Free Markets, Free People

Election 2012–the shape of things to come?

Larry Sabato has released a first look at how things appear today in reference to the 2012 Presidential election.  As he says, it’s only use is to establish a “baseline” from which to watch the events and the trends over the next year plus before the election.

 

LJS2011042101-map

 

As it stands now, the electoral votes for the Safe, Likely and Leans numbers are 247 for Dems and 180 for Reps.  Note the toss up states (111 EVs).  They say a lot. 

Remove the leaners and you’re at 196 D and 170 R.  That, at least to me, is a much more likely place to start.  The leaners and tossup states are going to be the obvious places to watch.  Not including them leaves 172 EVs to be claimed.  You need 270 to be elected.

So … have fun and speculate away.

~McQ

[ad] Empty ad slot (#1)!

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

26 Responses to Election 2012–the shape of things to come?

  • How much do Wisconsin and Michigan lean Dem when they just tossed out the Dems at the state level?

  •  
    Can I assume the other 7 states will vote for Obama since he created them?

  • Wake me in April of 2012. This is nothing more than an attempt to get on the scoreboard in furtherance of his reputation.
     
    As Harun noted above, no consideration is given to all the states that flipped in 2010. Is it possible the Republicans will govern so poorly in the next year that the voters will have buyer’s remorse? Maybe, but not likely.
    Tell me the conditions that will lead to an Obama victory in 2012. Compare those conditions to the policies he’s pursuing and then tell me how you get from here to there.

    • I think he was pretty clear about this being a baseline. And since Republican admins have taken over in places like OH, WI, etc., there’s certainly been a bit of turmoil that would point to the possibility that they’re not as solid for Reps as the were in 2010. So I think he’s got a pretty fair baseline that does indeed take into consideration what should be considered.

      • The guy (Sabato) is typically spot on with his numbers, one of the “go to” folks for polling.  As far as counting Wisconsin and Ohio as possible Republican wins, I think Sabato is correct.

        For instance Kasich’s approval rating is way down, with an approval rating of around 35%, and 54% disapproving of him.  What too may concern him is a 33/54 spread with independents. 

        Walker is in a similar boat as well in Wisconsin.  Polls indicated about a 43% approval rating, and a precipitious decline from his early weeks in office.   He won the govenor’s election with 52% of the votes. 

        Obama’ approval rating in Wisconsin is currently around 55%. 

        Rasmussen produces some of the most accurate and reliable polls in the country today. »-Larry Sabato, University of Virginia

        • Good points. I threw my question out there, but in my guy I know that the GOP already lost a lot of 2010 momentum. Its natural for any party, but especially when a party starts touching money.

    • “Tell me the conditions that will lead to an Obama victory in 2012.”
       
      that not as many of us are paying attention outside our local line of sight.
       
      That he can still manage to collect a positive poll number in double digits that exceed  20% is your first indication, not everyone sees it the way we do.  Some signs are that such a large collection of idiots could be assembled to support fleeing legislators in Wisconsin, that he’s started his campaign a year before his campaign, and he’s not going to fund raisers where he’s speaking to himself and his body guard.
       
       
      I know, it seem insane that anyone could consider voting him in, AGAIN,  but if you’re reading here (polite nod to all) you may not be in complete touch with what the whackjobs over on the other side think and believe about the anointed one.
      It scares the living crap out of me, but there it is.

      • Looker,

        Take heart.  The “Trumpster” just picked up a critical endorsement from Gary Busey, and one would have to consider Busey mainstream conservative.  Could his (Trumps) election as President be that far away? 

        • “consider Busey mainstream conservative.”
           
          Hah, you make joke!   Please, is joke, yes?
           
          Good heavens, here I thought I was a mainstream conservative.  Busey is a whackjob which makes me….oh good lord…..
           
          President Trump?  No, no. noooooooooooooooooooooo.  I don’t need a guy who thinks we can take all the art, oil, gold bars, televisions, toilets, windows, what have you, from a country and ship them home to pay for our foreign interventions.  Smacks of Commissar Ivan Ivanovich purloining what little was left of Eastern Europe to send back to Mother Russia and Uncle Joe at the end of WWII.
           
           

          • Sorry Looker, yea a really bad joke about Busey.
            He is mainstream nuts.  Trump’s 20 something percent conservative endorsement probably doesn’t mean to much.  Hell,  six percent of people still think there was no moon landing and Busey and Trump are probably part of that six percent.
            yea, me bad.

          • Busey has had clinical brain damage since his 1988 motorcycle accident in which he wasn’t wearing a helmet.

  • Those 20 in PA are definitely a “tossup”

  • Is it just me or would the country be in better hands if we could separate  California into two or more states, with one state encompassing SF and LA, giving greater voice to the more conservative voices in the state drowned out by the cities on the coast?

  • I agree with Neo about PA. I think Ohio has a good chance of flipping to the GOP if the candidate can clearly articulate a different vision for the country and doesn’t have the baggage of many of the current GOP types. If the GOP is smart they’ll go with Daniels from IN; I think he has a good shot at carrying the current red states plus picking up OH, PA, MI, and WI. Also, Daniels could probably flip VA and NC back, and that should do it.

    • Yes, we really don’t need another Bob Dole.  Even Bob Dole thinks that we don’t need another Bob Dole.
      Take back Mike Huckabee
      Take back Mitt Romney
      Take back Newt Gingrich
      Give ‘em all some place to go

      You’re jammin’ me, You’re jammin’ me
      Quit jammin’ me

    • I agree. Boring but competent will be a plus this election.
      If we have to go for exciting, I guess Palin over Trump.

  • Establishing baselines is rather important if you are conducting honest inquires.  And while I agree with McQ that throwing all the “leans” states in with the undecideds is wise, there are a few “staunch” states that might not be as firm as Sabato thinks.  I think it was Ace that pointed out that people are using tried and true modeling to predict what may happen – yet everything about our current President is unprecedented, and therefore most models, and conventional wisdom, tread in uncharted waters.
     
    Anecdotally, virtually all my lefty friends who were offended by my “OiiOhh” tee-shirt last year (Obama is in Over his head), dont say too much when I sport it this year.  In fact, a quiet resignation pervades when another asks just what my O double-I O double-H means.  Incidentally, I live in “undecided” Colorado – most of these friends are from “decidedly” D California, Washington, Connecticut and New York.

    • Agree with Bains, Sabato has it all wrong.  He really hasn’t taken into consideration the necessary info to accurately predict what will happen in 2012.  He typically has no clue when it comes to polling.  Esp “Yet everything about our current President is unprecedented, and therefore most models, and conventional wisdom, tread in uncharted waters.”  Absolutely correct, Sabato is an absolute a**.  Bains, please send me a OiiOhh T-shirt, I will wear it daily!!!!!

  • If Obama gets elected again I am definitely going to “tossup.”

  • IN should be a “Leans R”, at the least.  2008 was not an endorsement of the Dems,  but a knee-jerk anti-Bush thing for many in the middle “hoping” for a “change”.  The 2010 tide in the state was solidly Red.  The curtain has been pulled back, and Indiana will be called for the “R” candidate at 6:01 PM election night, as in past years. Especially if Daniels is a part of the ticket, top or VP.    

  • Lets just start with the assumption that Obama loses the traditionally GOP states he captured last time, but retains his reliably liberal coastal enclaves.

    Which is a pretty safe bet.

    That means the election is basically about the GOP flipping one or possibly two states from Baracky.  WI maybe?

  • There is something odd about the map … “DC 3″ ??  Since when ??