2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumDemocrats Hold Near Lock on Electoral College
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2013/04/07/democrats_hold_near_lock_on_electoral_college.htmlDemocrats Hold Near Lock on Electoral College
Mike Murphy: "The GOP's greatest challenge is the fact that Democrats begin each presidential election with a near lock on the Electoral College. Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia have given their electoral votes to the Democratic presidential nominee in at least five out of the last six elections. These states represent 257 electoral votes out of the 270 needed to win the presidency. Under current trends, the GOP nominee has to pull the equivalent of drawing an inside straight in poker to get to the White House."
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)dsc
(52,129 posts)sorry, i love Hillary as much as the next guy, but the GOP starts with all of the following pretty much guaranteed. (UT, MT, ID, WY, KS, NE, OK, TX, LA, MS, AL, TN, MO, SC, GA, Alaska, KY, WV, and IN). That is (6 + 3 + 4 + 3 + 6 + 5 + 7 + 38 + 6 + 6 + 7 + 9 + 11 + 10 + 9 + 16 + 3 + 8 + 5 + 11 + 6 (dakotas)) which is 169 which gets us to 411 remaining. The GOP could nominate Hitler and still win those states with us nominating Churchill.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)After all, the only votes the repubs have are old angry white males and by 2016 there will be even less importance as there are more other voters.
Raw statistical numbers.
lastlib
(22,978 posts)Tennessee Hillbilly
(575 posts)I wish this were true, but some of those so-called "lock" states, such as Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, are controlled by Republicans at the state level, and being Repugs, they will try to deny voting rights, and even rig the vote counts, to try to steal the election. So I don't think we can assume a "near lock" at all, unfortunately.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)But then again look at the schmuck who made the statement, Mike Murphy? Loser
treestar
(82,383 posts)in some of those states, like Pennsylvania.
NPolitics1979
(613 posts)OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)but a semi-successful defensive game so long as the Rs have a near lock on the House due to gerrymandering, the NewDems have a lock on the Senate, and the D in the White House keeps proposing to cut Social Security.
TJrules
(6 posts)by the repubes?
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)including the changing demographics. Winning is going to take getting younger people and minorities to go out and vote as in any election. As for a lock, that is ridiculous.
On the flip-side, anyone who believes we'll win by 400+ EV is demented. The last time that happened was 1988 which in 2016 would have been 28 years ago. Keep in mind the previous two elections were also won by 400+ votes and that president (Reagan) went on to endorse Bush. I don't see that kind of a swing coming for many more years.
There were some states Obama won that were close, Iowa, Colorado, New Hampshire, Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. All of them were within around 5 points and represent 97 EVs
I don't see many states that would possibly flip either: Obama won Indiana and North Carolina in 2008, but lost them in 2012. Indiana seems to be going harder red despite the victory of Donnelly. North Carolina I think will teeter back and forth and remain a swing state for along time to come with there being a really good prospect of winning it again. Arizona I don't know much about except for their wingnut governor and the anti-immigration laws. Neither do I know much about Georgia as well. All four of them were relatively close in 2012, but they only represent 54 ECs.
Best case scenario if the candidate won all of them would be 385, which won't happen. I would argue the next candidate might get more than Obama did in 2008 (365).
bigdarryl
(13,190 posts)After Obama's eight years are up all bets are off