Talk Elections

There will only be three types of threads posted until then:

- What about xxx for Vice President?
- Make a map of Obama/Biden vs. Romney/xxx
- How would the hypothetical independent candidacy of xxx affect the race?

Let's just save ourselves some time and end it now.

Just ignore the board. That's what I intend on doing.

Oh great, this board might get even worse than it was 1-2 years ago during that process. How much I hate the VP selection process.

Yeah this board was a lot more interesting before Romney won the nomination.

I actually like those three types of posts, so I think we ought to keep the board up and running through Inauguration Day 2013 when we need to start turning our attention to the 2014 mid-terms and the 2016 Presidential Election.

Oh I'm sure you do.

Plus, despite it's dry spells the 20xx presidential election boards are, to me, the anchor threads of this forum.  I don't think this forum, in all its greatness and longevity, would be around if it weren't for the Presidential Elections.

Well, actually this is the place to monitor the gaffes and stumbles and two-steps and so forth of Obama and Mittens. I failed to notice by the way much about Obama's launch of his "war on the courts."  So many wars, so little time.

would McDonnell clinch NC for Romney?

He's a neighboring state governor!

I think it's important that we heavily moderate and attempt to keep up the quality of discussion on the board during that time.  There will also be an influx of guest views during that time and it would be wise to give the impression that the board isn't a hangout for the mentally retarded. 

Too late!! :P

Meeker, you forgot a fourth, and incomparably more stupid, type.

"What if Obama drops Biden and picks XXX?"

Meeker, there is, of course, the fourth type of thread, which you failed to mention.

The let's bash Romney again thread, which includes troll posts asking stupid questions and making stupid statements about the next President of the United States, Mitt Romney.

:D

Hey everyone, who do you think will make the best VP for Romney?

Sorry, I just couldn't resist.

:D

I can see Romney's road to the White House being:
2008: Run for President, lose in primaries.
2012: Run for President, lose in November despite winning the PV.
2013-2015: The Restore Mitt's Future PAC spends millions pushing states to sign on to the NPVIC.
2016: Run for President, and this time win the PV and not need the EV.

It's not a likel roady, but it is far more likely than Romney winning without a crisis between now and Novermebt.

You think the electoral college screws Mittens that bad eh?  Why?  I don't quite see that myself, particularly given that NH is out there.

I think we are on the verge of moving into general election mode.  This board should stay up.

I would argue we're in GE mode, already, despite having 4 big states left to have their voice (PA, NY, TX, CA).

A simple uniform swing from 2008 to a PV tie still leaves Obama with a healthy 303-235 victory.

Even if Mittens picks up not just the three states he gains from a uniform swing (NC, IN, FL), but also Nevada, Iowa, and New Hampshire, he still loses 287-251.

(The polling from Iowa indicates it is likely to trend considerably more Republican than the national swing, and Nevada and New Hampshire are the states people like to tout a "home state" effect for Mitt, but I don't see it being enough on its own to swing Nevada, and post-primary polls have shown New Hampshire as no longer having the huge Republican trend they did pre-primary, but for purposes of argument I'll concede that Romney might be able to improve there by November more than he does nationally.)

Romney will need at least Ohio and probably both Ohio and Virginia to win and I can easily see Romney having a narrow national PV win and losing one or both of them.  If Romney can get to 51-48 his EV weakness might not cost him, but at 50-49, I think it will.

While there won't be a uniform swing, for Romney to not lose the EV in a close PV contest requires an awful lot of the states that trend Republican by more than the national swing be the tossup states and that would be a bit of astounding luck on Romney's part.

But doesn't everybody want 3 solid months of Romney VP speculation?  :D

I'm not sure about everybody wanting 3 months of veepstakes, but I think we're going to get it whether we like it or not.

Romney picks up Ohio from a uniform swing to an even PV - easily. He gets all he needs from a uniform swing (including VA which is about 0.5% on the GOP side of the ledger), except for NH. NH is the key.

It's just a good thing Morden is a mod, I remember him being one of the most irritated people at stupid speculation in 2008.

Your mom.

You're still wrong , but almost right, and a lot righter than I was thinking you were.  I made a dumb swing/trend mistake about when to cut things in half.

However, when you factor in some predictable non-uniform swings it does not look good for Mittens in a close PV race.  Indiana rebounding for an abnormally high Democratic trend in 2008 will suck up part of the Republican swing, as will rebound in the upper plains states such of Montana, Nebraska, and the Dakotas.  Plus the demographic trends that have been making Virginia more Democratic have slowly continued these past four years.  In an even PV situation, it looks to me that the GOP loses Virginia.

By contrast, the reason why the Lower Mississippi Valley states trended heavily Republican in 2008 is still there as Obama is running for reelection.  I expect that of the states that heavily trended GOP in 2008, only Arkansas will will see a large rebound to the Democrats.  (Tho not enough to put Arkansas in play, merely enough to ensure that in a national close PV race, Romney does not go over 60% of the PV in Arkansas.)

Plus the evidence indicates that Romney no longer has a "home state" advantage in New Hampshire.  I don't know why, maybe the New Hampshirites got offended by what Mittens thought of their trees.  Whatever the reason, as I said earlier, the post-NH primary polling no longer shows Romney benefiting in that State from a much greater than national swing in his favor.

Obviously, Dave isn't going to shut down the board.  In any case, even if this were a serious proposal, this thread doesn't belong here.  If you want to discuss proposed changes to the Atlas website, including the Forum, as distinct from discussion of the 2012 election itself, then please do so on the Atlas board:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?board=7.0