RCP Electoral Map: Romney 206 Obama 201

Q _ Q said:
assuming romney wins florida/virgina/colorado:

if romney loses ohio he must:

win nevada/new hampshire/iowa (all very close)

or win wisconsin (only down 2%) + any 1 of the 3 I just mentioned
Click to expand...

I he loses Ohio, I don't think it likely that he wins Iowa, NH, NV, and CO. I just don't see Ohio breaking Obama while all these others break Romney.
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
I he loses Ohio, I don't think it likely that he wins Iowa, NH, NV, and CO. I just don't see Ohio breaking Obama while all these others break Romney.
Click to expand...

well i disagree slightly. As of right now he's doing worse in ohio than he is in new hampshire/colorado and iowa

Actually, depending on what polls you look at, he's doing better than in WI than he is in ohio

I dont think it's likely he wins NV, but I can see him winning CO, IOWA, and NH without winning ohio. WI same deal. Definitely makes it more difficult though.
 
Ohio also has a larger than average number of people who say they will vote Johnson when he is included in the poll, which has only happened once and he was at 10.6%
 
RCP Toss-Ups: [my picks]

Colorado (9) [Romney]
Florida (29) [Romney]
Iowa (6) [Romney]*
Michigan (16) [Obama]
Nevada (6) [Obama]
New Hampshire (4) [Romney]
Ohio (18) [Toss-up]
Pennsylvania (20) [Obama]*
Virginia (13) [Romney]
Wisconsin (10) [Romney]

*'dangling chad' close race.

This would give Romney the win without Ohio.
 
And with polls NOT including Johnson, he could be doing as well in other states as he showed in Ohio. And THIS article says that the Romney camp is not as nonchalant as they once were.
 
Dixie said:
RCP Toss-Ups: [my picks]

Colorado (9) [Romney]
Florida (29) [Romney]
Iowa (6) [Romney]*
Michigan (16) [Obama]
Nevada (6) [Obama]
New Hampshire (4) [Romney]
Ohio (18) [Toss-up]
Pennsylvania (20) [Obama]*
Virginia (13) [Romney]
Wisconsin (10) [Romney]

*'dangling chad' close race.

This would give Romney the win without Ohio.
Click to expand...
Romney has never lead in Wisconsin, and in New Hampshire, LOTS of people vote libertarian. Again, without including Johnson in the polls none of us have any idea how many votes he will siphon off and which candidate it will effect.
 
Last edited:
General Buck Turgidson said:
I think their exercise of editorial judgment in deciding which states are "toss up" are a bit off. I'd comfortably put VA and FL in the lean Romney camp and PA, MI,WI and NV in the lean Obama camp. Those are subject to change, obviously, but Romney hasn't led a poll in PA ever. Same with Nevada. Same with Michigan. Same with Wisconsin. Obama hasn't polled that well in Florida or Virginia recently.
Click to expand...

it isn't that complicated......average score over 5pts, "leans", average over 10pts "likely".....under 5pts and you're in the margin of error territory.......sort of difficult to editorialize.......
 
Fluttershy said:
I usualy refer to fivethirtyeight. For one thing, RCP exludes "tossups". Pennsylvania and Michigan, my friend, are not tossups...
Click to expand...

agreed.....Obama has no chance in Michigan.....he's not even advertising on the west side of the state any more.....and the Grand Rapids area (65% Republican) is now the largest metropolitan area in the state.....

before the debates Baydoun/Foster, which is a pollster for the DNC only gave Obama 3 pts......I look for new polls in the next two weeks which will blow Michigan wide open......
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
That's why New Hampshire and Iowa are still toss ups and I'd put Virginia in the likely Romney column (NC is already there).
Click to expand...

I think you are missing the point. Iowa and New Hampshire were not supposed to be "toss ups" at this point.

In 2008, Romney won Iowa and New Hampshire by 54% to 45%.

The fact that it is this close is not good for your boy and you know it.
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
I think their exercise of editorial judgment in deciding which states are "toss up" are a bit off. I'd comfortably put VA and FL in the lean Romney camp and PA, MI,WI and NV in the lean Obama camp. Those are subject to change, obviously, but Romney hasn't led a poll in PA ever. Same with Nevada. Same with Michigan. Same with Wisconsin. Obama hasn't polled that well in Florida or Virginia recently.
Click to expand...

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
 
Socrtease said:
Romney has never lead in Wisconsin, and in New Hampshire, LOTS of people vote libertarian. Again, without including Johnson in the polls none of us have any idea how many votes he will siphon off and which candidate it will effect.
Click to expand...

most polls already take the "other candidate" into account. If you see the polls, they specifically are showing who is voting for who. Not who is voting for who given only two choices.
 
I don't understand this, my candidate is going to win shit. Does your candidate winning make you more right?
 
Obama might win, he might not. Either way its not going to change my opinion that he was the better choice. I'm sure if Obama wins, Dixie will still not like him.
 
Socrtease said:
Romney has never lead in Wisconsin, and in New Hampshire, LOTS of people vote libertarian. Again, without including Johnson in the polls none of us have any idea how many votes he will siphon off and which candidate it will effect.
Click to expand...

Sorry Sochead, Johnson will be insignificant. I figure 3% or less nationally, and that is being generous. I actually think he takes votes out of the Obama column more than Romney. No one I know of, who is voting for Johnson, would have EVER voted for Romney. But a good many of them are the kind of idiots who were enamored with Slick Barry. I can see a lot of Deaniacs supporting Johnson, for some reason. But I don't think he has ANY effect on Romney one way or the other, because those voters weren't ever going to vote for the GOP candidate anyway.

I will also add here, a whole helluva LOT will be determined by turnout. The way I see it, the liberal base is just not energized like they were in 2008. When people like Bill Mahr are no longer on board, you know there is a problem in paradise. Meanwhile, this is the Tea Party's proverbial "moment" and I expect we will see massive turnout across the country for Romney. If that's the case, he could win in a landslide.
 
Dixie said:
Sorry Sochead, Johnson will be insignificant. I figure 3% or less nationally, and that is being generous. I actually think he takes votes out of the Obama column more than Romney. No one I know of, who is voting for Johnson, would have EVER voted for Romney. But a good many of them are the kind of idiots who were enamored with Slick Barry. I can see a lot of Deaniacs supporting Johnson, for some reason. But I don't think he has ANY effect on Romney one way or the other, because those voters weren't ever going to vote for the GOP candidate anyway.

I will also add here, a whole helluva LOT will be determined by turnout. The way I see it, the liberal base is just not energized like they were in 2008. When people like Bill Mahr are no longer on board, you know there is a problem in paradise. Meanwhile, this is the Tea Party's proverbial "moment" and I expect we will see massive turnout across the country for Romney. If that's the case, he could win in a landslide.
Click to expand...

I think Johnson gets more from Romney than anywhere else, otherwise... You might be correct.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top