Name the Tickets

[barfbag]

Which ticket combination from both parties is most likely to provide us with this map? I gave the Electoral Vote total at the bottom, but which tickets would be necessary for this exact electoral map to happen?

Democrats   273
Republicans 265

[PolitiJunkie]

I don't know what Republican ticket could win the Midwest, Pennsylvania, AND Maine/New Hampshire. Walker *could* win the Midwest, Christie *could* win Pennsylvania, and Ayotte ***could*** win Maine/New Hampshire (that last one is especially unlikely), but we won't get all three on the ticket. The Democratic ticket looks like Warner/Schweitzer maybe, but I dunno what's going on with Florida, or what makes Tennessee in particular swing but not anything else in that region. I'm gonna have to go ahead and give you the answer you don't want and say this particular combination isn't possible anytime soon given the way the current parties are aligned/the current candidates. I like the concept though.

[barfbag]

I don't know what Republican ticket could win the Midwest, Pennsylvania, AND Maine/New Hampshire. Walker *could* win the Midwest, Christie *could* win Pennsylvania, and Ayotte ***could*** win Maine/New Hampshire (that last one is especially unlikely), but we won't get all three on the ticket. The Democratic ticket looks like Warner/Schweitzer maybe, but I dunno what's going on with Florida, or what makes Tennessee in particular swing but not anything else in that region. I'm gonna have to go ahead and give you the answer you don't want and say this particular combination isn't possible anytime soon given the way the current parties are aligned/the current candidates. I like the concept though.

It is very unlikely and is kind of why I posted the map. I think people here could have fun with it. Right now I'm going to say the Republicans would have to be from the northeast or Midwest. Actually, more thinking the great lake region. The Democrats would have to come from the south and possibly have Schweitzer on the ticket? Other than Montana and Tennessee I think the west and south states in their column here could be winnable. Christie/Ayotte vs. Clinton/Schweitzer comes to mind first. Who else?

[PolitiJunkie]

I don't know what Republican ticket could win the Midwest, Pennsylvania, AND Maine/New Hampshire. Walker *could* win the Midwest, Christie *could* win Pennsylvania, and Ayotte ***could*** win Maine/New Hampshire (that last one is especially unlikely), but we won't get all three on the ticket. The Democratic ticket looks like Warner/Schweitzer maybe, but I dunno what's going on with Florida, or what makes Tennessee in particular swing but not anything else in that region. I'm gonna have to go ahead and give you the answer you don't want and say this particular combination isn't possible anytime soon given the way the current parties are aligned/the current candidates. I like the concept though.

It is very unlikely and is kind of why I posted the map. I think people here could have fun with it. Right now I'm going to say the Republicans would have to be from the northeast or Midwest. Actually, more thinking the great lake region. The Democrats would have to come from the south and possibly have Schweitzer on the ticket? Other than Montana and Tennessee I think the west and south states in their column here could be winnable. Christie/Ayotte vs. Clinton/Schweitzer comes to mind first. Who else?

I was thinking along those lines, but something MAJOR, like massive scandal or Obama at a 20% approval rating, for Clinton/Schweitzer to be trailing Christie/Ayotte in Maine, New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, or Iowa; and stuff would still have to be really bad for them to be trailing in Ohio and Pennsylvania as well. People LOVE to massively underestimate how unpopular Ayotte is here; they think she's a godsend because she's an attractive female conservative Republican from the Northesat.

[barfbag]

I don't know what Republican ticket could win the Midwest, Pennsylvania, AND Maine/New Hampshire. Walker *could* win the Midwest, Christie *could* win Pennsylvania, and Ayotte ***could*** win Maine/New Hampshire (that last one is especially unlikely), but we won't get all three on the ticket. The Democratic ticket looks like Warner/Schweitzer maybe, but I dunno what's going on with Florida, or what makes Tennessee in particular swing but not anything else in that region. I'm gonna have to go ahead and give you the answer you don't want and say this particular combination isn't possible anytime soon given the way the current parties are aligned/the current candidates. I like the concept though.

It is very unlikely and is kind of why I posted the map. I think people here could have fun with it. Right now I'm going to say the Republicans would have to be from the northeast or Midwest. Actually, more thinking the great lake region. The Democrats would have to come from the south and possibly have Schweitzer on the ticket? Other than Montana and Tennessee I think the west and south states in their column here could be winnable. Christie/Ayotte vs. Clinton/Schweitzer comes to mind first. Who else?

I was thinking along those lines, but something MAJOR, like massive scandal or Obama at a 20% approval rating, for Clinton/Schweitzer to be trailing Christie/Ayotte in Maine, New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, or Iowa; and stuff would still have to be really bad for them to be trailing in Ohio and Pennsylvania as well. People LOVE to massively underestimate how unpopular Ayotte is here; they think she's a godsend because she's an attractive female conservative Republican from the Northesat.

Also if Obama was at 20%, Clinton or any other Democrat may not as well even be on the ballot in a state like Tennessee. What if Obama was at 40% and massive labor unemployment swept through the rust belt?

[Brewer]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

[barfbag]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

Chris Christie always pulls most of the weight.

[Brewer]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

Chris Christie always pulls most of the weight.

Lol.

[barfbag]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

Chris Christie always pulls most of the weight.

Lol.

What about a Walker/Huntsman ticket? I'd think with as well as the Christie would do in Democratic battleground states here, he'd at least win New Jersey.

[Flake]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

Chris Christie always pulls most of the weight.

Lol.

What about a Walker/Huntsman ticket? I'd think with as well as the Christie would do in Democratic battleground states here, he'd at least win New Jersey.

Chris Christie can carry New Jersey against a state senator after high approvals because of Sandy, but in 2016, New Jerseyans will not remember Sandy as much, they will not vote, in this heavily Democratic state, for Chris Christie in almost all match ups.

[Brewer]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

Chris Christie always pulls most of the weight.

Lol.

What about a Walker/Huntsman ticket? I'd think with as well as the Christie would do in Democratic battleground states here, he'd at least win New Jersey.

I'm not even sure Christie would win New Jersey, despite his popularity. Seeing as how different the national stage is from the state level, I seem to think most of them would forget about him in favor of Clinton or even Biden.

[barfbag]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

Chris Christie always pulls most of the weight.

Lol.

What about a Walker/Huntsman ticket? I'd think with as well as the Christie would do in Democratic battleground states here, he'd at least win New Jersey.

Chris Christie can carry New Jersey against a state senator after high approvals because of Sandy, but in 2016, New Jerseyans will not remember Sandy as much, they will not vote, in this heavily Democratic state, for Chris Christie in almost all match ups.

New Jersey isn't as blue as safe Democrat states though. With a popular governor as the GOP nominee it should be red.

[MATTROSE94]

I'm probably very wrong, but I'd probably guess that the tickets would be Huntsman/Christe vs Schweitzer/Hagan with Obama having approval ratings close to what Bush's were in 2008 due to whatever reason.

[PolitiJunkie]

I'm probably very wrong, but I'd probably guess that the tickets would be Huntsman/Christe vs Schweitzer/Hagan with Obama having approval ratings close to what Bush's were in 2008 due to whatever reason.

I think this scenario is the closest one could get to the truth, the only problems being Tennessee and Colorado.

[Flake]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

Chris Christie always pulls most of the weight.

Lol.

What about a Walker/Huntsman ticket? I'd think with as well as the Christie would do in Democratic battleground states here, he'd at least win New Jersey.

Chris Christie can carry New Jersey against a state senator after high approvals because of Sandy, but in 2016, New Jerseyans will not remember Sandy as much, they will not vote, in this heavily Democratic state, for Chris Christie in almost all match ups.

New Jersey isn't as blue as safe Democrat states though. With a popular governor as the GOP nominee it should be red.

Literally the reason he has such high approval ratings is Sandy. I said that. Right up there. When his popularity in the state drops (It will) the state will remain in the hand of Democrats in 2016 if he wins the Republican nomination.

[barfbag]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

Chris Christie always pulls most of the weight.

Lol.

What about a Walker/Huntsman ticket? I'd think with as well as the Christie would do in Democratic battleground states here, he'd at least win New Jersey.

Chris Christie can carry New Jersey against a state senator after high approvals because of Sandy, but in 2016, New Jerseyans will not remember Sandy as much, they will not vote, in this heavily Democratic state, for Chris Christie in almost all match ups.

New Jersey isn't as blue as safe Democrat states though. With a popular governor as the GOP nominee it should be red.

Literally the reason he has such high approval ratings is Sandy. I said that. Right up there. When his popularity in the state drops (It will) the state will remain in the hand of Democrats in 2016 if he wins the Republican nomination.

Do you think he'd be re-elected still though? I find it hard to believe that Christie would lose New Jersey if he came within five of winning the election simply because his state isn't all that blue. It's between being a solid Democrat state and a Democrat battleground state. Sometimes it's solid blue and sometimes it's light blue. It's not like Romney not having a chance at Massachusetts.

[PolitiJunkie]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

Chris Christie always pulls most of the weight.

Lol.

What about a Walker/Huntsman ticket? I'd think with as well as the Christie would do in Democratic battleground states here, he'd at least win New Jersey.

Chris Christie can carry New Jersey against a state senator after high approvals because of Sandy, but in 2016, New Jerseyans will not remember Sandy as much, they will not vote, in this heavily Democratic state, for Chris Christie in almost all match ups.

New Jersey isn't as blue as safe Democrat states though. With a popular governor as the GOP nominee it should be red.

Literally the reason he has such high approval ratings is Sandy. I said that. Right up there. When his popularity in the state drops (It will) the state will remain in the hand of Democrats in 2016 if he wins the Republican nomination.

Do you think he'd be re-elected still though? I find it hard to believe that Christie would lose New Jersey if he came within five of winning the election simply because his state isn't all that blue. It's between being a solid Democrat state and a Democrat battleground state. Sometimes it's solid blue and sometimes it's light blue. It's not like Romney not having a chance at Massachusetts.

Yeah, I think he'd be reelected, but it would be a whole different ball game. He probably would have gotten a better opponent. And it would be much tighter. Saying "Sandy is the only reason Christie has high approval ratings" is almost as dumb a statement as saying "Sandy is the only reason Obama won reelection," but what Flo said, which is that "Sandy is the only reason Christie has such high approval ratings," is a valid statement. Also I think all in all, New Jersey is bluer than you are claiming it to be. If Chris Christie didn't exist, where is your evidence coming from? (And if Chris Christie is the only reason, then your statement is ridiculous, because I could just as easily say "Wyoming isn't very red" because of Dave Freudenthal, about 10 points more than Christie's best case scenario)

[barfbag]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

Chris Christie always pulls most of the weight.

Lol.

What about a Walker/Huntsman ticket? I'd think with as well as the Christie would do in Democratic battleground states here, he'd at least win New Jersey.

Chris Christie can carry New Jersey against a state senator after high approvals because of Sandy, but in 2016, New Jerseyans will not remember Sandy as much, they will not vote, in this heavily Democratic state, for Chris Christie in almost all match ups.

New Jersey isn't as blue as safe Democrat states though. With a popular governor as the GOP nominee it should be red.

Literally the reason he has such high approval ratings is Sandy. I said that. Right up there. When his popularity in the state drops (It will) the state will remain in the hand of Democrats in 2016 if he wins the Republican nomination.

Do you think he'd be re-elected still though? I find it hard to believe that Christie would lose New Jersey if he came within five of winning the election simply because his state isn't all that blue. It's between being a solid Democrat state and a Democrat battleground state. Sometimes it's solid blue and sometimes it's light blue. It's not like Romney not having a chance at Massachusetts.

Yeah, I think he'd be reelected, but it would be a whole different ball game. He probably would have gotten a better opponent. And it would be much tighter. Saying "Sandy is the only reason Christie has high approval ratings" is almost as dumb a statement as saying "Sandy is the only reason Obama won reelection," but what Flo said, which is that "Sandy is the only reason Christie has such high approval ratings," is a valid statement. Also I think all in all, New Jersey is bluer than you are claiming it to be. If Chris Christie didn't exist, where is your evidence coming from? (And if Chris Christie is the only reason, then your statement is ridiculous, because I could just as easily say "Wyoming isn't very red" because of Dave Freudenthal, about 10 points more than Christie's best case scenario)

That's not my reasoning at all so my reasoning isn't ridiculous.

[PolitiJunkie]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

Chris Christie always pulls most of the weight.

Lol.

What about a Walker/Huntsman ticket? I'd think with as well as the Christie would do in Democratic battleground states here, he'd at least win New Jersey.

Chris Christie can carry New Jersey against a state senator after high approvals because of Sandy, but in 2016, New Jerseyans will not remember Sandy as much, they will not vote, in this heavily Democratic state, for Chris Christie in almost all match ups.

New Jersey isn't as blue as safe Democrat states though. With a popular governor as the GOP nominee it should be red.

Literally the reason he has such high approval ratings is Sandy. I said that. Right up there. When his popularity in the state drops (It will) the state will remain in the hand of Democrats in 2016 if he wins the Republican nomination.

Do you think he'd be re-elected still though? I find it hard to believe that Christie would lose New Jersey if he came within five of winning the election simply because his state isn't all that blue. It's between being a solid Democrat state and a Democrat battleground state. Sometimes it's solid blue and sometimes it's light blue. It's not like Romney not having a chance at Massachusetts.

Yeah, I think he'd be reelected, but it would be a whole different ball game. He probably would have gotten a better opponent. And it would be much tighter. Saying "Sandy is the only reason Christie has high approval ratings" is almost as dumb a statement as saying "Sandy is the only reason Obama won reelection," but what Flo said, which is that "Sandy is the only reason Christie has such high approval ratings," is a valid statement. Also I think all in all, New Jersey is bluer than you are claiming it to be. If Chris Christie didn't exist, where is your evidence coming from? (And if Chris Christie is the only reason, then your statement is ridiculous, because I could just as easily say "Wyoming isn't very red" because of Dave Freudenthal, about 10 points more than Christie's best case scenario)

That's not my reasoning at all so my reasoning isn't ridiculous.

Fine. Then let's pretend Christie does not exist. What, then, is your reasoning, as to why New Jersey "isn't all that blue"?

[barfbag]

Looks like Clinton/Warner v. Christie/Walker? Maybe? Walker could help in Wisconsin and possssibly Michigan, but I still think Christie'd be pulling most of the weight in Minnesota.

Chris Christie always pulls most of the weight.

Lol.

What about a Walker/Huntsman ticket? I'd think with as well as the Christie would do in Democratic battleground states here, he'd at least win New Jersey.

Chris Christie can carry New Jersey against a state senator after high approvals because of Sandy, but in 2016, New Jerseyans will not remember Sandy as much, they will not vote, in this heavily Democratic state, for Chris Christie in almost all match ups.

New Jersey isn't as blue as safe Democrat states though. With a popular governor as the GOP nominee it should be red.

Literally the reason he has such high approval ratings is Sandy. I said that. Right up there. When his popularity in the state drops (It will) the state will remain in the hand of Democrats in 2016 if he wins the Republican nomination.

Do you think he'd be re-elected still though? I find it hard to believe that Christie would lose New Jersey if he came within five of winning the election simply because his state isn't all that blue. It's between being a solid Democrat state and a Democrat battleground state. Sometimes it's solid blue and sometimes it's light blue. It's not like Romney not having a chance at Massachusetts.

Yeah, I think he'd be reelected, but it would be a whole different ball game. He probably would have gotten a better opponent. And it would be much tighter. Saying "Sandy is the only reason Christie has high approval ratings" is almost as dumb a statement as saying "Sandy is the only reason Obama won reelection," but what Flo said, which is that "Sandy is the only reason Christie has such high approval ratings," is a valid statement. Also I think all in all, New Jersey is bluer than you are claiming it to be. If Chris Christie didn't exist, where is your evidence coming from? (And if Chris Christie is the only reason, then your statement is ridiculous, because I could just as easily say "Wyoming isn't very red" because of Dave Freudenthal, about 10 points more than Christie's best case scenario)

That's not my reasoning at all so my reasoning isn't ridiculous.

Fine. Then let's pretend Christie does not exist. What, then, is your reasoning, as to why New Jersey "isn't all that blue"?

Simply looking at their numbers in the last few elections.

Gore 56-41
Kerry 54-46
Obama 57-42
Obama 59-40 (Sandy)

A true safe blue state like MA:

Gore 60-33
Kerry 62-37
Obama 62-36
Obama 61-38


There is a difference. Now it's still most likely New Jersey votes Democrat especially with all things being equal, however if Christie were in the race all things wouldn't be equal. As I've stated before we aren't talking about a similarity between Romney not having a chance in Massachusetts.

Here is Vermont:

Gore 51-42
Kerry 60-39
Obama 68-30
Obama 67-32

There should be clear difference seen between the numbers of Vermont and New Jersey. Now I'm going to show you New York which may have had a deceivable break in 2004, but nonetheless is also safe blue.

Gore 60-36
Kerry 59-40
Obama 63-36
Obama 64-35

Rhode Island and Hawaii also appear much further to the left than New Jersey. Lastly, New Jersey is very blue internally, but we're only discussing the numbers of presidential elections. I might be off by a point on the election numbers I gave, but my real point is that New Jersey isn't as blue as the bluest states.