Electoral Map: Obama's Quickest Paths to 270

[mb7588a]

Regardless of the fact that we shouldn't even have to be trying to win this race (Do your damn job, MSM!), the Constitution requires we focus on the Electoral Map to secure the win. I took off my partisan hat, and put on my political scientist hat for this analysis. Going back too far in time is not useful for this type of analysis, so I went only as far as 2000. I hope everyone finds it useful and has something to add.

The map, when blank, looks like this:



Basic principal: It takes 270 to win. Bush "received" 271 Electoral Votes (EVs) in 2000 for the win. Gore was not able to keep several states on the Democratic side that had gone for Clinton in 1996. Bush's "victory":



In 2004, Kerry received 252 EVs. Only three states switched their vote to the other party. Bush successfully flipped Iowa and New Hampshire, but lost New Mexico. Along with changes in the EV distribution due to the 2000 census, Bush netted 15 more EVs than in 2000. The census currently works against Democrats in national elections. However, the party has done well reaching into emerging Democratic markets and there is a lot of room for growth (discussed briefly at the end) in coming elections.

It is highly likely that Obama will win all of Kerry's states (Note: MN, MI, NH, PA will require substantial resources, but polling evidence doesn't really show them as serious battlegrounds at this point.). This is a significant starting point, seeing as most of the states are safely Democratic and almost none are ripe for Republicans to pick from us:



So, the question remains, what are Obama's paths to victory? To find this answer, we must ask, more accurately, what are Obama’s easiest and quickest paths to 270? Anything beyond that is extra credit as far as the Constitution is concerned. So, here we go!

The quickest path would be through one state - Ohio. This is where Kerry placed his eggs (along with Florida) but was defeated rather handily regardless of running the same ads and ground game that he successfully ran in MI, WI, MN and IA. Democrats have hopefully learned from Kerry’s experience that mounting expensive and time-consuming elections in only a couple of big states is not necessarily the best path to victory, though it may be the easiest. One could also make an argument for turning to Florida, but that is a higher mountain to climb than Ohio.

Since Ohio and Florida are difficult one trick EV ponies to wrangle, Obama must disregard the Kerry strategy.

Obama must first add a win in Iowa. This victory is almost certain for him. Kerry lost here by 10,000 votes in 2004. Obama knows how to organize the state and has done so quite successfully once already this year. Democrats destroyed Republicans in turnout there on January 3rd and there's no reason they won't do so again in a state that has been economically depressed because of the early summer floods and other economic issues. This would bring Obama's total to 259 EVs (252 Kerry states + 7 from Iowa).

This leaves a remainder of 11 necessary for 270. Where can Obama get it?

To get victory via only one state, Obama can turn to Ohio or Florida, again. We know both are difficult and not worth the investment because of Kerry’s failure. Virginia is a state that is ripe for Democratic picking. After this cycle, it will have switched from two Republican senators and a republican governor to two Democratic Senators and a Democratic governor all during George W. Bush’s term. That is impressive and nearly unprecedented electoral. With Mark Warner to thank for much of the swing, and his being on the ballot there this cycle, Virginia is Obama’s most likely place to win the 11 necessary for 270.

Without winning Virginia, Obama has a couple other paths to victory. Obama could win CO plus one of NM, NV, MT. Or, Obama could win NM + NV + MT.

I have identified 7 paths for the quickest possible Obama EV victory. I rank them below in order of likelihood based on current polling trends:
1. Kerry States (252) + IA (7) + VA (13) = 276
2. Kerry States (252) + IA (7) + CO (9) + NM (5) = 273
3. Kerry States (252) + IA (7) + CO (9) + NV (5) = 273
4. Kerry States (252) + IA (7) + CO (9) + MT (3) = 271
5. Kerry States (252) + IA (7) + NM (5) + NV (5) + MT (3) = 272
6. Kerry States (252) + IA (7) + OH (20) = 279
7. Kerry States (252) + IA (7) + FL (27) = 286

The 2004 map was blue only on the fringes. It used to be that electoral maps were deciphered by geography, see 1880 (http://www.presidentelect.org/e1880.html) and 1908 for two of the best examples (http://www.presidentelect.org/e1908.html). Political scientists have also traditionally looked at the 38th parallel for national election predictions. Currently, Obama is not doing well enough at and north of the 38th parallel. This is especially true in Northern Virginia, St. Louis and Denver. Today, however, geographic analysis is not enough to predict election results. One must examine and consider the urban vs. rural difference and demographics. Most of the states with a higher urban population (CA, NY, IL, etc.) have gone for the Democrats of late. TX, FL, OH are exceptions to this rule for reasons that have not been well examined. In future elections, Democrats need to capitalize in more of the states that have an emerging urban population – VA, CO and NV, for example. Some of these states may not yet be ready to vote for a Democrat, but Obama only needs a couple of them this time. The urban vs. rural difference is not the only emerging prediction tool – one can also look at governors’ success in the Rocky Mountains and successes in the 2006 Senate races. Democrats must also look at repeated successes in progressive Congressional Districts in the upper Midwest (West and Northwest Wisconsin, for example.) to try to find electoral programs that work in rural areas.

Conclusions:
Obama will have a difficult, though not impossible, task in finding 11 EVs. He has to switch Virginia to blue, or a combination of other states. From here, we have to closely watch the polls in IA, VA, CO, NM, NV, MT, and OH. These are Obama’s MUST WIN states in the above stated combinations. While I call this a difficult task for Obama, it appears that the polling trends are not on McCain’s side in scenarios 1, 2 and 3. McCain will not likely be able to stop the Democratic wave in Iowa, Virginia and Colorado. While the popular vote will be within 3 million votes again, and will favor either candidate, a McCain electoral victory is nearly impossible. His strategy to pluck MI, MN or PA to stop Obama is not going to be successful. He is playing a major EV defense and only a minor offense. Obama does not have to play as much defense. I predict this gives him the advantage in his easy paths to 270.

[democraticinsurgent]

1. Great analysis!

...and encouraging to boot.

K&R.

[Wickerman]

2. nice work. Hey, this map has Minnesota with a 1

on it in the Northern part of the State with 9 electors out state. Minn has 10 votes, so, are we to assume that the sovereign nation of Red Lake gets a vote? I've never seen this map before and am not sure what it means...

[mb7588a]

3. Edwards received an elector's vote.

But for all purposes, we count it as a Kerry vote because winner ought to take all.

[Wickerman]

4. right, now that you explain it I see it clearly

makes sense as we are looking at '04 numbers. The Red Lake thing was a little far-fetched. :blush:

[mb7588a]

6. No liked it!

They're revolutionary up there. The humor of your explanation was in the plausibility.

[nickgutierrez]

5. A bit of corroboration re: Iowa

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com gives him a 74% chance of winning the state, this in the midst of what the owner of the site called a prolonged convention bounce for McSame. He's personally a Democrat, but his model tends to play it very safe - so this kind of swing from Bush state to 74% Obama is interesting, and important.

[chiefofclarinet]

15. A little too safe

Iowa is blue. According to the polls, it's bluer than Minnesota and Wisconsin, two of its neighbors that have gone deep blue in the last handful of elections. (and Minnesota even further back)

[slinkerwink]

7. It's going to be hell of a nailbiter!

[goodgd_yall]

10. Again

whyohwhyohwhy

Not that I'm really asking "why?" but, it would be nice to have an election where it was a no-sweat event.

[mb7588a]

14. That sure would be nice!

It doesn't seem that will happen for a long while. We don't have a favorable EV map right now. 2010 census might make it worse for us.

[grantcart]

8. I thought that it was a great analysis up to the conclusion.

I don't think it will be 'difficult' for Obama to get there at all.

In fact your number 1 scenario is already met today with Iowa now solidly Obama (and McCain not contesting it) and VA with Obama +5 - and I don't see McCain there recently.

The state polls are still recovering from Republican/Palin bounce and it is difficult to see how McCain can keep or improve these numbers.

[Awsi Dooger]

17. You can't seriously believe Obama is up 5 in Virginia?

That's wacko. A state with a 21% liberal 35% conservative breakdown is hardly Democratic +5 in a dead even national landscape.

State polls are inept. It's about time we grasped that. The averaging is decent late in the cycle but at this point you're always at mercy of numb skull state polls, and that one qualifies.

Virginia is trending blue in the northern counties but it's slow and steady, not an avalanche that turns it into a blue state overnight. The partisan index was higher than +5 red in 2004. It will be closer to even with the national margin this time, but the logical outcome is slightly a red tilt. Obama will need to win nationally in the popular vote to drag Virginia along.

If the election were held today, there is literally zero chance that Virginia would favor Obama by 4 points or more.

Sheesh. I have no idea why I bother. It's preferable to be a blindfolded cheerleader and pretend we're going to win Montana and North Dakota and Utah is a dead heat.

[mb7588a]

20. VA items to ponder:

According to RCP, the 7 day average is tied: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/va/virginia_mccain_vs_obama-551.html

The graph since Obama got the nomination is basically tied, with very little movement (no discernible trend) over that time: http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Graphs/virginia.html

SurveyUSA: Obama Moves Ahead in Virginia (On 9/8 McCain was +2 in VA in the SUSA poll.. All previous VA polls were within the margin of victory): http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/09/15/surveyusa_obama_moves_ahead_in_virginia.html

Conclusion: TOO CLOSE TO CALL. And it will remain this way until the end. It was like this for Webb's Senate race and Kaine's gubernatorial race. However, turnout program was the margin of victory for both. Obama, I reckon, wins that competition.

I should have given more lip service to turnout in my original analysis. It is perhaps the single most important "game-changing" factor in Ohio and the Rocky Mountain states that are must wins.

[elkston]

28. Yeah why bother? Just go ahead and cast your vote for McCain and leave us alone! (eom)

[sandnsea]

9. Good Lord. CO and NM

We have IA and NH. CO and NM are the most likely means to a win.

[flamingdem]

19. NM and CO have many Latino voters

Does anyone have statistics or information on what Obama's campaign is up to as far as Latino outreach?

[sandnsea]

21. As much as 66% in some states

He's doing terrific with Latinos, better than Hillary did.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-09-Hispanicvote_N.htm

[blue_onyx]

11. Interesting post

Personally, I don't see it being as close as you and it won't be too hard to reach the 11 votes needed. I have a feeling Obama will win all the states you have in your 7 paths to victory, except for Florida. I don't follow polls too closely since I'm not so sure they are accurate so I could be wrong.

[mb7588a]

12. Ideally he wins all of those states, yes.

Like i said, those are extra credit. The first goal is 270.

The difference of difficulty between all seven scenarios (except Florida) is quite minimal, and I based the ranking on polling trends.

You do have a point about polls. It's difficult to find just the right one - likely voters or registered voters (in a state where it matters) with a margin of error less than 4 and a sample greater than 1,000. When the right conditions are met, a poll can be very useful. It's science, after all.

[mzmolly]

13. I think Scenarios 2 and 6 are the best hope for us?

Thanks for breaking it down. :hi:

[chiefofclarinet]

16. 2, 3, and 1 are good

Those three scenarios are the most likely, IMO. Iowa is in the bag. New Mexico is looking decently good, plus we had Richardson as a surrogate down there. Colorado is looking all right, especially since we had our convention there. From what I've been hearing here, California is trying to turn Nevada blue. And, the Democratic sweep in Virginia is a strong sign.

Montana may happen, it may not. Schweitzer is a positive for us, but Montana hasn't been looking rosy lately.

I'm quite pessimistic about Ohio or Florida. Actually, I think Indiana will flip before Ohio or Florida do. On the other hand, the Palin "dead pig bounce" will go away fast, and Florida may actually go bluer because of Palin.

We also have the quasi-swing states of Missouri, North Carolina, North Dakota, and 2nd District of Nebraska (which is Omaha metropolitan). In a landslide for Obama, these states will go blue. Even in normal circumstances, they may go blue anyways.

[mb7588a]

18. If we win a plains state, I'll eat my hat.

However, these were the states I was thinking of when I mentioned the progressive upper midwest congressional districts that have stayed blue for many many years. It is a very similar electorate in nearly all demographics.

[chiefofclarinet]

23. Again, these are my opinions.

I will agree that Nebraska as a whole, Idaho, Kansas, Oklahoma, Wyoming, and Utah are a lost cause. Then again, Obama isn't going after those states. The Dakotas may be nice surprise; however since I know South Dakota pretty well, it's not likely.

Montana may be in the mix with a Dem governor, and two Democratic senators. I am not familiar with either Baucus or Tester, and only vaguely familiar with Schweitzer, but it is a plus that they at least have D's by their name; it shows that certain Dems can win there.
On the other hand, it has been a relatively red state recently.

Omaha, Nebraska is a special case. It's a lavender city in a blood red state. Omaha went very heavy for Obama in the NE caucuses. It is possible to upset McCain there. I have friends there that say it's doable with a lot of work. However, it is only 1 EV. It's more efficient to send workers to Nevada or New Mexico or even Montana and North Dakota and get more EV's.

[amborin]

25. california

tried to turn nevada blue in '04

it was tough

now nevada seems red, an even tougher slog

[mb7588a]

22. I just realized my entire premise is bunk. It takes 269 to win.

We control the House!

This adds another scenario:
Kerry States (252) + IA (7) + NM (5) + NV (5) = 269

[chiefofclarinet]

24. Good catch!

I forgot it was the House that determined victory in a 269-269 tie. That makes me feel better.

[Radical Activist]

26. He can win Missouri.

He's very close in the MO polls and I don't think the polls are predicting the huge African-American turn out in STL and KC. Obama has strength as a Midwestern candidate. The states bordering IL can win this election. Iowa and MO are all he needs.

[Khaotic]

27. The Scenerio That's a Nightmare for the GOP

And a real possibility that McCain could win FL, OH, and VA ... and still lose the election.

If Obama can continue to escalate in CO and NM, and hold the other Kerry states + Iowa (which he WILL win my state of Iowa) ... he's our next president!