Skip to main content

Wild election-day prediction - Ohio won't matter

I'm a resident in the state of Ohio. Being originally from Nebraska, which is redder than a rash on Rudolph's nose, elections were more boring than watching a miniature a NASCAR race in slow-motion. We saw less of the presidential candidates than we saw of Bigfoot running through cornfields.  Yes, four years prior to the election, we knew who was going to win - the Republican candidate. That's not the case in Ohio, where we see the candidates more than we see some members of our immediate family. I'm surprised presidential candidates haven't bought homes in the Buckeye state for as much time as they spend here during election season. When they travel back home, they probably wake up some nights missing Ohio and thinking, "I wish I was back home. Wait...what am I saying? I am home! Ohio's home... What? Where am I? I'm so confused!"

I admit, it's quite a bit more exciting in this state than in Nebraska around election time, because it truly feels as if your vote counts. In Nebraska, my vote could have counted for 2,947 votes and it wouldn't have mattered if cast for the Democratic candidate. But with the good comes the bad and I can't tell you how sick and tired I am of all the political ads I have seen on television and all the lovely mailers I've had to pick up and look through. I half wish I had kept all of the mailers and made at least 10-11 mailer trees in my spare time.

On the eve of the election, almost all the talk is about Ohio - Ohio, Ohio, Ohio. A decent majority of the pundits and politicians think the race is going to come down to Ohio. It's all about Ohio. Even as a resident of this state, I'm frankly sick of hearing about Ohio and I have a wild prediction for those pundits and politicians - the race isn't going to come down to Ohio.

I know, upon reading that, you're shocked, aren't you? Take a few deep breaths, try to collect your thoughts and relax. Try to stay with me here. Before I blow your mind, please remember that it takes 270 electoral votes to win the election and all the times I will be listing are Eastern.

At 7 pm (yes, Eastern time), the following states' polls will close: Georgia (16 electoral votes), Indiana (11), Kentucky (8), South Carolina (9), Vermont (3) and Virginia (13). At this point, Romney will likely win: Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky and South Carolina for a total of 44 electoral votes. Obama will nab the 3 from Vermont and Virginia will probably be too close or too early to call at this point.

Score: Romney - 44, Obama - 3, Undecided - 13

At 7:30, North Carolina (15), Ohio (18) and West Virginia's (5) polls will close. Chances are that both Carolina and Ohio will be too close or too early to call and that West Virginia will go to Romney.

Score: Romney - 49, Obama - 3, Undecided - 46

Things start getting really crazy at 8 pm, when 16 states and D.C. have their polls close. The following states will likely go to Romney: Alabama (9), Mississippi (6), Missouri (10), Oklahoma (7) and Tennessee (11). Obama will likely nab these states (and D.C.): Connecticut (7), Delaware (3), D.C. (3), Illinois (20), Maine (4), Maryland (10), Massachusetts (11), New Hampshire (4), New Jersey (14), Pennsylvania (20) and Rhode Island (4). Florida (29) will likely be too close or too early to call.

Score: Obama - 103, Romney - 92, Undecided - 75

Arkansas (6) is the only state whose polls close at 8:30. Romney should win that state fairly easily.

Score: Obama - 103, Romney - 98, Undecided - 75

Things start getting wild again at 9 pm, where 14 states see their polls close. Romney will probably win the following states: Arizona (11), Kansas (6), Louisiana (8), Nebraska (5), North Dakota (3), South Dakota (3), Texas (38) and Wyoming (3). Obama will probably carry the following: Michigan (16), Minnesota (10), New Mexico (5), New York (29) and Wisconsin (10). Colorado (9) will probably be too close or early to call at this point.

Score: Romney - 175, Obama - 173, Undecided - 84

At 10 pm, Iowa (6), Montana (3), Nevada (6) and Utah (6) will see their polls close. Romney should win Montana and Utah. Obama will probably win Nevada. Iowa will likely be too close or early to call.

Score: Romney - 184, Obama - 179, Undecided - 90

Obama will likely make his big move at 11 pm, as the following states' polls will close: California (55), Hawaii (4), Idaho (4), Oregon (7) and Washington (12). Obama will win four of those five states, excluding Idaho.

Score: Obama - 257, Romney - 188, Undecided - 90

Lastly, at 1 am, Alaska (3) will close its poll. Romney is likely to win this state.

Score: Obama - 257, Romney - 191, Undecided - 90

So, there we have it, with six states undecided, comprising a total of 90 electoral votes, President Obama would need to win only 13 of them in order to be re-elected, while Governor Romney would need to win 79. The states up for grabs at this point are: Florida (29), Ohio (18), North Carolina (15), Virginia (13), Colorado (9) and Iowa (6). If Obama only won Virginia, that'd be enough. Ohio wouldn't matter. If Obama only won North Carolina or Florida, that'd be enough and Ohio wouldn't matter. If he only won Colorado and Iowa, that too would be enough and Ohio wouldn't matter. Romney could only afford to lose one state - either Colorado (would place Obama at 266 electoral votes) or Iowa (would place Obama at 263 electoral votes). If he lost two or more, regardless of the combination, he'd fall short of the necessary 270 electoral votes. Considering the fact that Obama leads in most Iowa, Colorado and Virginia polls, chances are he's not going to need Ohio's 18 electoral votes to win another four years in office. If he'd like to run up the score some, however, he leads in Ohio polling also. In any case, like I said at the outset - regardless of how much time has been spent by both the candidates and the media on the state of Ohio, the election is not going to come down to the Buckeye state.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/11/05/state-by-state-poll-closing-times/

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!"