23 January 2011

The importance of Virginia

I am starting to work with the Electoral College EV-distribution for 2012, 2016 and 2020:

Here is a composite map of the "Kerry" (2004) and "Gore" (2000) states:

Notice that with this map, had Gore just won N.H in 2000, would have made 270 EV. Now this same combination only makes 257 EV, a result of redistricting from the 2000 and now the 2010 census.

Watch what happens in a worst case scenario if just VA becomes cemented into the democratic column:

Yep. With VA we come to 270. This would be a worst case scenario for Obama and amazingly, he could still win the White House without 2/3 of the "Trifecta": Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. According to polling thus far, these states appear all but guaranteed for President Obama in 2012, even under bad circumstances, even Ohio and Florida.

But let's take into account massive hispanic growth, the fiasco over "papers only" in AZ, plus three other worthy goals for the President: adding GA, MO and MT to the DEM column. Here is a very possible outcome in a match-up between President Obama and ex-Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, who stepped down in disgrace for having an affair with an intern while he was prosecuting then President Bill Clinton for having an affair with an intern. Yes, THAT Newt Gingrich:

Such a scenario brings President Obama just under 400 EV, well on par with Bush 41's electoral landslide in 1988.

And based on polling overall and assuming a good +15 to +20 point romp over the half-term, quitter ex-governor of Alaska, Ms. Sarah "Crosshairs" Palin, here could be a good scenario for a match-up between her and President Obama:

Of course, this is all fun for now. In Palin's case, Obama could even perhaps go for a 50 state sweep.
And of course, it is way too early, but the conjecture is fun and it is good practice learning the new electoral math and how it adds up. Assuming the traditional democratic column of the entire NE, the entire West Coast, plus the critical Midwest states that tend democratic and at least the one state in the Union with the highest proportion of hispanics (NM), with VA cemented into the democratic column (and this possibility is a very realy one, statistically speaking, due to the population explosion in the NOVA area of the state), then a rough-riding example for the President in a nail-biter election still shows an extremely competitive field.

1 comment:

  1. By 2012, The National Popular Vote bill could guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

    Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. Elections wouldn't be about winning states. Every vote, everywhere would be counted for and directly assist the candidate for whom it was cast. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing districts and states.

    The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes–that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

    The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for president. Historically, virtually all of the major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action.

    1,922 state legislators (in 50 states) have sponsored and/or cast recorded votes in favor of the bill.

    In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). Support for a national popular vote is strong in virtually every state, partisan, and demographic group surveyed in recent polls in closely divided battleground states: CO– 68%, IA –75%, MI– 73%, MO– 70%, NH– 69%, NV– 72%, NM– 76%, NC– 74%, OH– 70%, PA — 78%, VA — 74%, and WI — 71%; in smaller states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE –75%, ME — 77%, NE — 74%, NH –69%, NV — 72%, NM — 76%, RI — 74%, VT — 75%, and WY – 69%; in Southern and border states: AR –80%, KY — 80%, MS –77%, MO — 70%, NC — 74%, and VA — 74%; and in other states polled: CA — 70%, CT — 74% , MA — 73%, MN – 75%, NY — 79%, WA — 77%, and WV- 81%.

    The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers, in 21 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in AR, CT, DE, DC, ME, MI, NV, NM, NY, NC, and OR, and both houses in CA, CO, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA ,RI, VT, and WA . The bill has been enacted by DC, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA, and WA. These 7 states possess 74 electoral votes — 27% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.



Constructive comments and critique are always welcome. Please keep it polite and respectful.