This is a race involving an unpopular incumbent (his approval rating is ten points or more lower than Carter's in January 1980), and the Republican candidate has nothing to do with George W. Bush or Washington this time (much like the 1980 race and Republican ticket had nothing to do with Nixon), so it is way too early to say much of anything other than the following:
Obama - 37
Romney - 170
Up in the Air - 331
In other words, Romney only needs 100 out of 331 (or, put another way, an electoral batting average of .302 versus Obama's required electoral batting average of .704)...
You really need to change your screenname politico. We don't need new users to get the wrong idea that you actually know what you're talking about.
Can you guess why the "blue state/red state" nonsense will soon come to an end?
Hint: The "red state/blue state" nonsense started with Bush.
In any case, you'll see what I am talking about in November.
The
name red state/blue state originated with the election of 2000, but states have been described to have certain political leanings long before. The Pacific West, Midwest, and Northeast has been lean Democrat since Dukakis in '88, and he was a terrible candidate (like fellow Massachusetts Mitt Romney, he has many parallels it seems...).
Romney will not win Massachusetts (BUT NAGAS, HE WAS GUBERNOR THERE!) in a presidential election year with higher democratic turnout, a solid Democrat running, and his flip flops on social issues. Besides, he never won a majority of the vote in the first place and didn't run in 2006 because he didn't want the stain on his record.
I could break down all of the solid Democratic states down for you but you'd just retort that Romney is the next jesus and will magically pull 4% unemployment out of his hat.
