Easy 270 Electoral Votes for Romney

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by 377OHMS, Apr 16, 2012.

  1. 377OHMS

    377OHMS

    Romney’s bright electoral landscape
    By Jennifer Rubin

    "The electoral map reveals how perilous is President Obama’s grip on the White House. Let’s start, as RealClearPolitics does, with a base of 170 electoral votes for Mitt Romney. It’s hard to imagine that Obama could win any of even the less-red states that comprise that batch (e.g. Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina, Montana). To get 100 more and seize the presidency, Romney only needs some states that routinely went Republican before the 2008 race (Nevada, Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia) and needs to hold on to a few that Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) managed to win (Arizona, Missouri). This gets Romney to 273.

    In other words, Romney doesn’t need to win (but he might) in New Hampshire or New Mexico. He would love to, but isn’t required to, break through in states like Pennsylvania, Iowa, Wisconsin or Michigan. (The first and last would seem the most likely.)

    It may come as a shock to liberals when you break it down by the only measure that matters (electoral votes), but Romney can do worse that George W. Bush did in 2004 (when he won Iowa and New Mexico) and still win the White House.

    This doesn’t mean Romney will have an easy time of it, but it does suggest that Romney doesn’t need to twist and turn on policy, or throw the longball for VP to win the race. If he runs better than McCain and worse than Bush, then he’s very likely to win.

    Of the states critical to Romney, it is not hard to see how important Ohio, Florida and Virginia are to his prospects. These states have a cumulative total of 60 electoral votes. Romney won all three in the primaries, and each has large urban and/or suburban areas of the type Romney has won all across the country. All three states have GOP governors. In 2010, Ohio and Florida each elected a conservative senator in part due to a backlash against Obama.

    All of this leads us to a couple conclusions. First, a popular VP pick from one of them would be a smart thing indeed. Jeb Bush, Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Virginia’s Gov. Bob McDonnell would qualify and please the base without turning off swing voters.

    Second, if you think of some of the issues that matter in these states (trade, Cuba policy, jobs) Romney is well positioned. Virginia (in part from government-related hiring in Northern Virginia) is the only one of the three with unemployment below 7 percent. Florida’s is over 9 percent. Romney need not rethink or restyle his agenda, nor (as liberals keep arguing) move “to the center.” He simply has to communicate over and over again why his middle-of-the-road Republican policies and his background in the private sector would be better for those states and the country.

    Republicans should be relieved, but not cocky, about the electoral landscape. The states most at risk will very likely be close. But Democrats’ confidence at this point seems unwarranted. It is very easy to spot Romney’s path to 270 electoral votes."
     
  2. pspr

    pspr

    The democrats are going to launch a massive "get out the voter fraud" vote. And, they are going to dig all the way to China to try and find dirt on Romney and his v.p. Then they will lie through their teeth to try and paint Romney as evil and a threat to the country. And, finally they will drop bombs in October to try to shock and scare the electorate.

    If none of that seems to be enough, Obama will try to invent a crisis to try to rally the country behind him. Then, if it still looks bleak, he may consider martial law or some type of internal government shenanigans to stall the vote.

    Am I pessimistic about what Obama will try in order to stay in office? Damn right I am. Marxists don't bow to the will of the voters. You've never seen a party go to the lengths to win an election like you'll see the democrats go to this fall.
     

  3. LOL !!!!!!!!
     
  4. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    That sounds about right. Of course our inherently dishonest flaming liberal Odumbo sheeple will applaud and support these actions and even defend them.
     
  5. I tend to agree. Why do you think Obama and Holder are taking the risk to associate with dirtbags like Sharton? Or why they have suspended federal laws to accommodate Occupy DC?

    There will be fraud on an unprecedented scale, lawsuits galore to try to replicate the 2000 banana republic aftermath to a lost election and possibly some sort of martial law ("to preserve order").
     
  6. Every recent presidential election comes down to Ohio and Florida, so not much new there.

    I disagree with the VP choices though and think any of the ones mentioned could cost Romney. The conventional wisdom is Christie or Rubio and I think either would be good. Rubio should secure Florida. Christie puts several normally blue states into play. Additionally, his in your face style may play very well with Tea Party and southern conservatives who are sick of the ultra PC tone of today's pols. The main negative to Christie is it would look like a rejection of Rubio, which could cost in florida and with hispanics.

    The worst choice in my view would be Jeb Bush. He is a moderate, opposes Romney's immigration policy and, let's face it, he's a Bush. Enough said. Do we really want to go there again, after two duds?

    McDonnell is not a national figure, would be excoroated as an extreme Evangelical and would invite a Palin-style all-out assault from the obama media. Portman is little known outside Ohio.

    Two other figures who get mentioned are Indiana governor Mitch Daniels and Wis. Rep. Paul Ryan. Either would be a bad choice. Daniels lacks charisma and is sort of the prototypical older white guy. Ryan has shown a tone-deaf approach to social security and tax reform. Picking himn would allow the democrats to turn it into a referendum on Ryan's plans rather than where it should be, on Obama.
     
  7. pspr

    pspr

    I think Rubio is problematic as a V.P. choice. As many claim Obama is not a natuarl born citizen because his father was not a U.S. citizen, Rubio was born, on U.S. soil to two Cuban citizens.

    Marco Rubio's parents, the late Mario Rubio and Oria Garcia Rubio, were both born in Cuba. and not US citizens at the time of his birth, although eventually they became naturalized citizens. According to Cuban law that makes Marco Rubio a dual citizen. He is not eligible to be President or Vice President for both of those reasons.

    Like Rubio, Bobby Jindal’s parents did not become citizens until after his birth. Therefore he can not be President or Vice President either.

    A Natural Born Citizen is different than US Citizen..........you can be a US citizen like the anchor babies but that does not make you a NBC.


    Democrats may decide this is worth the battle since Obama had one parent that was a U.S. citizen but Rubio had neither. This could embroil the entire debate around Rubio's eligibility.
     
  8. Epic

    Epic

    Add to that the fact that Rubio was raised and baptized mormon when he was younger. That is just too much of a distraction.

    But.... in this election, whoever wins Florida, wins the White House. The gamble might be worth it for Romney.
     
  9. What are you quoting from? There is no controlling Supreme Court decision on this point, to the best of my knowledge.

    Anyway, the democrats would look pretty hypocritical attacking Rubio's after the Obama dispute.
     
  10. 377OHMS

    377OHMS

    When did profound hypocrisy ever stop most Democrats?

    Did you hear Joe Biden a few days ago?
     
    #10     Apr 17, 2012