JMO, but this board severely overrates how loyal NH is to the Democratic Party.
This board in generally severely overrates the degree to which past performance are indicative of future results. Like see:
I agree on NH, but MN, PA and ME-02 are pipedreams. As a rule of thumb, I'd say if Bush could not win it in either 2000 or 2004, it is unattainable in 2016. (I include WI as a Bush 2004 win, he just never bothered to challenge the close result there.)
This irrationally over-weights the significance of the 2004 political environment while ignoring clear trends since. It'd be like saying in 2006 that Democrats were more likely to win Kentucky than Virginia in 2008, because Clinton won Kentucky twice but lost Virginia twice.
This map is consistent of a GOP popular vote win of 2-4 points (and some trends reversing). And you're saying that only has a 1 in 1000 chance of happening? There haven't been close to 1000 elections in US history and even then there have been many large victories, even in open seats. I'd say the GOP have better than 1 in a 1000 odds of a 50 state sweep. The chance of the GOP winning a modest victory of this magnitude are at
least 10% (if you're bullish on Dems) and more realistically 20%+.