"Must Win" Trump States

[RR1997]

Donald Trump must win Florida, Ohio, and PA.

[LLR]

I misinterpreted the thread title as meaning that the Trump campaign put out a statement that was nothing but the words "Must Win".

[RaphaelDLG]

276 Trump - 262 Hillary

This map is unlikely but not outside the realm of possibility (Trump greatly improves his standing with whites across the board but not with latinos).  I think Ohio is really the only state that is absolutely in every plausible winning scenario.

[Pessimistic Antineutrino]

No reasonable path exists without Ohio and Florida. After that there's a number of paths he could take, so only those two.

[LLR]

If Trump is winning NH of all places, he's also winning enough Whites in FL to win the state. No way NH votes to the right of FL, regardless of demographics. I know I keep repeating myself here, but I really feel that the election would be a Trump landslide if NH was ever in doubt on election night.

What will it take to convince you that you're wrong?

[Skye]

If Trump is winning NH of all places, he's also winning enough Whites in FL to win the state. No way NH votes to the right of FL, regardless of demographics. I know I keep repeating myself here, but I really feel that the election would be a Trump landslide if NH was ever in doubt on election night.

Further confirmation would also come in the shape of ME-02 being close.

[EliteLX]

OH, PA, FL.
OH, PA, FL.
OH, PA, FL.
OH, PA, FL.
OH, PA, FL.
and again..
OH, PA, FL.

Rest are irrelevant and can't get him to 270 or have literally a <0% chance of being won. His entire campaign falls on those three swing states, and at the rate of his mess of a campaign, he isn't coming close.

[Suburbia]

Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania. If he can't win Ohio and Pennsylvania, it's over.

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

If Trump is winning NH of all places, he's also winning enough Whites in FL to win the state. No way NH votes to the right of FL, regardless of demographics. I know I keep repeating myself here, but I really feel that the election would be a Trump landslide if NH was ever in doubt on election night.

Uh, NH took two hours to call in 2012.....

[ag]

Ohio, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Because he is not winning Florida.

[LLR]

Ohio, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Because he is not winning Florida.

He's not winning Wisconsin either.

[Dr. Arch]

Ohio, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Because he is not winning Florida.

He's not winning Wisconsin either.

Wisconsin is polling practically as a safe D state, and Trump is horrible horrible fit for it, so yeah, no.

[Tartarus Sauce]

If we assume OH, PA, VA, FL, IA and CO are the six most competitive states and Clinton wins VA and Trump wins CO, then Trump MUST win FL and PA. If Clinton wins VA and CO then Trump MUST win FL, OH and PA.

BUT, if we add AZ and assume Clinton wins AZ and VA, then Trump MUST win OH, PA, FL and CO.

So the map says Trump MUST win these states:

1. FL (if Clintons wins VA and FL, she wins)
2. PA (if Clinton wins VA and PA, she wins)
3. OH (if Clinton wins VA and OH, Trump will need FL, PA, IA and CO to win)

If Trump wins CO, he's winning AZ. Not the other way around.

CO is not actually all that Hispanic.  In a realignment scenario, I could see the Democrat narrowly winning AZ while barely losing CO.  Heck, it happened to Bill Clinton in 1996.

The realignment is occurring along a class-based axis. Educated white voters are a very heavy chunk of Colorado's voting bloc, which Trump does poorly with. Add that to the above average Hispanic population (it is well above average, even if it's not approaching New Mexico/California/Nevada territory) and you've got a solid coalition for Democrats to maintain over the state.

[5280]

If we assume OH, PA, VA, FL, IA and CO are the six most competitive states and Clinton wins VA and Trump wins CO, then Trump MUST win FL and PA. If Clinton wins VA and CO then Trump MUST win FL, OH and PA.

BUT, if we add AZ and assume Clinton wins AZ and VA, then Trump MUST win OH, PA, FL and CO.

So the map says Trump MUST win these states:

1. FL (if Clintons wins VA and FL, she wins)
2. PA (if Clinton wins VA and PA, she wins)
3. OH (if Clinton wins VA and OH, Trump will need FL, PA, IA and CO to win)

If Trump wins CO, he's winning AZ. Not the other way around.

CO is not actually all that Hispanic.  In a realignment scenario, I could see the Democrat narrowly winning AZ while barely losing CO.  Heck, it happened to Bill Clinton in 1996.

You have to remember, AZ was more Democratic than purple battleground CO in 1996. AZ trended hard GOP after the 2000 election, while CO stayed purple in 2004. AZ in 2004 was lean GOP.

1996:

AZ - Clinton 46.52%, Dole 44.29% = 2.23%
CO - Clinton 44.43%, Dole 45.80% = 1.37%

2000:

AZ - Gore 44.67%, Bush 50.95% = 6.28%
CO - Gore 42.39%, Bush 50.75% = 8.36%

2004:

AZ - Kerry 44.32%, Bush 54.77% = 10.45%
CO - Kerry 47.02%, Bush 51.69% = 4.67%

[Soonerdem]

Florida. He could win Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and Iowa and not win if he losses florida. It's almost impossible for a republican to make up that 29 electoral votes

[Wisconsin+17]

Ohio, Florida, Virginia.

[Hammy]

Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina are his four must-wins as far as the swing states. There don't seem to be any Romney states that are truly in play (at least not at the moment) aside from NC, so Trump needs to retain it and flip the other three.

[LLR]

If we assume OH, PA, VA, FL, IA and CO are the six most competitive states and Clinton wins VA and Trump wins CO, then Trump MUST win FL and PA. If Clinton wins VA and CO then Trump MUST win FL, OH and PA.

BUT, if we add AZ and assume Clinton wins AZ and VA, then Trump MUST win OH, PA, FL and CO.

So the map says Trump MUST win these states:

1. FL (if Clintons wins VA and FL, she wins)
2. PA (if Clinton wins VA and PA, she wins)
3. OH (if Clinton wins VA and OH, Trump will need FL, PA, IA and CO to win)

If Trump wins CO, he's winning AZ. Not the other way around.

CO is not actually all that Hispanic.  In a realignment scenario, I could see the Democrat narrowly winning AZ while barely losing CO.  Heck, it happened to Bill Clinton in 1996.

You have to remember, AZ was more Democratic than purple battleground CO in 1996. AZ trended hard GOP after the 2000 election, while CO stayed purple in 2004. AZ in 2004 was lean GOP.

1996:

AZ - Clinton 46.52%, Dole 44.29% = 2.23%
CO - Clinton 44.43%, Dole 45.80% = 1.37%

2000:

AZ - Gore 44.67%, Bush 50.95% = 6.28%
CO - Gore 42.39%, Bush 50.75% = 8.36%

2004:

AZ - Kerry 44.32%, Bush 54.77% = 10.45%
CO - Kerry 47.02%, Bush 51.69% = 4.67%

Perot also screwed up everything in '96