TIME's election guide's map

[they don't love you like i love you]

The gray states are just listed as tossups. I'm a little annoyed at them thinking Minnesota's a tossup. New Mexico is interesting, not that anyone expects it go to Romney but imagine in 2000 and 2004 being told it'd be considered a safe state just two cycles later.

Better than most mainstream media maps I'll grant them that, not that it's saying much.

[Joe Republic]

NC and IN safe Dem?  Sure.

[Likely Voter]

Better?  AZ, MI and MN are tossups but NC isn't?  NC is the only state of those four where significant money is actually being spent and TIme's brand new poll shows it as only Romney +1.

If you want to know the tossups just follow the money on where the campaigns and Pacs are spending.

[5280]

Doesn't make sense, NC is safe Romney and AZ is tossup?  AZ is not tossup this election cycle, and NC is lean Romney.

[they don't love you like i love you]

NC and IN safe Dem?  Sure.

Error actually. Fixed.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

MN-Red
Arizona-Blue
Missouri-Gray
North Carolina-Gray
Pennsylvania-Gray (if only due to the voter ID law)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Minnesota could go for Romney, but if it does it won't be a close election, anymore than it will be close if Arizona goes for Obama.

[Lief 🗽]

Pretty horrible map, honestly.

[Comrade Funk]

Pretty horrible map, honestly.

[mileslunn]

I don't think Minnesota is totally safe for Obama, but definitely favours him.  I could see Romney winning the white house without winning Minnesota whereas if Obama loses Minnesota, I cannot see him being re-elected.  I think Romney's chances in Pennsylvania are just as good if not slightly better than Michigan and Wisconsin.  All three are lean Obama, but far from a lock.  As for North Carolina, I would put it in the lean Romney camp, but not a lock by any stretch of the imagination.  Obama could conceivably win Arizona, but highly unlikely, otherwise I would say it is a 90/10 chance in favour of Romney.  Although I would be surprised if Romney doesn't win Indiana and Missouri, I think Obama's chances are better in both states than Arizona.  As for New Mexico, a lot has to do with the fact over 40% of the state's population are Latinos.  In 2000, Bush got 35% of the Latino vote while in 2004 he got 44%, by contrast Romney is pulling around 25-30% amongst Latinos so if the party did better here I think New Mexico would be a toss up.  Still I think Romney has a chance albeit a long one.

[Cory]

Pretty horrible map, honestly.

This. I wish the media would stop buying into this "Michigan/Minnesota/Arizona are in play" meme.

If anything I think Pennsylvania would go for Romney before Minnesota.

[sentinel]

Pretty horrible map, honestly.

This map blows.

[The Ex-Factor]

Most "mainstream" maps are bad because they put too much emphasis on prior elections rather than changing trends (any map with New Mexico or Missouri as a swing state is guilty of this) However this map is just dumb. Arizona and Minnesota tossups? North Carolina safe Republican? WTF?

[opebo]

Really if you rectify the Arizona and Minnesota errors, the map is not bad.  It is a little 'Romney friendly', which I think better reflects the new reality of the race better than much of what is imagined by our forum members.