Romney's path without Ohio, Hint: There is none

[Devils30]

I know there is a ton of talk on the right about how Mitt can win without the Buckeye state but I fail to see this happening realistically. Wisconsin seems even slightly more Obama friendly than Ohio, these two would bring Obama to 265 ev. However, I really don't see Mitt winning Nevada as he hasn't led a single poll there all year and Dems tend to overperform polling in the state. Colorado is only slightly better for Romney but still wouldn't bet on him winning it. Not to mention NH and IA look just as good for Obama as Ohio does. This is my best case scenario for a Mitt losing Ohio. Obama still wins 271-267

[Yank2133]

Pretty much.

Mitt is going to have to run the table and I just don't see it.

[Eraserhead]

It is very tough. He'd have to make a monster play for Nevada (and it only looks slightly better for him than Ohio).

[dirks]

Florida is 50/50 for Mitt...but Virginia seems to be in a slow creep away from him

Ohio can still be fought for. But if Mitt is down by 5 or more midway through Oct, it's abandon ship and all Ohio resources go to Virginia and Fla. Perhaps some to PA as well if it's on a positive Romney trend by then...but it also may be long gone by then too.

This is assuming a Romney win in Iowa as well...hmm. Again, very iffy. The midwest has not embraced Romney.

[Donerail]

Don't see Mitt winning unless he can flip states (Virginia, Iowa, Nevada, Wisconsin, New Hampshire) that are very unlikely to flip.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

No Republican has ever won without Ohio. And there's no sign that Romney's likely to be the first.

[ajb]

It is very tough. He'd have to make a monster play for Nevada (and it only looks slightly better for him than Ohio).

... not to mention that, realistically, it's hard to imagine a Republican losing Ohio and Wisconsin, but winning Iowa. Unless the losses in OH and WI are extremely narrow, in which case the goal should be to win OH and WI, not just IA.

[Likely Voter]

OH+WI+NV does seem to be Obama's last line of defense in the case of Romney being able to shift the race nationally back in his direction. I would guess that even if Romney had a small PV win, he wouldn't be able to take any of those three, he would need a 1-2% PV win before one of those three fell his way. 

[Politico]

If OH is out of reach with two weeks to go, you quietly draw down and go for broke in FL, VA, NH, CO and WI. Hedge WI by trying to pull NV AND IA (you would need both if you lose WI; maybe you win FL, VA, CO and WI but lose NH--in that case, you can still win with IA or NV).

Gore pulled out of OH with two weeks to go, and almost pulled it off (flip FL, TN or NH, and he would have won).

There is no realistic path for Romney if he loses FL. Romney has to flip NC and FL (IN, too, but it appears locked up already). It's tough without OH or VA, but it can be done so long as he wins one of the two (since winning one of these two almost surely implies winning NC and FL).

[Devils30]

I don't think Colorado has more than a 30% chance of going for Romney in an election decided under 1% nationally. Another state Dems tend to overperform and most polls dont have the white vote going enough for Romney to win there.

[ajb]

I think the bottom line is that any plausible path to victory for Romney has to be about raising his numbers nationally in some fairly substantial way, rather than banking on a small change in the national numbers, and a lucky configuration of states going his way.

[opebo]

His final strategy - a cruder, more blatant racism than he as run on heretofore (don't get me wrong, the campaign has been racist from the beginning, but I mean really laying it on thick now) - will turn around Ohio, and by the same fashion he'll win Florida and Virginia.  However both New Hampshire and Nevada are hopeless for him I think, so it all will come down to Colorado and Iowa:

A narrow Obama win if it can get both of them:

And a narrow Romney win if he can take either away from Obama.

[King]

The reason Romney has fallen so far behind in Ohio (lack of populist appeal) prevents him from winning Iowa, too.  That puts him just short of 270.  He either changes direction and wins both or stays the same and wins neither.

[opebo]

The reason Romney has fallen so far behind in Ohio (lack of populist appeal) prevents him from winning Iowa, too.  That puts him just short of 270.  He either changes direction and wins both or stays the same and wins neither.

Maybe.  But Ohio can be won on racism without populist appeal - Iowa, who knows?  They don't have many blacks there to work up the hatred.

[Likely Voter]

This OH problem is really part of Romney's bigger weakness which is the entire Rust Belt. From the beginning they have failed to bring PA and MI into play. WI also appears to be back in that category and OH has gone from trend R to trend D. This general Rust Belt weakness has put Romney onto the EV defensive since the beginning.  I think this is all about "let Detroit go bankrupt" combined with the general Thurston Howell thing. Even though these states dont have big non-white populations (so they should be good targets), Romney has just been the wrong candidate for working class whites in this region.

[Devils30]

It's possible Obama wins by less than 1% nationally yet takes 303 electoral votes. I'd still bet on Obama's margin being better than Ohio in IA, NV, CO, NH but that shouldnt exactly comfort Romney. Romney only wins WI if hes over +3 nationally IMO.

[opebo]

I'd still bet on Obama's margin being better than Ohio in IA, NV, CO, NH but that shouldnt exactly comfort Romney. Romney only wins WI if hes over +3 nationally IMO.

I agree with that except for Colorado.

[All Along The Watchtower]

If Romney wins McCain 2008 states+Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida,  he still loses to Obama, 273-265.

Add New Hampshire to that, you get an EC tie at 269.

Romney basically needs all of those, plus Iowa or Wisconsin, at the very least. Maybe Colorado.

[JFK-Democrat]

This race is OHVA

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Republicans have never lost when winning the popular vote. 2012 would be no different.

[Politico]

If Romney wins McCain 2008 states+Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida,  he still loses to Obama, 273-265.

Add New Hampshire to that, you get an EC tie at 269.

You forgot NE-2, which gets Romney to 270 (GOP House would push him into the White House even if we wound up with 269)

[Devils30]

I'll bump this: If Obama wins Ohio he is likely at 265 and adding Nevada puts him at 271 and over the top. I expect GOP trolls to say Mitt is close in Nevada but take a look at the polls vs election results history in NV and tell me if Romney should be confident. Dems in 2008,2010 overpeformed polling in NV by an average of 7 to 8 points
Bottom line: Romney likely cannot win the WH without Ohio

[J. J.]

Yes there is, and not a too unreasonable one:

I think it is less likely than an OH win, but it is possible.

[Lief 🗽]

Might make more sense to go after Michigan or Pennsylvania at this point. Those states haven't been bombarded for months with Obama ads attacking Romney, so there'd probably be more room to make up. And PA doesn't have early voting IIRC.

[Ty440]

I'll bump this: If Obama wins Ohio he is likely at 265 and adding Nevada puts him at 271 and over the top. I expect GOP trolls to say Mitt is close in Nevada but take a look at the polls vs election results history in NV and tell me if Romney should be confident. Dems in 2008,2010 overpeformed polling in NV by an average of 7 to 8 points
Bottom line: Romney likely cannot win the WH without Ohio

No republican has ever won the the Presidency without Ohio.

I know I know it's been said a thousand times..lol