Skip to comments.Karl Rove's Early Electoral Map: OBAMA WINS
Posted on 04/26/2012 12:15:14 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Ever since Mitt Romney all but secured the Republican nomination, we were all waiting with bated breath.
Wait no more. Karl Rove has finally put out his inaugural 2012 electoral map. And who's winning?
Barack Obama. Here it is, in all its glory:
You can see there how it breaks down: Right now, 284 votes are either solidly for Obama or "leaning Obama." Romney only has 172 solidly in his grasp or "leaning" toward him. The remaining 82 electoral votes are toss-ups.
What does this mean? Well, first, that Romney has some catching up to do and the gravity of the map he's up against. According to this map, even if Romney wins all the toss-up states of Iowa, Missouri, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Florida — which could be done — he still wouldn't beat Obama.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Rove is wrong again.
No way Obama wins Nevada. Think about it.
For several others, there are arguments to be made each way, but Nevada? C’mon...what’s he going to say will go to Obama next...Idaho? Utah?
Missouri voted against B.O. LAST TIME and even so, the “mood” around here was very liberal. No more.
What the media missed about our “Raucous Caucus” here was that the attendance was TEN TIMES all previous experience - and even in the re-do caucus, everyone showed up AGAIN.
Missouri may look like a tossup from inside the beltway to Rove but then, Rove is an idiot.
And for helping shape today’s Republican Party which can’t bring about an electoral majority against the worst President in American history, we can thank ...
... Karl Rove.
I'd say he's making states a Republican will probably carry into leaning Republican or toss-up states. But taking into account the advantages of incumbency, I'd say Obama stands a pretty good chance of carrying OH, PA, and MI. It's certainly not a lock, but a Republican will have to work hard to win those states.
Here's an alternative map that may be more plausible:
RE: Your map
So, Democratic states are now red and Republican states are now blue? When did that happen?
Uh...I don't think so. My map has Romney 311, Obama 227. But a lot can change.
I'm pretty sure Obama will win Vermont before he wins Indiana, though.
It just happened to be the map program that I used. As a whole though, I always found it odd that the traditional conservative color of blue was placed on dems and the red of socialism placed on the gop.
Yeah, looking now, I really screwed up on a lot of them. It won’t be a landslide for Obama, no matter what.
It's just a matter of time and demographics. Texas WILL flip to the blue side eventually. Mexicans outbreed whites and blacks.
But, but, but, but, but Karl the Great told us the Mittster was the only electable One. And now Karl’s the one with buyer’s remorse??
Yup, focus everything on those Senate races. I remember some polling a month or so ago that showed the Senate Democrats doing much worse in the polls than Obama was at the time. Gridlocking Obama for the next 4 years has an upside. His ability to be President would be exhausted during a time he couldn’t do much. Frankly we’re lucky the economy was as bad as it was while he was President, otherwise he would have had much more leeway to pass more socialist welfare programs and corrupt stimulus measures. If Obama loses, he could run again for another term years down the road, at a time when there is a liberal Congress waiting for him and do far more damage. And I’m not sure the Dems have a better weapon in the wings for later, someone as far-left and as charismatic in selling it to the public. So there is an upside to burning him out now while he’s weak, especially since the alternative is his progressive Republican counterpart, Mitt.
The RCP average map isn’t much different.
Many of us oldtimers remember that the way Theoria has it is the original color scheme.
FL & OH aren’t swing states. The Republican will easily win them. In 2010, both of those states elected new U.S. senators, and both are Republicans. In ‘10, both of those states elected new governors, and both are Republicans.
Maybe Uncle Walter didn't know but Carter did. Pat Caddell, his pollster, told Carter on Sunday evening that all his polling showed that Carter had no chance to win the election which was two days away.
I would have voted for Newt....
As me again about the latter following their Traditional Marriage amendment state constitutional vote on their primary ballot.
PA's not possible for Romney. McCain was probably the ideal Republican to run in PA and he performed horribly. Mitt doesn't stand a chance. FL was a 2-point spread, OH 4-point and PA 10-point. Let's not forget Toomey barely won his Senate seat in PA in 2010 during the big Tea Party year by a 2-point spread. MI was a huge 17-point spread so you can forget about that one too.
I laughed at that one, too!
“That’s the way uh huh uh huh karl likes it... uh huh uh huh”!
SC a toss-up?? Get real.
I think Mr. Romney will do quite well in Deseretland... especially Colorado. The key is always OHIO... and a massive voter turnout. BARRY OBAMA! ;o)
Thanks AT LAST for a map with the correct colors! Red for the socialists and pinkos, blue for the patriots!
That being said, I think you’ve made at least two mistakes:
1. You show Vermont as blue. It’s actually the reddest place in the USA, with the only self-declared socialist in the U. S. Senate.
2. You show Nevada as red. Nope. The large Mormon population there will give Romney a lock.
Therefore, when we correct for those two errors, Romney gains a net of three electoral votes. And if we accept the rest of your predictions, the final tally is Romney 271, Øbama 267.
On top of that, I think Indiana is also a lock for Romney. So even if he doesn’t win Ohio, I gotta put Romney’s electoral total at 282 or better.
Normally, any Republican should win this in a landslide against Carter, er, I mean Obama. Unfortunately, liberal/progressive Romney is no Republican.
While I fully expect SC to stay in the GOP column, IMHO the vote tally is going to be closer than many think: 1.) Mitt's religion. 2.) Gov. Haley, a Mitt endorser, falling from favor. 3.) Demographics and immigration from the NE and FLA.
“I have said for months that the polls are meaningless because no one is going to tell a pollster that they disapprove of Obama and risk being called a racist.”
I agree that these polls intuitively seem way off however I do not agree with the above statement in general. That’s margin of error material.
It's not just "support' ~ you can buy that, but what do you do when you win the delegates in a state with fewer votes than you got in 2008?
You can win if and only if you can get people to literally support you and go door to door and stick up signs and create some sense that there's something there!
So, after all that work Rove has to admit his boy is a loser.
I could have told him that.
Selecting him to run with Romney is simply throwing more heavy towels in the toilet!~
“at this stage in the game, any map or chart that Karl produces is done for the purpose of raising money for the GOP.”
Repeat three times in a row, Freepers.
Buckeye nailed it.
Many of us who are supporters of the other candidates have argued for a long time that Etch-a-Sketch is about as electable as McCain, Dole, or Ford. Now the Romneybot Rove appears to be on board.
Another problem is the idiot GOP elitists only understand how to market to people exactly like themselves, i.e. socially liberal urban professionals with lots of college education. That myopic view is one reason why they wanted Romney. They think they can get the “independent” Democrat voters who think, act and live like them to switch sides.
In reality, the biggest disconnect out there is how so many minority voters are SOCIALLY CONSERVATIVE but vote Democrat, even though their party doesn’t speak to those views at all. A better strategy would be to push social conservatism to try to make Hispanics and others realize that the Republicans are the party of traditional morality and family values.
So this self-absorbed view on the part of the GOP establishment, assuming that the only important voters are ones who think exactly like them, is another reason they’ll probably lose.
The Nevada thing has to do with Mormon demographics ~ they are union miners.
I wouldn’t worry too much about his ‘scary prediction’, it’s just his way of getting even with Conservative Republicans for turning their backs on him.
Nice try though.
That's because the Dumbocrats are always feeling depressed because Republicans are so much hotter than them.
Socially conservative from the point of the country as a whole, maybe. But socially conservative in terms of the Republican Party, maybe not.
What I mean, is even when swing voters consider themselves socially conservative they won't always vote for the most socially conservative Republicans.
Those voters are socially conservative in comparison with liberal Democrats, but can be pretty moderate in comparison with the most conservative Republicans.
Also, they may respond well to pro-life and pro-family themes, but not to Republican economic policies.
We've seen this before with very devout minority voters who still vote heavily for Democrats. No reason to think that would change anytime soon.
And this is the guy Rove wanted to win the nomination????? He is only NOW realizing he backed a loser!
I’m happy our energies will be devoted to TEA Party candidates!
The liars are free to do battle between themselves.
That's true, but the Republicans are trying to appeal to the opposite, the socially liberal, well-off, white voters who might like conservative economic policy. Trouble is they're violating conservative orthodoxy by changing their views on social conservatism. It's a much more natural fit for the party to seek out minority voters, especially since we don't have to change our economic policy much if it all, but simply explain stuff like the "trickle-down" theory better. And, arguably, the Hispanic voters are the most important demographic we need to appeal to going forward.
To hang on to those socially liberal voters later, they need to abandon their social conservative principles pretty much completely and permanently. To get minority voters, as well as any remaining white Reagan Democrat types, we ought to be able to stick to all our principles, and simply work on the marketing and messaging of our economic views. Our economic philosophies result in a better country for all.
Everyone thinks Rove is this mastermind but consider that he was going up against Al Gore and John Kerry and barely eeked out a win.
The guy is over rated.
I think theoretically good polls can be taken but the crap they give out free to the public are nothing but propaganda.
“The question becomes: what do we do to stop Obama from implementing his agenda from 2013-2016?”
The answer likely depends on how many Republican Congressmen and Senators are either RINO’s or have a skeleton in their closets the administration can exploit. Remember the 900 FBI files during the Clinton years. No doubt Big Sis Napolitano has collected plenty of information over the past 3 1/2 years.
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.