Posted on 04/30/2012 9:13:27 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Bush’s two successful races, and the map on which he built them, are quite instructive when trying to understand Romney’s narrow margin for error this fall.
In 2000, Bush won 271 electoral votes — one more than he needed to claim the presidency. In eking out that victory, Bush not only carried the South and Plains states with a near sweep but also claimed wins in swing states such as Nevada, Colorado, Missouri and the major electoral-vote prizes of Ohio and Florida.
If Romney was able to duplicate Bush’s 2000 map, he would take 285 electoral votes — thanks to redistricting gains over the past decade.
But to do so, Romney would need not only to win the five swing states mentioned above — with the exception of Missouri, all of them are considered tossups (at worst) for the president at the moment — but also hang on to states such as North Carolina and Virginia where Bush cruised 12 years ago. (Obama carried both states in
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Now, the good(ish) news for Romney is that if he has a low ceiling, he also has a relatively high floor.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) won 173 electoral votes in 2008. If Romney carried those same 22 states under the 2012 map, he would win 180 electoral votes.
Add Indiana, which McCain lost but which will almost certainly go for Romney in 2012, and the former Massachusetts governor’s electoral floor sits at 191.
Given the narrowness of his electoral map window, the key for Romney this fall is to win in places that Bush, McCain and other Republican nominees over the past two decades have struggled to make inroads. No Republican has carried Pennsylvania (20 electoral votes), Michigan (16) or Wisconsin (10) in any of the past five elections, for example.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Bigtime
I’m digging in.
I wont just charge down the hill into slaughter.
Live to fight another day, but tomorrow lets fight the dems instead of our own.
I’m digging in.
I wont just charge down the hill into slaughter.
Live to fight another day, but tomorrow lets fight the dems instead of our own.
Exactly!
I actually relish the fight ahead of us.
We must stand together with other like minded people. We cannot survive if we are divided.
It’s a delicate process
NCO CMT2 Standing by and ready to defend the constitution
Lame Duck = Nothing To Lose More Flexible = Traitor America = Over
Scorched earth
Obama Reelection Terminology.
Lame Duck = Nothing To Lose, More Flexible = Traitor, America = Over.
This sums up our position.
If Obama wins he has nothing to lose, he will go scorched earth on us.
If Romney wins, we hold his feet to the fire.
I’ll proudly be at your side.....along with millions more.
Pray for the best.
It wont be pretty
Amen!
It’s not going to be close.
Obama is going to lose big.
To be fair, No one ever elected me.
I am not a Charismatic.
I’m a realist and a fighter
Ted Cruz for Senate!
The polls son’t reflect that..It is very close.
Or to put it another way:
Start with www.270towin.com , which has MR at 191.
Add:
FL - 29
NC - 15
VA - 13
IA - 6
That’s 254. Add one of:
PA - 20
OH - 18
MI - 16
And, voila, Bye Bye Barry.
There are a lot of traitors about.
And there are a lot of weak hearts.
Sarah Palin needs to **** or get off the pot.
Our ticket is being shredded with indecision.
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.