On election night, as each state is called, what will be your predictions on the rest of the race?

[Lancia]

I’m trying to organize this into a coherent OP, let’s see if I succeed.

In this thread adaher claims that Romney cannot without taking Florida. I’m not about to argue this point, because I’m having a hard time putting the pieces together, which is the point of this thread.

In this thread, I’m asking for your opinion based on what you know of the electoral votes each state holds. Every tv pundit has their own ideas, but I haven’t paid enough attention to see if someone has done this or not (I’m sure someone has, and I’m sure each one is different).

Here’s the scenario: its election night, and polls are beginning to close on the east coast. You’re watching the election results as each state is called. As each state is called, you sorta mentally fast-forward to the next state that a given candidate needs to win to stay in the race. As the polls close going west, you change or confirm your predictions.

To use Florida as an example, if Romney wins Florida then you claim that Obama needs to win _______ to stay afloat. If Obama takes Ohio, then Romney needs ________ to stay afloat. Does that make sense?

What I’m asking is your predictions on the race, given these variables as you watch the results come in. if a wins b, then x needs to win y to stay competitive. Feel free to share your reasoning why you feel the way you do.

On election night, as each state is called, I’m having a hard time visualizing the remainder of the race based on how each state votes. I know I watched CNN in 2008 and they did a lot of this, but I don’t have CNN now.

I'm curious what Dopers' opinions are on this.

[Lancia]

It also occurred to me that there are probably websites that have this sorta game available. However, I suspect that (hypothetically) Fox and NPR would give wildly different results, hence my request for YHO.

[Oakminster]

Florida is huge. If Romney wins it outright, game on. If Obama wins it outright...probably game over. If it's still too close to call by 10:00 pm eastern, send lawyers, guns, and money. Well, OK, probably won't need the guns, but send extra lawyers instead.

[Wesley Clark]

Much like 2008, Obama has numerous paths to victory while the GOP really only has one.

There is Colorado, Virginia, Ohio and Florida that seem like the important states this time around.

I think if Obama wins any one of those 4, he wins the election (assuming he carries the Kerry states, Iowa, NM and NV. Iowa went democratic for the last 5 or 6 elections, except 2004). Romney has to win all 4 to win, more or less.

Adding in the west coast, southwest (NV and NM), upper midwest and northeast Obama has 263 electoral votes. This is assuming he carries NV and Iowa, both of which have him at about 70% chance of winning.

If Obama carries either OH or FL, it should be over for Romney. Those are the states I will watch for.

[LinusK]

The winner will be whichever wins two out of three of Penn., FL, and Ohio.

Penn. should go blue pretty quickly. After that you just want to watch the other two.

[Lancia]

Ok, so Florida and Ohio are the big ones. Is there any reliable polls that show where each of the states stand? Not Fox news - type propaganda. In Ohio, Huffpo gives Obama a 3pt lead, Rasmussen has them both dead even. WTF?

[Trinopus]

It's possible -- not too likely, but possible -- than some of the key states will be so close, we won't know the full outcome till late the next morning...or even a few days later.

Or, if something really ugly happens, we might not know until the Supreme Court rules on it.

[bup]

I'll go further and say that Virginia and Florida will both be close enough that the networks won't call them until a couple of hours later - thereby making them the states that will decide it. In other words, if Florida goes Romney or Obama, there won't be any more speculation left. Someone will have 270, or close enough to it with enough 'gimme' states that there are no 'X now has to win state ____' paths left.

[Lancia]

Originally Posted by Trinopus

It's possible -- not too likely, but possible -- than some of the key states will be so close, we won't know the full outcome till late the next morning...or even a few days later.

Or, if something really ugly happens, we might not know until the Supreme Court rules on it.

Well, this sorta goes back to my last question, namely are there any reliable polls that one can keep track of that gives us an accurate idea of likely outcomes? Perhaps one that utilizes cell phone numbers so we don't get a Bill O'Reilly vs. Harry Reid situation?

[Gagundathar]

Ohio and Florida.
If either go to Mr. Obama, then he will win.
If both go to Mr. Romney, then he will win.

[galen ubal]

Real Clear Politics and 538 are two poll aggregators.

[drewtwo99]

I love 538, and I also really like www.electoral-vote.com. It's not as rigorous as 538 but I love the commentary every day.

Also, to answer your OP...

Watch Florida and Ohio and Virginia. If Romney manages to win the three of those, then he's on his way to winning but he still needs to win something else. I made a map with the four most likely states that he would have to win ONE of, on top of those FL/OH/VA, here: 270towin map

If he can manage to pick off any of the states I left blank, then he wins. Otherwise, it's Obama's win.

[Simplicio]

If Romney looses FL or VA, he's pretty close to done, so conceivably we'll pretty much know the winner once polls close on the East coast.

If he wins both of those and then Ohio, he'll probably win the election. Conceivably Obama could still pull it out, but he'd need to win in Iowa and Colorado, which seems unlikely if he's doing badly enough to have lost FL, VA, OH.

On the other hand if Obama looses FL and VA but wins Ohio, he's still in relatively good shape as he can loose Iowa and CO and still win (albeit with a thin margin).

[ElvisL1ves]

Originally Posted by Gagundathar

Ohio and Florida.
If either go to Mr. Obama, then he will win.
If both go to Mr. Romney, then he will win.

Ditto. And we will probably know days or weeks ahead.

[Exapno Mapcase]

For an interesting look at the smallness of Romney's chances, go to Karl Rove's site.

He has Obama with 172 safe votes and 99 leaning. That's 271, enough to win even if Romney gets every single toss-up state. That's all based on polls before the Ryan pick, which will give Romney a bump just from sheer attention.

Everything has to work for Romney for him to win. Every leaning state, every toss-up state, and a few plucked from the safe basket. He can't afford to lose any of them. That's an extraordinarily high bar. If you're going to chew your nails on election night, remember that as you gnaw.

[Kolak of Twilo]

I think your question has more of less been answered.

The key will be what happens to Ohio and Florida. Pennsylvania and Virginia will play a lesser role, but Romney has to win both Ohio and Florida to not be out pretty early in the evening.

[Gangster Octopus]

Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo

I think your question has more of less been answered.

The key will be what happens to Ohio and Florida. Pennsylvania and Virginia will play a lesser role, but Romney has to win both Ohio and Florida to not be out pretty early in the evening.

Actually according to 538 the biggest tipping point state is Ohio by a large margin, almost 30% of the time it decides the election. Second is Virginia at 16% and then Florida at 15%. The drop after that is pretty big with Colorado being next at 7.1%

[Kolak of Twilo]

This electoral map is the worst I can see Obama doing given how things stand today. Switch Ohio to Romney and give Obama Florida and the President is re-elected by an even larger margin.

Both situations would give Colorado to Romney and Virginia to Obama so I guess the argument could be made that Virginia will tell us which way things are going when the polls close there.

(There are states on that map I put in Romney's column that are pretty likely going to be in the Obama column - New Hampshire and Wisconsin in particular. That just shows how much harder it really is for Romney to pull this off.)

[Lancia]

Cool. So by the time polls are closed in the eastern time zone, which includes most of these battleground states, we should have a fairly solid idea of who won the election. Sounds like Colorado is the only remaining possible game changer.

[Lancia]

I question how accurate some of these election maps are. In Karl Rove's example, he has Oregon as "leaning" Obama. That's a joke. I live in Oregon and would bet my life's savings that we will go Obama. Even when we were pissed at Clinton we still went Blue.

[drewtwo99]

Originally Posted by Lancia

I question how accurate some of these election maps are. In Karl Rove's example, he has Oregon as "leaning" Obama. That's a joke. I live in Oregon and would bet my life's savings that we will go Obama. Even when we were pissed at Clinton we still went Blue.

On these maps, it's best to treat "lean" and "safe" as "safe" for almost all the examples listed. Also, Karl Rove is a political pundit with his own agenda. He wants to build a narrative that Obama is defeatable, so he will constantly show him slipping/eroding as weeks go by up to election day.

Trust electoral-vote.com or fivethirtyeight.com way more than anything else you find, I'd say. RCP is also pretty good.

[septimus]

Originally Posted by Gagundathar

Ohio and Florida.
If either go to Mr. Obama, then he will win.
If both go to Mr. Romney, then he will win.

I agree with the first statement: Ohio and Florida are the two big must-win swing states for Romney.

However if the election is very close I expect Obama to lose both Ohio and Florida and still have a good chance. Virginia and New Hampshire will be the other very key Eastern states to watch -- Obama probably wins if he gets both, despite losing Ohio and Florida. (I assume he wins Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, as expected.) New Hampshire's paltry 4 votes are less important then the signal -- if this Democrat stronghold falls to Romney, expect more bad news as results proceed to the West.

In the case where Romney gets all three of Ohio, Florida and Virginia (but not New Hampshire) Obama still has a significant chance! All he'll need to do is to sweep the three remaining swing states -- Iowa, Colorado, Nevada -- in all of which he's favored as much as or more than in Ohio and Virginia.

[bup]

Originally Posted by drewtwo99

Also, Karl Rove is a political pundit with his own agenda. He wants to build a narrative that Obama is defeatable, so he will constantly show him slipping/eroding as weeks go by up to election day.

But it will be close!* Whether it's close or not, part of the job is making it seem like an uphill, but winnable, battle, if everybody pitches in.

*In reality, it will be close - Obama could win all the battleground states, of course, leading to a comfortable electoral win, but not a decisive popular vote win.

[Gangster Octopus]

Originally Posted by bup

But it will be close!* Whether it's close or not, part of the job is making it seem like an uphill, but winnable, battle, if everybody pitches in.

*In reality, it will be close - Obama could win all the battleground states, of course, leading to a comfortable electoral win, but not a decisive popular vote win.

I am not sure what will be considered close, in 2008 in mid August McCain was within 2% of Obama and then actually took the lead after the Republican Convention. He lost by more than 7% points. I don't expect it to be that big a swing, but I still think Obama wins by 4-5%

[Kolak of Twilo]

Originally Posted by Gangster Octopus

...I still think Obama wins by 4-5%

Your #'s are a little higher than my pessimistic soul will allow me to hope. I'm expecting 2% but think there is a slim chance (<1% chance) Obama loses the popular vote but wins the EV.

What a shit storm that would be...

[Gangster Octopus]

If it makes you feel better, the economy is actually not in too bad shape, not robust, but actually pretty positive.

[DSeid]

It is somewhat notable that as close as the popular vote projections are right now it is not all that close from an electoral college perspective.

The Rove site did help suggest one reason for Romney to have gone with Ryan: there are fairly few undecideds out there this time. Those "independents" have mostly already decided. The hope for Romney is that the GOP base comes out large and that the Dem base does not bother. The hope is that Ryan gets that GOP base off their duffs without excessively exciting the Dem base to come out too (and to hope that the voter suppression tactics work very well). Maybe even worth losing some over 65 voters in Florida ...

[Lancia]

Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo

What a shit storm that would be...

No snark intended, but why do you say that? For sure Fox News would have a field day, and it certainly would be interesting to see how they compare such a pro-Obama outcome to Bush benefiting from the same outcome in 2000. Whether or not such an outcome is a good thing depends on your politics. If such a thing were to happen again I would guess that it just provides another case study for history and pol-sci majors. The constitution is written in such a way to handle such contingencies, and has been effective in doing so in the past.

[Lancia]

Originally Posted by DSeid

It is somewhat notable that as close as the popular vote projections are right now it is not all that close from an electoral college perspective.

The Rove site did help suggest one reason for Romney to have gone with Ryan: there are fairly few undecideds out there this time. Those "independents" have mostly already decided. The hope for Romney is that the GOP base comes out large and that the Dem base does not bother. The hope is that Ryan gets that GOP base off their duffs without excessively exciting the Dem base to come out too (and to hope that the voter suppression tactics work very well). Maybe even worth losing some over 65 voters in Florida ...

Then he fucked up big time.

[Lancia]

Originally Posted by drewtwo99

On these maps, it's best to treat "lean" and "safe" as "safe" for almost all the examples listed. Also, Karl Rove is a political pundit with his own agenda. He wants to build a narrative that Obama is defeatable, so he will constantly show him slipping/eroding as weeks go by up to election day.

Trust electoral-vote.com or fivethirtyeight.com way more than anything else you find, I'd say. RCP is also pretty good.

Yeah, I know Karl Rove is an ass, and his job is to make Romney look good. I was just using the posted link as an example.

This was main reason that I started this thread. While I''m aware that there are states solidly red or blue, I'm not familiar which ones are which. The west coast usually goes blue, that I know. Since people like Rove can predict whatever they want, it don't mean shit come election night. Once the polls start closing, and the results are called, it's just a matter of basic math. It's a game: how many electoral votes does candidate x need to win, and which ones are still in play?

[Kolak of Twilo]

Originally Posted by Lancia

No snark intended, but why do you say that? For sure Fox News would have a field day, and it certainly would be interesting to see how they compare such a pro-Obama outcome to Bush benefiting from the same outcome in 2000. Whether or not such an outcome is a good thing depends on your politics. If such a thing were to happen again I would guess that it just provides another case study for history and pol-sci majors. The constitution is written in such a way to handle such contingencies, and has been effective in doing so in the past.

I don't mean any snark either but you do remember the election of 2000 don't you? Same thing happened there and there was a moderate shitstorm. The election results weren't officially settled for weeks as a result. In this case you have a person in office he is already viscerally hated by a very vocal segment of the population. I can only think it would be even worse.

[Chronos]

I'm expecting 2% but think there is a slim chance (<1% chance) Obama loses the popular vote but wins the EV.

What a shit storm that would be...

Part of me is actually hoping for that to happen, since for it to happen twice in such rapid succession, to opposite parties, might be just what it takes to build up political will to abolish the electoral college.

And the shitstorm in 2000 wasn't because of the split between the popular vote and the electoral vote, it was because the results in Florida were close enough that the usual sorts of irregularities were enough that they would have flipped the outcome. Now, granted, such a situation was made much more likely by the existence of the electoral college, but we would still have had the exact same brouhaha if the popular vote had been a fraction of a percentage point in favor of Bush instead of Gore.

[septimus]

Originally Posted by septimus

In the case where Romney gets all three of Ohio, Florida and Virginia (but not New Hampshire) Obama still has a significant chance! All he'll need to do is to sweep the three remaining swing states -- Iowa, Colorado, Nevada -- in all of which he's favored as much as or more than in Ohio and Virginia.

I may as well post the electoral map for that scenario. Does that website reuse its mapids? I'd assume the same map has been produced many times, just starting from an assumption that the election will be close.

Originally Posted by Chronos

... but we would still have had the exact same brouhaha if the popular vote had been a fraction of a percentage point in favor of Bush instead of Gore.

This is one reason I'm not so eager to abandon electoral college. The recounting of a couple of Florida counties in 2000 almost took on (Alert: Hyperbole ahead) the air of a Seldon Crisis. With popular vote, can you imagine the brouhaha in a close election? Especially if bad weather led to geographic differences in turnout?

[gamerunknown]

Originally Posted by septimus

With popular vote, can you imagine the brouhaha in a close election?

Wouldn't it be lower, by default, than the brouhaha caused by a less popular candidate winning?

[septimus]

Originally Posted by gamerunknown

Wouldn't it be lower, by default, than the brouhaha caused by a less popular candidate winning?

I was referring to the possible need for a recount. Given the consternation and alleged difficulty of counting just two Florida counties, imagine a close popular vote, with every vote important.

[DSeid]

Originally Posted by Lancia

Then he fucked up big time.

Early to say.

I suspect most here read 538. Before the VP announcement Nate was making the case for a moderate choice as the bold way to go and specifically stating that Romney had no reason to take a "risky" choice out of desperation (which is when a risky moves makes sense). It's the latter part of that analysis that I am not so sure about. Nate also notes that the numbers have been pretty consistent, never overwhelming for Obama in popular vote but not moving much. Given the electoral map considerations Nate's model has consistently given Obama more than 2 to 1 odds of winning with some variation of how much over that. The economy does not look like it is going to implode (Romney's best chance at victory).

Nate may feel that is not a desperate circumstance but if I was Romney I would. So which "risky" move does he make? Nate's proposed bold thumb nose at the base and go for the middle (see, we knew he wasn't really a conservative, the damn Etch-a-Sketch), or one that revs the base at the cost of some of the few remaining undecided swing voters? The gamble is that Ryan will do more good by driving turn-out for his ticket, if just to show their support of Ryan as their new leadership, more than it drives turn-out against them and loses the middle.

Sure it's a Hail Mary, but given that a Hail Mary may be needed for his side now to have a chance it may not have been any worse of a Hail Mary than any other alternative one he could have thrown. Even for Florida Romney would likely lose the state without a strong turn out from a base that is luke warm on him. Yes, I know that there is also a risk of it costing him turn-out or even driving turn-out to the other side from swing seniors (and I expect such to be the case), but desperate times ...

[Qin Shi Huangdi]

It would be ironic this time around if Romney were to win the popular vote but Obama were to win the electroal votes which is more likely than the other way around simply because of all the states Romney has to win.

[Measure for Measure]

The OP: yes, check out 538 in particular the "Tipping point" states. Nate Silver lists, "The probability that a state provides the decisive electoral vote." Here are the top 5:

1 Ohio 28.3%
2 Va. 16.1%
3 Fla. 13.2%
4 Wis. 9.1%
5 Colo. 7.3%

Together the top 3 total to 57.6%.

Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase

For an interesting look at the smallness of Romney's chances, go to Karl Rove's site.

He has Obama with 172 safe votes and 99 leaning. That's 271, enough to win even if Romney gets every single toss-up state. That's all based on polls before the Ryan pick, which will give Romney a bump just from sheer attention.

Everything has to work for Romney for him to win. Every leaning state, every toss-up state, and a few plucked from the safe basket. He can't afford to lose any of them. That's an extraordinarily high bar.

538 gives Romney at 30% chance of victory, while Intrade says 42%. How is that possible given your presentation? Nate Silver reminds us that voting patterns are correlated across states. In Karl Rove's terms, a lot of those leaning Democrat states could peel off all at once -- same for the Republican leaners. So Romney's odds aren't all that bad. Perhaps the Republican congress sabotaged the economy for naught.

Qin Shi Huangdi: 538 sets odds on some wacky scenarios:

Electoral College tie (269 electoral votes for each candidate) 0.2%
Recount (one or more decisive states within 0.5 percentage points) 6.0%
Obama wins popular vote but loses electoral college 1.8%
Romney wins popular vote but loses electoral college 3.1%
Map exactly the same as in 2008 0.3%
Map exactly the same as in 2004 <0.1%
Obama loses at least one state he carried in 2008 93.2%
Obama wins at least one state he failed to carry in 2008 26.2%

[Kozmik]

Originally Posted by Qin Shi Huangdi

It would be ironic this time around if Romney were to win the popular vote but Obama were to win the electroal votes which is more likely than the other way around simply because of all the states Romney has to win.

Mitt Romney, the Republican Al Gore.

[etv78]

Originally Posted by Kozmik

Mitt Romney, the Republican Al Gore.

Anyone else think we'll find out, after he's relieved of the burden of running for Prez, that Romney is secretly a very warm, charismatic guy?

[Exapno Mapcase]

Originally Posted by Measure for Measure

Together the top 3 total to 57.6%. 538 gives Romney at 30% chance of victory, while Intrade says 42%. How is that possible given your presentation? Nate Silver reminds us that voting patterns are correlated across states. In Karl Rove's terms, a lot of those leaning Democrat states could peel off all at once -- same for the Republican leaners. So Romney's odds aren't all that bad. Perhaps the Republican congress sabotaged the economy for naught.

I don't know what you're arguing here. Romney's odds aren't that bad. They're as high as 42%. He would still feel a million times more secure if they were over 50%.

What's your disagreement?

[septimus]

Originally Posted by Wesley Clark

If Obama carries either OH or FL, it should be over for Romney. Those are the states I will watch for.

Yes, but I expect Romney to get both if the election is close. Then, getting Virginia and Colorado may not be enough for Obama since latest polls show Romney gaining in Iowa and Wisconsin.

I'm now predicting a 269 to 269 tie.

[Uncle Jocko]

I've been playing around with the 270 to Win app, using Nate Silver's numbers as a starting point. As of now, I'm throwing 44 states to one candidate or the other. Only Virginia, Ohio, Florida, Iowa, Colorado and Nevada are "toss-ups" for my purposes. That gives Obama 251 EVs, and Romney 205.

Should Obama take Florida, he can lose all the rest and still win the Electoral College. If he can take Ohio, he can still lose the others (including Florida) as long as he takes Nevada, which is looking like a good bet right now.

Romney pretty much needs to win all three of Ohio, Virginia and Florida, then either Iowa or Colorado. I don't see any other path to victory, unless he's somehow able (through effort or outside events) to flip another likely Obama state, like Wisconsin.

If Obama wins Ohio, I think he wins the election. If Obama wins Florida, it's over.

[HurricaneDitka]

Originally Posted by septimus

I'm now predicting a 269 to 269 tie.

Interesting map. You do realize that tie = Romney victory, right?

[Ludovic]

Originally Posted by Simplicio

If Romney looses FL or VA, he's pretty close to done, so conceivably we'll pretty much know the winner once polls close on the East coast.

If he wins both of those and then Ohio, he'll probably win the election. Conceivably Obama could still pull it out, but he'd need to win in Iowa and Colorado, which seems unlikely if he's doing badly enough to have lost FL, VA, OH.

On the other hand if Obama looses FL and VA but wins Ohio, he's still in relatively good shape as he can loose Iowa and CO and still win (albeit with a thin margin).

If Obama still follows the 50 state strategy, he won't loose any state.

[septimus]

Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka

Interesting map. You do realize that tie = Romney victory, right?

IIRC in another thread, the conclusion was that tie was likely to lead to a Romney-Biden Administration.

[RTFirefly]

It's all about Florida, Ohio, and Virginia. Romney really needs a sweep, but if he gets it, he's the overwhelming favorite. If Obama wins Florida, that's the ballgame, and if he wins either Ohio or Virginia, the odds are heavily in his favor to win the election.

Assumptions:
1) Romney wins all the McCain states from 2008, plus Indiana and the one Nebraska CD that went for Obama last time, plus some share of the eight contested states.
2) Obama wins the states he won in 2008, minus Indiana and the one Nebraska CD that he won last time, minus some share of the eight contested states.
3) The eight contested states are: NH, VA, NC, FL, OH, IA, CO, and NV. That's where the campaigns are still spending money.

The net is that Obama starts with a 247-191 EV advantage.

Florida obviously puts Obama over the top. Even if he doesn't win FL, Ohio gets him up to 265; any other contested state besides NH wins it for him. Absent FL and OH, Virginia gets him up to 260; Romney needs to win NC and any 3 of the 4 smaller contested states (NH, IA, CO, NV) to win.

If Romney sweeps FL, VA, and OH, I'm assuming Obama loses NC also; it's always been more the icing on the cake than the state that's likely to push him over the top. In that case, Obama would need to win all four of the smaller contested states to win.

So I'll be watching FL, VA, and OH, in whatever order their polls close.

[Jas09]

Beyond the swing states, however, there are a few things you can learn from the early-closing states based on how quickly they are called.

In particular, if PA is called early for Obama that's a very good sign for him. Conversely, an early call of NC for Romney would be an extremely good sign for him. State-by-state results tend to correlate so a big win in PA portends good things for Obama in OH.

[HurricaneDitka]

I believe the polls are closing in this order:
VA, then NC and OH, then FL and NH (at this point we could find out the winner), next up are CO and WI, then lastly IA and NV.

[JKellyMap]

Originally Posted by septimus

Yes, but I expect Romney to get both if the election is close. Then, getting Virginia and Colorado may not be enough for Obama since latest polls show Romney gaining in Iowa and Wisconsin.

I'm now predicting a 269 to 269 tie.

Nice map. I think I'll just make two changes: Wisconsin to Obama, and New Hampshire to Romney.

That's enough to put Obama over the top.