Electoral College in 2008 - Political Forum

Cromben · 11-08-2007, 11:35 AM

I think that it might be wise to discuss the electoral vote disbursement in 2008 for the President. The overall (national) popular vote cannot override the electoral college, therefore it stands to reason that we should be discussing that outcome rather than the overall popular vote and looking at state voting polls rather than national ones. Gods, I hate Texas.

Here's a breakdown of the electoral votes to get the ball rolling:

Total: 538; Majority Needed to Elect: 270

Alabama - 9
Alaska - 3
Arizona - 10
Arkansas - 6
California - 55
Colorado - 9
Connecticut - 7
Delaware - 3
District Of Columbia - 3
Florida - 27
Georgia - 15
Hawaii - 4
Idaho - 4
Illinois - 21
Indiana - 11
Iowa - 7
Kansas - 6
Kentucky - 8
Louisiana - 9
Maine - 4
Maryland - 10
Massachusetts - 12
Michigan - 17
Minnesota - 10
Mississippi - 6
Missouri - 11 Montana - 3
Nebraska - 5
Nevada - 5
New Hampshire - 4
New Jersey - 15
New Mexico - 5
New York - 31
North Carolina - 15
North Dakota - 3
Ohio - 20
Oklahoma - 7
Oregon - 7
Pennsylvania - 21
Rhode Island - 4
South Carolina - 8
South Dakota - 3
Tennessee - 11
Texas - 34
Utah - 5
Vermont - 3
Virginia - 13
Washington - 11
West Virginia - 5
Wisconsin - 10
Wyoming - 3

Perhaps if people start posting any state poll results they find (please cite sources), I can start monitoring this thread posting beside each state how their electors might vote.

For those of you who are not familiar with how the electoral college works, lemme splain as best I can:

Each state and each major political party in each state has a certain number of electors based loosely on the number of national representatives they have which in turn is based on population. All of those electors are supposed to vote how the majority of the people in their state votes. So if most people vote for the democrat in a particular state, that party candidate gets ALL of the electoral votes.

So if most people vote for Giuliani and the Republicans in Ohio, then the Republicans get all 20 electoral votes. There are two states where the electoral votes can be split between the parties: Maine and Nebraska. I suppose that we'll have to consider them wild cards.

I'm saying this is how this system is SUPPOSED to work, not how it ACTUALLY works. This is a model exercise though, not necessarily a perfect prediction.

Oregon Elephant · 11-08-2007, 11:38 AM

First, how many aren't battle states for this election? And what side are they on?

apawllo · 11-08-2007, 11:50 AM

According to wikipedia, the following are swing states:

Quote:

The following states are grouped by geographic regions: (in parenthesis are the total number of electoral votes allocated to that state, followed by the winning party in 2004)

Northeast

* New Hampshire (4-D): Once very reliably Republican, New Hampshire became a swing state in the 1990s. Republicans still have somewhat of an edge in statewide elections, however the Democrats took control of the state legislature and both Congressional seats in 2006. The New Hampshire Republican Party tends to be more socially liberal than the national party, and as a result their behavior in national elections is harder to determine.

* Pennsylvania (21-D): Pennsylvania is famously described by Democratic strategist James Carville as "you’ve got Philadelphia at one end of the state, Pittsburgh at the other end, and Alabama in the middle.”[5] Pennsylvania Secretary of the Commonwealth Pedro A. Cortés stated on March 17, 2007, that "The commonwealth’s large number of electoral college votes and diverse population make Pennsylvania a key battleground state." [6] Pennsylvania has leaned Democratic since 1992, giving its electoral votes to Bill Clinton (1992 and 1996), Al Gore (2000) and John Kerry (2004). President George W. Bush visited the state more than 40 times during his 2004 campaign.[7]

[edit] South

* Arkansas (6-R): Although a conservative state in the heart of the Bible Belt, the Democratic Party is a powerful force in Arkansas and Democrats tend to have a comfortable advantage in statewide races. Presently, the Governor, both U.S. Senators, and 3 out of 4 of the Arkansas' House members are Democrats, and Democrats control the state legislature by a large margin. The Arkansas Democratic Party tends to be more conservative than the national party, however, and as a result voters there tend to be open to Republican Presidential candidates. Though favorite son Bill Clinton won Arkansas easily both times he ran, Arkansas gave their electoral votes to George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 by a fairly large margin.

* Florida (27-R): The outcome of the 2000 Presidential Election hung on a margin of roughly 500 votes in this state, and the fierce legal battles that ensued. Florida's electorate is balanced by heavily Democratic large cities like Miami and sparser, more Republican areas (the Florida Panhandle in this case). Republicans have been winning handily in statewide elections lately, however, the large Hispanic vote near Tampa and Orlando (Particularly Puerto Ricans who tend to be the democrats and have a significant presence in the Orlando area.) provide Democrats an edge, but the Cuban-American vote is crucial near Miami; their votes gave an edge to George W. Bush over Al Gore in 2000.

* Virginia (13-R): No Democratic presidential candidate has won Virginia since Lyndon Johnson's landslide victory in 1964, and it was the only Southern state that went Republican in 1976. Virginia is no longer as reliably Republican as it once was, as evidenced by two successive Democratic gubernatorial victories in 2001 and 2005 and Jim Webb's narrow victory in the 2006 Senate race against incumbent Republican George Allen. Also, Northern Virginia, the rapidly growing region of the state tends to lean Democratic.
o September 13, 2007, former Virginia governor and Democrat Mark Warner announced he will run for the Senate in 2008 for the seat of retiring Senator John Warner. [1]

* West Virginia

[edit] Midwest

* Iowa (7-R): Al Gore won Iowa in 2000 by a razor-thin margin, and George W. Bush did the same four years later. The state's highly influential caucus makes Iowa the political holy grail of Republicans and Democrats alike.

* Michigan (17-D): Michigan has generally tended to lean Democratic. One of the country's biggest centers of manufacturing, labor unions inevitably come into play, and the economic hard times the state has fallen on recently will no doubt be a major issue for the Great Lakes State in 2008. Republican strength tends to be primarily in the western portion of the lower peninsula of the state.(In particular in the Grand Rapids Metropolitan area which is also one of the fastest growing regions in the midwest.) While the Democrats are strong in the Southeastern region of the state around the Metro Detroit area in particular and also around the Ann Arbor, Flint, and Saginaw areas as well.

* Minnesota (10-D): Minnesota's transformation into a swing state is a surprising one, given how fervently Democratic the North Star State once was - it was the only state in the country that did not vote for Ronald Reagan in 1984. A strong tradition of populism and labor unions made it difficult for Republicans to have any real success there until recently; the recent competitiveness is due to the ever expanding suburbs of the Twin Cities and exurbs outside of the Twin Cities area. Republicans picked Saint Paul as the site for the 2008 Republican National Convention in September 2008.

* Missouri (11-R): Missouri is geographically situated where the South, the Midwest, and the Great Plains meet, and is in many ways a microcosm of the entire country. Missouri has voted for the winner of nearly every Presidential election since 1904 (they got it wrong only once, in 1956), and voters there have proven themselves to be an effective gauge of the national mood. Like most of the country the urban areas of St Louis and Kansas City tend to lean strongly to the Democrats while the rural and suburban/exurban areas tend to lean to the Republicans.

* Ohio (20-R): "I think 2008 is very likely to be a hotly contested race in Ohio," stated Eric Rademacher, director of the University of Cincinnati's Ohio Poll, for the Cincinnati Enquirer. [8] Its 20 electoral votes were critical to President Bush's reelection in 2004. In 2006, however, Ohio voters elected Democrats Ted Strickland and Sherrod Brown for Governor and U.S. Senator, The industrial urban areas of Cleveland, Dayton, Akron, and Youngstown tend to lean to the Democrats while the rural areas and the suburbs and exurbs (In particular around the ever growing Greater Cincinnati and Columbus areas.) lean more to the Republicans.

* Wisconsin (10-D): Wisconsin has narrowly gone to Democratic candidates since 1988, which is somewhat ironic considering that the Republican Party was founded there. The Republicans lost their advantage in Wisconsin in the late 19th century when perceived nativist sentiments - particularly the Bennett Law - alienated the state's large German-American population. Southern Wisconsin has a strong progressive tradition, and elected the country's only current openly lesbian U.S. Congresswoman, Tammy Baldwin.

[edit] West/Pacific

* Colorado (9-R): A reliable GOP stronghold, Colorado has started to steer towards the center, where moderate stances have come to prevail. With the victories of Ken Salazar to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Bill Ritter to the Governor's Mansion in 2006 along with an additional U.S. House seat pick-up that same year, Democrats are finding themselves in a better position than before. Large Hispanic populations with strong penchant for populist themes makes this a true battleground states; however Republicans have a 100,000 registration edge against the Democrats. Democrats selected Denver as the site for the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
o Rasmussen Reports conducted a poll in August 2007 indicating Rudy Guiliani leads Hillary Clinton, 50% to 40%. Clinton is tied with Fred Thompson, 45% to 45%. [2]

* Nevada (5-R): Usually considered a "fly-over" state due to its proximity to California with candidates looking for more exposure on the coast, the Silver State is once again looking like a strong swing state. Mormon populations make a decisive vote for the GOP while the presence of strong labor unions and Hispanic voters sway them towards the Democrats in areas like Las Vegas and Reno. A GOP bastion, the state has turned its tide for more populist themes.

* New Mexico (5-R): A classic swing state, personalities trump party affiliation in this western state. New Mexico is truly politically divided, with registration amongst Democrats and Republicans nearly equal and the existence of a strong Independent voting bloc. The state went to Al Gore in 2000 by a mere 400 votes while George W. Bush carried it by a margin of 6000 votes in 2004.

* Oregon (7-D): A Democratic-leaning state, the belief of anti-big government along with strong opposition to central government control, makes Oregon a GOP favorite; however, intense beliefs in civil liberties and liberal ideology on social issues often leads it to side with the Democrats. The state has gone to the Democrats from the 1988 election onward.

Cromben · 11-08-2007, 11:53 AM

Well, I haven't seen the poll results, mind you, because nobody freakin' looks at 'em in the national media (or on the googleverse) until it's too bloody late. I can say that CA and NY will go Dem and TX will go Rep. OH is always up for grabs but this time around I think they might go Dem.

Perhaps if people start posting any state poll results they find (please cite sources), we can start posting beside each state how their electors might vote.

For those of you who are not familiar with how the electoral college works, lemme splain as best I can:

Each state and each major political party in each state has a certain number of electors based loosely on the number of national representatives they have which in turn is based on population. All of those electors are supposed to vote how the majority of the people in their state votes. So if most people vote for the democrat in a particular state, that party candidate gets ALL of the electoral votes.

So if most people vote for Giuliani and the Republicans in Ohio, then the Republicans get all 20 electoral votes. There are two states where the electoral votes can be split between the parties: Maine and Nebraska. I suppose that we'll have to consider them wild cards.

I'm saying this is how this system is SUPPOSED to work, not how it ACTUALLY works. This is a model exercise though, not necessarily a perfect prediction.

Oregon Elephant · 11-08-2007, 11:59 AM

I know that a few months ago, they labeled Oregon as not a battle ground state to go to Democratic (meaning that it doesn't matter who is nominated or each side, we're going Dem). Based on which states are no longer battle ground, we can see what side already has how big of a lead one side has, and how hard the other side has to work. I'll look into it.

Cromben · 11-08-2007, 11:59 AM

Interesting post Apawllo. I'll bet my left gonad that PA will vote Republican next year.

Maybe if everyone posts what poll results they find we can get this thread to be a sticky.

I really think that it's more important to watch the electoral college results rather than the overall national poll results.

apawllo · 11-08-2007, 12:04 PM

Here are the non-battleground states and which direction they are predicted to go.....

Alabama - 9
Alaska - 3
Arizona - 10
Georgia - 15
Idaho - 4
Indiana - 11
Kansas - 6
Kentucky - 8
Louisiana - 9
Mississippi - 6
Montana - 3
Nebraska - 5
North Carolina - 15
North Dakota - 3
Oklahoma - 7
South Carolina - 8
South Dakota - 3
Tennessee - 11
Texas - 34
Utah - 5
Wyoming - 3

Total - 178

California - 55
Connecticut - 7
Delaware - 3
District Of Columbia - 3
Hawaii - 4
Illinois - 21
Maine - 4
Maryland - 10
Massachusetts - 12
New Jersey - 15
New York - 31
Oregon - 7
Rhode Island - 4
Vermont - 3
Washington - 11

Total - 190

Too early to tell? Haha.

Oregon Elephant · 11-08-2007, 12:04 PM

This only shows the battleground states (swing states) from Wiki. I don't know why Oregon is on their, probably because it was BG for the last 4 elections even though they said it wouldn't be this election. I'll try to find out how each of the none BGS's swing to get a good number of how big the advantage on a side.

Oregon Elephant · 11-08-2007, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apawllo

Here are the non-battleground states and which direction they are predicted to go.....

Alabama - 9
Alaska - 3
Arizona - 10
Georgia - 15
Idaho - 4
Indiana - 11
Kansas - 6
Kentucky - 8
Louisiana - 9
Mississippi - 6
Montana - 3
Nebraska - 5
North Carolina - 15
North Dakota - 3
Oklahoma - 7
South Carolina - 8
South Dakota - 3
Tennessee - 11
Texas - 34
Utah - 5
Wyoming - 3

Total - 178

California - 55
Connecticut - 7
Delaware - 3
District Of Columbia - 3
Hawaii - 4
Illinois - 21
Maine - 4
Maryland - 10
Massachusetts - 12
New Jersey - 15
New York - 31
Rhode Island - 4
Vermont - 3
Washington - 11

Total - 183

Too early to tell? Haha.

Don't forget the Oregon 7 to Dem. Bringing the total to Dem - 190 and Rep - 178. A 12 point advantage isn't a big as thought the Dems would have.

Cromben · 11-08-2007, 12:10 PM

Does the Republican candidate have a chance in Hades of getting NY? Is NY the big enchilada? Isn't he pretty much universally hated there? Perhaps that's why both parties are front-running candidates from NY? Okay, maybe a dumb question...