State by State, It's Still Obama

[boxman15]

Michael Tomasky of The Daily Beast wrote a short analysis of the Electoral College and the president's big advantage there. I don't know if it was written before or after the Quinnipiac poll showing Romney with a 7 point (or something like that) lead in Florida, but Obama is in good shape regardless. Here's why:

Today I read of Pennsylvania. PPP is out with a poll showing Obama 50, Romney 42, basically unchanged since a 49-42 Obama advantage in March. We're getting to the point where these trends are, while far from decisive yet, starting to count for something.

New Hampshire is out of play. That's a 10-point Obama lead. Nevada has crept into Obama's column, which surprised me when it started happening because the economy there was so miserably bad, but apparently it's been turning around (Kevin, are you reading?). And don't buy this latest Wisconsin poll showing a tie. That was a poll of likely recall voters, and that means the sample was probably heavy on pro-Walker voters.

The starkest way to put it is like this. Obama won nine states in 2008 that George Bush had won in 2004. You know them, or should: Florida (29), Ohio (18), North Carolina (15), Virginia (13), Indiana (11), Colorado (9), Iowa (6), Nevada (6), and New Mexico (5). Obama can lose eight of them. That's right, he can give eight of the nine back, as long as the one he wins is Florida, and he hits 275 EV's. And there are many alternative scenarios.

If Obama wins just Ohio and Iowa, or Ohio and Nevada, he's in, with 270. He's nine points up in Iowa right now and is very unlikely to lose it. He's also not going to lose New Mexico, where he's up by double digits. So put it another way. Of the nine flipped states, Romney will win Indiana. But then he has to run the table in Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, and Virginia. That's not impossible but it's all pretty tall order.

More here: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/05/22/state-by-state-it-s-still-obama.html

We are in very good shape to win this election. We just have to do our jobs now and work hard all the way up to November.

[XSuROsISX]

1. haha

Lol right, people with just half a brain would call that "media hype." lol

[RC]

2. Now, if only we would differentiate between the different brands of (D) in the primaries.

And vote for the more Liberal candidates, and get more actual Liberals back in Congress.
And do the same in the next Presidential primary.

Just because there is a (D) by a persons name, does not mean that person is a Democrat.

[zipplewrath]

3. I chuckled at the Sunday shows

They acknowledged that there were only like 10 "battle ground" states. Yet not a mention of the fact that Obama was MUCH closer to the total number needed to win. Obama needs to win like 2, and that doesn't include Florida. Romney needs to nearly "run the table" on battleground states. And that presumes he wins all of the states in his column. Romney can't have a "defector" state, and he has to practically run the table on the battle ground states.

This race isn't close at all. It all rests on factors well outside of the republican's control ableit Obama's too. European debt, Iran/Israel, terrorism, Pakistan, Afghanistan, or natural disaster. These are the issues that could bring him down in the next 6 months. The GOP has virtually nothing to do with these and Obama only has the slightest of influence. And the truth is, a good performance after a natural disaster could be a clincher for him.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

4. Obama by 10 in New Hampshire?

I'm sorry, but that seems off. That's one state I think Willard can flip.