg and Philly outvote the rest of the state), on a lesser scale.
NY is a lost cause, despite some slight gains. Christie is the only one who could carry NJ over Obama, and he wouldn’t be able to do it with his current approval ratings, he needs more time to get the state back in shape.
There’s a slight possiblity ME-2 goes Republican again, but I’d bet against it. New Hampshire is a swing state IMO, it’s no longer nearly as Republican as it used to be, but the GOP made some nice gains in 2008 to reverse 100% RAT rule and with Boss Sununu no longer around to give cushy jobs to every politician’s kid, we have a chance at carrying it in 2012. Depending on the GOP nominee.
I ultimately think the RATs will carry WI & MI, the voters here seem braindead regardless of some gains we made in the midterms when less voters show up. In Presidential elections, da unions in those states get out their people to loyally vote Dem no matter how bad the unemployment is. Ditto Minnesota, aside from showing promise in the early-to-mid 2000s.
Colorado is probably the most difficult western state for us to win, thanks to enclaves of liberal latte drinkers and potheads. But there are still more libertarians than liberals. I put it as tossup. Montana could also go RAT (for some bizarre reason, the RATs do quite well here), but I think it will ultimately go GOP. I think there it is unlikely Nebraska will split it’s electoral votes again. Even Democrat friendly Omaha has had enough of similarly named Obama.
In the southwestern U.S., I think there is a real danger of New Mexico going RAT. This is almost exclusively due to the number of fraudulent illegal alien votes the Dems will be to get to the polls, all of whom will vote straight RAT. The NM RATs will use JFK’s 1960 “win” in Texas as a model for Obama 2012.
Florida and Arizona seem to be becoming more and more Republican. Damn yankee transplants! ;-)
As seems to be customary for the last couple of decades, Ohio’s vote totals will be very similar to the nation as a whole. So who we run for President and how well they do in Ohio will be a good indicator of who wins nationwide. Obama has mediocre poll numbers right now and the GOP has a good shot at making him a one-termer. Our biggest weakness at this point is the current field of likely GOP candidates is also very weak and each would bring some handicaps in the race that won’t factor into a “generic Republic” model. Hopefully a decent candidate emerges who is capable of winning this thing.
A bloodfest in favor of which party? I think that a Republican will be elected president, Republicans will gain four seats, in the U.S. Senate, and Democrats will gain 10 seats, in the U.S. House.
2012 is going to be THE referendum election. If the first (second?) “Black” (mulatto), Communist POTUS loses, they left knows they're done.
The GOP controlled states should have already passed Voter ID laws and Constitutional Eligibility laws months ago - first order of business stuff, because the leftists are going to do whatever to win.
*IL and MA seem to have identical problems. Like I've posted many times, certain states, like MA, RI or CT should be written off completely. At least in your state, you can still get a few US Reps. or a statewide Republican elected. The “completely blue” states are a complete waste of time and money.
“In the southwestern U.S., I think there is a real danger of New Mexico going RAT. This is almost exclusively due to the number of fraudulent illegal alien votes the Dems will be to get to the polls, all of whom will vote straight RAT. The NM RATs will use JFK’s 1960 “win” in Texas as a model for Obama 2012.”
*The GOP controlled states should have already passed Voter ID laws and Constitutional Eligibility laws months ago - first order of business.
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.