Electoral college predictions... yes, it's only April

[Sims2789]

I used 270towin.com to make the maps.

The red and blue states are states that I'm calling for one candidate or the other. The white states are states that I'm not calling and think could reasonably go to either party.

Note that the Democrats will win if there's tie.

I bet Hillary will get Ohio. Obama will probably get Pennsylvania, and has a good shot in a lot of other states. For example, Obama wins Virginia if blacks make up 30% of Virginia's electorate (87% went for Kerry in 2004) and 95% go for Obama, and if he wins a third of the rest of the electorate. In 2004, 2% of the electorate was Asian, 3% was Latino, 2% was "other," 72% was white, and 20% was black.

 

[Godwynn]

I think McCain will take New Hampshire no matter who gets the Democratic Nomination.

 

[Stile]

I think the Obama map would have even more drastic changes. I think GA could go to Obama, but that McCain would fair much better in New England.

 

[JollyRoger]

I don't see how McCain takes New Hampshire. Both Clinton and Obama racked up more votes than he did and the Democratic field got over 50,000 more votes that the GOP field.

 

[Ecofarm]

@Sims: Weren't you predicting a landslide last week? What changed your mind? Perhaps I have you confused with someone else.

 

[Sims2789]

@Sims: Weren't you predicting a landslide last week? What changed your mind? Perhaps I have you confused with someone else.

My other map (made way more than a week ago) was similar to this one, but McCain won the plains, Alaska, and North Carolina, and I think I gave Virginia, Missouri, and Ohio to Obama. I didn't give myself the option of not calling any states in that map, and was a bit more optimistic then.

Obama will have 349 electoral votes if he wins all the white states. That's be a landslide in our Bush era of politics, but it isn't one historically. Excluding 2000 and 2004, it would be the closest election since 1976. I used the word "landslide" at some point, but I think you're thinking of somebody else. I probably shouldn't have said "[I predict a landslide]," and was a bit over optimistic when I did, since landslides are years like 1964, 1972, 1980, and 1984 where one candidate wins almost the entire electoral college.

 

[Elrohir]

I don't see how McCain takes New Hampshire. Both Clinton and Obama racked up more votes than he did and the Democratic field got over 50,000 more votes that the GOP field.

The Democrats had more primary voters this year all across the board, and I'm pretty sure that's been the norm for the past several election cycles.

Predicting results now, when the Democratic nomination isn't even over with, is dumb. Predicting results based on primary turnout is even more so.

 

[demokratickid]

Obama will probably get Pennsylvania.

You'd be suprised, their is a lot of racism, a sickening amount, left over in PA. Either end is blue, but it's Alabama in the middle. Obama might win PA if nominated, but if he does it would be by a slim margin, only 1-4%. You heard it here first!

 

[Sims2789]

You'd be suprised, their is a lot of racism, a sickening amount, left over in PA. Either end is blue, but it's Alabama in the middle. Obama might win PA if nominated, but if he does it would be by a slim margin, only 1-4%. You heard it here first!

All the black people are gonna vote (even more than they usually do; blacks are more likely to vote than whites when adjusted for wealth) which should push Obama up by a couple of percentage points. And the limousine liberals that went for Hillary in the primary aren't about to sit this one out or split for McCain.

 

[emzie]

You'd be suprised, their is a lot of racism, a sickening amount, left over in PA. Either end is blue, but it's Alabama in the middle. Obama might win PA if nominated, but if he does it would be by a slim margin, only 1-4%. You heard it here first!

Obama and Hillary both out poll McCain in PA by 10%

If Clinton wins, McCain takes MI, WI, and IA.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

Good head to head matchups.

My prediction is the economy becomes the number one factor and a dem wins regardless.

 

[JollyRoger]

The Democrats had more primary voters this year all across the board, and I'm pretty sure that's been the norm for the past several election cycles.

When was the last time there was an election cycle like this with wide open fields on both sides?

Predicting results now, when the Democratic nomination isn't even over with, is dumb. Predicting results based on primary turnout is even more so.

Totally ignoring turnout would be even dumber, especially for the time period where both races were still wide open and voters had a choice of which primary to vote in (aka New Hampshire).

At least I gave a reason why I think McCain won't win New Hampshire. You're welcome to present your brilliant hypothesis for the opposite result.

 

[downtown]

The voter demographics have been changing in PA over the last decade or so, culminating in a huge democratic registration explosion. The Politico wrote last week about how they think that PA may be losing its status as one of the super-competitive states (Democrats should expect to win PA)...just like Florida and the Republicans.

 

[Sidhe]

Personally from what I've seen and playing around with the outcomes of the remaining polls, I don't think Clinton has a hope in hell of being the Democrat nomination, but I'll eat my hat if I'm wrong.

I'm surprised no ones said! Are you kidding the Republicans will win!!!!"£$"$!"1111243one3209-u75jm 93 Yet. Have even the Republicans given up.

Or is electoral college something different from who's going to win the election? I don't know nowt about your crazy, complicated system so be gentle with me.

If those predictions only relfect who will vote where for a candidate then I would suggest that Mccain really does have little or no chance of winning against Obama.

 

[demokratickid]

@ Sims2789- You would be suprised! The voters here in OA are very fickle, although they have been leaning liberal lately.

@augurey- I didn't know it was that much, but still it wouldn't suprise me if that number slimmed if Obama gets the nod.

@downtown- You may be right, and I think this election in November will determine that once and for all.

 

[Zarn]

Arkansas (if Clinton is nominated) is not solidly red.

New York is unlikely to switch over but possible. New Jersey could flip. McCain has a lot of supporters in both. These are more likely to flip to McCain, if Obama is nominated. Don't underestimate the number of Libertarians. There are a lot of young libertarians in the Mid-Atlantic. A lot of them are registered to other parties or are independent.

McCain should take Montana, Alaska, and the Dakotas.

There are just so many things where I disagree completely.

 

[Head Serf]

Being a Michigander, I think that Michigan will go to McCain this election.

 

[Sims2789]

Arkansas (if Clinton is nominated) is not solidly red.

New York is unlikely to switch over but possible. New Jersey could flip. McCain has a lot of supporters in both. These are more likely to flip to McCain, if Obama is nominated. Don't underestimate the number of Libertarians. There are a lot of young libertarians in the Mid-Atlantic. A lot of them are registered to other parties or are independent.

McCain should take Montana, Alaska, and the Dakotas.

There are just so many things where I disagree completely.

I thought about New Jersey but I bet boss Norcross keeps it blue if it's close.
I think McCain will take the Dakotas, Montana, and Alaska.

How many young libertarians are there in the mid-Atlantic? Why do you think they'll vote for McCain? I know you're talking about the people who hate Michael Moore so they vote Republican, but they seem to be too cynical to vote most of the time anyway.

 

[Elrohir]

When was the last time there was an election cycle like this with wide open fields on both sides?

Does it matter?

Totally ignoring turnout would be even dumber, especially for the time period where both races were still wide open and voters had a choice of which primary to vote in (aka New Hampshire).

I'm not totally ignoring it. I'm saying making any predictions at this point is premature. If you want to make predictions in mid-October, then primary turnout is legitimately part of that - but only a part. And really, the Democrats almost always have more people come out to vote in the primaries, even in states that are safely and solidly Republican, or in states that are up for grabs. (I'm pretty sure in Florida - where the Democratic votes didn't count - there were more votes in the Democratic primary than in the Republican, and Florida now leans Republican) Saying "Well Obama got more votes in the primary in NH than McCain did, so he'll win the state" is asinine. Maybe he'll win it after all. But saying that he probably will because of primary results 10 months before the election is ridiculous.

At least I gave a reason why I think McCain won't win New Hampshire. You're welcome to present your brilliant hypothesis for the opposite result.

I never said I thought McCain would win New Hampshire. I said it's dumb to say that he won't. It's equally dumb to say that he will. All of this is too terribly premature.


But have your fun, I guess.

 

[JollyRoger]

Well, it is a prediction thread and I made a prediction and gave a reason. It's not written in stone just yet. Still plenty of time for proper supplication so that I may not harden the hearts of the voters against McCain in a swing state or two on election day.

 

[Sims2789]

I never said I thought McCain would win New Hampshire. I said it's dumb to say that he won't. It's equally dumb to say that he will. All of this is too terribly premature.

I'll probably change mine more before November.

For example, I think there's a small chance that black turnout is so high that Obama wins Georgia and South Carolina, and McCain could pull a slim victory in Michigan.