Will Mitt Romney win Massachusetts?

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

What would you say are the odds of Romney winning Massachusetts?

I'll put them at 1%. My context is that Romney has a 25% chance of winning the election as of now. 1% is the chance of a global catastrophe tied with an Obama scandal that makes him unelectable in a 1984-type GOP sweep that includes my state of Massachusetts. That's it. It's not happening.

The bolded part is where we disagree. Given the instability of China, Europe and the Middle East+climate change, I would posit it to be near certain that a global depression starts either this year or in 2013. Obviously if it doesn't then Obama will win Massachusetts cleanly, but I'd put the chance of depression having started by election day at somewhere between 50% and 25%. If it has started by then I'd say Mass is a tossup.

So I'd pin the odds of a Romney victory in Massachusetts at somewhere between 25%(based on the high estimate of a depression having started by then) and 12.5%(based on the low estimate of it having started by then).

I also disagree that winning Massachusetts entails a nationwide sweep for Mittens. Their were number of states bluer then Massachussets in 2008.

[Oakvale]

I think the prospect of Obama winning Kansas (his mother's home state) is comparable to Romney's chance in Massachusetts. Seriously, folks, this is the most ridiculous thread ever.

Yeah, I don't know why I'm bother to engage the troll. Romney's got about as much chance of winning California as Massachusetts.

Stastically flat out false. The most recent poll in California shows Obama with a 21% lead margin, whereas the most recent Massachusetts poll shows Obama with an 11% lead.

It's really quite disengenous for you to bring up "chance" without having looked up the statistics from which "chance" is determined.

Don't be silly. Obama could get about 45% in Texas, but he's not going to get 51%, and everyone knows it, so it hardly matters that it's just a ten point gap between him and Romney.

Absurd troll threads aren't entitled to respect - if someone made a thread about Obama winning Kansas we'd smirk, too, and rightfully so.

Romney would lose Massachusetts in a general election even if he was still Governor.

I'm calling you a troll because this is a ridiculous premise, and I think you're well aware of that. Not least because it rests on the most outrageous goldbug prophecies coming to pass before Election Day - are you a disciple of Peter Schiff?

[Gravis Marketing]

The reference to climate change causing a depression in fall 2012 or 2013 is trollish.

[Governor Scott]

I will enjoy bumping this thread when he loses it.  In fact, I'm bookmarking this page for that very occasion.

[Governor Scott]

I wonder how many people in 1992 thought Clinton was going to lose Arkansas?

Arkansas (along with the rest of the South) actually wasn't as hostile to Democrats statewide as it is today.

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

I think the prospect of Obama winning Kansas (his mother's home state) is comparable to Romney's chance in Massachusetts. Seriously, folks, this is the most ridiculous thread ever.

Yeah, I don't know why I'm bother to engage the troll. Romney's got about as much chance of winning California as Massachusetts.

Stastically flat out false. The most recent poll in California shows Obama with a 21% lead margin, whereas the most recent Massachusetts poll shows Obama with an 11% lead.

It's really quite disengenous for you to bring up "chance" without having looked up the statistics from which "chance" is determined.

Don't be silly. Obama could get about 45% in Texas, but he's not going to get 51%, and everyone knows it, so it hardly matters that it's just a ten point gap between him and Romney.

Absurd troll threads aren't entitled to respect - if someone made a thread about Obama winning Kansas we'd smirk, too, and rightfully so.

Romney would lose Massachusetts in a general election even if he was still Governor.

I'm calling you a troll because this is a ridiculous premise, and I think you're well aware of that. Not least because it rests on the most outrageous goldbug prophecies coming to pass before Election Day - are you a disciple of Peter Schiff?

Your first assertion is downright wrong. Obama could conceivably have won Texas if the GFC had occurred in 2007 rather then 2008... the Democratic national shift would instead have been a tidal wave.

Peter Schiff? ROFLMAO. Goldbugs are nuts, gold is a bubble that will soon pop just like everything else. I don't see how suspecting an economic collapse is Austrian... to the contrary the people who are most bearish on Europe are folks like Krugman that reject austerity.

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

I will enjoy bumping this thread when he loses it.  In fact, I'm bookmarking this page for that very occasion.

You promise to bump it if he wins it?

[True Federalist]

I think the prospect of Obama winning Kansas (his mother's home state) is comparable to Romney's chance in Massachusetts. Seriously, folks, this is the most ridiculous thread ever.

Yeah, I don't know why I'm bother to engage the troll. Romney's got about as much chance of winning California as Massachusetts.

Well, they are both states Mitt has homes in.

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

The reference to climate change causing a depression in fall 2012 or 2013 is trollish.

No it isn't. The climate is complex, a crisis situation could develop at any time. The Arctic and Antartic polar caps in particular are ticking time bombs.

[Old Europe]

The bolded part is where we disagree. Given the instability of China, Europe and the Middle East+climate change, I would posit it to be near certain that a global depression starts either this year or in 2013. Obviously if it doesn't then Obama will win Massachusetts cleanly, but I'd put the chance of depression having started by election day at somewhere between 50% and 25%. If it has started by then I'd say Mass is a tossup.

You're obviously forgetting that Israel's impending attack on Iran is going to trigger World War III this year. As wartime president Obama will of course win 40+ states in a FDR-esque landslide, among them Massachusetts.

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

The bolded part is where we disagree. Given the instability of China, Europe and the Middle East+climate change, I would posit it to be near certain that a global depression starts either this year or in 2013. Obviously if it doesn't then Obama will win Massachusetts cleanly, but I'd put the chance of depression having started by election day at somewhere between 50% and 25%. If it has started by then I'd say Mass is a tossup.

You're obviously forgetting that Israel's impending attack on Iran is going to trigger World War III this year. As wartime president Obama will of course win 40+ states in a FDR-esque landslide, among them Massachusetts.

Theirs some evidence that Israel is just saber rattling. But if does spiral into a general conflict, it could indeed be a windfall for Obama. OTOH it could turn out a humiliating failure that discredits him politically. If the latter is the case, then Romney winning Massachusetts becomes especially plausible.

And yes I know you are being sarcastic with the intent of mocking me.

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

I would also like to remind everyone that the 2008 statewide polling initially showed McCain with a strong lead in Indiana and North Carolina before the GFC.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2008#North_Carolina

[mondale84]

Why is this still going?

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

Another concerned troll

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

Another concerned troll

Please explain what you mean.

Why is this still going?

Your disapproval of a thread is not sufficient basis for its closure. Wink.

[Senator Snowstalker]

lolno

[Trueconservative]

I doubt that it will, but it's possible because he was a good Governor there.

[GM Griffin]

Five pages? I'm going to go start a thread on how Georgia's going to go 60% for Barack Obama. Maybe Romney (or any Republican) should try to win a county in Massachusetts first.

[Oakvale]

Rockingham seems to think that Romney is somehow going to achieve a 25-point swing despite the fact that he was elected once, quite underwhelmingly, as Governor and left office fairly unpopular. This thread should be stickied as a somber reminder of the useless trolling this board will consist of until the conventions.

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

For all the folks complaining about this thread's existence/how long it is, half the replies in this thread are folks complaining about this thread's existence/how long it is.

I don't mind the spam, I find it funny and intend to gloat over it if Mittens wins Massachusetts, but  remember you're being hoisted by your own petard! If not for your posts, this thread would already have disappeared, and be only half as long.

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

Rockingham seems to think that Romney is somehow going to achieve a 25-point swing despite the fact that he was elected once, quite underwhelmingly, as Governor and left office fairly unpopular. This thread should be stickied as a somber reminder of the useless trolling this board will consist of until the conventions.

I repeat, look at the recent statewide polling:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2012#Massachusetts

The most recent poll shows Obama with 51%, Mittens 40%, 9% undecided. Assuming undecideds split fairly evenly that's 55 to 45 for Obama.

Mittens needs only a 5% swing in his favour in Massachusetts. I see that as a fairly plausible event if the economy starts collapsing again before November and/or Obama suffers a serious foreign policy humiliation in the Middle East.

[Gravis Marketing]

Rockingham seems to think that Romney is somehow going to achieve a 25-point swing despite the fact that he was elected once, quite underwhelmingly, as Governor and left office fairly unpopular.

That 25-point swing isn't as intimidating when you break it up into a series of highly reasonable 5-point swings.

[Gravis Marketing]

The most recent poll shows Obama with 51%, Mittens 40%, 9% undecided. Assuming undecideds split fairly evenly that's 55 to 45 for Obama.

I know this is all trolling, but did you see that it's a Rasmussen Poll and no other poll shows anything like that narrow a margin?

[ag]

I'm going to enjoy bumping this thread when he does win it.

I am afraid, others will find bumping this thread a lot more enjoyable )

If Romney wins MA, he wins, at least, 40 other states as well.  He should, of course, do better than most recent Republicans - I am almost certain he'd get into the 40s, may be even come close to 45%.  He will, probably, win in Plymouth county and might win Worcester. He'd struggle in Norfolk and Barnstable and almost certainly loose the rest of it, mostly by big margins.

To do much better than that, he'd have to run against the national Republican party, on a VERY liberal platform. He could do this when running for governor - he'd never be able to pull it off running for President. Even then it would be a strong lean D, though.

But there is no reason for him even to try to win MA - it would be a ridiculous use of limited campaing resources.

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

The most recent poll shows Obama with 51%, Mittens 40%, 9% undecided. Assuming undecideds split fairly evenly that's 55 to 45 for Obama.

I know this is all trolling, but did you see that it's a Rasmussen Poll and no other poll shows anything like that narrow a margin?

False. YouGov and Suffolk Uni have show similar results. PPP has been all over the place.

Justify your assertion that I am trolling, or admit to using to avoid having an open mind.