Throwing in the first towel

I guess that could be considered a wise use of campaign funds.

Like some of the deep red states with few electoral votes might be good places for Harris to write off.

Or put minimal resources towards.
 
New Hampshire was never a "battleground" state. It has too few electoral votes for that. It's like saying Montana is a battleground state.
 
Crepitus said:
Battleground simply means the state is up for grabs and not secure for either side. It has nothing to do with the number of electors.
Click to expand...
No, battleground means it's a state that will make a significant difference in the election results and is currently closely divided. For example, Arizona is a battleground state with more electoral votes than Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire combined. That's what makes it a battleground state.
 
Crepitus said:
The tRump campaign has determined that New Hampshire is "no longer a battleground state" and is pulling their resources out.

Where will be next?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1830716282590695778
Click to expand...
Excellent news. This sort of thing tends to happen when you put a family member in charge of your party's campaign funds and she uses them for your legal troubles rather than to reach voters. lol
 
T. A. Gardner said:
New Hampshire was never a "battleground" state. It has too few electoral votes for that. It's like saying Montana is a battleground state.
Click to expand...
Montana is not a Presidential battleground state, because it is firmly in the Republican camp. If it were more middle of the road, it would be a battleground state.

If Harris gets between 269 and 274 Electoral College votes, trump will regret not even trying in New Hampshire. Right now the medium projected number of Electoral College votes for Harris is 272.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top