Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mitt Romney’s road to presidency this fall looks narrow on electoral map
The Washington Post ^ | April 30, 2012 | Chris Cillizza

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 ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: road2ridicule
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-193 last
To: presently no screen name
Well everyone had a chance to vote for Newt. The GOP didn’t give us NEWT! So this nonsense about the GOP giving us mitt - NO ONE had to support him.

Bingo. There were about 30 primaries before Santorum dropped out. The opportunity was there to vote for Santorum or Gingrich.

I live in Utah and the Utah primary is the last primary election in the country. I still plan on voting. It will be interesting to see who is on the ballot (Romney for sure, Santorum? Gingrich - maybe, unless he never paid the bounced check...)

151 posted on 05/01/2012 1:56:38 PM PDT by Utah Girl (John 15:12, Matthew 5:44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Utah Girl
Santorum and Gingrich will be on it, unless like you said Gingrich - maybe, unless he never paid the bounced check..

It's a sad realization for America that romney had mega $$ support and verbal support and a Patriot like Newt had to make plans day by day because of little support. They don't love America only want what she stands for and no fight in them to keep it.

152 posted on 05/01/2012 2:56:11 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

True to an extent. Santorum dropped out because after the Wisconsin loss, money donations to his campaign vanished. I’m pretty sure the same thing happened to Gingrich, only much much earlier (when he said that the South would vote for him and actually that didn’t happen after Georgia.) And after Delaware last week, I do believe Gingrich was out of luck in regards to monetary donations.


153 posted on 05/01/2012 3:26:41 PM PDT by Utah Girl (John 15:12, Matthew 5:44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge

If you look through my historical threads I’ve never advocated Christie for any federal office; I understand that he is the solution to problems many states don’t have. For a liberal northeastern state, he is an absolute fascist (in a good way).

Until someone has lived here and watched their property taxes increase $500 to $600 annually, I take their opinions of him with a grain of salt.


154 posted on 05/01/2012 4:04:16 PM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA; AuH2ORepublican; randita; BigSkyFreeper

Auh2orepublican correctly pointed out that I forgot Florida. IMHO, Romney is the slight favorite there.

One thing no one remembers is that Obama almost carried Georgia and Montana in the last election. With Georgia, it was obviously a huge turnout in inner-city Atlanta. I don’t know what happened in Montana. John McCain and Sarah Palin had natural appeal there as westerners.


155 posted on 05/01/2012 4:39:04 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued (A liberal's compassion is limited to the size of other peoples' paychecks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued; Impy; Perdogg; fieldmarshaldj; AuH2ORepublican; Kenny Bunk; nutmeg
You must talk to my Mom, because BOTH OF YOU WORRY TOO MUCH ABOUT NOVEMBER!!!

Think of Obama as the carbonized crumbs of a slice of burnt toast. You know, the black, crunchy stuff that you shake out.

I'm not saying to take him lightly, GOD NO. But he's done, unless video of Mitt eating uncooked aborted fetuses while on a coke binge appears.

156 posted on 05/01/2012 4:58:08 PM PDT by GOPsterinMA (The stench of Earth Pimp-age is permeating over the internet...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Continue to bring as much focus as I can on the non-negotiable, indispensable first principles of the republic.
Try to convince those who call themselves conservatives that if they want the republic to survive they
MUST NOT compromise those non-negotiable principles
for anyone or for any politically expedient reasons.

Gather together all of those who have made such a commitment to core American principle into a cogent, coherent, permanent, potent political force for good.

If Romney should be the nominee, I will seriously consider ... not at this point promise ... to consider a write-in vote for President. Down-ticket, I have already searched out the most conservative available.

I vote in Maine, so this time around, my vote actually counts, as we are poised for a counter-revolution spurred by universal dislike of our RINO-Girl Senatrices.

157 posted on 05/01/2012 5:39:13 PM PDT by Kenny Bunk (So, Scalia, Alito, Thomas, and Roberts can't figure out if Obama is a Natural Born Citizen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk

Well, I guess that’s progess, sorta.


158 posted on 05/01/2012 5:43:44 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Obama v. Romney: Zero plus Zero still equals Zero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: Utah Girl
money donations to his campaign vanished.

Santorum $pent TOO much for his lust to LIE about NEWT. And he started his lies during the debates in the after reports right after the debates which cost him nothing but cost him any support from me thereafter.

159 posted on 05/01/2012 6:31:22 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

In that case, I don’t see the Republicans standing up to 0bama any more then than they are doing now. Do you?

Of course! They’d have to out of sheer political necessity. If you are going to be the opposition party, you must oppose or else have no reason for existing.


Well, the republicans are doing a poor job so far.


160 posted on 05/01/2012 7:02:09 PM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

I will not be dictated to as to who I vote for. I will vote for Romney with gritted teeth.

Well, do so honestly.


I said I’m voting for Romney.


161 posted on 05/01/2012 7:10:15 PM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: unkus
I said I’m voting for Romney.

No, initially you claimed you were voting for Obama. Without a sarcasm tag.

162 posted on 05/01/2012 7:29:50 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

I’m voting for 0bama./s

Does that meet your approval?/s


163 posted on 05/01/2012 7:32:51 PM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: unkus

Considering that someone in post 22 thought you were serious, yes. I’m sure elsewhere on FR someone will point to your comment as proof that FR is full of Obama voters now.


164 posted on 05/01/2012 7:34:59 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: unkus
Well, the republicans are doing a poor job so far.

If you think they're bad now, just wait until they're working to advance socialism under a Republican president. Romney's already begun trying to convince his supporters that support for the individual mandate is "conservative" -- given how many so-called conservatives he's been able to convince to support him already, how long do you think such weak-kneed people will resist his "logic"?
165 posted on 05/01/2012 7:52:19 PM PDT by Antoninus (Sorry, gone rogue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

If you think they’re bad now, just wait until they’re working to advance socialism under a Republican president.


Excellent point. Most people will/would see Romney and think all is well. Anything goes because, after all, he’s a Republican.

I’ve said that for years.


166 posted on 05/01/2012 8:35:41 PM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Considering that someone in post 22 thought you were serious, yes. I’m sure elsewhere on FR someone will point to your comment as proof that FR is full of Obama voters now.


I told each person who thought I was serious that I was being sarcastic. Freepers who know me knew I was not serious.

Besides, Freepers don’t vote for evil bastards like 0bama.


167 posted on 05/01/2012 8:41:49 PM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Considering that someone in post 22 thought you were serious, yes. I’m sure elsewhere on FR someone will point to your comment as proof that FR is full of Obama voters now.


I told each person who thought I was serious that I was being sarcastic. Freepers who know me knew I was not serious.

Besides, Freepers wouldn’t vote for evil anti-American bastard scum like 0bama.


168 posted on 05/01/2012 8:43:25 PM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: CommerceComet

If he does that, he is truly a stupid person. My guess is he will tune in with the voting block based on exit polls which voted for him. But I can’t read his mind. All we can do is hope he makes a right turn.


169 posted on 05/01/2012 9:29:43 PM PDT by entropy12 (Winning is the only thing...coach Vince Lombardi. Losers in elections have zero power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

Hey, you don’t have to explain it to me. Christie can do considerable good in NJ.


170 posted on 05/01/2012 9:39:10 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

Then perhaps he shouldn’t have run at all, if he wasn’t prepared to go the distance. Heaven knows he certainly didn’t hurt Romney at any point of the primaries.


171 posted on 05/01/2012 10:50:22 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge

You always say the dumbest things. I have no time for your nonsense.


172 posted on 05/01/2012 10:59:01 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Amen!

Evil never gives up so neither can we. Continue the fight against evil, never waver or be fearful, until we hear ‘you finished the race, you fought a good battle, well done’. For this is only a battle as the war is won!

Good quote from Churchill.


173 posted on 05/01/2012 11:16:22 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

Truth hurts. At least we know where he really stands when he endorsed Romney.


174 posted on 05/01/2012 11:28:14 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: unkus
;o)
175 posted on 05/02/2012 12:08:10 AM PDT by dixiechick2000 (This hobbit is looking for her pitchfork...God help the GOP if I find it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: JediJones

I don’t know Jedi, if Scalia dies under Obama America could be done.


176 posted on 05/02/2012 5:43:51 AM PDT by Impy (Don't call me red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA; Clintonfatigued; AuH2ORepublican; Kenny Bunk; fieldmarshaldj; randita; BillyBoy; ...

Human nature. It’s better to be pleasantly surprised than horribly disappointed.

Let me go state by state. I expect a close win but I can’t say I’d be surprised if Romney or dumb voters screw it up. Romney needs to avoid gaffes at all costs but not pull a Dewey and think he can coast even if he opens up a lead.

Obama did okay in Georgia cause of Black turnout alone. It will be lower and even if it’s not 50% will not happen. He can get 47% there but never 50. That winning margin for a democrat would be like getting blood from a stone.

Montana is the least GOP state among the sparsely populated Western prairie states. Obama did well in Montana and pretty good in the Dakotas. He could never win any of them. MT was very close only cause Ron Paul stole 2% as the nominee of the state’s rouge Constitution party. Obama + Nader got almost 48% but 50 is a bridge too far. He’ll get closer to 40 this time. I think ND will put him under 40.

Arizona is one of few states I could imagine having a swing *towards* Obama cause it was McCain’s home state and he did better than a generic Republican would have in 2008 (there are some Mormons there though so maybe Romney would have too). There are 2 polls out, one showing Obama up 42-40 and another showing Romney up 42-40. Scary right?

Lets be real though, AZ is a Republican state there is no chance Obama wins it unless he increases his popularity and wins a big landslide making it meaningless anyway. Clinton only won it cause of Perot. It’s more likely Obama does get that 42%, and Romney gets most of the rest winning big. Undecideds do not go to the incumbent and I don’t know if those polling orgs are even halfway decent, I never heard of them. I think Obama loses AZ by 8-12 points most likely.

Missouri was the closest GOP state. It is not a swing state in POTUS elections anymore. If the Republican wins he’s winning Missouri without difficulty.

Obama will not take any electoral votes from the GOP column.

Omaha and Indiana are gimme gains. The rats hope to hold NC and polls are close but I can’t buy it. He won by an eyelash last time with under 50% and is LESS popular now, the state went huge GOP in 2010. He will lose that.

The big 3 are Florida, VA, and Ohio. We need them all.

Florida tilts the GOP way and I think VA does as well. Ohio is the ballgame, it will probably be tight, this is reason #1 why Portman is on the VP list.

That’s 266.

NH is one of Romney’s home states and is very White. I think he wins that and that’s 270. Obama doesn’t seem strong in Iowa and that’s White I think Romney takes it.

Colorado is a very even state now I expect a very close result there.

That would be 285-253 with NH/IA/CO and that’s my guess right now.

Nevada is more rat than Colorado, Obama won by a disappointingly large margin in a state that’s usually close. Assuredly close and in play though.

New Mexico looks bad I could see them still voting easily for Obama. It was very close in 2004, big Obama in 2008. Martinez as VP could help, Gary Johnson as Libertarian could take 5% and make it impossible anyway.

Wisconsin (10) doesn’t look good but 2008 was an aberration there. It was very close in 2004 and I expect it will be again. A win by the Governor would provide momentum. Ryan or Pawlenty as the VP would help (as would the Governor of course, that’s the man that should be President instead of Glove Romney).

PA and MI tilt dem. PA will be close, MI was big Obama but close in 04 and is a Romney homestate and went big Republican in 2010, (too bad there wasn’t a Senate seat up that year). Both are in play. Either assures victory.

MN is unlikely but not out of range of becoming competitive.

Maine’s second district should be in play but is extremely likely not to matter.


177 posted on 05/02/2012 5:58:37 AM PDT by Impy (Don't call me red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: entropy12
If he does that, he is truly a stupid person.

Nevertheless, that's what Romney did in Massachusetts.

178 posted on 05/02/2012 6:30:12 AM PDT by CommerceComet (Obama vs. Romney - clear evidence that our nation has been judged by God and found wanting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Impy

In general, I agree with your analysis. I don’t think NC is a slam-dunk, but with a conservative runningmate for Romney it could become so. That leaves FL, VA and OH, plus one more state, that Romney must win to get to 270. I concur (and have been saying for many months now) that NH could be the state that gets the GOP to 270; and I agree that IA and CO are also possibilities to get Romney over the hump, although I don’t think they’re quite as promising as NH. OH is really the key, since without it I don’t see how Romney could get to 270 short of a GOP resurgence in the Mountain West (PA, MI and WI won’t go GOP if OH is going Dem, and to get to 270 without OH Romney would need NH + CO + IA + NV). That’s one of the reasons why Romney needs to pick Portman. And if everything swings the GOP’s way and Romney wins with 350+ EVs, all the better.

But I have to call attention to a word you used that I had let pass the first time you used it (about a week ago) because I had assumed it was due to fat fingers. Ron Paul was nominated by MT’s *rogue* Constitution Party, not its “rouge” Constitution Party. You must have confused the Constitution Party with that other CP, the Communist Party (of Quebec, I guess). : )


179 posted on 05/02/2012 6:48:09 AM PDT by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what makes you think that he'll protect your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: AuH2ORepublican

THAT damnedable (okay fine, damnable) word has always given me trouble. Since I spelled “rouge” correctly my buddy spellcheck did not help me out. He doesn’t care if the sentence makes sense or not so long as every word is in his database. I appreciate spelling corrections.

I’m never sure where to put commas but it would likely be too much work to make sure my grammar is 100%. ;)


180 posted on 05/02/2012 7:22:08 AM PDT by Impy (Don't call me red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Impy
Yeah, messing up and spelling a word in a way that is the correct spelling for another word makes such typos undetectable by spellchecking aps. The worst, of course, is the word “public,” which, when misspelled by leaving off the L, can lead to horribly embarrassing incidents that would never be caught by your spell checker (particularly if you make a mistake while writing about “public areas”).
181 posted on 05/02/2012 7:51:28 AM PDT by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what makes you think that he'll protect your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Impy; BillyBoy

Obama can’t win Arizona. In 2010, AZ elected a republican U.S. senator and republican governor. Republicans gained two seats, in the U.S. House, in AZ.

The Republican will win Florida and Ohio. In 2010, both states elected new U.S. senators and governors. All four of those people are Republicans.


182 posted on 05/02/2012 7:52:38 AM PDT by PhilCollins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: AuH2ORepublican

I don’t think I’ve ever done that but I can see it happening if were to write something about the Punic Wars. N is right next to the b. :-D


183 posted on 05/02/2012 8:06:57 AM PDT by Impy (Don't call me red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Impy

If you wrote about the Punic Wars you’d be careful to spell “Punic” correctly. But if you wrote about “public areas” you’d probably breeze right through it, and if you missed the L the spell checker wouldn’t help you at all.


184 posted on 05/02/2012 8:10:37 AM PDT by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what makes you think that he'll protect your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Impy; fieldmarshaldj; PhilCollins; BillyBoy; AuH2ORepublican; Kenny Bunk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeI5ke0BENw


185 posted on 05/02/2012 8:36:38 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (The stench of Earth Pimp-age is permeating over the internet...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Impy

Nice blow by blow breakdown, as usual.

Regarding Nevada, there are a lot of Mormons in Nevada (isn’t Reid Mormon?) so that would help Myth. Also Lost Wages has been hit hard by unemployment and the subprime mortgage debacle. I’ll bet a lot of folks there are highly disappointed in Mr. Hopey-Changey.


186 posted on 05/02/2012 10:06:24 AM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

* Romney is at worst unknown. Obama, however, is known. Romney’s positions are clearly to the right of Obama. With Romney you might get 75% of what you want. You might even get more. With Obama you will be lucky to get 5%.

* Reward? First off, the presidency is NOT about rewarding or punishing any individual man. Frankly, NOBODY is that important. It is about the people of the country, first foremost and always. Secondly, losing on “Dont ask Dont tell” came about because we lost elections. What did you think you’d get with Clinton, Obama, Pelosi and Reid? Ice cream cake?? Elections have consequences, and when you lose you get a shift toward the middle, as it validates your opponent and debunks your side. The only way you can shift a party to its base is to have it validated by WINNING. You argue the symptoms and not the root cause.

* I lived in SoCal for almost three decades, so you in the northeast have nothing on us in terms of having to deal with an inept Republican party. And by choosing to play “take your ball and go home” out of spite you will do federally what the state party has done locally, marginalize our views and our values. You will get to keep your precious purity at the cost of giving your true enemy, Democrats, the power.


187 posted on 05/03/2012 12:58:07 AM PDT by Dragonspirit (Always remember President Token won only by defecting on his CFR pledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Dragonspirit
Romney is at worst unknown. Obama, however, is known.

Better a known enemy than a false friend.

Romney’s positions are clearly to the right of Obama.

Oh? You mean his stated positions or his record? His record is one of implementing gay "marriage", raising taxes, expanding government, creating government funded abortion, punishing Catholic institutions for the crime of following their beliefs, instituting socialized medicine and gun control. Obama's got nothing on this chump.

With Romney you might get 75% of what you want. You might even get more.

Ok, you are clearly delusional.

You will get to keep your precious purity at the cost of giving your true enemy, Democrats, the power.

News flash for you--Romney IS a Democrat. His only connection with the Republican party is that he's registered as one. He said so himself.
188 posted on 05/03/2012 8:08:45 PM PDT by Antoninus (Sorry, gone rogue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: chopperjc

I totally disagree. He wont win a single state in the south. The Obamaeconomy is just too bad. Plus, I expect Romney to take a surprise state like WI too.


189 posted on 05/03/2012 11:36:16 PM PDT by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: KC_Conspirator

Va polling is showing pretty consistent leads for Dems. Again if only hoping made it so.


190 posted on 05/04/2012 1:33:37 AM PDT by chopperjc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: randita

Bingo!

Regarding Nevada, there are a lot of Mormons in Nevada

Look at the map, O wants to put AZ in Play.

What states border Utah?


191 posted on 05/04/2012 2:03:55 PM PDT by CPT Clay (Pick up your weapon and follow me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: randita

Yes Mormons are a big reason why Romney won the Nevada caucuses twice and he’ll need them to win in November.


192 posted on 05/06/2012 12:59:28 AM PDT by Impy (Don't call me red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: ChiMark
Sore loser!

Hardly. I wouldn't call Romney a 'winner' under any circumstances. He's a liar and a fraud. Just because you've sunk your standards down to that level, doesn't mean I'm required to do the same. I never have and never will.

193 posted on 06/09/2012 3:28:53 PM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-193 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson