Colors inverted for use off site:

[pbrower2a]

MY PREDICTION, 2012 Presidential election, as of 4 February 2012

Based on binary matchups only

Based on recent polls that show substantial leads for President Obama in New Hampshire and OHIO against everyone and near-ties or outright ties against Romney or Santorum elsewhere I get these results, Polls from 2011 suggest that Pennsylvania and Michigan would be much closer, but we all know what happens when the unions start organizing their campaigns.


Obama    290
Toss-up   110
Romney   138  


Obama vs. Gingrich -- it gets really ugly for the Republicans.

Obama       357
toss-ups      58
Gingrich     123

[Yelnoc]

blasphemy

[Adam Griffin]

I don't think there's a scenario in this election where South Carolina is in play before Georgia, even with Newt Gingrich.

[Хahar 🤔]

Post reported for incorrect color usage

[TheGlobalizer]

LOL

TX and SC are not in play.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

LOL

TX and SC are not in play.

[pbrower2a]

Here's the sort of "off-site" area for which I have created this map:

http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/showthread.php?5242-2012-Elections&p=419878#post419878

The above site does not support electoral maps.

Of course I know the norm for Dave Leip's Atlas. Other places have 'red' and 'blue' the opposite way from Dave Leip.  

[pbrower2a]

LOL

TX and SC are not in play.

The latest poll for South Carolina showed it in play against Romney. Both states are very much in play with Gingrich as the nominee. 

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

LOL

TX and SC are not in play.

The latest poll for South Carolina showed it in play against Romney. Both states are very much in play with Gingrich as the nominee. 

If some polling firm we've never head of had Obama leading Romney by 1 point in Utah, would you consider Utah in play? Or would actually take a minute to rationally think it out and realize its an outlier and probable joke poll?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

This is just not right.

[Napoleon]

Use off site? What part of "for use in uselectionatlas.org forum posts only" was unclear?

[argentarius]

The numbers look wrong because they make no sense. Red is left, blue is right.

[Averroës Nix]

My prediction, for use off-site:

[argentarius]

My prediction, for use off-site:

THIS IS NOT THE POST RANDOM MAPS THREAD. But anyway, 1880

[5280]

AZ should be lean GOP, not toss up.  Same with TX.

Gingrich is not going to get nominated, so that map is moot.

[Vote UKIP!]

This is just not right.

[pbrower2a]

MY PREDICTION, 2012 Presidential election, as of 8 February 2012

Based on binary matchups only

Obama vs. Romney

Based on recent polls that show substantial leads for President Obama in New Hampshire and OHIO against everyone and near-ties or outright ties against Romney or Santorum elsewhere I get these results, Polls from 2011 suggest that Pennsylvania and Michigan would be much closer, but we all know what happens when the unions start organizing their campaigns.


Obama    290
Toss-up   110
Romney   138  


Obama vs. Gingrich -- it gets really ugly for the Republicans.

Obama       357
toss-ups      58
Gingrich     123

In view of results of caucuses or primaries in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri I may soon need here is a map including Rick Santorum.

Obama vs. Santorum

Obama       342
toss-ups      51
Santorum    161

[pbrower2a]

LOL

TX and SC are not in play.

The latest poll for South Carolina showed it in play against Romney. Both states are very much in play with Gingrich as the nominee. 

If some polling firm we've never head of had Obama leading Romney by 1 point in Utah, would you consider Utah in play? Or would actually take a minute to rationally think it out and realize its an outlier and probable joke poll?

Not in the least -- unless there were some compelling reason to believe it.

As a rule I reject internal polls, although they might be entered  (no harm, no foul) if they corroborate what is already understood as truth.

The most likely whopper is an inversion -- typically a typo such as Gingrich leading Obama 70-28 in Vermont or Obama leading Santorum 68-28 in Oklahoma. Most of us would spot these if they are more than 10% off what we expect. I am the ultimate arbiter of what I accept or reject for my purposes, and anyone can dispute me for anything.

[pbrower2a]

AZ should be lean GOP, not toss up.  Same with TX.

Virginia then "leaned" Democratic. Gingrich, Paul, and Santorum apparently lose Arizona. A PPP poll showed Gingrich losing Texas by about 2%. If that is an inversion, then it is still a "lean".   

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm keeping Gingrich maps until I see him drop out (which includes "suspending his campaign") or if someone clinches. As you see I have added Rick Santorum even though he appeared weak before the February caucuses or primaries in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri  that he won. I did not see that coming.

[Stranger in a strange land]

BLASPHEMER! GATHER STONES!