Can President Obama Win The White House If We Dems Don't Get Florida?

[Vogon_Glory]

Like most Democrats (And, I suspect, like most politically-aware Americans who have paid attention to what's been going on these last twenty five years and who aren't reactionary lunatics), I favor President Obama's re-election.

Unfortunately, I find that I'm biting my nails again like I did in 2008. Things ARE going to be tougher this time around and so far Mitt-sie hasn't been making the same sorts of errors that Gramps did last time.

I'm also worried that this time, we Democrats aren't going to win so many of the states that we took last time. Some of the states that swung for Obama last time around are likely to turn red as energized Tea Baggers get active and the slackers who woke up from their political torpor in 2008 give in to their natural inclinations.

Florida worries me. To this outsider, the Sunshine State looks like a particularly flagrant case of the R's not only seizing control of the state's legislative and gubernatorial branches, but successfully ramming through legislation and policies aimed not only at discouraging minority voters from registering to vote, but stripping already-registered minority voters of their access to the ballot box.

Moreover, there were a lot of people burned when Florida's housing bubble crashed, and a lot of them blame President Obama and Democrats for not reviving Florida's economy, despite active hostility in Washington and Tallahassee.

My question to more knowledgeable DU'ers is whether President Obama will have the electoral votes to win re-election even if Rick Scott and his fellow Republicans succeed in their "squash the vote" efforts.

Your thoughts?

[Marzupialis]

1. You asked two different questions

Whether Obama can win if Dems lose Florida and whether he would win if votes are squashed. Which is it?

[Vogon_Glory]

28. I was thinking of Florida and Florida's Squash-the-Vote effort

I was thinking of Florida and the Florida R's successful-seeming Squash-the-Vote efforts. Rick Scott and his buddies seem to be more brazen and successful than Republicans in other states.

I wasn't thinking so much of other states, although perhaps I should have. I shudder to think that Republican efforts in other states might prove to be even half as successful as the Banana Republicans' efforts in the Sunshine State.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

2. President Obama has a lot of "paths" to victory this time around

He will undoubtedly lose some red-leaning states (i.e. Indiana) that he won last time but Romney has to basically "run the tables" in a lot of states in order to win. Odds are he won't be able to do that. As always, turnout is key. Romney will have to pick up a significant amount of momentum or "enthusiasm" to win against President Obama. The bigger worry for me are the downticket races but if we get a lot of people to the polls for President Obama, odds are good that they'll vote Dem in the downticket races too, so we need to keep the heat turned up in those races as well!

[AlinPA]

4. The voter suppression in PA is serious. The GOP is bragging about it, saying it is Romney's key

to winning here.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

5. Yeah

I'm aware of (and worried about) this too. I'm surprised that such candid comments didn't get the DOJ's attention the same way Scott's efforts have. They should IMHO.

[HopeHoops]

3. Yes. Obama has most of the swing states in his pocket.

[Dawson Leery]

6. Pennsylvania may be a loss this time around.

If Obama wins a second term without PA's electoral votes, that would be highly unusual, as the state only votes for Rethugs when the Rethug wins the national election in a landslide.

Romney's "win" would be electoral theft.

[Drunken Irishman]

13. Until I see a poll with Romney leading in PA, I won't ever say it 'may be a loss this time around...

Has Romney led in any polls?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/pa/pennsylvania_romney_vs_obama-1891.html

No. Obama is going to win PA.

[BeyondGeography]

26. I agree...stop waving the white flag, people

The threat of voter suppression is real, but Obama won by 600,000 votes last time, and all signs are he has a healthy lead right now.

If you're going to concede PA, show us how they erase that 600,000 vote margin. And, remember, if the ID law stands, you need to subtract a few votes (e.g. 10 percent of those suppressed) from Romney's column.

[MrSlayer]

29. Polls don't matter with voter ID.

If the ID law is upheld we're looking at 750,000 less votes. That equals loss. What good is a poll if 18% of those polled get shut out on election day?

Mark it down, if ID is upheld Romney takes the state.

[Drunken Irishman]

31. I'll mark it down...

Because you'll wrong.

[MrSlayer]

33. Ok, do so.

I'll be more than happy to eat that crow.

[Dawson Leery]

34. We do have to consider the voter ID factor in this equation.

I did not say Romney is certainly going to win PA. Chances are if he takes it, this will be do only to fraud on behalf of the GOP.
I am aware the Democratic party and other groups are working to get these people photo id's.

[AlinPA]

23. The voter suppression by the GOP is a game changer. It looks bad in PA.

[Drunken Irishman]

27. I know voter suppression is a key problem. But c'mon...

Obama's margin, with a ten-point win in 2008 over McCain there, was over 620,000 votes. That's a lot. That's a lot of votes to just mysteriously have vanish.

Now, it's likely '12 is closer than '08, even so, Obama's average poll lead in PA is 7.8 points - or maybe two-points less than his victory in '08.

Assume Obama wins PA by 8 points, that puts his margin over Romney at about 500,000 or so votes, depending on the turnout.

That's the deficit Romney is probably facing out of the gate. You throw out 250,000 votes, which is extremely high, and you're still 250,000 votes short of winning.

Fraud is serious. But fraud is not going to win PA for Romney.

[AlinPA]

30. More than 700K people in PA are affected. That 500K spread you mention could be washed out.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/07/09/voter-id-issues-could-be-worst-in-pennsylvania

[Drunken Irishman]

32. Yup...

And guess what? Of that 700,000, a great deal probably wouldn't vote anyway. In 2008, voter turnout in PA was 61.3%. That's not awful, but hardly all that high. If that held this November, and across the same lines, of that 700,000, 61.3% is 429,100 votes. Now, of that 429,000 votes, a good number of 'em will probably still be Romney votes that are tossed out. Say maybe 30% of those votes are Romney votes, which would mean Obama won the tossed-out votes by an incredible 70-30 margin, that would leave Obama with 300,000 votes tossed out, while Romney would have 128,000 votes tossed out.

The margin Obama will win PA by is going to be considerably larger than the 172,000 vote margin it would take for Romney to win. In '04, Kerry narrowly won Pennsylvania by 2.52 points. Yet, in the popular vote, he won by a margin of 250,000 votes - almost 100,000 more than the margin in this scenario.

Look, I understand the pressing issue. But if Romney wins PA, I'll eat my hat. If he wins PA by a sizable margin, I'll move. It's not going to happen.

[AlinPA]

37. Thank you, you certainly have thought through this more than I have. (I feel better!)

[Sheepshank]

38. One small point to add on the voter suppression.....

...the rules and regs they are trying to implement tend to effect a demographic population, not necessarily strictly a party affiliation. By that I mean of the 500-700,000 votes that may be suppressed, many don't vote and many would not have voted for Obama anyway. There are plenty of indies and reps that will inadvertantly be swept up in the net...even though these laws attemp Dem suppression, it isn't 100% fool proof. Meaning their foolish stunt will likely disenfranchise some of their own. That can only hurt them in 2016.

[RZM]

7. Yes. He can win it without Florida, Ohio, Virginia, N. Carolina, or Indiana.

Romney could flip all of those from 2008 and still lose. To win, Romney needs all of those, plus one of the Western swing states . . . either Colorado, Iowa, New Mexico, or Nevada. I think it's possible Obama will win all of those.

The only wrinkle here would be if Romney flips another state east of the Mississippi, such as Pennsylvania or Michigan. But I see that as very unlikely.

[cthulu2016]

8. Easily. He can, however, not win without PA.

I doubt anyone really expects Obama to carry Florida this year.

[demwing]

20. Not really

It's a tiny stretch, but check this map:

http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=oFA

Here, Obama loses Florida, Ohio, Iowa, and (yes) Pennsylvania. He holds Virginia and North Carolina, Colorado, and Nevada = 274 EC to win.

He won't lose PA, but if the GOP steals that state, Obama can still pull it out with NC.

[craigmatic]

9. If he doesn't win FL he has to win OH

[WI_DEM]

11. Not necessarily

He must hold the true blue states he won last time (PA, MI, IA, WI for example) and can still lose Ohio and Florida and win by taking Virginia, Colorado & Nevada. Of course it would be easier if he won Ohio.

[WI_DEM]

10. Yes, he could win Ohio and win or he could lose Ohio and FL and still win by

winning Colorado, Nevada and Virginia. He just can't lose states like Michigan and Pennsylvania.

[Maximumnegro]

12. Are you sure?

Looking at electoral-vote.com it looks like he could lose PA,FL,IA and still win. He doesn't need PA. He def. needs OH - but if he loses OH then that would mean he had no chance to begin with.

[Drunken Irishman]

15. Wrong.

He can lose Ohio and still win. I don't know what map you're looking at, but it's wrong. Throw it out.

[Maximumnegro]

16. The map is fine I'm saying

if he loses Ohio then that means he'd probably be toast period. Ohio is a cornerstone of his messaging.

[Drunken Irishman]

17. It doesn't work that way.

[Drunken Irishman]

14. Yes. Clinton won rather easily in '92 without it.

[Thrill]

18. Mittens shouldn't even run close

in a state like FL. They should have destroyed this clown by now

[demwing]

19. Yes, let me show you:

Here's an Obama win (279 EC) that shows Florida, Ohio, and Iowa going red.

http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=oFt

Here's another Obama win (270 EC), that also has Wisconsin going red (and Nebraska splitting off 1 EC)

http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=oFw

and one more (274 EC to Obama), with Wisconsin, Iowa, Virginia, and Florida all going red

http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=oFy

None of the above scenarios is even improbable, let alone impossible.

[jenmito]

21. Yup. Check out two EV maps:

http://electoralmap.net/2012/intrade.php

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

[Motown_Johnny]

22. Interesting.

Intrade gives VA to Rmoney and Iowa to Pres. Obama while the other map reverses these states.

Intrade even has Iowa as 59.5% probable win for Pres. Obama and VA only 52.4% probable for Rmoney.


Then that other map has VA as likely (D) and Iowa as barely (R).



Strange how they have these flipped.

[jenmito]

24. Intrade goes back and forth on VA. They DID have it as Dem. and it recently turned to Repub.

Since quite a few new polls have Obama ahead in VA, I bet it will flip again soon to Dem.

[demwing]

40. I lost interest in Intrade as a predictor

when it pooched the SCOTUS support of the ACA.

Realized that it wasn't a measure of collective knowledge, but rather one of collective wishing.

[AJTheMan]

25. Yes, I think so. This is a map based on all of the latest polls.

[grantcart]

36. If Obama gets VA, OH and PA, you will be looking at an EC landslide.

[grantcart]

35. Yes but the more interesting question is can Romney win without it.

There are a number of states that are good for Obama but must have for Romney.

[CreekDog]

39. Not coming back?

[JaneQPublic]

41. Here's how Obama wins without PA or FL:

http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=oIc&referring_service=email#.T_8zLJcFJ0Q.email