The Importance of Winning Ohio

[Harry Hayfield]

Having done an assessement of the presidential election results since 1968 (when all of the states produced election returns) and found that four states have voted for the President in every election. Those four are KY, MO, OH and TN. I then decided to find out how accurate those four states were to the actual result by finding the percentage error compared to the national lead since 1968. The results were:

Kentucky: 46% error (i.e 46% greater than the average national lead)
Missouri: 44% error
Ohio: 39% error
Tennessee: 53% error

Does this therefore mean that it can be said with a great deal of confidence that to win a presidential election, candidates must ensure that Ohio is in their column and if so, does this also mean that whoever wins Ohio on Super Duper Tuesday is likely to be the candidate
for their party?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

First of all, Ohio isn't on Super Tuesday, its primary is in March.  Also, Ohio votes for winners because it has 20 EV, a state that large tends to be important.  It is entirely possible to win without Ohio.

[Padfoot]

Winning Ohio certainly makes it easier to win the general election.  Not only do we have 20 EVs, but also winning Ohio requires appealing to a broad range of voters which usually translates well onto the national scale.

That being said, Ohio is not essential to winning the White House.  There are realistic ways for both parties to win the election without winning Ohio.  For example, the Republicans could lose Ohio and win the election by taking either New Hampshire or Wisconsin.  There are even more plausible possibilities for the Democrats involving them winning various combinations of Iowa, New Mexico, Nevada, West Virginia, Colorado, or Arkansas.  Also, by flipping just Florida, Democrats could win without Ohio.