Can Obama win without Pennsylvania?

[Lincoln Republican]

Let's suppose that Romney pulls off a big surprise upset on election night and narrowly wins Pennsylvania?

Does Obama still have a path to victory in this scenario, or would this unlikely event of Romney winning Pennsylvania effectively close the door on Obama?

[Gass3268]

This is still an Obama win

[pepper11]

PA is a substitute for OH, nothing more. Both sides need to stop acting like its not.

[Vosem]

PA implies OH is also lost. OH+PA is a sure Obama loss.

Like the Romney-without-Ohio thread, this is mathematically possible, and you can construct plausible-looking maps that show it, but ultimately, realistically, no, Romney cannot win without Ohio and Obama cannot win without Pennsylvania, because of the implications such defeats would have in other states.

[Stirring Wolf🥣🐺]

Romney upsets Obama in OH & PN but Obama gets the other swings + FL.  He could even forfeit Virginia and still win here.

So yeah, Obama can lose OH/PN but pretty much would have to make an equal attack on FL for a win to be possible; and FL isn't something Obama should be counting on.

[DemPGH]

The PA talk is frankly pretty outrageous. And really, Obama's chances of winning with a PA loss are maybe what Romney's are with a FL loss.

[Penelope]

PA is a substitute for OH, nothing more. Both sides need to stop acting like its not.

Ohio 2008: 51-47
Pennsylvania 2008: 55-44

Ohio 2004: 48-50
Pennsylvania 2004: 50-48

~

No, it isn't.

Also, Obama can win without Pennsylvania pretty easily. But it's highly unlikely it will come to that.

[Yank2133]

PA is a substitute for OH, nothing more. Both sides need to stop acting like its not.

No, it is desperate ploy by a losing campaign.

[memphis]

Can Romney win without TX? About as likely as Romney carrying PA.

[pepper11]

PA is a substitute for OH, nothing more. Both sides need to stop acting like its not.

No, it is desperate ploy by a losing campaign.

Quote me in five days.

I guarantee you Obama will be campaigning in the state soon.

[gotapresent]

If Obama takes South Carolina, Georgia, and Idaho, can Romney win if he flips Oregon and Hawaii?

[Yank2133]

PA is a substitute for OH, nothing more. Both sides need to stop acting like its not.

No, it is desperate ploy by a losing campaign.

Quote me in five days.

I guarantee you Obama will be campaigning in the state soon.

Obama's schedule is already set.

You don't think they have their internal polling of PA? The state is simply not in play, Republicans can continue to delude themselves, but this is nothing more then sheer desperation by Team Romney.

Ohio is gone and they are looking for a new path.

[DrScholl]

If next door Ohio is a problem for Romney, Pennsylvania certainly isn't a viable option, since it's 2-3% more democratic than Ohio on average. That doesn't equal a substitute.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Are we back in 2008 again?

[Mehmentum]

If Romney wins Pennsylvania, it means that he's also won Virginia, Colorado, Ohio, New Hampshire, Iowa, and maybe Wisconsin.  For Romney to win Pennsylvania, the polling needs to be very off this election, or for something huge needs to happen against Obama. 

So the answer is while he doesn't mathmatically need it, realistically if Obama loses Pennsylvania, he's long since lost the election. 

[stegosaurus]

PA implies OH is also lost. OH+PA is a sure Obama loss.

Like the Romney-without-Ohio thread, this is mathematically possible, and you can construct plausible-looking maps that show it, but ultimately, realistically, no, Romney cannot win without Ohio and Obama cannot win without Pennsylvania, because of the implications such defeats would have in other states.

This is exactly right. In 2008, PA was 44% D and 18% I (where Romney's biggest strength will be).  If Romney is winning in deep blue turf like that, it means we're talking about a landslide.

[ajb]

PA implies OH is also lost. OH+PA is a sure Obama loss.

Like the Romney-without-Ohio thread, this is mathematically possible, and you can construct plausible-looking maps that show it, but ultimately, realistically, no, Romney cannot win without Ohio and Obama cannot win without Pennsylvania, because of the implications such defeats would have in other states.

This is exactly right. In 2008, PA was 44% D and 18% I (where Romney's biggest strength will be).  If Romney is winning in deep blue turf like that, it means we're talking about a landslide.

As I posted in another of these PA threads today, McCain had polls in the final week in 2008 where he was behind by 4-6 points in PA, too -- in a national environment where Obama was ahead by much more than he is today.
The fact that the PA poll most favorable to Romney still has him behind by four points suggests that PA has trended D over the last four years.

[morgieb]

1. No
2. Anyone who thinks we'll lose it needs their heads checked.

[Antonio the Sixth]

When Winfield starts a thread with "let's suppose", we know Mitt's hopes are fading.

[J. J.]

Can Romney win without TX? About as likely as Romney carrying PA.

It is more like that Romney would win PA than lose TX.  It is still very unlikely Romney will win PA. 

In the hypothetical, Romney winning PA would mean Obama has lost the election.

[Middle-aged Europe]

I don't see much relevance to the question.

Winning without Pennsylvania would be difficult for Obama. Then again, he's also screwed if he loses California.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Romney won't win here before taking IN, NC, FL, CO, VA, OH, NH, WI, IA, NV, and maybe NM and MI.