An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Will New Hampshire Pick the Next President?

While it is still too early for pollsters to say anything with certainty, a look at the current Rasmussen electoral college predictor shows yet another close election shaping up for this fall. Most, but not all, of the states traditionally considered to be fairly safe or at least “stronly leaning” for each party are lining up as they have in recent presidential races. The two notable exceptions (and they may prove critical to the outcome) are Iowa and New Mexico. Both of these states were carried by George W. Bush in 2004 but are now leaning significantly toward Barack Obama.

Should this current snapshot hold through the fall, the 46 listed states deliver 260 electoral college votes for Obama and 240 for John McCain. As in 2004, the giant among the four remaining toss-up states is Ohio with its 20 electoral votes. As previously noted, in this scenario the Buckeye State would become an absolute must win for McCain. A loss in Ohio would put Obama over the finish line and on his way to the Oval Office without having to consider the remaining three contests. However, in the Democratic primary, Ohio delivered a big win for Hillary Clinton and exit polls indicated it was one of the states where her supporters showed a serious reluctance to supporting Obama’s candidacy. This might be enough to bring McCain the win he needs and keep Ohio in the red column.

However, as shown earlier, Ohio by itself will not finish the job for Senator McCain. He would still need to carry Colorado’s nine votes and either Nevada or New Hampshire. The last data we have for Colorado is about three weeks old, but shows Obama with a slim, six point lead, trending upward from a three point lead the previous month, so clearly Senator McCain has some work to do there. Nevada has been holding steady for a few months with McCain holding an identical six point lead over Obama. This leaves only New Hampshire, once considered relatively safe for the Democrats, (John Kerry held the state in 2004) but now clearly in play. Our data there is also a few weeks old, but Obama was clinging to a five point lead, 48-43.

New Hampshire only has four electoral votes, but in the senario shown above it could hold the key to the election. Obama could afford to actually lose both Ohio and Nevada, but if he held on to Colorado and tiny New Hampshire, he would squeak across the finish line with 273 electoral college votes and the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Much praise has been lavished on Obama’s team for the skillful way they studied and won key districts in the states he carried during the primary, so they will doubtless be paying close attention to these numbers and figuring out how to pull off a win in these battleground states. But this is hardly John McCain’s first trip down the aisle either, and his staff can read an electoral map as well as Obama’s. Expect to see an extra large dose of attention paid to these four states as the summer wears on into fall.

  • mlhradio
    There are plenty of websites out there that have electoral maps and calculators, places where you can crunch the numbers and analyze the polls to death.

    But, perhaps the best one I've seen is www.FiveThirtyEight.com. Using polling data, then run 10,000 scenarios through a regression model to come up with realistic percentages to come up with some interesting results (like, 65 of the 10,000 scenarios end up in an electoral tie!, or 21% of the scenarios Obama can win without winning Ohio), and it's updated daily as new information comes available. It also breaks down the estimated win percentage by state.

    About a week ago, I sat down, checked out all the various websites, and worked out my own personal list of states. I came up with 39 "safe" states and districts, leading to 207 electoral votes for Obama, 202 for McCain. That left 4 Obama-lean (PA, WI, CO, NM), 4 McCain-lean (VA, MO, IN, ND), and 4 toss-up states

    Those four toss-ups? Ohio, Michigan, Nevada...and New Hampshire. Right now, FiveThirtyEight has OH, MI, and NV at a statistical tie - 50/50 they could go either way; and NH at 55/45 McCain. Hmmmm. This could get verrrrry interesting.

    But, then again, we are still in our very first week of the general election, with TWENTY more weeks to go. The old saying goes, "Overnight in politics is a lifetime", and I'm sure we will have a dozen little hiccups and scandals and blowups in the next four months. So -- at this point, playing around with all the electoral votes is just speculation. Sure, it's fun, but I wouldn't put too much weight into any of the numbers just yet.

    At this moment it seems that no matter how I crunch the numbers, it all boils down to one, big state: Ohio, Ohio, Ohio. Whomever wins the state, wins the presidency. We'll see if that holds true a month from now, two months from now, three months from now. It's going to be a long, long summer; buckle up and hang on!
  • All conjecture at this point. Obama has already raised some eyebrows by turning out two groups of supportive voters who have been staying home in past elections: African Americans and the young. Even the "safe" states in the South may have some surprises for us this time.
  • mvy
    The real issue is not how well Obama or McCain might do in the closely divided battleground states, but that we shouldn't have battleground states and spectator states in the first place. Every vote in every state should be politically relevant in a presidential election. And, every vote should be equal. We should have a national popular vote for President in which the White House goes to the candidate who gets the most popular votes in all 50 states.

    The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral vote -- 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 major shortcoming of the current system of electing the President is that presidential candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or worry about the voter concerns in states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind. The reason for this is the winner-take-all rule which awards all of a state's electoral votes to the candidate who gets the most votes in each separate state. Because of this rule, candidates concentrate their attention on a handful of closely divided "battleground" states. Two-thirds of the visits and money are focused in just six states; 88% on 9 states, and 99% of the money goes to just 16 states. Two-thirds of the states and people are merely spectators to the presidential election.

    Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide.

    The National Popular Vote bill has been approved by 18 legislative chambers (one house in Colorado, Arkansas, Maine, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Washington, and two houses in Maryland, Illinois, Hawaii, California, and Vermont). It has been enacted into law in Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These states have 50 (19%) of the 270 electoral votes needed to bring this legislation into effect.

    See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com

    susan
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC