What happens if Romney wins Michigan?

[RogueBeaver]

If Romney wins Michigan then he's winning the WH with 300-something EV.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

By your logic, Obama should have won Arkansas because its a democratic state. 

Having a GOP governer shows that Michigan is trending Republican, and might turn Red in 2012. 

These statements don't make sense together.

You're deriding this poster because of his alleged apples-to-oranges local/presidential party preferences, and then you go on to use the same ideas in your post. Pick a side!

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

So Michigan is the 2012 GOP pipe-dream? 

Gotcha. 

[NVGonzalez]

MI this year seems to be the new PA... Republicans seem to think they can win it but in reality it is fool's gold.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

MI this year seems to be the new PA... Republicans seem to think they can win it but in reality it is fool's gold.

It's the same deal with PA, too.

[Lincoln Republican]

Democrats who continue to persist in the belief that Romney has no chance in Michigan are deluding themselves.

Perhaps Romney won't win Michigan, but on the other hand, he just might.  At least he's in the fight, contrary to just two weeks ago for example.

If Romney comes on strong in Michigan, I believe he is as well going to be very competitive in Wisconsin and Iowa, so we have three states the Democrats are depending on.   

If Romney wins Michigan, he wins the election.

[milhouse24]

By your logic, Obama should have won Arkansas because its a democratic state. 

Having a GOP governer shows that Michigan is trending Republican, and might turn Red in 2012. 

These statements don't make sense together.

You're deriding this poster because of his alleged apples-to-oranges local/presidential party preferences, and then you go on to use the same ideas in your post. Pick a side!

My point was that she is completely wrong about everything, including governors political party, swing states, and presidential candidates that are R or D.  She makes these statements that are based on superficial political theories in a world where GWBush is running for president against Obama. 

Bill Clinton won Arkansas and it was a reliable Democrat state and had Democrat senators. 
Yet, Al Gore and Obama lost Arkansas. 
There are political trends that change over time.  Did anyone believe Scott Brown would win in Massachusetts?  Nothing is set in stone and its naive to make ignorant statements. 

You can choose to believe anything you want, but there are very specific reasons that pertain to Michigan and to Romney that makes me think it will be close. 
This doesn't mean it will also be the case for Ohio or Wisconsin.  Even if Romney squeaks out a victory in Michigan, it can still mean he loses Virginia and Florida. 
There are a lot of advantages for Romney being a Northern Republican and a more moderate/secular republican than GW Bush. 

[old timey villain]

By your logic, Obama should have won Arkansas because its a democratic state. 

Having a GOP governer shows that Michigan is trending Republican, and might turn Red in 2012. 

These statements don't make sense together.

You're deriding this poster because of his alleged apples-to-oranges local/presidential party preferences, and then you go on to use the same ideas in your post. Pick a side!

My point was that she is completely wrong about everything, including governors political party, swing states, and presidential candidates that are R or D.  She makes these statements that are based on superficial political theories in a world where GWBush is running for president against Obama. 

Bill Clinton won Arkansas and it was a reliable Democrat state and had Democrat senators. 
Yet, Al Gore and Obama lost Arkansas. 
There are political trends that change over time.  Did anyone believe Scott Brown would win in Massachusetts?  Nothing is set in stone and its naive to make ignorant statements. 

You can choose to believe anything you want, but there are very specific reasons that pertain to Michigan and to Romney that makes me think it will be close. 
This doesn't mean it will also be the case for Ohio or Wisconsin.  Even if Romney squeaks out a victory in Michigan, it can still mean he loses Virginia and Florida. 
There are a lot of advantages for Romney being a Northern Republican and a more moderate/secular republican than GW Bush. 

Well, first of all, I'm a he not a she

And you need to realize that you shouldn't use state political trends as a foolproof barometer to predict national trends.

The governorship in Michigan has volleyed back and forth, and hasn't really paralleled national trends very closely. Michigan had a Democratic governor from 1982 to 1990, yet it voted for Reagan in 84 and Bush in 88. Then it had a GOP governor, Engler, from 90 to 2002, and in all of the elections in that time frame it voted Democrat.  Jennifer Granholm D was gov from 2002 to 2010, and Michigan was still blue.

So, GOP governors in Michigan are nothing new, and they're not really indicative of how the state will vote in presidential elections.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

If Romney wins Michigan, I will personally pay every GOPer $20. Like Joe Scarborough said, "Every year there's a state that we think we can win, we spend  lot of money there and think its coming our way. Then come September, we're down in the polls. Halfway through October, all the offices are closed.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I bet a lot of Republicans woulda said that about Obama and Indiana. We saw how that went.

[5280]

If he won Michigan, the states name would be changed to Mittchigan. lol

[morgieb]

Then he's already won the election.

[nkpatel1279]

Trade PA,MI,WI,IA,and NH with FL,OH,VA,CO,and NV.  Obama-D ends up with 276ev.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Trade PA,MI,WI,IA,and NH with FL,OH,VA,CO,and NV.  Obama-D ends up with 276ev.

However, the first group of states (especially PA, MI, and WI) are definitely less swingy than FL, OH, and VA.sss

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Trade PA,MI,WI,IA,and NH with FL,OH,VA,CO,and NV.  Obama-D ends up with 276ev.

You do realize that this is an entirely ridiculous map, right?

[milhouse24]

Trade PA,MI,WI,IA,and NH with FL,OH,VA,CO,and NV.  Obama-D ends up with 276ev.

You do realize that this is an entirely ridiculous map, right?

Romney is stronger in the North.  Liberals keep thinking GWBush is running for president and not someone else. 

[milhouse24]

By your logic, Obama should have won Arkansas because its a democratic state. 

Having a GOP governer shows that Michigan is trending Republican, and might turn Red in 2012. 

These statements don't make sense together.

You're deriding this poster because of his alleged apples-to-oranges local/presidential party preferences, and then you go on to use the same ideas in your post. Pick a side!

My point was that she is completely wrong about everything, including governors political party, swing states, and presidential candidates that are R or D.  She makes these statements that are based on superficial political theories in a world where GWBush is running for president against Obama. 

Bill Clinton won Arkansas and it was a reliable Democrat state and had Democrat senators. 
Yet, Al Gore and Obama lost Arkansas. 
There are political trends that change over time.  Did anyone believe Scott Brown would win in Massachusetts?  Nothing is set in stone and its naive to make ignorant statements. 

You can choose to believe anything you want, but there are very specific reasons that pertain to Michigan and to Romney that makes me think it will be close. 
This doesn't mean it will also be the case for Ohio or Wisconsin.  Even if Romney squeaks out a victory in Michigan, it can still mean he loses Virginia and Florida. 
There are a lot of advantages for Romney being a Northern Republican and a more moderate/secular republican than GW Bush. 

Well, first of all, I'm a he not a she

And you need to realize that you shouldn't use state political trends as a foolproof barometer to predict national trends.

The governorship in Michigan has volleyed back and forth, and hasn't really paralleled national trends very closely. Michigan had a Democratic governor from 1982 to 1990, yet it voted for Reagan in 84 and Bush in 88. Then it had a GOP governor, Engler, from 90 to 2002, and in all of the elections in that time frame it voted Democrat.  Jennifer Granholm D was gov from 2002 to 2010, and Michigan was still blue.

So, GOP governors in Michigan are nothing new, and they're not really indicative of how the state will vote in presidential elections.

The right candidate can win any state under the right conditions, regardless of party affiliation.
Reagan won California.
GHWBush won California. 
Perhaps some states follow trends instead of lead trends.  Reagan may have boosted elections for Republican governors in states after he came into office. 
Michigan is in play.
Romney is the right candidate to make Michigan in play.
Michigan has a GOP governor who will help Romney GOTV. 
The Michigan citizens seem tired of Democrats and are ready for change.
Romney's peer group in Michigan in their 50's and 60's will help GOTV and encourage their 30 year old children to vote for Romney. 

[pbrower2a]

http://www.freep.com/article/20120621/NEWS15/120621032/New-poll-puts-Obama-and-Romney-Michigan-race-in-dead-heat

So Romney is slightly ahead of Obama according to some Michigan polls.  There's a very strong chance that Romney can actually win the state, given his family's history, his father's popularity with older citizens, and his "favorite son" homestate status. 

It Romney gets the 16 EV points, does this help him get to 270? 

He would still need one or two of Ohio, Virginia, and Florida.  He would also need to be strong in the mountain west. 

Michigan tempts Republicans, sucks them in, wastes their money, and then turns on them in Presidential years. The Republicans win the state if they are able to discourage the well-organized unions from campaigning on behalf of the President. If Romney can win despite the strong union electioneering and the large African-American population, then Mitt Romney has likely won everything but the states to the north and east of the Potomac except that he would win New Hampshire, the West Coast except for Alaska, and maybe Illinois and Minnesota. 

[Wisconsin+17]

Shhh. You want them to stop wasting money?

[hopper]

He doesn't win it outside of a landslide and that's not a likely scenario. The only states that are really on the table for Romney to make 270 are ones that Bush won.

How can you say that when polls show Romney tied with Obama in Michigan? 

Michigan has a Republican governor.

He might very well win it, and still lose the election. 

A state's governor is not a very good indication of how it will vote. Tennessee had a very popular Democratic governor, Phil Bredesen, from 2002 to 2010, and the state still voted R twice during his time in office.

At the same time, California had a Republican governor and the state still voted for Kerry and Obama decisively.

Beredesen partly got elected the first time because the previous governor who was a Republican got embroiled in that debate over the income tax which Tenneseeans don't and still don't want.

[WhyteRain]

I'm pretty confident Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin, will go red.  If Michigan goes red, Barack and Michelle better start packing.

I see it the other way.  Wisconsin goes GOP (for the first time in decades), but Detroit and environs states Democratic. 

If Romney does Greater Detroit, then he's in landslide territory -- winning more than 40 states.

[WhyteRain]

Romney winning MI is about as likely as Romney winning NM. Romney's pissed off the auto industry workers as much as he's pissed off Latinos, each have a pretty equivalent amount of electoral power in their respective states and both states have a similar DPI. Anybody in MI who would vote for Romney based on the "home state" factor or that his dad was governor 50 years ago has got to be at least 65 and is already going to vote for Romney. I don't see too many union workers or inner-city Detroit blacks jumping with glee at the chance to vote for Romney as "one of their own".

It would be much more feasible for Romney to win IA, WI or even MN than MI.

Agreed.  Though the reason for Romney's near-sure loss in NM is Gary Johnson, the popular former governor, running on the Libertarian ticket.

[WhyteRain]

He doesn't win it outside of a landslide and that's not a likely scenario. The only states that are really on the table for Romney to make 270 are ones that Bush won.

How can you say that when polls show Romney tied with Obama in Michigan?  

Michigan has a Republican governor.

He might very well win it, and still lose the election.  

What polls are you looking at?

Rasmussen has it 50-42 for Obama, and Rassie isn't known for erring on the Democratic side.

[modify:]  The poll was taken just a week ago.  http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/michigan/election_2012_michigan_president

[Peeperkorn]

It Romney gets the 16 EV points, does this help him get to 270? 

No.  Despite surface appearances, Romney getting Michigan's 16 EV hurts his effort to get 270.