Are the Republicans locked out of the Electoral College?

[Desroko]

Unless something changes, the answer is yes --- the Northeast is inaccessible; they've lost Virginia, New Mexico, Colorado, and Nevada; Florida, Georgia, Arizona are going quickly; and the Midwest is stubborn (i.e. PA).

The good news, however, is that they can effect the necessary changes. They just need to realize that they need to change because 2012 didn't do it.

In florida we have a Republican governor, a supermajority republican house, a republican senate majority, a republican senator, and a majority republican hose delegation. But tell me again how Florida is out of reach for republicans....

Democrats were competitive or dominant at the state level in the South for over a generation after 1965. How'd they do in presidential elections?

[Desroko]

Of course they are not locked out. Someone like Mitt Romney, who isn't a terribly exciting candidate, would likely be leading the polls right now, given how Clinton has been struggling. Rubio or Kasich would likely be leading as well.

The fact that most Republicans probably agree with these baseless assertions is yet another feather in the Democrats' cap. They don't understand that Trump is a symptom, not a cause.

[Desroko]

Any candidate who wins the popular vote by more than 1% will win the electoral vote.  Start with 2000 (which, btw is now 285 EVs thanks to a net 14-EV loss in Gore states).  Take away VA and and you still have 272 EVs.  Take away NV and NH and add IA and WI, and you have 278.  Take away CO, and the GOP will probably pick up either PA or MI.  And so on...

The real question is: Are the Republicans locked out of a popular vote plurality?  And the answer to that is, unless they change, and barring a spectacularly bad Democratic candidate or a significant third party challenge, yes.

Unfounded assumptions there.