Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Electoral Opponent Which Cannot Be Defeated: Math
The website 270towin.com has a fascinating interactive tool for looking at how the Electoral College has voted and conceivably will vote in the near future.
You can look at the 2012 election results and see where Mitt Romney needed to win in order to get to 270 electoral votes (click individual states to change how they voted). He needed to take some 63 electoral votes away from Obama in order to win, by the way.
One of the more fascinating settings on the map is to look at states which haven’t changed their voting habits since 2000. What this setting reveals is the infamous “blue wall” of 242 electoral votes which the Democrats can essentially rely upon come hell or high water. In the Republican column are some 179 electoral votes which also haven’t changed since George W. Bush’s first election.
Obviously, given this state of affairs, Republicans have little margin for error when it comes to the Electoral College — the Dems’ 242 “guaranteed” electoral votes plus just Florida yields 271, and thus the Presidency. Republicans could run the table on the remaining tossup states and still lose if they don’t win Florida, so all electoral strategy necessarily begins and ends with winning that state. From this perspective it seems that some states have their nicknames mixed up — Pennsylvania’s position as the “Keystone State” is easily eclipsed on the electoral map by Florida. It is the eye of a needle through which all electoral success apparently must pass.
So, in order to construct a scenario where a Republican candidate can assemble the requisite 270 votes, there are several roads which can be taken. First, that person must hold all of the Romney states. Next, they must win Florida plus some number states George W. Bush took sufficient to reach 270 or they must begin flipping other states on the map.
I’ll address the last question first: which Blue Wall states could conceivably change allegiance? Wisconsin has shown a trendline which might credibly lend itself to joining the Republican coalition, mainly due to Gov. Scott Walker’s having neutered one of the state’s largest (and hostile to Republican) political constituencies. To a lesser extent, Bernie Sanders’ primary win there indicates that dissatisfaction with the presumptive Democrat nominee might run deep enough for the Republican candidate to scrape out a win. Outside of Wisconsin, the only other state from the Obama slate (and not part of the Blue Wall) showing signs of flipping would be Iowa. Given the lack of a charismatic Democrat candidate, this isn’t totally unbelievable — but that still leaves the Republican candidate with some 251 electoral votes, assuming they won all of the Romney states plus Florida, Wisconsin and Iowa.
The presumptive Republican candidate would still find themselves in the position of having to come up with 19 additional electoral votes – 18 of which would be conveniently located in Ohio, where Gov. John Kasich might be able to help the nominee over the finish line. Yet this scenario leaves that candidate a single vote shy of victory and creates an electoral college tie, whereupon the House of Representatives would select the President.
It should be noted that there are a lot of “ifs” buried in the assumptions of these electoral scenarios. Given how fractured and broken the various party infrastructures are this year, it’s hard to say what, if anything will hold true — but it does seem likely that the 242 votes of the “Blue Wall” will be fairly solid, with the possible exception of Wisconsin. The campaign will be an organizational run to the finish line with the candidate who is best able to marshal their resources to drive voters to the polls being likely to win.
In that sense, the old rules of politics haven’t changed a bit. The Democrats have a huge, structural advantage in the Electoral College — but the Republicans still possess a narrow gap through which they can reach the promised land. What it will take is a candidate who is savvy enough to out-organize the opposition, and shrewdly drive a wedge through the middle of the Democrat coalition in order to ensure that the Blue Wall can’t grow.
Published in General
With the ever-increasing federal government, is Virginia still a toss-up?What is listed as a tossup is based off of best available polling data where the difference is <5%, if I recall correctly.
I would place it in the “leans Democrat” column, personally.
If the GOP is to survive , it must begin retaking ground. This map is a replay of WW1.
Pick one major blue city and throw everything you have at it. Walk neighborhoods, be there 24/7 365. Take Jeb’s 100 million dollars and put it into the battle of Pittsburgh, or whatever city you can take.
The Democrats still operate as a 50 State party. When they lose, they report for work the next day and keep playing to win in their territory.
Conservatives go on a cruise the day after the election and scribble.
I think it’s a fair reflection of reality – and rather than pie-in-the-sky ideas about taking back large urban areas, my preference would be for the party to merely focus on re-taking the states that we previously took. Doing only that means we win without possibly sinking our entire party’s fundraising apparatus into what amounts to a prop bet.
I don’t think it’s a lost cause like some other “blues,” but it’s getting there. The government employee element in No. Virginia is part of the reason, but ironically private businesses employing younger workers (e.g., tech sector) is also a major factor. If HRC picks Tim Kaine for Veep, that’s probably fuggedaboutit.
The other interactive map is Sean Trends’s that allows you to tinker with the demographics of the turnout. I happen to believe that the demographics that came out for Obama will be vastly different than what comes out for Clinton. I am not convinced that the Dems, even with their Blue Wall, will have it so easy.
Given how important the state of Florida is to Republican electoral prospects, this article should serve as a sobering tonic.
One thing is for certain: the amount of damage that Trump has done to the party – even if it were limited to just Florida – is catastrophic. This quote, in relation to the down-ticket effect makes me want to pull my hair out:
That’s a fair response. I will counter by saying if you take an urban area, it guts the heart of your enemy. You are not playing on the margins, you are taking out their blood supply in a state.
If the GOP cannot win in urban areas, it cannot be a national party. If you can win in one and make it work, you get a virus like weapon to take that one and take more.
If your enemy has to copy your policies to hold you off, you have won at a national and strategic level.
Playing at the margins, playing it safe is a losing strategy.
The Democrats for decades made the Republicans fight on their policy ideas in their battlespace. If the GOP can turn around a city with jobs and schools in rapid succession , they reverse the process.
Scott Walker was on this wavelength in Wisconsin. Apply that to a city. Find one that works where you get a non white population voting GOP because they like the result. It has to be done in a three year period but the payoff is large.
Note:
This comment was flagged. We believe it was made in jest.The Florida polls are wrong because they were taken by hysterical, pearl-clutching, feminized, cuckservative, couch-fainting losers.
That must have been an interesting poll qualification questionnaire.
No, I just thought I’d better join the Trump movement before I got left behind. (I’m angling for a cabinet position.)
The issue with this strategy is that picking a large city to engage this strategy upon doesn’t happen outside of the larger context of that city’s state. Democrats run up huge margins in big blue states like California, New York and Illinois.
Looking at each of those states, let’s assume (optimistically) that you could flip 10% of the voters in one of those states’ big cities. Let’s ignore California, because there are at least three huge cities there that you’d functionally have to conquer. Ditto New York. That leaves Illinois.
So, you go into say, Chicago and full-court press that city in order to flip maybe 10% of people in Cook County. Cook County went 74% for Barack Obama and had 2,000,000 votes. 10% of them are 200,000 voters – which get subtracted from Obama’s total and added to the Republican which means that the Republican still loses Illinois by a count of 2.7 to 2.3 million votes.
There are some states that are simply out of reach. Even in a State like Washington which has a single, large urban area (SeaTac) it would be tough to flip such ossified opposition for minimal potential gain.
The party has to spend its resources getting suburban and rural voters out in places like the Florida panhandle if it wants to have a chance in national elections. Once we accomplish that, we can start thinking about expanding the map.
Those damned NeverTrump people are costing the GOP its traditional strongholds Washington, Oregon, California, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland!
Remember, nothing is forever. Why, one nuclear war could wipe out the Dems in several states.
The only certain thing about the future–no matter the topic–is that it is unknowable. Anyone trying to predict November, particularly after this past primary season, is trying to sell snake oil. I used to get caught up in election predictions and the only time I was correct was 2002 and 2004, after that I have been wrong more times than not. Let’s just wait and see but in the meantime work to prevent Hildabeast from winning.
The best plan would be to maximize votes in states that are easy to get as you said. I think we could compete in Iowa, New Mexico, and Ohio. We could compete in Florida too given the right circumstances. Why the hell is Indiana on the map as a battleground?
If Bernie were to run third-party, could he win even one state to draw down “the blue wall?”
Give me something to hold onto here…
Because that map shows states that have voted consistently in a single direction since 2000. IN voted for Obama in 2008.
I would say that if we were looking at a more normal year, IN would definitely be in the R column. This gets back to that “future” thing you were discussing a moment ago – who would have thought IN would have gone Obama in ’08?
I had a horrific vision this morning.
After bruising convention battles, both Bern and Trump ultimately defeated and are sent packing by their respective parties, only to team up in the fall.
Wash your mind out with this:
If Bernie goes third party it probably dooms the Democrats, even though they have a considerable distance to fall in some of the bigger states before they’re at threat of losing them. Where Bernie’s third party run would kill them would be in a place like Michigan or Ohio. Wisconsin, Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado would probably fall as well. Winning is almost academic at that point.
I specifically used the example of Pittsburgh as it is the right scale to make a difference and could by itself put Pennsylvania firmly on the GOP side. The effect of a GOP “Pittsburgh Revolution” would be the same as if you could turn Chicago without the bloody defense.
Similar opportunities could occur in Milwaukee , Michigan and others. My state of Oregon would take a Libertarian Party that aligned with the GOP nationally to take out Portland.
The GOP needs an urban division. You do not need to invade Japan first, just take the islands piece by piece.
Well, the more likely scenario is Trump brings Bernie on as a his Socialist Outreach Spokesman. A free condo at Mar a Lago and he would be living like a real Communist.
When I left New York in the Seventies, it leaned Dem but it was still competitive in presidential elections. I arrived in a California that was solidly conservative, in fact, just about the conservative capital of the country. (Dixie was still Dem back then.) TKC has a point: things change, and things can be changed. But it’s a damned slow process, so slow that by the end of it, the causes and effects can be mistaken, or skillfully lied about. Even three years is the blink of an eye.
Giuliani made a revolutionary difference in the way New Yorkers looked at their city. He didn’t make them conservative voters, but he recognized where he and they agreed–crime and cleaner streets. He delivered both. He got a Republican elected as his successor, Bloomberg. It’s hard to say it made a permanent change.
Fair enough. Let’s look at Allegheny county.
In 2012, BO won there rougly 56% to Romney’s 42% Let’s assume (again) that you could flip 10% of the vote (just over 600,000 people voted there) which means that now Romney wins that County 52%-46%.
Romney still loses Pennsylvania by a count of about 2.85 to 2.65 million.
I’m afraid that in a lot of these states a much larger see-change has to occur before a “strike force” strategy could go in and take down a city in order to flip an election.
What makes WI and IA compelling is that they are shifting towards being more Republican through a combination of natural factors and good governance. We need to move a state like Michigan or Ohio in that direction in order to get them into our column more permanently.
Giuliani was an old school Republican. When the GOP had a liberal and a conservative wing. Back when it competed in all 50 States.
Now we are true conservatives and fighting a lost cause 25 state rear guard defense.
For all the railing about Northeast liberal Republicans, they did deliver votes in those presidential elections.
I would take Giuliani as a candidate over any of the ones that ran this year.
You are missing the point completely. If the GOP turns a city positive and black voters respond to the changes, you change minds in Philadelphia at the same time. You keep assuming that positive change has no effect beyond the borders of the change in the most interconnected era humans have ever lived in.
He was my guy back in 2008. Still think he was the only one with a shot at defeating BHO. But, boy, I guess he ran a lousy campaign.
He did, but the party was looking for the next in line, and that was you know who. As far as I am concerned, McCain is the reason that the New Hampshire primary should be moved to May.
I guess my attitude about this is informed by the pessimism I have regarding the state of racial relations in this nation – especially where it intersects with politics.
Estimates vary, but most people agree that upwards of 96% of blacks voted for Obama in ’08 and ’12. 96%. The reason for this (I believe) has very little to do with Republicans failing to reach out to blacks as much as it has to do with intense racial animosity of the black community towards non-blacks and towards Republicans in particular. Their track record in this regard is fairly consistent as well – it wasn’t merely BO who got hypermajorities of inner-city blacks, but each Democrat Candidate for half-a-dozen cycles has gotten 90+% of the black vote.
I have to be honest: I have no idea how to break their stranglehold on that community.
We don’t engage with them in their popular culture, (which is anathema to middle-class values) and when we attempt to get at them in a place where they’re willing to listen, like on school choice, the other members of the Democrat coalition such as the Teachers’ unions are ready to crack the whip and get them back in line.
African-American voters may have to hit rock bottom before they’re willing to take the hand up rather than asking for more hand-outs.
In 2006-07, when Rudy was getting ready for the campaign, an NRO writer, a SoCon, suggested a deal, if an unwritten one: Okay, everyone knows social conservatives would rather have someone else, but if it’s going to be you, here’s our terms. We don’t ask you to insincerely fake being one of us; that does neither of us any good. But here are our bright lines, the stuff you don’t mess with if you want us to go along.
I’ve sometimes felt that Cruz would benefit from that kind of bracing open letter: Okay, we know you’re a big SoCon. We don’t expect you to lie about it, but here’s some things you won’t do in the campaign if you want moderates to give you a look. I doubt he’d take the advice.
This is doable. My opinion is Rubio is more needed to secure FL than Kasich is to secure OH.
Need to find 91.
Trump can change focus from iPhones to Chinese car tariffs and that should flip Michigan’s 16.
Address coal to get PA’s 20 and Ohio’s 18.
Rubio as VP gets Florida’s 29 for 83.
Could NC or Indiana fall in line and close it out? Could Trump flip WN or NJ? All are possible, but might need a fine tuned strategy targeting that state.