Crystal Ball: A first look at the Electoral College - 248 R, 244 D, 46 Toss-up

[steve2470]

Link to tweet

http://crystalball.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/the-2020-electoral-college-our-first-look/


I really hope the 2020 election is a complete blowout for us, not like this map.

[DFW]

1. If Trump can win 248 electoral votes in a legitimately held election with no outside tampering

We are one pitiful country indeed.

There IS that little problem that the party currently in power is not exactly the greatest advocate of legitimately held elections with no outside tampering.

[steve2470]

2. I agree

How are you, friend ? I hope you, your wife and daughters are all well

[DFW]

6. All well and good, thanks!

The little one now has a 9 month old daughter, and the elder one just came over here for 36 hours to check out the wedding venue (August) that her sister had picked out for her in the wine-growing country north of Frankfurt.

This being February/March, I am practically commuting daily between Düsseldorf, Brussels, Paris, Barcelona, Munich and Zürich. Same old same old! Mrs. and I would like to take a four day weekend off and go see Edinburgh. Now, all I have to do is find four days in a row when I can do it!

Never a dull moment (or a good night's sleep). You've been here. You know the drill.

[FakeNoose]

3. PA will go Dem next year

I live in Pennsylvania and I don't consider us a tossup. Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and the Harrisburg-Happy Valley corridor are all heavy blue and that's generally enough to swing the entire state. What we need in PA and we're about to get are brand-new unhackable voting machines, so the problems of 2016 will never recur. Still, I wish we could revert to paper ballots but the governor has a different idea.

If Joe Biden is the candidate, Pennsylvania will go blue for sure. But even if Biden isn't our candidate, I believe we'll turn the state blue.

[Amishman]

15. PA goes blue for sure if we run Biden, Bernie, or Booker

The only one I see maybe losing PA is Harris.

[edhopper]

4. Florida will not lean R

when ex-felons start voting next time.

[Awsi Dooger]

16. Don't be a Happy Adjuster

The projections here regarding that felon vote have been bizarre to put it mildly. I'm trying to be as reserved as I can, but it is admittedly difficult. I saw people taking the entire 1.5 million and dumping it atop the Democratic number.

Meanwhile, as I emphasized last fall the felon vote does not change Florida at all. The betting line would not move a fraction of one percent. There have been studies indicating the vote leans slightly Republican. Others say it is in the toss up range and may lean slightly Democratic. But everyone agrees that turnout will be very low and the vote figures to be very close to split, either way.

The governor DeSantis is taking steps to delay matters anyway.

Here is one article looking at the situation from a mathematical perspective, followed by some sections from the article:

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/11/2/18049510/felon-voting-rights-amendment-4-florida

"Ex-felons vote at low rates. And when they do, there is no strong partisan lean.

One thing that limits the electoral impact of restoring ex-felons’ voting rights is that they turn out at particularly low rates.

<snip>

The potential electoral impact of Florida’s ballot initiative is further limited by the fact that the ex-felons who do vote are not politically uniform. While black voters within this population overwhelmingly register with the Democratic Party (87 percent), nonblack voters within this population were more likely to register as Republicans (40 percent) than as a Democrats (34 percent). The fact that 26 percent of the remaining nonblack voters affiliate with neither party suggests that their votes may not reliably be cast for either party.

<snip>

Although people do not always vote consistent with their party of registration, we can approximate the electoral impact by assuming that they would. Specifically, we multiply the estimated disenfranchised population first by the turnout rate and then by the party registration rate for both black and nonblack individuals. Had all ex-felons been eligible to vote in Florida in 2016, we estimate that this would have generated about 102,000 additional votes for Democrats and about 54,000 additional votes for Republicans, with about an additional 40,000 votes that could be cast on behalf of either party."

[edhopper]

17. Thanks for the data

But Nelson lost by 0.2% and Gillum 0.4%, so the felon vote would have swung both of those.

[Claritie Pixie]

5. No way.

[Thekaspervote]

7. Discouraging... here's something that may put it in a better perspective

https://morningconsult.com/tracking-trump/

[steve2470]

8. if he's still in office on Election Day 2020 and he wins....

legitimately ....I must stipulate.... I will be in a suicidal depression. I cannot fathom we as a country are so stupid and corrupt and approving of a sociopathic dictator-wannabe. The evidence is plain to all but the most deluded followers.

[JustAnotherGen]

9. Does this

Assume 45/280 is alive?
That it is Trump/Pence?
That there is no Russian Interference and everyone who is eligible to vote - is allowed to vote?

[DarthDem]

10. PA and WI . . . .

. . . are going Democratic. Republicans are completely on the run in PA (see recent election results), and getting rid of Scott Walker in a non-presidential year (praise be!) bodes very well for WI voting Democratic in a presidential year.

[ooky]

11. I have PA and WI in the light blue and NC in the toss up.

Dem 274
Rep 233
Toss up 31

[Goodheart]

12. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin will be Democratic

North Carolina and Florida are tossups.

[llmart]

13. Michigan is not "Leans D".

It is more like "Likely D". (See midterms results)

[theophilus]

14. Someone on MSNBC did this the other day and showed the Dems

quite a bit ahead based on approval ratings in the states. There were only fifteen states where he is fifty percent approved and eighteen where he was only forty percent approved. I believe that was a Gallop finding. Anyway I think this is bogus. We know that it will be billed as "too close to call" by the media types. Horse race don't you know.....Meh.

[Awsi Dooger]

18. Much more realistic than other versions I've seen

2020 figures to be very tight. And we should be pleased with that, given the situational terrain. Normally an incumbent whose party has been in power only one term has a monumental advantage and is virtually unbeatable. Only the sustained lowlife nature of Donald Trump and his 40ish approval rating keeps this race from falling comfortably into the category of a typical incumbent hold.

Pennsylvania and Michigan and Wisconsin want to default blue but they are tight enough from an ideology perspective that we can't take them for granted or nominate the wrong person. All are in the range of 5-9% fewer liberals than conservatives. The national gap is 9% so you can see they are very much in the swing category and not solid blue as we preferred to believe before 2016.

North Carolina is not a swing state. I'll continue to argue that Obama winning North Carolina in 2008 was one of the worst things to happen in recent Democratic politics, and specifically regarding Hillary 2016. Instead of recognizing that North Carolina simply has too many conservatives -- 43% -- and will not fall our way in a balanced environment, Hillary's camp stupidly put resources into that state while ignoring states that should have been recognized as very tight and not a cinch, given the demographics and the ideology.

I realize many fine posters here put great effort into states like North Carolina and Georgia and Texas. I'm a math guy so I'll continue to point out those states simply have too many self-identified conservatives to vote Democratic right now. They are in the 42% (Georgia), 43% (North Carolina) and 44% (Texas) range. Effort level and subjective hope cannot overcome the sheer numbers. You have to get to 37% conservatives to have a chance in a 50/50 national race. None of those will be 37% in 2020. Beto as presidential nominee might be enough to take Texas with him, but I doubt it.

There was a post here the other day asserting 360+ electoral votes, especially if Kamala Harris is the nominee. I guess that type of thing feels good to believe but I hope that type of person doesn't do any actual speculating. 2024 sets up well for the Democrat regardless of who wins in 2020. Once a Republican won in 2016 we had to understand the situational difficulties of 2020.