States that will fall away from Obama in 2012

[21st Century Independent]

Which states do you think Obama will lose that he carried in 08?

I would say the highest probability is Indiana.

[Rowan]

North Carolina and Indiana are definitely gone.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Obama can only hold IN in case of larger landslide, and that's unlikely.

[Oakvale]

It depends if he wins or loses (imagine that). If he wins, his victory will be larger than 2008 and thus it's unlikely that he loses states he won last time around. Then again, it's not without precedent- Clinton lost a couple of states in 1996, so if you put the proverbial gun to my head I'm going to say Indiana and Florida.

[DS0816]

It depends if he wins or loses (imagine that). If he wins, his victory will be larger than 2008 and thus it's unlikely that he loses states he won last time around. Then again, it's not without precedent- Clinton lost a couple of states in 1996, so if you put the proverbial gun to my head I'm going to say Indiana and Florida.

In 1992, Bill Clinton carried Colorado, Georgia, and Montana. Bob Dole flipped them on him in 1996, but Clinton countered by picking up Arizona and Florida. He had a net gain of 9 electoral votes.

As I've mentioned this plenty, Woodrow Wilson [D-New Jersey] is the only "two-term" president to have suffered a loss in electoral votes in his re-election (by comparison to his first: in 1912 he won 435; in 1916 it was 277).

[yougo1000]

I think Florida, New Mexico, Virginia, North Carolina, Oregon, Washington, Pennsylvania

[auburntiger]

Am I missing something about why an Obama victory in 2012 automatically means that his electoral and popular vote will increase?? Couldn't it be possible that he could lose Indiana, North Carolina, NE-02, and either Ohio or Florida without gaining anything?

Woodrow Wilson in 1916 is a perfect example.

[Reaganfan]

NE-CD, IN, NC, OH, VA, FL and CO...which puts Obama at 260 to the GOP's 278 in the 2012 EV count.

[Kalimantan]

NE-CD, IN, NC, OH, VA, FL and CO...which puts Obama at 260 to the GOP's 278 in the 2012 EV count.

VA will stay with Obama, the African American vote will be out in force again and that state is trending blue in any case. I would put a fair amount on NC staying with Obama for much the same reason.

As things stand I would expect IN to flip, and quite possibly FL (and OH?), but AZ and MO to go the other way

[Reaganfan]

NE-CD, IN, NC, OH, VA, FL and CO...which puts Obama at 260 to the GOP's 278 in the 2012 EV count.

VA will stay with Obama, the African American vote will be out in force again and that state is trending blue in any case. I would put a fair amount on NC staying with Obama for much the same reason.

As things stand I would expect IN to flip, and quite possibly FL (and OH?), but AZ and MO to go the other way

I respectfully have to strongly disagree. The Hillary vs. Obama primary race got more Democrats energized, which will not occur in 2012. Also, the whole notion of electing the first African American President is past, so they will not turn out in droves as they did in 2008. Also, the Republicans are likely to be more energized, especially now with the Teaparty movement, and as we saw in the New York Congressional race, Republicans and Teapartiers tend to band together in order to try and win, and will do so in 2012 against Obama/Biden.

As far as the states go, if Obama lost Missouri in 2008 and Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Indiana, and North Carolina were close...they'll slide back to Republicans, thus giving the Republican nominee (totally unknown BTW...could be Romney to Thune...who knows...even Marco Rubio) the White House.

[Oakvale]

Am I missing something about why an Obama victory in 2012 automatically means that his electoral and popular vote will increase?? Couldn't it be possible that he could lose Indiana, North Carolina, NE-02, and either Ohio or Florida without gaining anything?

Woodrow Wilson in 1916 is a perfect example.

Yeah, but Wilson's election was a three-way race which skews the results and is, thus, irrelevant for comparison.

[bullmoose88]

Woodrow Wilson in 1916 is a perfect example.

Not really.

Wilson might not have been President, let alone not have had racked up 400+EVs, had the split in the GOP not occurred.  (I also second what Oakvale said, if that wasn't clear enough).

[DariusNJ]

The obvious answer is Indiana, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if it was Nevada or Montana.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

The obvious answer is Indiana, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if it was Nevada or Montana.

Montana was never with Obama for it to fall away.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

NE-2 seems to be the most likely place to flip to the Republicans in 2012 (although it is not a state).

As for states, I agree that Indiana is the one most likely to flip to the Republicans in 2012.

[auburntiger]

Woodrow Wilson in 1916 is a perfect example.

Not really.

Wilson might not have been President, let alone not have had racked up 400+EVs, had the split in the GOP not occurred.  (I also second what Oakvale said, if that wasn't clear enough).

OK scratch the 1916 comment, but that doesn't really answer my question. Why is it that people assume that an Obama victory 2012 would be larger than his 2008 victory? I could easily see him losing Indiana, North Carolina, Florida, and Ohio to someone like Daniels, without winning a 2008 McCain state.

Do they just base it on historical precedence, because I think there is a clear backlash coming...maybe not enough to defeat Obama, but definitely deny him the large victory he got in 2008.

[bullmoose88]

Woodrow Wilson in 1916 is a perfect example.

Not really.

Wilson might not have been President, let alone not have had racked up 400+EVs, had the split in the GOP not occurred.  (I also second what Oakvale said, if that wasn't clear enough).

OK scratch the 1916 comment, but that doesn't really answer my question. Why is it that people assume that an Obama victory 2012 would be larger than his 2008 victory? I could easily see him losing Indiana, North Carolina, Florida, and Ohio to someone like Daniels, without winning a 2008 McCain state.

Do they just base it on historical precedence, because I think there is a clear backlash coming...maybe not enough to defeat Obama, but definitely deny him the large victory he got in 2008.

Well sure, yeah.  Could he somehow recover his popularity and gain a state or two (or in a weird case, a lot of states, ie somewhat like what Reagan did)? Sure.  I wouldn't bet on it.  We just know that bad poll numbers right now aren't the kiss of death.

But if he's reelected in 2 years, I'm sure it will along the lines you've mentioned, a smaller EV win.

[phk]

Indiana, North Carolina, Florida, NE-2, will be the first to fall.

[The Dowager Mod]

IN, NC, FL.

[Eraserhead]

North Carolina and Indiana are definitely gone.

There isn't any way to know that for sure in 2010.

[Devilman88]

In order of states that will flip to Republican:

(NE-2), IN, FL, NV, OH, CO, NC, VA, NM, NH, IA and PA.

[useful idiot]

I'm guessing VA, NC, and IN will flip. Next in line would be FL and OH.

[Derek]

Most likely is Indiana and I don't even believe he won it in 2008. It was ACORN cheating to give him IN, NC, OH, FL, VA, NV, and CO. The media's polls almost match up cuz they are also biased left. Without all the second graders, deceased, and disney characters, Obama loses NC, VA, IN, OH, and FL easily.

[The Ex-Factor]

Most likely is Indiana and I don't even believe he won it in 2008. It was ACORN cheating to give him IN, NC, OH, FL, VA, NV, and CO. The media's polls almost match up cuz they are also biased left. Without all the second graders, deceased, and disney characters, Obama loses NC, VA, IN, OH, and FL easily.

ACORN must have been pretty good to singlehandedly deliver Obama 7 states, huh?

[pbrower2a]

Most likely is Indiana and I don't even believe he won it in 2008. It was ACORN cheating to give him IN, NC, OH, FL, VA, NV, and CO. The media's polls almost match up cuz they are also biased left. Without all the second graders, deceased, and disney characters, Obama loses NC, VA, IN, OH, and FL easily.

ACORN had no such power. It's possible to win a close election by cheating in one place, as has been claimed on occasion -- like Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004. Multiple places? As John Boehner says, "Hell no, you can't!"

One can just as easily attribute the electoral success of Barack Obama, a failed President on the other side, a catastrophic choice of a VP nominee by the Republicans,  and an economy that got very bad very fast. One can also recognize that Barack Obama is a superb campaigner and that demographic trends favored Democrats in 2008 as they didn't in 2000 and 2004.

Eighteen states and the District of Columbia haven't voted  for a Republican nominee since 1988 -- and they all voted decisively for Barack Obama, that is by 10% or more. Those states and DC accounted for 248 electoral votes in 2008. If you see it this way, then the GOP has been operating with  92% of a loss  built into every Presidential race after 1988. That leaves little wiggle room.

States that had voted for a Republican nominee (George W. Bush) only once after 1988 (Iowa, New Hampshire, New Mexico) also went firmly for Obama in 2008.  Those states went for Obama by at least 9%, so they weren't close. That put Obama within easy striking range of an electoral victor with 264 electoral votes. That is 97.8% of a win, with 264 electoral votes.  Any Obama win of five electoral votes (Nevada) would allow the election to be decided in the House of Representatives.  Anything more-- let us say Arkansas, which has 6 electoral votes, would  give Obama the win outright. Obama didn't win Arkansas and really had no chance there. But there were several other states up for contention.

Let's take a good look at Ohio. In 2004 it was iffy, and had it gone to Ohio, we might have had John Kerry running for re-election in 2008. The economy was (and is still) a mess, much as is so than in either Michigan or Pennsylvania.  If Michigan and Pennsylvania, which are somewhat similar to each other politically and economically and Obama got about a 5% shift toward the Democrats between 2004 and 2008, then how could the Republicans hold onto Ohio, especially if the state's Secretary of State wasn't a partisan hack favoring the GOP?

Let's take a good look at Indiana. I can, because I live in Michigan and have much access to Indiana and Ohio news. Sure, Indiana was arguably a freak. But much went wrong for the GOP.  The state ordinarily is a lock for Republicans, but not this time. The Indiana economy was about as much a mess as were the Michigan or Ohio economies; that is bad for an incumbent.  The Democratic nominee actively campaigned in Indiana because he could do so easily. For a while, Michigan was in doubt, so the Obama campaign had to buy advertising in the South Bend-Elkhart area to get access to a part of Michigan that gets its TV from northwestern Indiana. Ohio was in doubt until a few days before the election, and to reach certain parts of Ohio, the Obama campaign needed to buy advertising time in Fort Wayne to reach certain parts of Ohio.

That advertising worked in part to make Indiana a possible win. Indiana does not go for Democratic  nominees for President in close elections. It was one of the worst states for Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. neither Clinton nor Kennedy ever came close to winning the state -- and both were about as adept campaigners as Obama. It is a hard state in which to campaign, and a Republican machine makes it a difficult state to contest. Obama did -- and won it.

The rest? Nevada was a complete meltdown for the Republicans because of the real estate meltdown. Colorado? A legitimate swing state in most years, it had a rapidly-growing Hispanic population that rejected McCain. Different as Colorado and Florida are in geography, their demographics are surprisingly similar. Virginia? The state hadn't voted for a Democratic nominee since 1964, but the state was drifting D for a long time. North Carolina? Much the same.

Sure, Virginia has since voted for right-wing stealth candidates as Governor and Attorney General... a political nutcase. If there had been any political shenanigans in Virginia in 2008, do you think that that right-wing hack wouldn't be going after those?

Keep denying the reality of the 2008 election. Keep promising an abortion ban, creationism and prayer in public schools, and other aspects of the Culture Wars of the 1990s and the Double Zero Decade -- promises that the Hard Right has yet to deliver upon. Keep promising tax cuts to the super-rich that can do little more than create speculative bubbles, and Americans will reject you. Keep denying the foreign-policy successes of our President and that our economy seems to have stabilized.

The best thing that can happen for the GOP in 2010 and 2012 is further losses. The GOP has had much the same coalition for victory that worked in 1980, 1994, 2000, and 2004.  That coalition has eroded, and it is even breaking down. The GOP needs to develop a new coalition that can win election, and it won't be between sultan-like plutocrats and people who don't care about economic consequences so long as they get empty promises of a changed culture in their favor. There just aren't enough people to win consistently for the GOP, which has not made gains outside its core areas of support.

The Democrats, badly defeated in three consecutive Presidential campaigns between 1980 and 1988 ended up rebuilding one under Reagan and Bush I landslides.  Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter were both Southern moderates fairly similar in political values. But Clinton won with a combination of states very different from those that Carter won in 1976.

Go ahead and deny as you wish -- but demographic trends alone suggest that Obama will win at least as decisively in 2012 as in 2008. An economy in form recovery and clear achievements in foreign policy (like China imposing sanctions on Iran), not to mention the possible extraction of US armed forces in Afghanistan and Iraq... and the Republican nominee for President could easily face a defeat as smashing as Stevenson in 1956. 

President Obama won't need ACORN in 2012. He had better not; the organization is now defunct.