Posted on 05/10/2012 9:29:34 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Eager to debunk the conventional wisdom that suggests that the Obama campaign has an easier path to an electoral college victory than they do, Romney campaign officials briefed reporters today on the many ways they can reach the magic 270 number.
With names like the 3-2-1″ plan, the Southern Sweep and Hawkeye Granite, the Romney campaign argues that it can lose some traditionally red states and still win the White House.
In the 4 + 1″ plan, for example, Romney would need to carry four states Florida, North Carolina, Virginia and Ohio, but just one of these former red states: Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico or Iowa. A win in Pennsylvania or New Hampshire both of which went blue in 2004 plus the original four would also work.
The 3-2-1″ map requires Romney to win three traditionally Republican states Virginia, North Carolina and Indiana; pick up two states carried by George W. Bush in 2000/2004 Florida and Ohio; and then pick up just one of eight states, many of which were considered Republican before 2008 New Hampshire, New Mexico, Iowa, Nevada, Colorado, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.
The path that, in my estimation, looked the most realistic was dubbed the I-80 scenario. In it, Romney would need to hold onto to all the states carried by John McCain, carry the states along Interstate 80 Nevada, Indiana, Colorado, Iowa and Ohio, and then North Carolina and Florida. Colorado is probably the toughest of those states for Romney to carry (and, technically, the interstate doesnt go through there, it snakes along its northern border). If he lost Colorado, hed need to carry Virginia.
The Romney campaign continues to be optimistic about its chances in traditionally blue states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
No. Those would leave him at exactly 270. What the heck numbers are you looking at? Use that link I posted maybe you are looking the electoral votes from before the new census.
to make it worse, he needs to flip a safe state.
I have no idea what state you could be referring to. I laid out the numbers for you. The "safe" Obama states result in about 200 votes about the same as the states I think are certain to go for Romney (206).
I also don't understand why you are fixating on the number of states he needs to "flip" either. Bush needed to flip a lot of states to win in 2000. Obama needed to flip 1 and did much better than that. Things change, this is not 2008 when Obama won because Bush and the GOP were as popular as dirt. Romney is tied or slightly ahead in credible polls. You could better compare this election to 2004.
Obama could win, especially if Romney screws up but I think his ceiling is lower, ie if someone pulls out to a decent lead it won't be Obama. If he wins it's narrowly. My own prediction is a narrow win for Romney.
another 3rd shifter I see. First of all, national polls don’t matter, they never do. All that matters to Mitt Romney is “flipping” enough previously blue battleground states and/or other previously blue states and, as I said, that means he has to flip Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Indiana, NH, and one other previously blue state. failing to flip the “one other previously blue state” puts him at 265 EVs to Obama’s 273. So, I am sure he’ll grab a few of those states but I don’t believe the demographics are sufficiently in his favor to flip ALL of them.
First of all, national polls dont matter, they never do.
State polls in the swing states matter more but still it's retarded to pretend national polls mean nothing. If Romney is polling ahead nationally it's not plausible that he'd lose states that are more Republican than the country. That alone places him on the cusp of victory. If you win the popular vote by more than 1% the chances you'll lose the electoral college is slim.
that means he has to flip Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Indiana, NH, and one other previously blue state.
For the THIRD TIME that collection of states results in exactly 270, learn to count my friend. How many votes do you have those adding up to because I'm telling you the correct number is 270. Even if he needed 2 more states which he wouldn't because that collection of states results in exactly 270 I think he'll get Iowa and Colorado is 50/50. And there are several other states Obama won in play.
And you are making it sound like Romney is starting from where McCain did an has to make up that ground somehow. If so where have you been the past 4 years? Obama was on a high in 2008, he's come back to Earth. He's not gonna get that same high turnout with Blacks or White college idiots and he's not gonna do as well with independents.
Also this isn't a video game where Romney is expending bullets to "flip states" one at a time and he's gonna run out of ammo before he can get the last one or something like that. Your characterization of the race is very bizarre to me, forgive me for not quite understanding.
Every state is on a pendulum and that pendulum has swung further to the Republican side than it was in 2008.
No. It would add up to 264 under the previous allocation (not 265) but it adds up to 270 now because we had a census and the number of votes each state gets has changed, this occurs every 10 years.
Of this I'm 100% certain. I have no idea how you are doing your counting but it's wrong, you are giving Obama 5 phantom votes.
http://uselectionatlas.org/TOOLS/evcalc.php
Please use that link and see for yourself so we can stop arguing about your incorrect math on top of more important things.
He also has to win all of Nebraska's EVs which McCain failed to do btw.
Please, that 1 vote is the surest gain of all. Obama won the Omaha congressional district by a hair after trying hard to do so. In a fantasy world where he is more popular than last time maybe he wins it again, in the real world where he is less popular he has 0 chance of winning it and would be a fool to waste a dime trying.
You are untitled to your view that Romney has "long odds" but most serious analysts would disagree. Only people saying it will be an easy Obama win are democrat shills and people who think Romney is worse than Obama and thus want Romney to lose. Neither of them live in the real world in terms of correctly evaluating the race. Honestly saying a guy tied or AHEAD in the national polls has "long odds" is just completely absurd. He has even odds at worst as of today. The election isn't today but that's where it stands now.
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.