Skip to main content

2012 Election - A Possible Tie...is declared 4 months prior to it...

A story broke yesterday, that in light of the recent Washington Post Poll, a tie in the 2012 Presidential Election is very possible. The poll showed the two candidates - Barack Obama and Mitt Romney - tied at 47% a piece and if Romney won all the states John McCain did in the 2008 election, plus a few (while Obama nabbed the Omaha electorate in Nebraska), the two would tie 269-269.

What day is this? ::checks calendar::. Ah, that's right - it's July 12th. When's the election again? Oh, in November... I see... So, it's about 4 months from now? Lovely...

In my opinion, as I've stated before, polls are next to meaningless right now. The only significance they have is to illustrate how much ground one candidate or the other has to make up in 4 months and so long as the difference isn't too great, this can be done - through ads, debates, campaigning, etc. Also, while some, myself included, may not agree with the Electoral College system and would rather the election be decided by popular vote or at least a compromise between the two, it is the system we have in place for the time. Due to that, national polls are of less significance than state polls. While Obama has led in most national polls of late, ranging between about 2 and 6 points, that's not as important as how he and Romney are faring in state polls - the battleground states in particular. While, again, I don't see these polls as being of much significance, however, if anything, they've illustrated that Romney does have some catching up to do. Obama leads in: Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Florida and New Hampshire. North Carolina is a toss-up at this point, I'd say. The only state Romney seems to have a clear-cut advantage on, which surprisingly went to Obama in '08, is Indiana. He also leads in Missouri and Arizona, which have leaned Republican in recent elections.

Let's get this straight - it takes 270 electoral votes to win the election and I'd be very surprised to see Obama lose any of the following states: Hawaii (4), Washington (12), Oregon (7), California (55), Nevada (6), New Mexico (5), Minnesota (10), Wisconsin (10), Michigan (16), Maine (4), Vermont (3), New Hampshire (4), Massachusetts (11), Connecticut (7), Rhode Island (4), New York (29), New Jersey (14), Delaware (3), Maryland (10), Washington D.C. (3), Illinois (20) and Pennsylvania (20). That's 21 states and D.C. worth a combined 257 electoral votes. He'd need 13 to win re-election. Colorado (9) and Virginia (13) are trending more in his direction, which would give him 279 electoral votes. I have a feeling Iowa (6) is as well, which would give him 285. He wouldn't even need Florida (29), Ohio (18), North Carolina (15) or Missouri (10) to win fairly comfortably. If he won those 21 states and D.C. which I feel he should without much problem, the guy could lose Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Missouri, Colorado and Iowa so long as he won Virginia, which would give him exactly 270 electoral votes.

I know the news media is trying to make this election as compelling as possible and drag out that interest for the next 4 months, but come on... While the election will likely be close nationally, with the system we currently have in place - the Electoral College - Obama has the advantage at this point and Romney will have some catching up to do.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"