Joe Biden
2012-04-30 19:48:36 UTC
Loading Image...
Romney's looking much more like his 65 years these days, huh? A bit
haggard?
But after all, black shoe polish -- like repeated excuses for not
releasing his tax reports -- wears thin after a while.
==================
"Mitt Romney’s road to presidency this fall looks narrow on electoral
map"
Op-Ed
By Chris Cillizz
April 29, 2012
IT'S NO SECRET that former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has a
narrow path to win the presidency this fall. Nowhere is that reality
more apparent than when examining the electoral map on which Romney
and President Obama will battle in November.
A detailed analysis of Romney’s various paths to the 270 electoral
votes he would need to claim the presidency suggests he has a ceiling
of somewhere right around 290 electoral votes.
While Romney’s team would absolutely take a 290-electoral-vote
victory, that means he has only 20 electoral votes to play with — a
paper-thin margin for error.
Romney’s relatively low electoral-vote ceiling isn’t unique to him. No
Republican presidential nominee has received more than 300 electoral
votes in more than two decades. (Vice President George H.W. Bush won
426 electoral votes in his 1988 victory over Massachusetts Gov.
Michael Dukakis.)
By contrast, Bill Clinton in 1992 (370 electoral votes) and 1996 (379)
as well as Obama in 2008 (365) soared well beyond the 300-electoral-
vote marker.
Much of that is attributable to the fact that Democrats have near-
certain wins in population (and, therefore, electoral-vote) behemoths
such as California (55 electoral voters), New York (29) and Illinois
(20).
The only major electoral-vote treasure trove that is reliably
Republican at the moment is Texas, with its 38 electoral votes. So
while George W. Bush won 30 states in 2000 and 31 states in 2004, he
never came close to cresting the 300-electoral-vote mark in either
race.
Bush’s two successful races, and the map on which he built them, are
quite instructive when trying to understand Romney’s narrow margin for
error this fall.
In 2000, Bush won 271 electoral votes — one more than he needed to
claim the presidency. In eking out that victory, Bush not only carried
the South and Plains states with a near sweep but also claimed wins in
swing states such as Nevada, Colorado, Missouri and the major
electoral-vote prizes of Ohio and Florida.
If Romney was able to duplicate Bush’s 2000 map, he would take 285
electoral votes — thanks to redistricting gains over the past decade.
But to do so, Romney would need not only to win the five swing states
mentioned above — with the exception of Missouri, all of them are
considered tossups (at worst) for the president at the moment — but
also hang on to states such as North Carolina and Virginia where Bush
cruised 12 years ago. (Obama carried both states in 2008.)
In 2004, Bush won reelection with 286 electoral votes, losing New
Hampshire from his 2000 map but adding wins in Iowa and New Mexico.
Under the 2012 map, Romney would win 292 electoral votes if he
replicated the Bush 2004 victory. But New Mexico seems like a very
tough place to win — not to mention the fact that he would again need
to carry Ohio, Florida, Colorado and Nevada as well as North Carolina
and Virginia.
Now, the good(ish) news for Romney is that if he has a low ceiling, he
also has a relatively high floor.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) won 173 electoral votes in 2008. If Romney
carried those same 22 states under the 2012 map, he would win 180
electoral votes.
Add Indiana, which McCain lost but which will almost certainly go for
Romney in 2012, and the former Massachusetts governor’s electoral
floor sits at 191.
Given the narrowness of his electoral map window, the key for Romney
this fall is to win in places that Bush, McCain and other Republican
nominees over the past two decades have struggled to make inroads. No
Republican has carried Pennsylvania (20 electoral votes), Michigan
(16) or Wisconsin (10) in any of the past five elections, for example.
Win even one of them and Romney has a bit more flexibility when it
comes to getting to 270 — and beyond.
Romney's looking much more like his 65 years these days, huh? A bit
haggard?
But after all, black shoe polish -- like repeated excuses for not
releasing his tax reports -- wears thin after a while.
==================
"Mitt Romney’s road to presidency this fall looks narrow on electoral
map"
Op-Ed
By Chris Cillizz
April 29, 2012
IT'S NO SECRET that former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has a
narrow path to win the presidency this fall. Nowhere is that reality
more apparent than when examining the electoral map on which Romney
and President Obama will battle in November.
A detailed analysis of Romney’s various paths to the 270 electoral
votes he would need to claim the presidency suggests he has a ceiling
of somewhere right around 290 electoral votes.
While Romney’s team would absolutely take a 290-electoral-vote
victory, that means he has only 20 electoral votes to play with — a
paper-thin margin for error.
Romney’s relatively low electoral-vote ceiling isn’t unique to him. No
Republican presidential nominee has received more than 300 electoral
votes in more than two decades. (Vice President George H.W. Bush won
426 electoral votes in his 1988 victory over Massachusetts Gov.
Michael Dukakis.)
By contrast, Bill Clinton in 1992 (370 electoral votes) and 1996 (379)
as well as Obama in 2008 (365) soared well beyond the 300-electoral-
vote marker.
Much of that is attributable to the fact that Democrats have near-
certain wins in population (and, therefore, electoral-vote) behemoths
such as California (55 electoral voters), New York (29) and Illinois
(20).
The only major electoral-vote treasure trove that is reliably
Republican at the moment is Texas, with its 38 electoral votes. So
while George W. Bush won 30 states in 2000 and 31 states in 2004, he
never came close to cresting the 300-electoral-vote mark in either
race.
Bush’s two successful races, and the map on which he built them, are
quite instructive when trying to understand Romney’s narrow margin for
error this fall.
In 2000, Bush won 271 electoral votes — one more than he needed to
claim the presidency. In eking out that victory, Bush not only carried
the South and Plains states with a near sweep but also claimed wins in
swing states such as Nevada, Colorado, Missouri and the major
electoral-vote prizes of Ohio and Florida.
If Romney was able to duplicate Bush’s 2000 map, he would take 285
electoral votes — thanks to redistricting gains over the past decade.
But to do so, Romney would need not only to win the five swing states
mentioned above — with the exception of Missouri, all of them are
considered tossups (at worst) for the president at the moment — but
also hang on to states such as North Carolina and Virginia where Bush
cruised 12 years ago. (Obama carried both states in 2008.)
In 2004, Bush won reelection with 286 electoral votes, losing New
Hampshire from his 2000 map but adding wins in Iowa and New Mexico.
Under the 2012 map, Romney would win 292 electoral votes if he
replicated the Bush 2004 victory. But New Mexico seems like a very
tough place to win — not to mention the fact that he would again need
to carry Ohio, Florida, Colorado and Nevada as well as North Carolina
and Virginia.
Now, the good(ish) news for Romney is that if he has a low ceiling, he
also has a relatively high floor.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) won 173 electoral votes in 2008. If Romney
carried those same 22 states under the 2012 map, he would win 180
electoral votes.
Add Indiana, which McCain lost but which will almost certainly go for
Romney in 2012, and the former Massachusetts governor’s electoral
floor sits at 191.
Given the narrowness of his electoral map window, the key for Romney
this fall is to win in places that Bush, McCain and other Republican
nominees over the past two decades have struggled to make inroads. No
Republican has carried Pennsylvania (20 electoral votes), Michigan
(16) or Wisconsin (10) in any of the past five elections, for example.
Win even one of them and Romney has a bit more flexibility when it
comes to getting to 270 — and beyond.