Bold prediction: Where does Obama win

[justfollowingtheelections]

I'm curious of what everyone thinks.

[minionofmidas]

Delete and restart, using the "allow up to ( ) options "window, plz.

[justfollowingtheelections]

Vote for the one that is more likely to happen in your opinion if you feel more than one of these states will vote for Obama.  There is a reason why I am only allowing one option and I can explain if you want me to.

[anvi]

I placed a vote for Missouri because Obama only lost it by a point this time, and I have the feeling, based on what a large number of Obama campaign volunteers told me, that a critical number of Missourians were worried about Obama's alleged ties to "terrorists" and related nonsense.  Once these folks see that Obama cares at least as much as they do about the country, and assuming Obama has a relatively successful term, Obama will flip the state next time.  As a native North Dakotan, I would like to vote for that state, but I don't think the campaign will put in enough resources to win the paltry number of electoral votes there, and South Dakota is less likely to go for Obama than North Dakota because social conservatism is stronger in South than in North Dakota.  The other states in that list are off the table, and the Nebraska state legislature is likely to change their constitution to a winner-take-all format before they allow Obama to peel off an electoral vote from Omaha again. 

[Tyrion The Unbanned]

Wow, long paragaph, lots of info.
I hope Nebraska makes it winner take all. It should match with the rest of the nation, although I disapprove with the electoral college as a whole

[LanceMcSteel]

Despite Missouri's trend from a Midwestern battle ground state to a Southern GOP bastion, Missouri will vote for Obama. When the real murricans in Missourah realize that Obama isnt a Muslim Terrorist and is instead a sensible moderate, he will pick up a lot of less informed voters. Expect to see large swings to Obama in Appalachia as well.

[Purple State]

Delete and restart, using the "allow up to ( ) options "window, plz.

Agreed. I'd like to pick at least 2 or 3 of those...

[big bad fab]

None.

But why not Arizona....

[Daniel Z]

I'll be conservative and say none, but with a reasonably successful term Obama could win Missouri or Arizona. Any other state would be a bit of a stretch.

[Jacobtm]

It'll be interesting to see how Obama does in these states when Republicans don't have quite so bad a national image...

I placed a vote for Missouri because Obama only lost it by a point this time

Actually .14

McCain: 49.39
Obama: 49.25

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Obama could very easily pick up the dakotas, ne-1, mt & ak ect. The appalachian states 1.won't for black
2.have church going dems who need to be destroyed

Obama could very easily start picking up states in the 'new' south like sc, ga, tx. And every jackass who keeps saying that the 5% in ga is rock solid rep, don't you know that this is (or at least was) the fastest growing state in the nation?

[TheresNoMoney]

Didn't he already win NE-01? Or was that NE-02?

[Alcon]

Didn't he already win NE-01? Or was that NE-02?

That was NE-02.  He lost NE-01 (here), 54-44.

[JSojourner]

My first choice (Arizona) is not on the list.  I would say Missouri or South Dakota from the ones provided.

[Countess Anya of the North Parish]

North Dakota and West Virginia.
Change is a come'n.

[Person Man]

Arizona and Missouri look promising. Some how, Montana looks like a good bet, too.... he may or may not hold unto North Carolina. I have no idea how he could lose any other state unless he turns out to be incompetent.

[pbrower2a]

I'll be conservative and say none, but with a reasonably successful term Obama could win Missouri or Arizona. Any other state would be a bit of a stretch.

McCain won Arizona by roughly the same amount  (about 9.5%) the usual difference for a favorite son -- about 10%. He won't be running in 2012, and it's hard to imagine any GOP nominee having any connection to Arizona. Romney or Huckabee would almost certainly have lost Arizona to Obama. To give some idea of how strong the effect is, look at how much better George McGovern did in South Dakota in the 1972 election than in politically-similar North Dakota: about 45% of the vote in SD as opposed to 36% in ND. The two states were within 3% of each other in 1976 (Ford 48% SD, 46% ND  versus Carter). For a winner? Contrast Alabama, which Bill Clinton got about 43% of the vote, and Arkansas where Clinton won 53% of the vote in 1996. Arkansas and Alabama would seem to be fairly similar in demographics.

George W. Bush won Texas by a margin of 23% in 2008; John McCain, with no particular connection to Texas, won it by 11.7%. To be sure the GOP had a bad year in 2008 in contrast to 2004... but not that bad. That McCain in 2008 won Arizona by the same amount that Dubya did in 2004 suggests that either


(1) McCain was an unusually-inept campaigner

(2) Dubya was a politician of unusual competence

(3) the Favorite Son effect is a myth, or

(4) Arizona and Texas have been changing in their demographics


... Obama was a far stronger campaigner than John Kerry and had a far better-organized campaign than Kerry, so that (1) and (2) are likely irrelevant; if anything, McCain would have crushed Kerry in 2004. The Favorite Son effect is genuine, so one needs to consider demographics. Mexican-American populations that strongly supported Obama everywhere have been growing quickly in both Texas and Arizona, and more significantly, Mexican-Americans of voting-age  have been growing rapidly in both states. Add to this, both states are have fast-growing cities and suburbs, and urban America votes for high-priced government because it could not survive without it. Suburban America has been becoming more urban in character and less rural -- and less politically-conservative.

The population in Arizona is heavily concentrated in two counties: Maricopa (greater Phoenix -- McCain's political base) and Pima (greater Tucson). Texas has six cities with populations over 400,000 -- Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, El Paso, Austin, and Fort Worth -- and except for Fort Worth, their respective counties voted for Obama. Bigger cities imply larger support for Big Government.

Should Obama fare as well nationally in 2012 as he did in 2008, then he probably picks up Arizona; the GOP nominee will have no connection to Arizona. Obama would win Arizona by a thin margin -- probably by 1% to 3%. Texas? Obviously not unless things change dramatically. 

Few people expect the political dynamics of 2012 to resemble those of 2008. There will be demographic shifts (larger Latino populations and bigger urban areas), there will be generational change (youth born between 1990 and 1994 are likely to vote heavily Democratic just as did those born between 1986 and 1990, the youngest voters of 2008), and of course there will be success or failure of Obama as President. Obama might not need much political success to flip Arizona; to flip Texas he will need considerable success.

So if I were to make a medium guess on Obama 2012, I would expect Obama to win Arizona by about 1%... and lose Texas by about 5% (urbanization and demographic shifts making the improvement). I would also expect Obama to find some of his double-digit margins of support in the Northeast, Midwest, and West Coast to erode... some... and much the same happen in some states that he lost by large margins. Call it reversion to the mean, and with about the same percentage of the popular vote that he got in 2008 he might pick up a state or two in the popular vote.

Note also that Obama got comparatively few electoral votes (365) for his margin of victory (53-46) which is about the same as for Bush 1988 (53-46, 488); Eisenhower 1952 (55-44, 442); and FDR 1944 (53-46, 432) in elections in which third parties did not figure important.  That suggests political polarization far more severe than in a war that decided the fate of Western civilization, the complacent era of post-WWII era, or the Reagan-era consensus. Such polarization could erode (probably indicating general success), and even slight success could swing a few states to Obama. 

But that's the small picture. The big picture remains to play -- and we have yet to see whether Obama is an unqualified success or an unqualified failure, or most likely somewhere between those polar opposites. Much must go wrong for Obama to lose one of the large states that he won by a double-digit margin (MI, PA)... and much must go right for him to pick off a state that he lost by a double-digit margin (TX, GA).

   

[Josh/Devilman88]

None of them.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Missouri is the more likely to vote for Obama in 2012, but I wouldn't exclude North Dakota and NE-1 ( as Montana, who should be in this list ).

[pbrower2a]

Prediction of 2012 based on:

1. Obama as strong in 2012 as in 2008 (53-46 split)

2. Biden is the VP candidate in 2012

3. GOP nominee not known, but not from AZ

4. GOP vice-presidential nominee not known

5. Obama does no campaigning as President

6. Reversions toward the mean

7. Increasing Latino electorate concentrated in the American Southwest

8. No significant third party candidate

COLOR CODE:

deep red:           Obama wins by over 10%
medium red:       Obama wins by 5-10%
pink:                   Obama wins by less than 2-5%
pale green:         within 2% (tossups)
pale blue:           GOP nominee wins with 2-5%
medium blue:      GOP nominee wins with 5-10%
dark blue:           GOP nominee wins  with over 10%

The states that won by either Obama or McCain won by 15% or more remain in the deep-color category; those that went by 10-15% are shoved into the 5-9% category; those that either won by 5-9% remain there unless I have shown reasons below; those that either won with 2%-4% stay in that category, and those that either won by  less than 2% are genuine toss-ups. This model takes reversion to the mean seriously.

Notable exceptions:

1. Arizona: Favorite Son effect, worth 10%, won't be there. Put this one among toss-ups.

2. Texas: Rapid urbanization and fast-growing Mexican-American electorate makes this state a possible Democratic pick-up.

3. SC, GA: Cut the difference in half, and that's what you get. Lots of Yankee transplants will carry liberal values with them, as in Texas.

4. KY, WV: Republicans cast Obama as an environmental radical intent on 'punishing' coal. WV is highly-unionized and has lots of elected Republican officials. KY is slightly less so...

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I really can't understand how the Democrats believe that every state is trending in their direction. It's amazing how "Texas is a swing state" syndrome has caught on to all the liberals in the past week. Everyone is now putting Texas in the Dems column!

[MasterJedi]

Obama will win none of them.

[pbrower2a]

I really can't understand how the Democrats believe that every state is trending in their direction. It's amazing how "Texas is a swing state" syndrome has caught on to all the liberals in the past week. Everyone is now putting Texas in the Dems column!

I haven't put Texas in the Democrats' column. I have put it in the "Weak Republican" column because of the rapid urbanization, the fast-growing Mexican-American electorate, and the large black population. The model that I use suggests that Obama will lose about 5 points of support where he won by 10 points and that the generic Republican will lose about 5 points of support where McCain won by 10 points or more, taken three points away from those in which one or the other won between 5 and 10 points, roughly halving the support that either Obama or McCain won elsewhere, making some adjustments where population shifts are taking place, and accounting for the certain difference in results where a Favorite Son effect will not apply (Arizona). I have also accounted for the likely repudiation of the "anti-coal" contention will likely prove false.

Arkansas goes back to a very deep blue should Huckabee win the Republican nomination. I believe that I have not given Obama gains without corresponding losses elsewhere. The only unambiguous shifts that my cautious model shows are from bare wins to toss-ups, WV, KY, TX, and AZ.

That is a baseline; should Obama's Presidency show itself sub-standard then it loses all states shown in pink as well as pale green, and perhaps plain red (remember -- Leip has chosen to show Democrats as red and Republicans as blue). But note well that if Obama has a very effective Presidency he picks up not only the states in pale green but also makes headway in states in light blue. That probably suggests that he is winning  56-43 instead of 53-46.  What Republican wins the nomination matters greatly, too. McCain showed no obvious regional weakness that the GOP does not now have. (It's the fault of the GOP that McCain couldn't win on the West Coast, New England, or the Great Lakes region due to choices that the Rove/Bush clique made you-know-when).

[Fine...I Made This More Civil]

He will win none of them.