Talk Elections

This week we have seen the GOP Superpacs pull out of MI and PA. Romney was already not spending there, leaving just nine states being fought over. Both sides are spending in eight states, with the GOP side also now spending in WI (following the Ryan pick).

So which above state is the next one to fall off the battleground list, or will they all stay on the list all the way to the election?

North Carolina and New Hampshire will drop. The others will stay.

Nevada.

I think New Hampshire will surprise us; in fact, I think it's Romney's best opportunity for a pickup after NC and IN.

I doubt any of these will drop, at least not until October.

North Carolina.

I voted for Nevada.

I think Obama will win Nevada.  I think that all the talking heads think that Obama will win Nevada.  I think that all the polls show at least a 3-point lead in Nevada.  The housing prices there have tanked worse than anywhere except Florida.  Folks seem to think, perhaps correctly, that decisions made by the Securities and Exchange Commission, particular those GOP appointees, led to the deregulation of the housing market that led to the subprime mortgage crisis.  I think that the 12% unemployment rate there is on of the highest in the nation and that they blame much of it on Republican policies.  

Too bad, really.  I've been to Las Vegas several times.  Hell, I was married in Vegas.  And I've spent more than a few weekends in Reno as well.  And I've tooled around Carson City, Elko, and the interior.  It's a lonely desert country full of mullets, cigarette addicts, gambling, prostitution, and general free-wheeling individualism.  It's the sort of place that Republicans ought to be able to easily count on.  But, to be honest, Republicans have made some decisions that cost Nevadans greatly.  We reap what we sow.  And there ain't much to sow in Nevada except Money and Hardship.  It comes in waves.  Now is a hardship time, and it'll be blamed on the GOP.  

In my prediction map, I put Nevada in Obama's camp long ago, and I have never even thought about changing it.

I can see Georgia, Indiana and Montana becoming battle states in the next weeks.

None, MI would stay on my battleground list.

I wish, but that's not going to happen.

Awaiting Obama's speech tonight, this might change, but as of now I do not see any more states losing their battleground status.

It is interesting, though, to hear that Romney has pulled out of PA and MI.

NV and CO both seem too hard for Mitt to take back. He polls terribly with Hispanics and has a let-them-eat-cake attitude toward distressed homeowners (bad for NV). And Colorado just has too many of those upscale, educated white people who were Rockefeller Republicans in an earlier era and today vote for Obama. The Republicans' awful performance in CO in 2010 of all years suggests it's a swing state that will likely have turned blue by 2016.

Romney didn't; one superpac did.

Well Romney did in so much as his campaign decided not to spend any money in either MI or PA, so essentially Romney and the party "pulled out" in the late spring when the general election spending really started.   3 major GOP  superPacs have tried in both states, but as of now all have pulled out.

Nevada

If Obama is not leading in NC polls after the convention, there is no way that he is winning the state come November. 

I still think Wisconsin is fools gold for the Republican Party. It also appears as though Obama is going to make out from his convention more so than Romney did his.

That being said it mostly depends on who's winning. Obviously North Carolina will be the first if the election turns sour for Obama and Nevada and Colorado will be among the first to go if Romney starts tanking. If Florida keeps leaning Obama, Romney is toast. He's got to secure it by October to have a chance in this thing.

NH, NV, WI.

NV will be off from Romney, I think that's it.

1.  That's not true, CO is mostly an Independent state with a streak of Republican voters. GOP registered voters are higher than DEM in 2012.

2. 2010 for the GOP in CO was a fluke, they ran joke candidates and the opponents ran a strictly on social issues.  So I disagree with you.

Nevada will come off for Romney and probably North Carolina for Obama.

Iowa. Only six electoral votes, no Senate seat up for grabs, and no egos (as in "Paul Ryan" or "Scott Walker") at risk. Nevada has as many electoral votes, but it has a Senate seat up for grabs. Wisconsin and Iowa vote largely in tandem -- and when they voted differently for President in 2004 they were both decided by less than 13,000 votes. But it has a Senate seat at risk. 

To be sure Iowa puts seven electoral votes at risk, if you include one of the electoral votes in Nebraska because it is in the same TV market as most of western Iowa. (If you don't know how Nebraska allots its electoral votes you need a little lesson).

So far, Obama has been more likely to make ad buys in the peripheral out-of-state markets than Romney.  For example, as of a week ago, Obama was up in the Burlington-Plattsburgh and Portland, ME markets, which serve parts of northern New Hampshire, while Romney was only up in Boston to reach southern New Hampshire, where most of the people live.  Similarly, the Romney campaign hasn't been up in Omaha in recent weeks, while Obama has (though some Romney PACs have been up in Omaha). 

It will be interesting to see if this changes in the upcoming weeks.  Romney is supposedly starting a huge ad blitz tomorrow.

I don't think the campaigns will pull out of Iowa first.  New Hampshire would likely come before that, since it's expensive to advertise in the Boston TV market.

You may be right about New Hampshire.  Four electoral votes aren't going to make the difference.

I think NH is the next state to drop off the list, at least for the campaigns and parties. Some SuperPacs might stick it out as they have money to burn.

I think NV and NC could drop off before the end.

WI will be interesting to watch. It wasn't a battleground until Ryan was picked. So far only the GOP side has spent money there. There hasn't been a lot of polling. It could be that it might snap back to Obama lean but the Romney campaign  are going to push hard as they see IA and WI as their backup plan if they lose OH...and they are (rightfully) worried about losing Ohio.

New Hampshire is also super out of the way compared to all the other swing states, which mostly cluster together. Though it is near fund-raising Meccas like NYC and Boston.

His campaign could take over in either state.  MI is still a possibility, and closing.

Yes in theory they could but as of now no one is spending money in MI and PA and it isn't part of Romney big new push. The Superpacs are also spending money in the same states as romney and the party so it isn't really like Romney and the GOP PACs  have been trading off on who spends money where. Basically the SuperPacs have been so flush with money they have spent money in four states where neither Romney nor the party were trying: NM, MN, PA and MI. And now their experiment in trying to expand the map is over.

Nevada should not be on this list. Too many CA tansplants in Vegas for Romney to win. Union and OFA GOTV will swamp Romney, Obama wins Nevada by at least 5%.

NH will be next one to go, then maybe Wisconsin, although Romney have a lot of money to burn so it will probably stay right until the end.

NV.

Followed by NH and WI.

None will come off the list. All those states are battlegrounds.

()

My guess is North Carolina.  My view is that Romney will slowly build momentum nationwide, and North Carolina will probably be among the first "swing" states break his way. 

Even if his chances in NC are slim, Obama isn't going to "pull out" of the state because he has a massive ground game there and it would be more trouble to shut it down than to pull out.

The calculus is different for the Republicans because Romney has a big ground game in fewer states and can more easily cut off ad spending.

J.J., what do you know about Michigan that the Romney campaign and the SuperPACs don't? It's all well and good to say that Michigan will close for Romney but no one seems to agree.

If I had to guess, I'd say the opposite.  Then again, I'm basing my guesses on previous elections and the CU economic analysis.

Nevada

1. New Hampshire
2. Nevada
3. North Carolina

I wouldn't say they will be completely off the battleground list, just that they will be greatly reduced in priority as we get closer to the election.  I feel pretty sure about the first two - I think people greatly misunderstand New Hampshire.  Nevada I just think is more reliably Democrat even than the polls indicate, but as for North Carolina I think it is mostly a function of money - the state is a very bright future goal for Dems, but Obama may be playing defensive money-wise and not be able to focus there much.

If 2008 & 2010 polls/results were any indication, NV is not really a battleground. I find it difficult to imagine Romney pulling it off there.

Well this is how I see the current state of the race:

()

So I think the next state to come off the battleground map is NC, once Obama locks it up.

Montana, Arizona, Georgia and Indiana are not tossup. Colorado, Florida, Virginia and New Hampshire are tossup.

Fixed. The DNC was successful beyond anyone's wildest dreams and Bubba's speach is probably going to swing these tossups to Obama. I can see Tennessee, Texas, and the Dakota's getting competitive in the next few weeks.

What are you on?

Take off your hack goggles, wtf are you talking about.

I'm talking about the current state of the race. Obama's prospects have never been better. He's at 52% on Gallup and only 43% disapprove. The base is fired up and the independents are flocking to the equal opportunity ticket in droves. Obama will probably end up winning bigger than in 2008 because the American people have faith and no one likes Romney.

23+ million unemployed people are going to vote for Obama a 2nd term?  Give me a break, that's the most hackish thing I've seen on this thread. Obama is good at throwing red meat to his crowd of appeal that you know so well.

The unemployed of America are hopeful for a better tomorrow because of our President's bold vision. Furthermore, the unemployed are grateful to a President who has fought for their benefits and their jobs against an opponent who would have fired them long ago and shipped every one of their jobs overseas in order to pocket his profit.

I don't know where to go with this.

You can start to support a new economy for the 21st century where opportunity and prosperity flows from the bottom up rather than trickles from the top down. :)

Too early to tell, but for the Dems I would say Wisconsin and for the GOP North Carolina but I doubt either side will concede either anytime soon.