Obama over/under 50.73% nationwide PV

[© tweed]

Bush04 benchmark.

[Eraserhead]

Over I'd guess.

[zorkpolitics]

Bush increased his national PV from 48.4% to 50.7%. 
Obama will surely see his margin decrease from 52.9%, probably by about 3%, making it another very close election

[Penelope]

Bush increased his national PV from 48.4% to 50.7%. 
Obama will surely see his margin decrease from 52.9%, probably by about 3%, making it another very close election

No. 2012 will be very similar to 2004 in the fact that Barack Obama's electoral and popular vote margins will increase slightly.

[Yelnoc]

I did some quick math and, assuming Obama's popular vote increased by 2% across the board, Montana and Missouri would flip while Indiana and North Carolina would move to the 50% column.  The question is, against what Republican would Obama get that result?

[Penelope]

I did some quick math and, assuming Obama's popular vote increased by 2% across the board, Montana and Missouri would flip while Indiana and North Dakota would move to the 50% column.  The question is, against what Republican would Obama get that result?

He could likely manage this against most candidates that they have. Newt, Pawlenty, and Romney would all likely get this result. Meanwhile Huckabee might be able to give Obama a close election.

[CarlSchulz]

Over.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I did some quick math and, assuming Obama's popular vote increased by 2% across the board, Montana and Missouri would flip while Indiana and North Dakota would move to the 50% column.  The question is, against what Republican would Obama get that result?

Probably none-Romney would win Montana and lose Missouri, Huckabee would win Missouri and lose Montana, and the others would lose other states.

[redcommander]

Under.

[pbrower2a]

I did some quick math and, assuming Obama's popular vote increased by 2% across the board, Montana and Missouri would flip while Indiana and North Dakota would move to the 50% column.  The question is, against what Republican would Obama get that result?

Corrected for a likely  typo:

I did some quick math and, assuming Obama's popular vote increased by 2% across the board, Montana and Missouri would flip while Indiana and North Dakota Carolina would move to the 50% column.  The question is, against what Republican would Obama get that result?

---

It's unlikely that the President would get an across-the-board 2% nationwide in Utah and Vermont just the same. The gains would be bigger near the margin (Indiana, North Carolina, Georgia, and Missouri) and in states that President Obama lost.   

[Yelnoc]

I did some quick math and, assuming Obama's popular vote increased by 2% across the board, Montana and Missouri would flip while Indiana and North Dakota would move to the 50% column.  The question is, against what Republican would Obama get that result?

Corrected for a likely  typo:

I did some quick math and, assuming Obama's popular vote increased by 2% across the board, Montana and Missouri would flip while Indiana and North Dakota Carolina would move to the 50% column.  The question is, against what Republican would Obama get that result?

---

It's unlikely that the President would get an across-the-board 2% nationwide in Utah and Vermont just the same. The gains would be bigger near the margin (Indiana, North Carolina, Georgia, and Missouri) and in states that President Obama lost.   

Thanks, it was a typo.  And you are correct, across-the-board percentage increases do actually happen.  I was originally going to do a 2% proportional increase in each state (Multiply his 2008 numbers by .02 and then add the product back to the original) but that was too time consuming to bother.

[Smash255]

Over. Daniels & Huntsman are really the only ones I think can make it competitive, with perhaps Romney. I think Pawlenty could have been a decent candidate for the GOP had he not gone the religious nutter route.   The others are across between unelectable and completely unelectable and the margins would likely surpass 08 in those cases.

[pbrower2a]

Over. Daniels & Huntsman are really the only ones I think can make it competitive, with perhaps Romney. I think Pawlenty could have been a decent candidate for the GOP had he not gone the religious nutter route.   The others are across between unelectable and completely unelectable and the margins would likely surpass 08 in those cases.

Jon Huntsman is too intellectual for the Tea Party types. Mitch Daniels has kept a low profile for a long time, and his star fades if the sorts of political demonstrations that appeared in Michigan and Ohio appear in Indiana.

I think that you are right about Pawlenty, but for a different reason: having gone the Protestant fundamentalist route, he is a lapsed Catholic, and that will offend huge numbers of Catholics.  Ex-Catholics might do OK in places with few Catholics, but he effectively throws away any state with  a large Catholic population except perhaps Texas or Louisiana.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Over, as long as the economy improves and goes down more and more to under 8%, he wins reelection, by 50% plus. If it stays stagnet and gas pricies doesn't go down to under 4.00, he gets under.

[The_Texas_Libertarian]

Obama v Perry
Obama >50.73%

Obama v Cain
Obama >50.73%

Obama v Romney
Obama < 50.73%

[LastVoter]

Still over...

[NVGonzalez]

Still over...

[Zarn]

Obama v Perry
Obama >50.73%

Obama v Cain
Obama >50.73%

Obama v Romney
Obama > 50.73%

Obama v Paul
Obama <50.73%

Obama v Gingrich
Obama >50.73%