The five states that really matter in 2012
As the Obama and Romney campaigns march into the crucial summer months, there will be a relatively small group of battleground states that will define the outcome. Here’s my prediction of where 2012 will be decided.
Arizona. Polls show that Barack Obama is within striking distance, thanks in part to the deep hostility that the state’s Hispanic community feels toward Mitt Romney. If Democrats can flip Arizona, it may be all over. Latest poll: Romney +2.
Colorado. Republicans desperately need to stop their slide in the Rocky Mountain West and Mitt Romney might be the sort of economy-first candidate to pull it off. If he can flip Colorado, his chances soar. Latest poll: Obama +13.
Florida: This is the biggest state in the US that remains in play. The guy who claims Florida almost certainly wins the White House. (Though, unlike Romney, Obama has a plausible path to victory that doesn’t include Florida.) Latest poll: Romney +1.
Ohio: Democrats appear to have locked down most of the Great Lakes region, and Pennsylvania is inching out of reach for the GOP. But Ohio is still on the razor’s edge and it’s another must-win for Romney. Latest Poll: Obama +2.
Virginia: This is another state that Obama can survive without winning, but which looks more and more like a make-or-break battleground for Romney. The GOP needs to reclaim its ownership of the “Shallow South.” Latest Poll: Obama +8.
The big take-away here is that despite national polls which show a virtual tie, many of the contests are being fought on what used to be reliably Republican turf. That makes things very tough for Romney.
If the GOP loses Arizona, Colorado and Virginia in a single election cycle, it might signify real long-term challenges for the party.
UPDATE: Real Clear Politics’s new analysis puts 253 electoral college votes as solidly or “leaning” into the Obama column, just 17 shy of the number he needs to win — and that’s without any of the five states listed above. Which shows just how brilliant and efficient Romney’s campaign needs to be. Romney needs to find a whopping 100 EC votes to win, which means he has to run the table.
Tags: analysis, election12, politics
Colorado is the only state mentioned I would consider living in but only if I lived higher up than Denver. I’d pick Glens Falls over Denver.
I would pass on Ohio and Florida. But the other states are beautiful as long as you stay out of the big cities.
I would probably pick Ogdensburg over Denver.
I don’t know about the other states, but in Ohio, it’s a race hatred thing.
Despite Brian’s attempt to use his position to get Obama reelected, the race is very close. Don’t allow your lowly reporter have you think otherwise
wakeup: Glad to see I’m not the only one who sees it that way. You have my thumbs up!
Even if Brian was so inclined, wakeup, he would be picking a lousy state to try it. Like 47 other states, NY has a winner-take-all system for deciding out 31 Electoral votes. If Obama wins by 5,000, 000 popular votes, he gets all 31; if he wins by one, lonely vote, he also gets all 31. Since he is an overwhelming favorite to win NY by at least one vote, neither candidate is bothering to campaign here, or as far as I can tell, spend a nickle here (outside of NYC, the nation’s media center). Maine and Nebraska have systems where electoral voting is awarded by Congressional District. If we had that, our traditionally Republican-leaning district might be important in the election. Under the current system, the North Country, and the entire state of New York is as important to the race as so much flea poop. Of course, I am not taking into consideration Brian’s ability to sway the voting listeners in NCPR’s major audience areas outside of NYS: Ontario, Quebec, and Vermont.
wakeup, gary –
it’s pretty easy to just snark and say that someone is biased. why not make it more interesting by pointing to something in my post that suggests some unfairness or preference?
the fact is that my analysis is right in line with analyses posted recently by reuters, the washington post, realclearpolitics, npr…and karl rove.
:)
brian, ncpr
I don’t find Brian’s comments that shocking or biased. You have an incumbent president, they rarely lose. The polls can change a LOT between now and September so we will see what happens. The problem is I just don’t see places like Ohio or Florida saying gee things are getting worse in the economy and Romney can fix them. I mean they might kind of not mind Romney, but I don’t see anyone being drawn to him in a big way to really provide big answers. I basically like the guy and would vote for him if he was not for re-invading Iraq and staying in Afghanistan forever, but those reasons alone put me in the third party category or possibly voting for Obama.
Brian’s analysis is, as he says, in line with other analyses. Of course, it is still early. But if I were rooting for a GOP victory, i’d be worried about Romney the candidate. With the focus on him, there is a good chance he will chase away voters–or keep them home, as the carefully constructed republican base is divided. Whereas Obama has some very strong demographics–among women, blacks, and hispanics. Should we look for Rubio on the GOP ticket? Would like to know what electoral strategy Karl Rove is proposing. If it becomes an attempt at a smear campaign, we will know there isn’t one.
Historically, incumbent presidents running for re-election lose about1 time in 3…but I would agree with Brian that, as of today, things look “pretty good” for Obama…but not better than “pretty good” Even in our increasingly polyglot country most voters will still be white Americans and most white Americans have jobs, health insurance and dont really care that much about Afganistan or immigration.
That is why we need a draft, if we had a draft; I bet they would care about Afghanistan. Right now outside of the money which is borrowed it costs most families nothing unless we have a family member in the service. War is way way to easy, no taxes to pay for it, no death except to those who volunteered to go.
Ron is the GOP wild card that has been ignored by the media, notwithstanding the growing number of delegates his grassroots support is gaining and the huge crowds of thousands he has attracted. None of the other GOP runners come even close with the public draw that Dr. Paul has.
While all the other GOP candidates save Romney have fallen by the wayside, including Newt Gingrich who is 4 million is the red, Ron Paul still
is in the race and in position to cause an upset by winning the hearts and minds of the unbound delegates.
Ron is the GOP wild card that has been ignored by the media, notwithstanding the growing number of delegates his grassroots support is gaining and the huge crowds of thousands he has attracted. None of the other GOP runners come even close with the public draw that Dr. Paul has.
While all the other GOP candidates save Romney have fallen by the wayside, including Newt Gingrich who is 4 million is the red, Ron Paul is in position to cause an upset by winning the hearts and minds of the unbound delegates. If a broker convention occurs, all bets are off for Mitt Romney being a “shoe-in” for the nomination.
I don’t think he could pull an upset, but he could make some real waves and I hope the does!
Mervel,
You’re right. either Way, Ron Paul has influenced the GOP and the dialogue of the Presidential race. No other candidate has addressed the flawed US foreign policy and government spending issues as he has done.
I apologize for the double post. it was unintentional . I though I could delete them–But now I know otherwise.
I agree. No other candidate has given a cogent argument about why we should not be running around the globe intervening and entangling ourselves in civil wars and occupations.
I think Obama has done a good job of getting us on the right path toward stopping the wars but he still has a tendency to want to intervene.
His real benefit is that he has given true conservatives the realistic option and space to be against occupations and world police efforts, which are simply another aspect of big government power and control over individual liberty.
The military is the biggest part of big government. You can’t be for limited government and limited government power and be for a large military.