Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:BigNorseWolf wrote:Knight who says Meh wrote:
Technically if he keeps the traditional Red States, and gets Florida, New Hampshire, Texas, and Ohio, he can squeak into victory with 278 Electoral Votes even if he loses the Popular vote the way Bush 1.0 got in.
Since the last election, Florida has doubled down on denying ex-felons, a largely Democratic population the vote, and New Hampshire is still New Hampshire, as well as Texas. Ohio may be too swingy to call yet.
If Texas is even in question, he's lost. It's certainly considered one of the traditional Red States, so I'm not sure what you're calling "Traditional red".
Romney got 206 electoral votes, including Texas. Adding Florida, NH & Ohio to that gets him 257, not enough to win. His chances of winning all three of them and whatever else you think is traditional are slim.
According to 538's wonderful little snake diagram, he'd have to take Iowa, Arizona, Ohio, North Carolina, Florida, Nevada and Pennsylvania, all of which are currently at least leaning towards Clinton. (Or some other, even less likely states. Those are his best chances.)
It's certainly possible. Even now, something could happen to shake up the race. The polling could be massively overstating Clinton's lead across the board.
But you've been predicting a Clinton disaster all along and it keeps not happening. Forgive me for thinking you're off now as well.
I don't know what she meant but I thought of the old Solid South, which had a strong blue tradition between Reconstruction and the 1960s-70s.