Cliff Notes on what to watch for on the Electoral Map on Election Night

[Grummgug]

Short version:

The 3 KEY states are now Virginia, Iowa, and Colorado.

Long version:

We all know if Romney takes Ohio, he is the president. But there is ONE clear path for him without Ohio, so let's look at that.

1. Obama is pulling out of Florida and North Carolina. Those are now RED. That leaves you with 7 tossups:

New Hampshire
Virginia
Ohio
Wisconsin
Iowa
Colorado
Nevada

Romney is at 235 Electoral votes.

The 3 key states are Virginia, Iowa, and Colorado.

2. In Virginia, the polls average has Romney in the lead. If he takes it, Romney moves to 248 EVs.
3. In Iowa, Obama is +2, but a couple polls have Romney in the lead. Romney wins Iowa and he has 254 EVs
4. In Colorado, there are some polls with Romney tied or ahead. if he grabs that state, he moves to 263 EVs

If Virginia, Iowa, and Colorado go Romney, Romney just needs Nevada's 9 Electoral Votes to reach 269 and become president, thanks to the tiebreaker being the House vote. He can lose Ohio and be president. The Nevada vote is VERY close. A V-I-C win ensures election night will go on a long time.

This also dismisses Wisconsin, where the polls are tightening, the last two showing a +3 Obama lead and a tie. And again, it assumes Ohio votes Obama, where the polls are also within the margin of error.

Also note that of the 7 states up for grabs, if Romney carries ONLY Virginia, Iowa, Colorado and Nevada, we have a 269-269 tie, and President Romney and Vice-President Biden. And that is actually a fair possibility.

Keep an eye on the one district in Maine as well. Maine apportions 2 of its Electoral Votes. If that one district goes Romney, he can pick up 270 and Biden is out as well.

[Wells]

On the otherhand, 538's predictions put Obama at a 80% chance of taking Ohio and a 91% chance of taking Wisconsin.

[Grummgug]

On the otherhand, 538's predictions put Obama at a 80% chance of taking Ohio and a 91% chance of taking Wisconsin.

Of course, Romney needs neither. He can lose Ohio and Wisconsin, if he picks up Virginia, Iowa, Colorado, and Nevada, which CAN definitely occur.

[Wells]

None of which he is polling at in the lead on aggregate.

---------- Post added 2012-11-02 at 02:39 AM ----------

In the end its going to come down to Ohio, as it always seems to.

[Grummgug]

None of which he is polling at in the lead on aggregate.

The polls are all within the margin for error.

[Wells]

The polls are all within the margin for error.

Not really.

[smelltheglove]

just curious... are there any states considered red within that same margin of error? by that same line of thinking, arent they in jeopardy the other way?

[Grummgug]

In 2008, North Carolina was aggregate McCain, but Obama carried it.

In 2004, Wisconsin was aggregate Bush, but Kerry carried it.

In 2004, most polls had Kerry ahead or tied in Florida. Bush won the state.

In 2000, Florida was aggregate Gore, but Bush won.

In 2000, Wisconsin was aggregate Bush, but Gore won.
http://www.aapor.org/Content/Navigat...ngaccuracy.pdf

If we just make the aggregate poll leader the winner everywhere, you have Obama 290-248. Romney only takes Virginia. Romney would need the race to be like 2004, where the polls were wrong about TWO close states. One of them MUST be Ohio. The second can any of the others, it doesn't matter. If THREE state aggregates are wrong, there are multiple combos that exclude Ohio to get Romney into the White House.

Rest assured, at least one state aggregate poll will be wrong.

[obdigore]

just curious... are there any states considered red within that same margin of error? by that same line of thinking, arent they in jeopardy the other way?

Florida is polling less for Romney than any of those other states are polling for Obama. That includes Virginia and Nevada, which have generally been pretty red for presidential elections.

Again, just to be clear, Of the listed states, only Florida and NC are polling for Romney, all the rest are, and have been, polling for Obama. And the only state within any kind of margin of error on the polls is Florida, which is currently slightly leaning Romney.

[Grummgug]

just curious... are there any states considered red within that same margin of error? by that same line of thinking, arent they in jeopardy the other way?

Obama is almost completely on the defensive on the Electoral Map. The 3 states favoring Romney that are close are Virginia, Florida, and North Carolina. Obama has pulled out of Florida and North Carolina. Those are red. Obama is still trying to get Virginia.

So your answer is really just Virginia.

---------- Post added 2012-11-01 at 08:10 PM ----------

Interestingly enough, the aggregate polls predicted a Gore win in 2000 and a Kerry almost win in 2004, losing 270-268. They got 2008 correct, which was a blowout anyway.

---------- Post added 2012-11-01 at 08:23 PM ----------

Further study of the history of aggregate polling shows that of the 5 states where it was wrong, 4 of them involved an aggregate that was less than 1%. The only state where the polls are REALLY wrong was Florida in 2000. The aggregate polling of Florida had Gore up by 2.3% and he lost it.

If we use the "less than 1% rule" in Romney's full favor, of the 7 battleground states, he keeps Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia which all are aggregate in his favor, but only turns Colorado, making it 281-257 Obama.

The two narrowest Obama aggregate leads beyond that are Iowa at 2% and Ohio at 2.3%.

[Wells]

just curious... are there any states considered red within that same margin of error? by that same line of thinking, arent they in jeopardy the other way?

Florida and NC at this point are really the only red states that aren't solid red.

---------- Post added 2012-11-02 at 03:25 AM ----------

In 2008, North Carolina was aggregate McCain, but Obama carried it.

In 2004, Wisconsin was aggregate Bush, but Kerry carried it.

In 2004, most polls had Kerry ahead or tied in Florida. Bush won the state.

In 2000, Florida was aggregate Gore, but Bush won.

In 2000, Wisconsin was aggregate Bush, but Gore won.
http://www.aapor.org/Content/Navigat...ngaccuracy.pdf

If we just make the aggregate poll leader the winner everywhere, you have Obama 290-248. Romney only takes Virginia. Romney would need the race to be like 2004, where the polls were wrong about TWO close states. One of them MUST be Ohio. The second can any of the others, it doesn't matter. If THREE state aggregates are wrong, there are multiple combos that exclude Ohio to get Romney into the White House.

Rest assured, at least one state aggregate poll will be wrong.

5 states over a period of 10 years. WOOOOOOOOOOW

---------- Post added 2012-11-02 at 03:26 AM ----------

OP has rapidly turned into another "polls are great when they're on my side and shit/marginoferror when they're not".

[Grummgug]

OP has rapidly turned into another "polls are great when they're on my side and shit/marginoferror when they're not".

I'm looking for Romney paths to victory. It is assumed that Obama has the upper hand, so looking for Obama paths to victory isn't as interesting. In other words, its MUCH easier to observe election night from the standpoint of what Romney needs to survive. Don't confuse that for partisanship.

[Mormolyce]

This thread is really interesting reading, but are we all really talking about the election being decided by 3 or even 1 state when the election hasn't even started yet? Are American politics really that static? They always seemed a lot more dynamic than ours here in Australia.

[obdigore]

This thread is really interesting reading, but are we all really talking about the election being decided by 3 or even 1 state when the election hasn't even started yet? Are American politics really that static? They always seemed a lot more dynamic than ours here in Australia.

Because of the electoral college, and how idiot states write idiot constitutions, most EC votes are 'winner takes all' in the state. Which means that in CA, for example, despite the huge amount of republican suberbanites, the city dwellers that vote democratic win the state. You can judge where a large number of states are voting well before the election. There was really only about 7 states that were up for grabs, and Obama seems to be winning six of them. (NC was never going to vote Obama, I really don't care what anyone says).

Without huge failures in a presidency, 40+ of the states vote for the same party each time.

[Lysah]

This thread is really interesting reading, but are we all really talking about the election being decided by 3 or even 1 state when the election hasn't even started yet? Are American politics really that static? They always seemed a lot more dynamic than ours here in Australia.

Of the 50 states a good 40 of them will always vote for the same party.

[FusedMass]

Of course, Romney needs neither. He can lose Ohio and Wisconsin, if he picks up Virginia, Iowa, Colorado, and Nevada, which CAN definitely occur.

I am trying to stand out of political discussions. However you do know that Ohio is Symbolic to Republicans? Why you ask. Because no Republican has ever became President without winning Ohio. We all "Don't know" that Romney takes Ohio. In fact the polls show Obama with a four point average lead. If it's not that it's virtually a dead heat.

How can you say he can take Ohio. Looking at the polls Obama has an easier time of being re-elected then Mitt does at being elected. I am just floored at the misinformation. This is why for the most part I am staying out of discussions like this until the actual election.

[Swargle]

You may want to hold off on Calling Florida for the reds there.
SOURCE
Leaked internal memo from GOPers in Florida.

The early and absentee turnout is starting to look more troubling.

As of yesterday, Republicans made up only 22% of early voters and 30% of returned absentee votes.

This is closer to (and worse than) 2008 where we saw 19% EV and 38% of the absentees. 2010 (our blowout year) was 33% of EV and 45% of AB.

Conslusion: The Democrat turnout machine in the county has been very effective and they are cleaning our clock. Even if Romney wins the state (likely based on polls), the turnout deficit in PBC will affect our local races.

When you are calling or canvassing, remind people how effective our opposition has been and how they must not only get themselves to the polls, but their friends and neighbors as well.

While the memo does state that it is likely according to polls that Romney may take Florida, it does admit handily that for the moment, they are getting hammered in early votes and absentee ballots.

Just food for thought.

[WillFeral]

I am trying to stand out of political discussions. However you do know that Ohio is Symbolic to Republicans? Why you ask. Because no Republican has ever became President without winning Ohio. We all "Don't know" that Romney takes Ohio. In fact the polls show Obama with a four point average lead. If it's not that it's virtually a dead heat.

How can you say he can take Ohio. Looking at the polls Obama has an easier time of being re-elected then Mitt does at being elected. I am just floored at the misinformation. This is why for the most part I am staying out of discussions like this until the actual election.

So you took the time to input information and give your personal opinion,only then say you are staying out of the discussion...so why did you post again?
You must be a liberal because you seem very confused.

Infracted. Be respectful please.

[Swargle]

Because no Republican has ever became President without winning Ohio.

Please see http://xkcd.com/1122/

I like the note on 2008. No Democrat can win without Missouri, Until Obama did.

[Healing Rain]

Keep an eye on the Senate elections as well.