Rothenberg Early Presidential Ratings

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Toss-Up:

CO
FL
OH
VA

Tilt D:

NH
WI

Lean D:

IA
PA

Likely D:

MI
MN
NM
NV
OR

Tilt R:

NC

Likely R:

AZ
GA
IN
MO

Everything Else is Safe for the party that won it in 2012. In total, there are 263 electoral votes at least tilting toward the democrats and 206 at least tilting toward the republicans, with 69 electoral votes in the Toss-Up Category.


http://www.rothenberggonzales.com/ratings/president

[136or142]

How can you seriously make predictions for each state when you don't even know who the candidates are?  I realize the increasing partisan lock for each state, but this still seems a little silly to me.

[pbrower2a]

Repeat 2012 unless one sees evidence to the contrary.

[Likely Voter]

Repeat 2012 unless one sees evidence to the contrary.

The main difference is moving NV out of the battlegrounds. It will be interesting to see if either side spends money there this time.

But the list does show the GOP challenge with so many states in the battleground being must win or at least semi-must win.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The Dems have targetted COLO moreso than Ohio, and the Dems best bet to get over 272. Then, Ohio, due to the southwest becoming more Democratic than Ohio river valley

[Free Bird]

NH is not "Tilt Dem" but "Likely Dem" .
And IA more Democratic than WI? Seriously?
I agree with the rest, though.

What is your fetish with NH being a solidly blue state? A libertarian Republican could carry it with ease

[Senator Cris]

[pbrower2a]

(although I would shade the Second District of Nebraska as "likely R"and the Second District of Maine as "likely D"). I'm not going to distinguish "tilt" from "lean".

Rothenberg assumes a 50-50 election in the popular vote in which the pattern of the Democratic nominee winning 'his' states by smaller margin than by which the Republican nominee wins 'his'. Such was so in the elections of 2000, 2004, 2008, and 2012. So far nothing in statewide polling contradicts this assumption. The Democrat has a built-in advantage with such a reality. If he wins Virginia by 4% and loses West Virginia by 40% he wins the election.    

It looks reasonable enough. It's about how the 2012 election looked around September 1. The Republican nominee has a disadvantage in that he must win all four states in white. That leaves one chance in sixteen based on random chance. The four states are distant enough that they will stretch the Republican nominee's ability to campaign, and different enough that the Republican nominee will have no easy task of formulating a late-minute appeal that wins all four states in white. If he can do that, he's going to turn the four states in white into 'tilt" or "lean" R, push the one "tilt or lean R" into "likely R", and knock the states shown as "likely R" out of contention. Thus:

This looks like Kerry vs. Dubya, 2004. The Democratic nominee will have to play defense to hold onto states that he would win in a 50-50 election just to have a chance at a miracle. That is the inverse of Obama vs. Romney 2012. Republicans may pick up a couple House seats, net and barely hold onto the Senate. Although the electorate is split 51-49 Democratic the US makes the biggest lurch to the Right through free elections since 1932 in Germany.

So what does the brink of a Democratic runaway look like?

Much like 2008, except that states that voted for Clinton in 1992 and 1996 that rejected Barack Obama get much closer. Republicans are biting their nails about Senate races and perhaps holding onto the House of Representatives after the networks call Florida, Ohio, or Virginia for the 45th President of the United States.  The Tea Party wing of the Republican Party has stayed home.

...Like it or not, this is how I see things.

[pbrower2a]

NH is not "Tilt Dem" but "Likely Dem" .
And IA more Democratic than WI? Seriously?
I agree with the rest, though.

NH -- Rothenberg must assume that the Republicans and Koch fronts are going to pour Big Money into New Hampshire to protect the Senate seat of Kelly Ayotte. If her re-election bid is going down in flames, then the Republican Party and Koch fronts are going to find better uses for their money. The Boston media market is just too expensive for going after four electoral votes unless those four will decide the election. In 2000 they could have.

Love them or hate them, the Koch brothers are shrewd investors. They spend only when it has an effect that they want. 

IA and WI -- Rothenberg must have assumed that Scott Walker would have a strong Favorite Son effect in Wisconsin.

I have more of a problem with MN -- the state just does not swing much. It's going to go Democratic by a 6% margin in a bad year for Democrats and by 13% or so in a Democratic blowout.

[Mister Mets]

Repeat 2012 unless one sees evidence to the contrary.

The main difference is moving NV out of the battlegrounds. It will be interesting to see if either side spends money there this time.

But the list does show the GOP challenge with so many states in the battleground being must win or at least semi-must win.

Eh, the winner of the presidential election tends to get all the tossups.

[Xing]

It's too soon to assume that Scotty will be the Republican nominee, so switch IA and WI. Also, OR is definitely Safe D. Even in a Republican wave, it would still go Democratic by 5-6%. It's not 2000 anymore.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

If Murphy is FL senate nominee and Cuban embargo lift,which is supported by American people, FL is in play.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Repeat 2012 unless one sees evidence to the contrary.

The main difference is moving NV out of the battlegrounds. It will be interesting to see if either side spends money there this time.

But the list does show the GOP challenge with so many states in the battleground being must win or at least semi-must win.

Eh, the winner of the presidential election tends to get all the tossups.

Nah, not all of them:

Toss-Up States won by Romney 2012: NC
Toss-Up States won by McCain 2008: MT, MO (both were considered Toss-Ups in '08)
Toss-Up States won by Kerry 2004: PA, OR, MI, MN, WI (again, all of these were considered Toss-Ups in '04)
Toss-Up States won by Gore 2000: see 2004

["'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted"]

Bush swept the Southern/border state tossups, but Gore won most of the others (Delaware and Maine were considered tossups that year).

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Gore, like Clinton, like Hilary makes FL very close, because of the Latino vote. Since they are the third constituency out there other than blacks and whites. That's why FL will be in play.

[Devils30]

These ratings are reasonable but I would switch around Iowa and Wisconsin. Wisconsin is always a little bluer than Iowa and the polls don't suggest Walker is in for a big home state boost.

[Suburbia]

Put Minnesota to lean D. The Republicans can contest it at any time.

[IceSpear]

Now we need Charlie Cook to tell us everything is a toss up.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

Put Minnesota to likely D. The Republicans cant contest it at any time.