Early projection: A Romney-Obama match-up goes to …
As I write, we’re still 30-plus hours from getting initial results from Florida’s primary. In the meantime, here is the first state-by-state analysis of electoral votes in November’s election, based on actual polling numbers, that I have seen. It anticipates a Romney-Obama match-up — no other Republicans are analyzed — in which the president is very, very narrowly re-elected: 272 electoral votes to 266.
(FYI: The source, a blogger named Scott Elliott, has been close enough in the last two presidential elections to be worth following this year. In 2004 and again in 2008, he ended up predicting 48 of 50 states correctly.)
A couple of points to note:
- The conventional wisdom is that a Democrat, and particularly Obama this year, begins the race with most of the necessary 270 EVs sewn up. According to this initial projection, Romney actually holds a 170-149 advantage in those states in which he or Obama leads the other by double-digits. Obama pulls ahead only slightly, 217-206, when the margin is as few as 5 percentage points.
- In this projection, Romney flips only five states won by Obama in 2008: Florida, Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia. That would leave him still four states short of what George W. Bush won in 2004 — suggesting there’s still some upside for him.
- Flipping any of the states from Obama’s list of “weak” or “moderate” leads would hand the election to Romney.
- Romney is projected to lose the election despite narrowly winning the popular vote.
- The frailty of Romney’s numbers is underscored by the website’s projections for Senate races. With Democrats faced with defending 21 of the 33 seats (23 if you include seats held by Democrat-leaning independents), the GOP is pegged for a net pick-up of just three seats — into a virtual 50-50 tie (including one Democrat-leaning independent). The party with the presidency would, via the vice president, control the Senate.
- The GOP is projected to gain three seats in states that lean toward Romney, while failing to pick up five other seats in such states. If Republicans were to post a 3-5 record in those races, it could not possibly be considered a sign of strong coattails for their presidential nominee.
So, a few questions for y’all: Is the presidential race really going to be this close?
Even if Romney were to beat Obama, would a tie in the Senate put a damper on the election?
Do you expect Romney’s numbers to get better or worse if and when he becomes the presumptive nominee?
And, because the GOP nomination is still very much in doubt: Does this prediction make you feel better or worse about Romney’s electability?
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
174 comments Add your comment
Dusty
January 30th, 2012
4:21 pm
Del,
Good to see you here. I cannot get excited over Romney. Many feel like I do. But I believe that most conservatives will vote for the Republican candidate because they fear for the country otherwise.
Don’t know about Congress. Just hope we have a conservative president who can have some diplomatic relations with that “body”. Seems essential at this time.
Hillbilly D
January 30th, 2012
4:23 pm
To be serious for a minute, I think we’re in a period much like the late 1800’s, where we’ve had and are going to have a series of “caretaker” Presidents, who really don’t have much effect on anything. It’s just a matter of which mediocre guy fits your fancy.
barking frog
January 30th, 2012
4:28 pm
dusty, it seems you consider yourself a conservative but
not a republican, is this true?
Del
January 30th, 2012
4:29 pm
Dusty, Thanks…as Buckley used to say ‘I’ll support the best conservative that has the best chance to win.” Romney with all of his historic faults appears to have the best chance to win and this election is a must defeat for Obama and company in my opinion.
Dusty
January 30th, 2012
4:31 pm
Hillbilly D,
Were we not in the Industrial Revolution at that time? Now we are in the No Industry Left Time.
Seems we need more than a caretaker. After the last three years. we need a “resident in charge”. I see Romney only as a caretaker or undertaker. Not a happy thought but better than the present..
Intown
January 30th, 2012
4:32 pm
I think Obama will pull this thing out. Once the differences between the two become clearer and unethusiastic Dems who turned out in 08 but who are less than thrilled with Obama’s results are going to get scared into voting for Obama because the Republican platform is so regressive in every way. Also, Obama’s record ain’t all that bad. He got Osama, followed-through on bringing Iraq to an end, is winding down Afghanistan, saved the American auto industry, and ended America’s inexcusable discrimination against gays in the military. In addition, he added two sharp left-of-center justices to the USSC and will likely end up replacing the other two aging left-of-centers with new ones if he gets a 2nd term. That’s more than enough for any Dem or left-leaning independent to get off his/her butt and show up to punch the ticket.
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
4:33 pm
“Obama’s results are going to get scared into voting for Obama because the Republican platform is so regressive in every way.”
How would it be worse under Romney?
“Also, Obama’s record ain’t all that bad.”
Ok, I stopped reading. If it’s not “all that bad” why is he running away from his own record?
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
4:35 pm
“That’s more than enough for any Dem or left-leaning independent to get off his/her butt and show up to punch the ticket.”
Looks like someone don’t realize that there are more conservatives/moderates in this country than left leaning libs.
Obama will not win the swing states. Remember, the swing states all went red after 2010 and people are still pissed off about Obozocare.
Hillbilly D
January 30th, 2012
4:37 pm
Were we not in the Industrial Revolution at that time? Now we are in the No Industry Left Time.
My part of the country wasn’t but some were. The Robber Barons held sway then, much like the Globalists hold sway now, in my opinion. I’d agree we could use more than a caretaker but I haven’t seen one that’s running.
In my lifetime, the only President who had a vision, was Reagan. Now whether his vision was good or bad, depends on a person’s perspective but he did at least have a vision. For everybody else, the main vision is to be President. Once they get that, they’re like the dog that chases the car; what to do once you catch it? I think that’s why a lot of Presidents seem to lose their way after a year or two in office, they’ve already achieved what they set out to do, so they’re like a rudderless ship.
Dusty
January 30th, 2012
4:38 pm
Barking Frog,
I am a conservative Republican. (Is there any other kind?) Luv that big red, white & blue flapping in the wind..
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
4:38 pm
Del
Mitt would have won in 08 had it not been for Huckaby taking away votes from him. Mccain would have won if he hadn’t have uttered that stupid phrase “I don’t really know anything about the economy.”
Left leaning goofballs who think Obama will win need to look at the facts. Unemployment is high, Democrats got smashed in 2010 and will likely lose the Senate. Moderates in swing states put Obama over the top in 2008 and he’s lost them. Even PMSNBC admits that now.
Remember leftys, NO president has been re-elected with unemployment over 7.2% since WW2.
barking frog
January 30th, 2012
4:45 pm
dusty, I was just curious. many describe themselves as conservatives
but don’t support any of the republican candidates so don’t seem to
qualify as republicans so i guess they are conservative independents
or even conservative democrats.
Dusty
January 30th, 2012
4:51 pm
Ah Hillbilly D,
You are like Demosthenes (I think it was). He kept looking for an honest man. You keep looking for a visionary. I think we all do. You described why we yearn so and what happens when we don’t get one. .
Reagan was happy to be president because he loved this country, didn’t mind saying so, and did everything he could to make it better. He also knew how to make others feel the same way. He was happiness, honesty and good reasoning all in one. No wonder people remember him with great respect.
barking frog
January 30th, 2012
4:53 pm
dusty, reagan was a democrat before he ran for office.
Del
January 30th, 2012
4:54 pm
Do what?????, Obama has lost favor with the majority of Independents and that’s the voting group who determined the outcome of 08’s election. I respect McCain for his military service as a naval aviator and former POW but as a presidential candidate he sadly lacked. Charisma and presidential appearance albeit cosmetic has a lot to do with electability. The majority of voters perceived those qualities in Obama and of course he turned out to be a stuffed suit with a teleprompter but he will get the vote in November from his block. That means an opposing candidate must sway the Independent vote in order to win. In my opinion Romney has the best chance of doing so.
Hillbilly D
January 30th, 2012
5:01 pm
Del
I’d agree with you, in most all elections, with a few rare exceptions, the middle is who determines the winner.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 30th, 2012
5:05 pm
If cutting the deficit and reducing the size of government and getting folks off welfare are “regressive”, real Americans will take regressive over Obozo.
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:13 pm
“dusty, reagan was a democrat before he ran for office.”
Yep, he wised up.
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:14 pm
“That means an opposing candidate must sway the Independent vote in order to win. In my opinion Romney has the best chance of doing so.”
Yep, same here. I don’t see the election being all that close because a LOT of people are pissed off at him. Obama will lose in November.
ld
January 30th, 2012
5:14 pm
A third party; a third, VIABLE choice–better than GOP or DEMS.
A third party; a third, VIABLE choice–better than GOP or DEMS.
A third party; a third, VIABLE choice–better than GOP or DEMS.
DAMN, repeating sumpin’ o’er & o’er again will not make it so.
Del
January 30th, 2012
5:15 pm
H.D.
Good chatting with you again. Yeah the candidates usually play to their base during the nomination process and when they win move more toward the center to get as much as they can from the Independent vote and where they can cross over votes from moderates in the other party.
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:15 pm
“the middle is who determines the winner.”
Not always. In 2004, it was the Evangelical vote that really turned out for W.
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:17 pm
Checked out Bookman’s take on the Florida primaries.
He writes:A Suffolk University poll has Romney up by 20, 47 percent to 27 percent. A Quinnipiac poll puts Romney up by 14, 43 percent to 29 percent, up from a nine-point margin a week ago.
Now, last time I checked, those two polls were garbage. Those are the polls far left goobers like to talk about on PMSNBC.
Del
January 30th, 2012
5:18 pm
“Obama will lose in November.”
I certainly hope you’re right. I remain cautiously optimistic.
redneckbluedog
January 30th, 2012
5:22 pm
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:15 pm
“the middle is who determines the winner.”
Not always. In 2004, it was the Evangelical vote that really turned out for W.
————————————-
Reckon’ who the evangelical vote will turn out for this year..? Interesting….
redneckbluedog
January 30th, 2012
5:22 pm
I’m writing in Tancredo/Arpaio….
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:22 pm
“Reckon’ who the evangelical vote will turn out for this year..? Interesting….”
Not Obama.
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:23 pm
Del
I just look at Obama’s record which is horrendous. There are a lot of angry people out there who are mad as hell over his horrible policies.
redneckbluedog
January 30th, 2012
5:24 pm
Robama….No Difference….2012…..
Dusty
January 30th, 2012
5:24 pm
barking frog,
Yes, Reagan was at one time a Democrat.
As Do what??? said,” he got wised up.”
I wonder what Obama was before he was a Democrat? Lots of possibilities there.
wallbanger
January 30th, 2012
5:24 pm
It is a testament to the ignorance and/or lack of education, or simply that people remain uninformed and just are resistant to learning, that they would even think of voting for a socialist like Obama, who will not be content until he has this country on its knees. If you think we have poor people now, when he gets done there will be a lot more poor people, and not very many rich people to pay to support them.
ld
January 30th, 2012
5:25 pm
Still hope the Supreme Court recognizes Obamacare is unconstitutional –as in, like, THIS TERM, which will be BEFORE the election and, therefore, will not be the major issue.
As to what will likely be the “major issue”, I keep hearing echoes of, “it’s the economy, stupid”. If the majority of voters vote in their own economic best interest–including the “values voters” (many of whom voted for Newt in SC) don’t bet on that being for the, “…Party of the Rich” (Rolling Stone article NOV 2012, “How the GOP Became the Party of the Rich”)
If the values voters–especially those financially hurting the most– would rather have a president w/a personal history of Newt rather than someone they deem a member of a cult–Obama could win some of their votes, too if Romeny is the nominee. Wonders never cease.
Just saying, at least Obama claims to be Christian and has not yet, while in office, been tarred by any personal sex scandal.
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:31 pm
“I wonder what Obama was before he was a Democrat?”
A crackhead.
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:32 pm
“Just saying, at least Obama claims to be Christian and has not yet, while in office, been tarred by any personal sex scandal.”
There’s still time.
Jefferson
January 30th, 2012
5:35 pm
4 more years, maybe next time the GOP will work for Americans and quit pandering to the greedy.
ld
January 30th, 2012
5:36 pm
Not only are grocery prices going up but the amount of product in each package–for which we are paying more–has been going down. I first noticed this in potato chips but it is happening in boxes and cans on most aisles.
They put ‘buy one get one free’ ads to remove old stock to try and keep folk from comparing the price of one before and the price of one after.
ld
January 30th, 2012
5:38 pm
Do what:
Thus the “yet”.
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:38 pm
This pretty much says it all.
Obama: The most polarizing president. Ever.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/obama-the-most-polarizing-president-ever/2012/01/29/gIQAmmkBbQ_blog.html
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:39 pm
“4 more years, maybe next time the GOP will work for Americans and quit pandering to the greedy.”
You do realize that Democrats pander to the greedy, right?
ld
January 30th, 2012
5:39 pm
before democrat–a teddy kennedy “disciple”? (drinking buddy?)–always wondered how an (almost) “unknown” got the support of the “infamous”
ld
January 30th, 2012
5:40 pm
When polititions are pandering to the truly greedy, they are pandering to themselves
Dusty
January 30th, 2012
5:43 pm
td
Seems to me you try to connect rich people to Republicans. Somehow I don’t get the same impression.
First there’s Hollywood with Michael Moore and so many celebreties getting in the spotlight for Democrats.
Then the sports stars seem to be pro-Obama.
Then Union leaders, who all seem to make big money, are for Obama.
Big corporations like GM got fed government money are surely not going to bite the hand that fed them the most.
Big rich Buffet is a favorite of the Obamas.
Who are the wealthy people giving their support to Republicans?
redneckbluedog
January 30th, 2012
5:44 pm
As a moderate…the thing that amazes me….Is how the ultra-Conservative TEA party just vanished into thin air….POOF……Where did it go..? Salt Lake City..? Massachusetts…?
Seriously…a lot of folks went to a lot of trouble shouting down those town halls and wearing those outfits and making those signs…and now….!?!?? CRICKETS….
ld
January 30th, 2012
5:44 pm
McCain had little enthusiastic support from the GOP faithful; he’d have stood a better chance as a third party candidate
and also if he had not picked a woman VP
The hardcore GOP has its “preferences” for elected officials that usually don’t seem to go beyond ‘old, white male”.
ld
January 30th, 2012
5:46 pm
Money bought off the tea-party outrage–no other explanation seems likely
ld
January 30th, 2012
5:50 pm
The Dems have the opposite problem–’political correctness’ seem to demand that the YOUNG black guy that spoke like the man on the 6′oclock news rather than “street black” be their nomination for president–even if he was unqualified.
That said, if Oprah had backed Hillary instead of Obama, Hillary would have been the Dem’s nominee.
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:50 pm
“As a moderate…the thing that amazes me….Is how the ultra-Conservative TEA party just vanished into thin air”
That’s because there’s no election until November.
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:50 pm
“and also if he had not picked a woman VP”
Not this again.
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:51 pm
“That said, if Oprah had backed Hillary instead of Obama, Hillary would have been the Dem’s nominee.”
And Oprah has disappeared into thin air. POOF!
Do what??????
January 30th, 2012
5:51 pm
“Money bought off the tea-party outrage–no other explanation seems likely”
Oh boy.