Jump to content

2008 Election: Electoral Anaylsis


Max

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I know that there is already a thread devoted to a discussion of the 2008 presidential election. However, because that thread solely deals with people's opinions on the issues and the candidates, I wanted to start a new thread that is simply devoted to an objective analysis of how McCain and Obama will do in the Electoral College. (If the moderators choose to lock this thread and ship this post over to the existing thread, I completely understand. However, I strongly feel this new thread is necessary because I don't want discussion regarding the Electoral College to get lost in the shuffle of the very large thread that currently exists.)

Most of you are familiar with the Electoral College: Presidents are not elected on the basis as to which candidates win the most total votes. (And, if you believe the rules should be changed to reflect this, this thread is the place to discuss you opinions on this matter.) Rather, electoral votes are awarded for each state where a candidate gets the most votes. Currently, the winning candidate must accumulate at least 270 electoral votes (out of a possible total of 538).

Below is a list of how many electoral votes each state has. However, rather than just provide an alphabetical listing of the states, I have sorted them into five categories: Safe Obama, Lean Obama, True Toss-Up, Lean McCain, and Safe McCain. Note that the number of electoral votes a particular state has is in parentheses next to that state's name.

Safe Obama (186 electoral votes in total):

California (55)

Connecticut (7)

Delaware (3)

District of Columbia (3)

Hawaii (4)

Illinois (21)

Maryland (10)

Massachusetts (12)

New Jersey (15)

New York (31)

Oregon (7)

Rhode Island (4)

Vermont (3)

Washington (11)

Lean Obama (62 electoral votes in total):

Maine (4)

Michigan (17)

Minnesota (10)

Pennsylvania (21)

Wisconsin (10)

True Toss-Up (74 electoral votes in total):

Colorado (9)

Iowa (7)

Missouri (11)

Nevada (5)

New Hampshire (4)

New Mexico (5)

Ohio (20)

Virginia (13)

Lean McCain (81 electoral votes in total):

Arizona (10)

Florida (27)

Georgia (15)

Indiana (11)

Montana (3)

North Carolina (15)

Safe McCain (135 electoral votes in total):

Alabama (9)

Alaska (3)

Arkansas (6)

Idaho (4)

Kansas (6)

Kentucky (8)

Louisiana (9)

Mississippi (6)

Nebraska (5)

North Dakota (3)

Oklahoma (7)

South Carolina (8)

South Dakota (3)

Tennessee (11)

Texas (34)

Utah (5)

West Virginia (5)

Wyoming (3)

For most of these states, the categories in which they belong are obvious. I had a tough time whether to place Georgia, Indiana, & North Carolina in the Safe McCain or Lean McCain categories; while I am 90% sure that McCain will carry these states, many experts (and polls) have suggested a somewhat close race in these states. Also, while many people condiser Florida as a toss-up, I put it in the Lean McCain category since (1) the state has been trending Republican in recent years and (2) Obama is doing considerably worse than most other Democrats when it comes to appealing to Jewish and Hispanic voters. Finally, most pundits would probably rate Michigan and Pennsylvania as toss-ups. However, I could not disagree more with this assessment, since recent statewide elections show both states to be considerably Democratic.

If you add up the Safe and Lean Obama states, it totals 248 electoral votes; meanwhile the Safe and Lean McCain states total 216 electoral votes. (It should be noted that the Democrats carried all of the Safe & Lean Obama states in the past two elections, while the Republicans carried all of the Safe & Lean McCain states.) This, of course, means that the burden is on McCain to carry the lion's share of toss-up states.

Currently, I am not ready to make an exact prediction as to how many electoral votes each candidate will get on election day. However, this thread is the place for both me and you to make these predictions as the election nears. Also, free free to discuss how the presidential election is shaping up in every one of these states, and whether you agree with my assessment over which states are Safe Obama, Lean Obama, toss-ups, Lean McCain, or Safe McCain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

This is so embarassing; however I just realized that I spelled the word "Analysis" incorrectly in the thread's title as "Anaylsis." While I sincerely apologize for my rudeness, could one of the moderators please fix the thread's title so that the correct spelling is used? It would be very much appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I love this thread! Great topic, Max!

If all goes as in 2004, McCain would win all the toss-up states except NH and the total would be 286 to 252. Advantage McCain.

This is definitely my hope! Oddly enough this would be the exact electoral count between Bush and Kerry.

Ohio is the big one! Ohio is the one to watch. This toss up state's 20 elec. votes will make or break either campaign. If Obama wins Ohio and NH out of the toss ups the total would be 266 to 270 advantage Obama! ..only a 4 vote win..

Wow this race is probably going to be very close!

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/president/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Casey, you are right that Ohio is so very critical in this election. Simply put, McCain must win Ohio in order to win the election. (In fact, no Republican has ever been elected president without winning that state.) However, Obama still has several ways he can win without carrying Ohio. (For example, he can win if he carries both Virginia and Colorado, or if he wins Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico.)

Also, my hope is very close to yours! Personally, what I am hoping for--and actually believe could happen--is that McCain carries all of the toss-up states except for Iowa (along with the Safe and Lean Republican states). This would result in McCain winning 283 electoral votes to Obama's 255.

Below are my opinions regarding the eight toss-up states I identified earlier:

COLORADO: This is a state that I am very worried about, since it has trended so Democratic in the last couple of years. However, as of this moment, I predict that McCain will pull out a narrow victory here because (1) Obama is far more liberal than the Democrats who actually do win statewide elections here, and (2) McCain is not an advocate of religious conservatism, which happens to be unpopular with this state's swing voters.

IOWA: Out of all of the toss-up states, Iowa is the state that is most likely to vote for Obama. That's because this state has a history of voting Democratic in recent elections (despite the fact that Bush narrowly won Iowa in 2004, Dukakis actually carried the state in 1988), and because Obama did so well in this state's caucuses.

MISSOURI: I consider this the toss-up state most likely to vote for McCain, given the fact that the state is home to so many social conservatives (who could never vote for Obama). However, if the black turnout in St. Louis happens to be at an all-time high on election day, then Obama could very well score a narrow victory here.

NEVADA: While Nevada is truly split down the middle between McCain and Obama, I actually think that--out of the three southwestern battleground states--this is the one that is most favorable to McCain. Certainly, the Democratic trend in this state is not as strong as it is in Colorado (or Virginia, for that matter).

NEW HAMPSHIRE: Although this is the only one of the eight toss-up states that voted for Kerry in 2004, I actually think that McCain will pull out a narrow win here (despite the fact that Democrats have made so many gains in the state over the last decade). I feel this way because (1) McCain himself has proven that he is well-liked in this state, and (2) the Clintons are extremely popular in New Hampshire (which could result in a backlash against Obama).

NEW MEXICO: While New Mexico has traditionally been one of the least Republican states in the western United States (apart from the Pacific Coast states), I actually feel McCain has the edge here because Obama is still having trouble with Hispanic voters (which I believe comprise over a third of all voters in this state).

OHIO: There's no doubt about the fact that Ohio has been trending Democratic in recent years. (The poor economy in this state certainly does not help the Republicans.) Yet, Ohio is packed with the white, blue-collar voters who are turned off to Obama. While this also holds true for Michigan and Pennsylvania, Ohio has more Republican strongholds than either of those other states. And, social conservatism plays considerably better in Ohio than it does in either Michigan or Pennsylvania. As a result of these factors, I actually think that McCain will carry this state by a razor thin margin (while meanwhile, I simply cannot rate either Michigan or Pennsylvania as a toss-up state).

VIRGINIA: Truth be told, no state worries me more than Virginia. (While, as I earlier stated, Iowa is the toss-up state most likely to vote for Obama, it is the state of Virginia that has considerably more electoral votes.) Until the last several years, Virginia was one of the most Republican states in the country. However, what has happened is that so many liberals from Maryland and DC have moved to northern Virginia, turning that area into an absolute Democratic stronghold in the process. In fact, because of the heavy concentration of Democrats in the northern part of the state, Virginia now has a Democratic governor and a Democratic senator (and will soon have another Democratic senator as well, since the party is easily expected to win the senate seat being vacated by John Warner). Nevertheless, I am still holding out some hope for McCain in this state, simply because Obama is far more liberal than any of the Democrats who have won a statewide election in the recent past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

About Ohio, it may not play that big of a role. Obama is leading in NM, and if he can get NV and CO, which are definite possibilties, he's in. Virginia is also pretty close. Virginia and NM would give Obama the win. I really don't think the traiditional battle ground states are as important this year because of the western states that have come in to play. Look at a place like Montana. In 2004, there was pretty much always a 15-20 point spread between K and B. This year that number is down to 10, and has even gotten lower than that. And Florida really hasn't been talked about, although the polls are very close there.

I recommended this before, but electoral-vote.com is great for polls. (Although as many in the media have pointed out, there are always problems with polls).

Also, just some rambling from me. I think that a lot of people have left out the race factor. No, race really shouldn't be a factor. But I guarantee you, African Americans in the south (MS, AR, AL, LA, GA) are going to come out in DROVES to vote for Obama. And while that may not enough to turn the states blue, that will definitely raise the numbers for Obama. Think about it this way, what if Gore had had several more millions votes than he did, but Bush still won the electoral vote. It would've made the case for the elec college even smaller. Where is the line drawn for majority vs. electoral college? Do you need 2, 5, or 10 million more votes than the other candidate to over rule the elec college? And why should the supreme court decide an election in such a case? The supreme court is NOT elected by the people, even though it is supposedly for the people. Shouldn't congress decide? (Which is the case for a 269-269 tie, which is a possibility this year). (And granted I don't think that would've changed who won in 2000 because I think congress was majority republican).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The electoral college was set up for the very reason that it serves. The founders did not intend for the people to actually select the president. I'm not saying that just because it benefited the republicans in 2000, I'm just basing it on historical fact.

IA that race will serve a major role. IA that it shouldn't but it is unavoidable IMO. I think it could hurt Obama just as well as it could help. There has been research done which is known as the Bradley Effect. Tom Bradley, the mayor of LA (who was black) was leading all of the polls in the CA race for governor in 1982 up to the day of the election. He eventually lost by quite a large margin.

The Bradley Effect is a way to describe now how white voters misrepresent their intentions in polling. It has been said that many are too embarassed to admit they are not voting for the black candidate when asked simply because race is their only reason for not voting for the non-white candidate. It has been documented that whites have strayed from their party lines to vote for the white candidate.

Some experts are saying that on the national level the Bradley Effect will be even more wide spread and come into play in this election more than ever. These experts are saying that Obama's numbers are very much inflated and that his slight lead in the polls spells doom for him.

Just food for thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The fact that the race has remained so tight definitely bodes better for McCain. You would think after 8 years of failed Bush Republican policies and approval ratings in the 20's Americans would be racing to elect a Democrat.....

Well that isn't happening strangely enough. Aside from his stance on the war and a few of his social views, McCain is far far different than Bush and I think alot of Americans are overlooking his similarities to Bush and supporting him. Simply because they refuse to support Obama for whatever reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Ehhh, historical fact is a big grey area. People also thought the world was flat and that blacks were beneath whites. I know that's an extreme example, but things change. And honestly, that was in 1982, things have only improved since then.

And are you saying that if McCain won by 5 million votes but Obama won the electoral map, it'd be okay that Obama was president?

I definitely agree that racism is alive in our country. However, I still don't believe the polls either way if it's within 10%. Everybody doesn't have landlines anymore, especially the young voters who tend to go for Obama. (I have two 30ish year olds in my immediate family that only have cell phones.) Think of the millions of college students that wouldn't get polled because they aren't in a phonebook. A spin on polls will work in both candidates' favor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's pretty cut and dry. The founders set up the electoral college as a safety measure to ensure the states had more of a say than the majority of people. This was because of the tensions between the north and the south even back then. The south and the smaller states argued that they would never be able to produce a president because they didn't have the numbers. The population of the state still weighs in, but smaller states at least have an impact. They set up the electoral college to balance things out a bit.

I personally believe that we should stick with it because it has worked for 200+ years. And if McCain won by 5,000,000 votes and lost in the electoral college, Democrats would be the college's biggest advocates.

I would be upset if Obama won reguardless, but I would not change my opinion of the electoral college.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

How relevant is that today? When, in modern times, does it matter where somebody is from? We have a VP candidate from Alaska and a P candidate born in Hawaii. Those are the most out of the way places in the country, yet people love both of them. People say, oh well if we use a popular vote, candidates won't pay attention to small states. DO YOU THINK THEY DO TODAY?!?! No, they don't care about states with 3 or 4 electoral votes.

And it HASN'T been flawless in the past 200 years. There's the 2000 election, and then way back in 1876 and 1888.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Its pretty relevant. Without the electoral college states like Rhode Island, Alaska, and Hawaii would have virtually no say as to who the president would be. The electoral system allows them to participate and have an impact. The electoral system puts power in the hands of the states rather than the people.

Yeah your right. The popular vote did not match the electorates when Harrison and Bush were elected but it still served its purpose. These were the only times in history that the system worked the best IMO. The states had more of an impact than the individual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Dear God in Heaven (/KatherineChancellor), maybe blazer is the wrong word - I’m just saying André needs to wear baggy clothes or larger sizes cause he’s a short king and the sizes they’ve chosen for him make him look smaller and shorter than necessary  

      Please register in order to view this content

      btw he’s not even that young, must be around Martin’s age…
    • I think she left before Justin. I remember someone saying her last scene is dancing with Ross at the ball, telling him she's leaving to be with Ben.
    • What a wonderful photo! It really is a shame that Peacock will not show those early years. I know I'd love to see them!
    • With the death of Days and GH actress, Denise Alexander, someone posted this in the Days thread, a '60s-era photo of some of the cast, which lists the names. In the upper left, is a young Susan Flannery, who obviously ended up playing Stephanie Forrester on B&B, who was one of a few actresses to play Dr. Laura Horton [mother to Mike and Jennifer Horton] on Days. Here is a link to the photo: https://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/topic/38014-days-behind-the-scenes-articlesphotos/?do=findComment&comment=2022200  
    • https://parade.com/news/days-of-our-lives-star-susan-seaforth-hayes-pays-heartfelt-tribute-to-denise-alexander-a-friend-to-treasure

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Sorry, there must have been a error, while creating the file. I redone it and it has audio
    • Tamara Tunie was on a local CBS affiliate in Baltimore the other day talking about a few things she had going on, BTG amongst them: "Beyond the Gates" star Tamara Tunie is in Baltimore for the Reginald F. Lewis Museum's 20th anniversary
    • Kobe/Long had their own template and pretty much gutted the cast. As soon as contracts were up established characters were dropped. They needed to free the budget for the new characters. Going back to Ann,I wonder why the Dobsons renewed her contract around 78? After her initial story she became supporting and they didn't seem to want to pursue a romance with Mike. Maybe the feedback was that viewers blamed her indirectly for Leslie's death. If Mike hadn't taken on her case etc. Did she decide not to disrupt her son's life? Seems odd after everything she didn't claim him back. 1976 continues... Joe Werner is just not bouncing back after his recovery as he should, and Sarah, concerned about his sometimes morbid-seeming depression, consults Justin Marler. They agree that Joe is becoming a “cardiac cripple,” and know this kind of overcompensation for illness and overprecaution can not only be a permanently depressed condition but can actually cause a setback for him physically.  Marler releases Joe into Sarah’s care, but it’s soon apparent that just being out of the hospital hasn’t done anything to boost Joe’s spirits about his return to a normal existence. Marler finally lays it out to Joe—the choice has to be his. He can choose to lead a normal, productive life as a doctor and as a husband to the best wife he could have, or he can choose to become an invalid and live on the outside looking in for the rest of his days, sentencing Sarah to the same fate. Realizing the selfishness of what he’s doing to —Sarah as well as the narrowness of the confinement he’s set for himself, Joe begins to see his preoccupation with his illness as the self-pity it really is and decides he’s ready to return to the hospital for a one hour shift each day. Sarah is overjoyed by his turnabout, but full happiness is hers on the day she overhears Joe telling a fearful patient that the world is beautiful and worth any. effort to get back into it. Steve and Adam are thrilled to learn that Cedars has been the recipient of the Levy Grant for expansion of hospital property. But they have learned, as they report to Ed, that the land they were hoping to build the new research facility on, the land immediately adjacent to the hospital, has been purchased by Dr. Justin Marler. Both Adam and Steve feel that Justin is expanding a power base at Cedars and the land purchase is just one more block in Justin’s power play. When Ed asks Marler why he purchased this particular parcel of land, Marler explains that he bought it with the express intention of someday building his own offices and facilities convenient to the major facilities of Cedars. When the subject of the hospital’s needing the land arises, Marler meets with Adam, and they agree that he should realize a fair profit from his property and that an unbiased assessor should be engaged to evaluate the market value of the land so they can agree on a selling price. When Sarah comments on the fact that Marler is to realize a profit on the land, he bitterly replies that no matter what he’s done since coming to Cedars to prove that he has changed. since she last knew him, she refuses to see him as anything but what he was all those years ago. Sarah insists this isn’t true. But Marler then calls Adam for a meeting and informs him that the land is not for sale at any price. As Adam begins to grow alarmed, Marler continues that the site for the new building will be his personal donation to the hospital. As Adam expresses profuse thanks and appreciation, Marler wryly notes that the tax deductions he’ll realize on this contribution to a charitable institution will benefit himself almost as much as Cedars. When Steve Jackson learns that Marler is to be elected head of the research wing that will be built on his property, he expresses the conviction that this was the exact intention of the gift. Adam, however, assures Steve that the donation wasn’t a factor in the hospital  board’s decision, they were concerned only with Dr. Marler’s reputation as a doctor. | After lengthy consultations and meetings. with the hospital  staff, Ed assured by the head nurse that her nurses performed commendably despite the added pressure of the train wreck, presents his findings to the hospital review board. Steve arrives at two possible explanations for the facts. Either Grainger, more active than usual due to the previously delayed medication, reached for the writing pad and inadvertently disconnected the breathing tubes, or he was in a state of extreme upset because of the delayed medication and.in the excitement a surge of adrenalin within his system caused his brain aneurism to start hemorrhaging. " Upon learning that the review board has ruled out negligence in Grainger’s death, Ed tells Rita, who takes her first free breath in a long time. But Ed hasn’t thought to tell Rita that he’s been in touch with Grainger’s attorney, Mr. Schafer, who, knowing that a woman was at the base of Grainger’s investigation, is coming to Springfield to try to find out who the woman - was who walked out on Grainger when he collapsed —in the restaurant. Peggy, learning that Rita’s “forgetting” to deliver Holly’s message was instrumental in their divorce ‘being finalized, tells Ed that Holly wanted to reach him to stop the divorce. Immediately after, Peggy is torn by doubts, wondering if she did the right thing.She confides in Barbara, who then discusses the situation with Ed. He tells her he and Holly have discovered a new closeness now that they are building their separate lives. Barbara quickly contradicts him: Holly is not building a new life. Barbara gently cautions Ed, saying, “People change, feelings change, and what seems right now may not be right a year from now. No decision is irrevocable.” Ed agrees with this. Now that Ben has declared his love for her, Hope finds herself apprehensive, fearing that she might be making a mistake, as she did a few years ago, when she was sure she was in love with her college professor. Explaining that she doesn’t want to make another mistake, she asks Ben to be patient, and he agrees. When Mike expresses his disapproval of Ben’s overstated independence, his need to be beholden to no one, Hope quickly jumps to Ben’s defense, and Mike apologizes. But Ben, surprisingly, accepts Mike’s assessment as constructive criticism. Later Hope, examining her feelings and desires, tells Ben she does love him and wants to belong to him. Later that evening, after they’ve made love, Ben asks Hope to marry him.And, delighted, she replies that she will. At Hope’s instigation, Bert has a family dinner to which Ben is invited, and Hope announces their intention to marry over glasses of wine. Mike politely offers best wishes while Bert thrills the couple with her offer to' make a Christmas wedding for them. Bert later tells Mike he must accept this engagement with good spirits for Hope, and later, seeing the joy she’s feeling, he gives his daughter his approval. But Ben finds another problem on his very own doorstep: his brother Jerry, who announces he’s left home after several bad fights with their parents. He refuses to tell Ben what they were fighting about. As Ben is showering, Jerry borrows his car and goes out for an hour. The phone rings, but Ben can’t hear it. Shortly after, two uniformed officers visit Mike at home to tell him that his late wife’s car has been involved in a delicatessen robbery earlier in the evening. Since Ben bought Leslie’s car, Mike accompanies the officers to Ben’s apartment. Ben curtly informs the police that he had nothing to do with the robbery and makes it clear that he feels they wouldn’t be there if he didn’t have a record and that his exoneration doesn’t prevent his being hassled like any ex-con,as they tell him he has to go to the police station for questioning. Hope tells Ben she called him earlier, and when he replies that he must have been in the shower, she accepts his word unhesitatingly.Jerry finally returns to Ben’s place and under questioning from Ben admits that he robbed the store,explaining that he has debts. Ben is now in a quandary,as he feels he must protect his brother but doesn’t want to be unfair to Hope. He tries to ease the situation by withdrawing $185 from the joint checking account he opened with Hope and repaying the delicatessen owner. He then sends Jerry out of town to stay with a friend. His relief at having solved the problem is short-lived, however, when Mike informs him that, despite the reparations, the robbery was a felony and the police will continue to investigate. Hope is badly upset to learn while making a deposit that Ben withdrew’a sum which Mike tells her is equal to the amount stolen. This shakes her belief that he _was really home when she called, and she goes to him, asking for an answer to put her mind at rest. Ben can’t betray Jerry and asks Hope to trust him, promising she will have the whole story eventually. But Hope can’t accept this; she needs complete honesty and openness in her relationship and without it cannot goon. She painfully tells her father that the wedding is off despite her love for Ben, and tells Bert to stop preparations. Mike goes to Ben, reminding him that half the money in the account is Hope’s and she has the right to an answer. But Ben won’t say any more and refuses Mike’s offer to represent him legally, again stating that he doesn’t need a lawyer, because he’s done nothing wrong.     
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy