Posted on 05/28/2012 12:19:55 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Not too long ago pundits were arguing that Mitt Romney’s path to 270 electoral votes was “narrow.” We didn’t buy it.
Lo and behold, conventional wisdom has now changed. The Associated Press writes: “Warning signs for Obama on tight path to 270.” The AP explains:
Obama’s new worries about North Carolina and Wisconsin offer opportunities for Republican Mitt Romney, who must peel off states Obama won in 2008 if he’s to cobble together the 270 electoral votes needed to oust the incumbent in November.
Iowa, which kicked off the campaign in January, is now expected to be tight to the finish, while New Mexico, thought early to be pivotal, seems to be drifting into Democratic territory.
If the election were today, Obama would likely win 247 electoral votes to Romney’s 206, according to an Associated Press analysis of polls, ad spending and key developments in states, along with interviews with more than a dozen Republican and Democratic strategists both inside and outside of the two campaigns.
Seven states, offering a combined 85 electoral votes, are viewed as too close to give either candidate a meaningful advantage: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio and Virginia.
Among that group, you have to like Romney’s chance in Florida, New Hampshire, Nevada, Ohio and Virginia, with Iowa and Colorado going to the President Obama. That puts Romney’s total at 276....
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
"If the election were today, Obama would likely win 247 electoral votes to Romney’s 206"
ANY OTHER CONSERVATIVE WOULD WIN TODAY, TOMORROW, AND November.
And THAT is why Romney was chosen by the DNC.
What data is she seeing that would lead one to believe Iowa, Nevada and Colorado are competitive for Mittens?
The way it appears today is that either Romney or BHO will win the presidency. I will vomit no matter who wins on election day. A liberal R or a liberal D - are still liberals.
lds vote will push Romney over the top, probably Colorado as well.
The Democrats kind of think the economy is doing o.k. Plus, they think Obama is a great campaigner. Plus, they really don’t believe that Rasmussen and Gallup show this race to be close. Therefore, they think, the race is theirs to lose.
On the other hand, we have already seen about a half dozen Democrat Senators, Governors and Congressmen dissociate themselves from Obama. And, the money isn’t coming in as projected for Obama. So, who exactly are the Democrats who think the race is Obama’s to lose?
It is an increasingly narrow circle of cult-like followers and hangers-on. Everybody else realizes this is going to be a big year for the Republicans. We will win just about all the races thought, at this time, to be close and also a good number of surprises.
Did I mention that the index of leading indicators went down this month? Has anybody in the mainstream media mentioned this?
A lot of states which Obama won comfortably in 2008 may be in play. I include the following:
Pennsylvania: This could be the state that ends Obama’s Presidency. Democrats have won it since 1992, but Bush nearly won in 2004 and even the hapless Bob Dole ran better-than-expected there in 1996.
Nevada: IMHO, McCain got caught off guard. The terrible economy hurts Obama badly now. Also, the state has a significant Mormon vote. The Reno area and suburbs of Las Vegas will decide the outcome.
Wisconsin: Watch the recall vote VERY CLOSELY. Also, George W. Bush very nearly won the state twice.
Colorado: Obama won by a larger-than-expected margin and demographic trends favor the ‘Rats. However, there are strong conservative voting blcos (especially Colorado Springs) and the economy is bad.
Minnesota: An improbable place, but still an opportunity. It nearly went for George W. Bush twice and ex-Governor Tim Pawlenty will go all out for Romney. Republicans did very, very well there in the 2010 off-year elections.
The author makes an interesting point about the Hispanic vote. Obama is far ahead natoinwide among Hispanics, but that’s bloated by overwhelming margins among Hispanics in California, Illinois, and New York. Among Hispanics in Florida and Texas, for example, his margins are less impressive.
Watch the (BO) pond dry up.
Minnesota: An improbable place, but still an opportunity. It nearly went for George W. Bush twice and ex-Governor Tim Pawlenty will go all out for Romney. Republicans did very, very well there in the 2010 off-year elections.
Yes they did. but in a statewide election you get Dimbulbs like Dayton.
You have to get the core metro area to stay home or the dimbulbs will win the statewide offices much like they did in 2010.
It would be funny as hell if a ton of unregistered Mormon wives who are never let out of the house suddenly showed up at the polls to vote for Romney. The Democrats, who pull manufactured crap like this all the time would complain but what could they do? THEY passed all the crap to allow this sort of thing to happen.
Wisconsin will go red for the first time since 1988. And Mittens Romney and the GOP-E will take the credit.
Sorry guys, but it’ll be Scott Walker who is the hero here.
And typical of the RNC, this factoid will not be acknowledged.
Conservatives are the ones working the hardest in this state right now..Grassroots, Conservative, Tea Party activists.
Hmmm. Reince, Ryan and the establishment gang must have misplaced our phone numbers.
I’m sure our gifts are in the mail.
And THAT is why Romney was chosen by the DNC.
Why don’t you hold your breath and stomp your feet.
NJ Sen Menendez every 2 years seems to like to claim GOP Senate candidate for any state was not in touch with that state’s values.
I am guessing Tammy Baldwin is to far left for Wisconsin. Pres. Obama I dare you, campaign with Baldwin, hold hand in unity!
If you look at all the presidential elections since 1888, only in one race did a candidate win the electoral vote without gaining a plurality of the popular vote (if we include fraud): that, of course would be George W. Bush vs. Al Gore in 2000, who trailed in the popular vote by a mere half a percentage point.
In the current race, although we still have more than five months until the election, the educated guess is that Romney will beat Obama by more than a couple of points nationally. So, should that occur, Jennifer Rubin need not waste her time figuring out how Romney will win the Electoral College. It will almost surely follow by the rules of probability and statistics.
“So, should that occur, Jennifer Rubin need not waste her time figuring out how Romney will win the Electoral College. It will almost surely follow by the rules of probability and statistics.”
True, but if Obama is defeated for reelection, we want the electoral vote victory to be as wide as possible, so that a mandate can be claimed.
What data is she seeing that would lead one to believe Iowa, Nevada and Colorado are competitive for Mittens?
What States Border Utah and have large Mormon Populations?
Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, Arizona, Nevada all have regions where there is strong Mormon representation.
not iowa
If you’d kept reading instead of fulminating, you’d have seen:
“That puts Romney’s total at 276.”
The 247/206 initial comment just allocates the EVs by state propensity; then she analyzes the swing states. There is no way any conservative would take today’s CA or NY or VT or or or. The battle will be among the half dozen or so states that could go either way. At the moment, that favors Romney.
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.