Obama v. Thune

[Kaine for Senate '18]

253 - 166 - 119

[exopolitician]

I honestly don't really know with Thune, it would probably be closer than that map though.

[tmthforu94]

Obama: 226
Thune: 224

With no tossup's, I'd give Thune Florida and Wisconsin, and give Obama Nevada, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.

[Psychic Octopus]

Obama: 226
Thune: 224

With no tossup's, I'd give Thune Florida and Wisconsin, and give Obama Nevada, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.

Flip Iowa with Minnesota and I'd agree. I'd say that under this scenario, Obama would hold every 2008 state except North Carolina, Indiana, Florida, and perhaps Ohio, but still win.

Thune is largely a "meh" candidate for me. I prefer Governors in general, but Thune has no track record at all of note in the Senate and is generally just a good-looking suit. I want to see some substance and some character before he becomes the nominee.

[Miles]

With tossups:

Obama-276
Thune-191
Tossup-71


Without tossups:

Obama-300
Thune-238

[Miles]

Thune would need to carry CO,NC, IA and WI.

Thune-278
Obama-260

[feeblepizza]

Thune would need to carry CO,NC, IA and WI.

Thune-278
Obama-260

^^^^ This

[Grumpier Than Thou]

I don't think Thune would break 200 EVs.

[Liberalrocks]

I would give Iowa to Thune. Minnesota would be closer but still for Obama. Obama would still win the general election once Thune's social issue stances were revealed and he would lose ground with women.

[pbrower2a]

I would give Iowa to Thune. Minnesota would be closer but still for Obama. Obama would still win the general election once Thune's social issue stances were revealed and he would lose ground with women.

Iowa may look much like South Dakota (flat-to-rolling terrain, sharp seasons, rural, very white populations), but otherwise the states are very different. Iowa has corn and dairy cattle (rather liberal for rural areas), and South Dakota has wheat and beef cattle (conservative tendency). Iowa is much more urban. Iowa may have no giant metropolises, but it does have several cities bigger than Rapid City.

Iowa and South Dakota usually vote very differently. They vote together mostly in blowout elections. Even in 2000, the states both voted for Dubya, but Dubya won South Dakota by about a 20% margin and Iowa by less than 1%. They did vote rather similarly in 1976, but American voting patterns were so different from what they are now that 1976 might as well be ancient history. South Dakota and Iowa voted differently in an election that the winner won with 426 electoral votes (1988).

Carter and Obama
Carter and McCain
Ford and McCain
Ford and Obama

(Ignore shades).

[Liberalrocks]

I would give Iowa to Thune. Minnesota would be closer but still for Obama. Obama would still win the general election once Thune's social issue stances were revealed and he would lose ground with women.

Iowa may look much like South Dakota (flat-to-rolling terrain, sharp seasons, rural, very white populations), but otherwise the states are very different. Iowa has corn and dairy cattle (rather liberal for rural areas), and South Dakota has wheat and beef cattle (conservative tendency). Iowa is much more urban. Iowa may have no giant metropolises, but it does have several cities bigger than Rapid City.

Iowa and South Dakota usually vote very differently. They vote together mostly in blowout elections. Even in 2000, the states both voted for Dubya, but Dubya won South Dakota by about a 20% margin and Iowa by less than 1%. They did vote rather similarly in 1976, but American voting patterns were so different from what they are now that 1976 might as well be ancient history. South Dakota and Iowa voted differently in an election that the winner won with 426 electoral votes (1988).

Carter and Obama
Carter and McCain
Ford and McCain
Ford and Obama

(Ignore shades).

On your above analysis I believe you meant to write 2004. Gore carried Iowa by a whisker in 2000. Yes, I agree with you about 1976 being ancient history in relation to todays voting patterns. However I still think a republican can win in the Iowa of 2012. As far as 1988 goes the vote was close due to the farm crisis of the 1980s. Dukakis didnt do as bad here as one might expect.

[freepcrusher]

I would give Iowa to Thune. Minnesota would be closer but still for Obama. Obama would still win the general election once Thune's social issue stances were revealed and he would lose ground with women.

agreed. On the surface Thune is sort of that friendly, handsome, next door neighbor type guy. But Thune is a fundie, and if Obama could try to "Willie Horton" him on that it would be very effective with the "suburban pro-choice mom" demographic.

[pbrower2a]

[
On your above analysis I believe you meant to write 2004. Gore carried Iowa by a whisker in 2000. Yes, I agree with you about 1976 being ancient history in relation to todays voting patterns. However I still think a republican can win in the Iowa of 2012. As far as 1988 goes the vote was close due to the farm crisis of the 1980s. Dukakis didnt do as bad here as one might expect.

My goof. 2004. Iowa was a legitimate swing state in 2000 and 2004, and it proved to be the victory line (the state that made the difference between winning and losing for Obama and McCain. Obama won Nevada and New Mexico by large enough margins that Republicans would have had to win every state that Obama won by a smaller margin than Iowa  and Iowa itself to win.

Colorado is now most likely that state due to the shift of electoral votes.

I would give Iowa to Thune. Minnesota would be closer but still for Obama. Obama would still win the general election once Thune's social issue stances were revealed and he would lose ground with women.

agreed. On the surface Thune is sort of that friendly, handsome, next door neighbor type guy. But Thune is a fundie, and if Obama could try to "Willie Horton" him on that it would be very effective with the "suburban pro-choice mom" demographic.

 

Unless he is as disarming about his religion as Jimmy Carter a Protestant fundamentalist is going to lose the feminists, secularists, and (again) the Catholic part of the Hispanic vote.  That is one sure way for a Republican nominee to lose at least as badly as John McCain did in 2008.