This is just a gauge of who you think is going to win; not who you hope will win.
Obama, not a landslide but not a squeaker either, a little worse than his 2008 win.
I wish there was an option for “a moderate win.”
This. Obama will win comfortably in the electoral college and by 1 or 2 points in the popular vote. That’s neither a landslide nor a squeaker.
Agreed. I selected “landslide”, as the closest approximation, but what I mean is that there’s a nice, high probability of him winning by a moderate amount.
I’m going with “Too Early To Tell”. Right now, it looks like Romney has an uphill battle - he has to win almost all of the swing states, and he’s trailing in a lot of them. But Romney has a pretty big cash advantage, and the real ad blitz hasn’t really kicked in yet. And voter suppression efforts in PA and FL might very well move those states into the Red column. There’s a lot of game left here.
IMO it’s very winnable by Romney but Obama has the (vulnerable) advantage for now. As to how we call a landslide or not, even well-fought competed elections tend to end up with a decent EV margin due to the WTA allocation of Electoral Votes; the only elections in the last 100 years (531 to 538 total EVs in play) that the winner had under 300EVs were 1916, 1976 and 2000.
Another vote for an Obama win that’s neither a squeaker nor a landslide.
I voted “Obama in a landslide,” but really I think it will be somewhere between a landslide and a squeaker.