Obama/Romney starts here

[Devils30]

80%= safe, 40%= lean, 30% tossup/tossup tilt

[Lief 🗽]

I'd switch Ohio and NC to pink.

[5280]

50% = safe, 30% lean, 0% = toss up

[The_Texas_Libertarian]

80%= safe, 40%= lean, 30% tossup/tossup tilt

Looks good.  I'd probably just change both OH and CO to toss-up.  NC may be a toss-up but it may be too early to call that

[Fritz]

Minnesota is safe Obama.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

As of now...

80% - Strong
40% - Lean
30% - Tilt
0% - pure toss-up

[Zarn]

[tmthforu94]

That's my map.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

[President von Cat]

That's my map.

That looks exactly right.

I'm surprised the Dem posters here aren't giving Obama the benefit of the doubt in Ohio. Romney's Kasich flip flop is political gold for the Obama camaign, he just needs to air out Romney's support for Kasich's reforms, or better yet Romney's original inability to take sides, and follow up with some ads featuring Romney "gaffes", and I'm pretty sure he can eke out a win.

[Politico]

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)...

[Lief 🗽]

^^LOL

[RogueBeaver]

I'd flip MI and WI in Tmthforu's map, otherwise agreed with him.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

^^LOL

Dude... Xanax is your friend.

[5280]

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)...

That's not giving Obama not enough credit for your map, but then again the Democrats on the forum give Obama too much credit based on their maps.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

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.

[Politico]

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.

[argentarius]

If the election was held today:

Which is bad for Romney, imo.

By the time the election comes around:

Both the candidates throw money at eachother, for Obama it sticks in the midwest, for Romney it sticks out west. This could be a good one.

[I'm JewCon in name only.]

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)...

...

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

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.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

actually, Politico's map (minus AZ) is probably Mitt's ground floor - can't really see Mitt doing worse than 159 unless Obama pulls a cure for cancer out of his arse.

But, if everything goes to hell in a hand basket (recession, unemployment >10%, middle-east war sending gas prices >$5, etc...), Obama could be lucky to get 37 electoral votes.

...But, that's obviously not where the election stands today.

[Politico]

actually, Politico's map (minus AZ) is probably Mitt's ground floor - can't really see Mitt doing worse than 159 unless Obama pulls a cure for cancer out of his arse.

But, if everything goes to hell in a hand basket (recession, unemployment >10%, middle-east war sending gas prices >$5, etc...), Obama could be lucky to get 37 electoral votes.

...But, that's obviously not where the election stands today.

Yeah, I am not saying that is where the election stands today. Plenty of other maps on here that show what would happen if the election were tomorrow. But it is not until November. I am just saying that this is all we can say at this point: Romney has a floor of about 159-170 and Obama has a floor of 37. Everything else is literally up in the air between now and November.

[Politico]

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...).

Here's a newsflash: Things change, and usually relatively unexpectedly. Just compare 1964 to 1972, or 1976 to 1980, and so on.

There is nobody in this race with any ties to George W. Bush. He is ultimately the reason why the nation divided into the "red state/blue state" camps of 2000-2008. Like Nixon in 1980, Bush is out of the picture in 2012. Nobody knows the full implications upon the EC. It is silly to think that slight variants of 2000/2004 will be the norm indefinitely.

[Ebowed]

Yeah, Maryland is totally 'up in the air'... and all across New York City, people are chanting amongst themselves, 'Hope?  Nope!'

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Yeah, Maryland is totally 'up in the air'... and all across New York City, people are chanting amongst themselves, 'Hope?  Nope!'

it's easy to come up with situations that lead to Obama losing NY. 

e.g.: Israel gets into a war with Iran, Obama refuses to engage the US in the war....the Jews suffer heavy chemical weapons attacks, the MB in Egypt (which Obama helped bring to power) throws it's support behind Iran and starts pouring troops into the Sinai, Iran closes Strait of Hormuz sending oil above $200/barrel, gas prices in the US spike to $10/gallon causing gas lines, US unemployment quickly spikes above 12%....etc, etc, etc.