Oh, that is true.
Nevertheless, any Demon Rat--Hitlery, Michelle Obama, Fauxachontas, the socialist NYC mayor, Dennis Kook-cinich, ANY DemonRat starts with a huuuuuge advantage.:
Gallup's daily polling from last year showed these states as the most "Democrat" of all 50...how many electoral votes does ANY DemonRAT start with, then--meaning they don't have to campaign in these states because the voting population is so dense, so uneducated, so addicted to government that the DemonRat is assured of winning the state?
You also ought to throw in a couple of other states: Wisconsin and Pennsylvania....both of those states have, sadly, voted for the DemonRat candidates in EACH OF THE LAST SIX PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS....so, sadly, here is what the DemonRat starts with:
247 votes...sucks, I know. But we cannot avoid reality. Has Obama done so much damage to the DemonRat party that some of that advantage is mitigated? Maybe. But not much.
Now, let's look at what the Republican starts with. Here are Gallup's most Republican states in 2013:
So, let's add those states with the same criteria as we applied to the DemonRats. States SO solid for Republicans that campaigning shouldn't be done there--you add...Texas and Mississippi. That is it. Believe it or not, every other state has voted Democrat at least once since 1992. So here is the "solid" Republican map, as I see it:
105 votes. Paltry.
In other words, the Demonrat starts out needing ONLY 23 electoral votes to find...whereas the Republican has to find 165.
Resources are limited--and the Demon Rat can put their monies and operations in many places.
Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Missouri, are all deeply competitive but they are almost MUST wins for the Republican--the 'rat can afford to lose them because it can afford to cobble together 23 votes elsewhere.
I don't want to be depressing, but realistic.
If someone wants to shed light and hopefully suggest I have missed something, I am open to that possibility.
Please note, the "solid" designation may have shifted...I can't imagine, really, Kentucky or Louisiana or Tennessee or West Virginia or Arkansas or Georgia REALLY voting for a Democrat. But how much does that help the Republican? And just for fun, let's add in Indiana and North Carolina--two states that went for Obama in '08 but went for Romney in '12. Let's see:
Well, that helps a wee bit. Now the Republican is at 179 votes. So s/he is short by 91 votes.
The Republican starts out needing 91 votes, the DemonRat only 23.
Thoughts, anyone?
they use the term “tipping point” and, as I’ve noted, FLA is no longer in that column as it has become more GOP than average. Prob stayed the same as COL VA NV have drifted left.
Pennsylvania has moved toward the GOP. I have no articulate theory on it. Industry. Coal. Rural-living.
Republicans have to win FL, OH, CO and NV to win - all states Obama carried in 2012.
PA is not winnable because of Philly. So it leaves those four states plus VA which nowadays is very difficult to win because its flipped from Red to Purple.
The path is there but its easier for a Democrat than a Republican in Purple states due to changing demographics.
As it stands the GOP is at a disadvantage and has to run the boards to win the White House.
Its the political reality come 2016.
For a Republican to win, on top of what you have (179), we would have to parlay winning all of:
Florida - 29
Wisconsin - 10
Ohio - 18
Arkansas - 6
Missouri - 10
Iowa - 6
Arizona - 11
Which gives 269.
Meaning we’d have to also get one of:
Virginia - 13
Colorado - 9
Nevada - 6
New Mexico - 5
New Hampshire - 4
Maine - 4
Pretty long odds. But God is in the long odds business.