For how much longer will the media treat Ohio as the most important state?

[Phony Moderate]

Seriously, the media is still living in 2004land.

[Never]

Well, Ohio is definitely an important state, considering the last time it did not vote for the winner of a presidential election was 1960. The state's bellwhether status should remain intact at least for next one or two election cycles.

Anyhow, to answer your question, I would venture to say that as soon as 2016, we could see the media focus more on swing states like Colorado and Virginia than Ohio.

[Non Swing Voter]

Well, Ohio is definitely an important state, considering the last time it did not vote for the winner of a presidential election was 1960. The state's bellwhether status should remain intact at least for next one or two election cycles.

Anyhow, to answer your question, I would venture to say that as soon as 2016, we could see the media focus more on swing states like Colorado and Virginia than Ohio.

Yet more Republican trolling.  As the vast majority of people on this board have said (and voted in the VA topic), Virginia and Colorado are trending heavily democratic and won't be focused on as the most important states.  Believe it or not there is reality beyond what Fox News tells you to believe.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Well, Ohio is definitely an important state, considering the last time it did not vote for the winner of a presidential election was 1960. The state's bellwhether status should remain intact at least for next one or two election cycles.

Anyhow, to answer your question, I would venture to say that as soon as 2016, we could see the media focus more on swing states like Colorado and Virginia than Ohio.

Yet more Republican trolling.  As the vast majority of people on this board have said (and voted in the VA topic), Virginia and Colorado are trending heavily democratic and won't be focused on as the most important states.  Believe it or not there is reality beyond what Fox News tells you to believe.

Colorado is actually not trending heavily democratic, at least not yet.

In the latest polling there, while Hillary vs. Bush shows about the same democratic margin as we had with Obama vs. Romney, Hillary is tied with Christie, leads Huckabee by just a single point, and is five points BEHIND Rand Paul.

In the poll before that, Hillary is 5 points BEHIND Paul Ryan, 4 points BEHIND Rand Paul, and leads Christie and Cruz by just a single point.

If this polling means anything, it clearly shows that Colorado is likely to vote more REPUBLICAN in 2016 then it did in 2012. Granted, it's early, but right now, anyone claiming that Hillary will have an easy time in CO can't find a poll to support their cause.

Source: http://www.270towin.com/2016-polls/2016-general-election-matchups/

[Never]

Well, Ohio is definitely an important state, considering the last time it did not vote for the winner of a presidential election was 1960. The state's bellwhether status should remain intact at least for next one or two election cycles.

Anyhow, to answer your question, I would venture to say that as soon as 2016, we could see the media focus more on swing states like Colorado and Virginia than Ohio.

Yet more Republican trolling.  As the vast majority of people on this board have said (and voted in the VA topic), Virginia and Colorado are trending heavily democratic and won't be focused on as the most important states.  Believe it or not there is reality beyond what Fox News tells you to believe.

Colorado is actually not trending heavily democratic, at least not yet.

In the latest polling there, while Hillary vs. Bush shows about the same democratic margin as we had with Obama vs. Romney, Hillary is tied with Christie, leads Huckabee by just a single point, and is five points BEHIND Rand Paul.

In the poll before that, Hillary is 5 points BEHIND Paul Ryan, 4 points BEHIND Rand Paul, and leads Christie and Cruz by just a single point.

If this polling means anything, it clearly shows that Colorado is likely to vote more REPUBLICAN in 2016 then it did in 2012. Granted, it's early, but right now, anyone claiming that Hillary will have an easy time in CO can't find a poll to support their cause.

Source: http://www.270towin.com/2016-polls/2016-general-election-matchups/

Thanks so much for pointing that out about Colorado.

Don't mind Non Swing Voter. He thinks that practically all Republicans are trolls (not to mention making baseless accusations that I actually watch cable news)

[TDAS04]

It's still easily one of the most important.  Ohio's voting margins continue to be close to the national average, and it has more electoral votes than Virginia or Colorado.

[ElectionsGuy]

It still is, obviously. Although even I'm getting sick of the "so goes Ohio so goes the nation" thing. When Kasich (probably) wins in November, the media will probably think that 2014 is a republican year, even though it might not be.

In presidential elections now, its still the second most important state after Virginia.

[Rockefeller GOP]

NSV wants so desperately for Virginia to be a Democratic stronghold.  If current trends continue, it will be someday.  But it's simply not one yet and won't be by 2016.  Period.  The same thing x2 for Colorado.

[Hamster]

It's still easily one of the most important.  Ohio's voting margins continue to be close to the national average, and it has more electoral votes than Virginia or Colorado.

Florida?

[TDAS04]

It's still easily one of the most important.  Ohio's voting margins continue to be close to the national average, and it has more electoral votes than Virginia or Colorado.

Florida?

Florida has more electoral votes than Ohio, but Florida also votes more Republican relative to the national popular vote, so it's less likely to be the tipping point state. 

I guess Pennsylvania also has more EVs than Ohio, but I didn't say that Ohio is the most important state, but it's undoubtedly still one of the most crucial.  Sure, Ohio may be less of a bellwether state in the near future, and states shift around politically, but it's way too soon to insist that Virginia or Colorado or another state will be the deciding state next election, or that Ohio will not be.  Ohio may not have been the all-crucial state in 2008 or 2012 as it was in 2004, but it was still pretty close, and its number of electoral votes enhances its importance.

I don't think that there is much of a problem with the media overemphasizing Ohio, even if it doesn't provide enough attention to some other states.

[MATTROSE94]

My logic might be a bit off, but I was always under the impression that Ohio would tilt Republican by a point or two in a 50-50 election.

[Never]

My logic might be a bit off, but I was always under the impression that Ohio would tilt Republican by a point or two in a 50-50 election.

I agree with this logic. Ohio seems to be ever so slightly right of center.

During a tie, Virginia would be the state to watch, in my opinion. Recently, it has been very close to the national margin, and I could see either a Demcorat or Republican winning Virginia with just 50% of the vote in a nationally tied election.

[ElectionsGuy]

My logic might be a bit off, but I was always under the impression that Ohio would tilt Republican by a point or two in a 50-50 election.

Yep, if Obama and Romney completely tied in the popular vote, Romney would win Ohio by 0.9%. It was actually left of center in 2004, but most of the time its 1 or 2 right of center, if not almost center.

[Mister Mets]

It's a big state that's close to the tipping point. As long as that continues to be true, it remains important. It's also gone to the winner of the electoral vote in every election since 1948, so that makes it a consistent bellweather.

Right now if we have competitive elections (IE- the winner isn't clear two months before the election) Ohio will be key for electoral calculations.

And if one presidential campaign is leading in the state by ten points, it's a sign that the election probably isn't going to be competitive. So that's a major story too.

[eric82oslo]

My logic might be a bit off, but I was always under the impression that Ohio would tilt Republican by a point or two in a 50-50 election.

Yep, if Obama and Romney completely tied in the popular vote, Romney would win Ohio by 0.9%. It was actually left of center in 2004, but most of the time its 1 or 2 right of center, if not almost center.

And ironically - or maybe rather interestingly - that seems to keep being the case. At least in my polling database, it is right now the second closest state to the perceived national average of any of the 29 states having been polled so far (which includes all recent battleground states except Nevada). The only state that's polled even closer is Maine, a state that hasn't been polled more than once, and that was more than 7 months ago, so not exactly a very recent poll either. What mostly makes the Maine poll fairly uninteresting right now though, was that it was taken pre-Bridgegate, and Christie at that time was the only candidate polling even remotely close to Hillary in Maine. The second best GOP candidate was Jeb Bush at -23%. So in other words, it shouldn't be much of an exaggeration to claim that Ohio is right now probably the closest state we have to the national popular vote of 2016, at least if Hillary ends up on top of the Democratic ticket.

What's more, according to the database, Ohio should be about 1% more Republican-tilting than the projected national margin, continuing nicely in line with its ever so slightly Republican tilting historical tendency. While the country as a whole stands at Hillary +7.2%, Ohio is at 6.2% (the average of 5 polls there): https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=169131.316

[JRP1994]

I agree with Non Swing Voter that Virginia is trending Democratic, but I don't think it's safe or fair to say that it is non-winnable for the GOP. In 2008, it was still ever-so-slightly Republican leaning, and in 2012, it was only 1/100th of a percent more Democratic than the nation.

If VA is D+1 or D+2 in 2016, then I'll agree. But I think the GOP can certainly win a state that, in 2012, was D+0.01.

[Never]

I agree with Non Swing Voter that Virginia is trending Democratic, but I don't think it's safe or fair to say that it is non-winnable for the GOP. In 2008, it was still ever-so-slightly Republican leaning, and in 2012, it was only 1/100th of a percent more Democratic than the nation.

If VA is D+1 or D+2 in 2016, then I'll agree. But I think the GOP can certainly win a state that, in 2012, was D+0.01.

I see what you're saying; for now I think the best way to describe Virginia is as a bellwhether.

If we trust polling from reliable organizations, it seems unclear whether or not Virginia is going to go left of the nation in 2016.

eric82oslo is doing an admirable job working with data over in the 2016 Offical Polling Map Thread, and right now he has Hillary Clinton projected as winning the presidential election nationally by 7.2%, with Virginia only going Democrat against the strongest performing Republican candidate by 3.2% (which is actually an improvement for Republicans from 2012). That would make the PVI of the state R+4.

This is from Eric's post on June 16 (reply #316 on the "Official Maps" Thread), showing how the expected margin of victory in polled states for 2016 compares to the actual margin from 2012.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Virginia has been drifting towards the Democrats recently, but it remains to be seen whether the state will be to the left or right of the nation in at least 2016. Granted, the Virginia being 3.2% more Democratic than it was in 2012 is under a Clinton v. Christie match-up, but a Quinnipac poll from this spring shows Clinton leading Paul (the second-best performing Republican in Virginia, and probably a likelier nominee than Christie) by six points (48-42), which is still less than Clinton's expected national margin of 7.2% (a Clinton victory of six points in Virginia would make the state R+1 compared to the national margin).

While I don't think it is a smart idea to go out on a limb in 2014 and say that Virginia will trend Republican, I also somewhat disagree with the notion that Virginia will keep trending Democratic.

[pbrower2a]

In 2004 Kerry thought that Ohio would decide the election -- and it did, for his loss.

In 2008 Ohio was the first "must win" state for the Republicans that went to the Democrats. It simply counted its votes faster than any other state that Bush won in 2000 and 2004 but that Obama won.  Once Obama was projected to win Ohio (that was around 9:30 PM EST) and had accumulated 195 electoral votes, there was no doubt that Obama was going to win the 82 electoral votes of the West Coast (CA, HI, OR, WA) and Iowa. All other remaining quick calls would be for Republicans, but that would be too little. New Mexico just accentuated the reality.

As it turns out, Iowa, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington were all quick calls', and at 11PM Barack Obama had achieved 284 electoral votes. Four other "must win" states for Republicans (Nevada, Virginia, Florida, and Colorado) went to Obama by midnight EST.

In 2012, Obama had not won Iowa, Minnesota, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada, Virginia, or Florida before the states on the West Coast came in. At 11PM President Obama was at 234 electoral votes.   Minnesota and Iowa  got called soon, and Obama was at 252 electoral votes. Then came Ohio, and the Obama win was clinched with exactly 270 electoral votes.  Colorado, Nevada, Virginia, and Florida wee decided after midnight.

[DS0816]

For everyone alive who was born after November 8, 1960, Ohio is the only state which has carried every time during such persons' lifetime. Those born November 9, 1960, at the earliest, have been alive to see Ohio carry in all cycles beginning in 1964 and thus far up to 2012. That's 48 years' worth of elections. That's 13 cycles. (It's a match for it previous streak, 1896 to 1944.) And what 1964 to 2012, so far, all have in common is that Ohio has carried not only for each winner but with a margin within five percentage points of the national number. It's the only state that has done this. And, in 2012, the gender voting results matched the national ones: With Barack Obama re-elected, he received nationally and from Ohio 45 percent from men; he carried nationally and from Ohio 55 percent from women. It is highly likely that, come 2016, Ohio will once again carry for the winner and break its 1896 to 1944/13 elections streak with a 14th consecutive "got it right" outcome.