Minimum National Swing Needed for a Losing Candidate to Win

[SPC]

(EDIT: I went back to these to take notes of which states switched sides between every election. Enjoy.)

These are the maps of what would happen with a minimum national swing required for the losing candidate to win the election. For example, Romney lost the tipping point state Colorado by 5.37%, so this is the map if Romney had that much of a national swing:

2012

Mitt Romney 49.9% 275 EV
Barack Obama 48.3% 263 EV

Iowa technically returns to the Democrats, although this is more a consequence of Republican states gaining electoral votes.

2008

John McCain 50.4% 276 EV
Barack Obama 48.1% 262 EV

Nevada moves to the Democratic side.

2004

George W. Bush 49.7% 254 EV
John Kerry 49.3% 284 EV

New Hampshire settles with the Democrats.

2000

Al Gore 48.4% 292 EV
George W. Bush 47.9% 246 EV

New Mexico settles with the Democrats. West Virginia switches to the Republicans.

1996

Bob Dole 45.3% 282 EV
Bill Clinton 44.6% 256 EV

Missouri settles with the Republicans, New Jersey switches to the Democrats, and New Hampshire starts oscillating for a few elections. All other state changes appear to be ephemeral.

1992

Bill Clinton 40.7% 263 EV
George Bush 39.8% 275 EV

The only changes of note are the alignment of Delaware and Maine with the Democrats.

Alternatively,

Ross Perot 35.8% 320 EV
Bill Clinton 34.5% 167 EV
George Bush 29.0% 51 EV

1988

Michael Dukakis 49.6% 280 EV
George Bush 49.4% 258 EV

New Mexico oscillates for a few elections, Connecticut moves to the Democrats, Ohio settles back with the Republicans, and Missouri flirts with the Democrats for a few more cycles.

1984

Walter Mondale 50.1% 275 EV
Ronald Reagan 49.3% 263 EV

In the absence of a Southerner on the ticket, the 1972 map is restored, with West Virginia, Maryland, Hawaii, and Vermont (back) with the Democrats and Connecticut and Delaware back with the Republicans.

1980

Ronald Reagan 46.8% 255 EV
Jimmy Carter 45.0% 283 EV

Vermont moves to the Democrats. All other changes are explained by the geography of the 1980 and 1976 Republican nominees.

[SPC]

1976:

Jimmy Carter 49.2% 261 EV
Gerald Ford 48.9% 277 EV

Nominating a Southerner temporarily restores the 1952 map, with New York serving as a surrogate for ordinarily Democratic Midwestern states.

1972:

Richard Nixon 49.9% 269 EV
George McGovern 48.3% 269 EV*

*Democratic House makes McGovern's election more likely in this scenario. Plus, the closeness of Maine makes it a possibility that McGovern would win one of the congressional districts, thus making the actual count 270-268.

Alaska and Hawaii go to the incumbent. California, Oregon, Wisconsin, and Iowa go to the Democrats, while Texas, Missouri, and New Jersey go to the Republicans.

1968:

Hubert Humphrey 43.9% 246 EV*
Richard Nixon 42.3% 247 EV
George Wallace 13.5% 45 EV

*Assuming that Southern Democrats in the House ultimately vote for Humphrey

Alternatively,

Hubert Humphrey 44.2% 275 EV
Richard Nixon 42.0% 218 EV
George Wallace 13.5% 45 EV

Washington and Illinois settle with the Democrats, and Kentucky goes to the Republicans.

Alternatively...

1964

Barry Goldwater 50.8% 276 EV
Lyndon Johnson 48.8% 262 EV

Most of the South (except Virginia, Florida, and Texas), Delaware goes to the Republicans, and New Jersey goes to the Democrats.

1960

Richard Nixon 49.8% 262 EV*
John F. Kennedy 49.5% 260 EV
Harry F. Byrd 0% 15 EV

*Assuming Nixon makes a deal with Southern Democrats

Otherwise,

Richard Nixon 50.0% 282 EV
John F. Kennedy 49.3% 240 EV
Harry F. Byrd 0% 15 EV

Washington flirts with the Republicans. Tennessee and Florida go to the Republicans, while New York, Connecticut, and Maryland go to the Democrats. This election also bears similarity to the 1928 map.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Awesome thread! Keep it going.

[Gunnar Larsson]

Interesting,  from this perspective the 1984 is an important realigning election, as the ones after are quite similar to the current one, whilst earlier elections have more of an east/west-split :-)

[Nichlemn]

Washington looks so lonely in 1968.

[Benj]

Interesting,  from this perspective the 1984 is an important realigning election, as the ones after are quite similar to the current one, whilst earlier elections have more of an east/west-split :-)

Sort of. 1972 was much closer to the modern pattern, and 1968 is difficult to describe with much certainty (but, since those same areas of the South had gone hard for Goldwater in 1964, it's possible that they would have favored Nixon over HHH given HHH's stronger association with Johnson and Civil Rights). When done, 1964 will of course strongly resemble the modern map.

On the longer view, 1964 is probably more clearly the realigning election than 1984, with 1976 and 1980 explained as a brief renaissance of the Democrats in the South with Carter as the candidate rather than a continuation of past strength. (House, Senate and state legislature results tell a different story, of course, but they tend to be lagging indicators of partisan changes.)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

1968:

Hubert Humphrey 43.9% 246 EV*
Richard Nixon 42.3% 247 EV
George Wallace 13.5% 45 EV

*Assuming that Southern Democrats in the House ultimately vote for Humphrey

Alternatively,

Hubert Humphrey 44.2% 275 EV
Richard Nixon 42.0% 218 EV
George Wallace 13.5% 45 EV

Southern Dems voting for Humphrey was no sure thing.  However, if Nixon kept his end of the bargain he struck with Humphrey, it wouldn't matter.

[SPC]

1968:

Hubert Humphrey 43.9% 246 EV*
Richard Nixon 42.3% 247 EV
George Wallace 13.5% 45 EV

*Assuming that Southern Democrats in the House ultimately vote for Humphrey

Alternatively,

Hubert Humphrey 44.2% 275 EV
Richard Nixon 42.0% 218 EV
George Wallace 13.5% 45 EV

Southern Dems voting for Humphrey was no sure thing.  However, if Nixon kept his end of the bargain he struck with Humphrey, it wouldn't matter.

What exactly was the bargain between Nixon and Humphrey?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

What exactly was the bargain between Nixon and Humphrey?

Allegedly, that if one of them won a plurality of the Electoral College, but not a majority, the second place person would see to it that enough of his electors either did not cast ballots or voted for the first place ticket to keep the election out of the House so that neither side would need to make a bargain with Wallace and his allies.

[SPC]

1956

Dwight D. Eisenhower 50.1% 259 EV
Adlai Stevenson II 49.2% 272 EV

New Mexico goes to the Republicans.

1952

Adlai Stevenson II 50.1% 281 EV
Dwight D. Eisenhower 49.4% 250 EV

Most of the Mountain West goes to the Republicans. Michigan and Pennsylvania go to the Democrats.

1948

Harry S Truman 49.3% 254 EV
Thomas E. Dewey 45.3% 239 EV*
Strom J. Thurmond 2.4% 38 EV

*Assuming (implausibly) that Southern Democrats vote for Dewey.

Otherwise,

Harry S Truman 49.1% 226 EV
Thomas E. Dewey 45.5% 267 EV
Strom J. Thurmond 2.4% 38 EV

Truman brings Missouri into the Democratic column for twenty years. California and Connecticut go to the Republicans

1944

Franklin D. Roosevelt 50.9% 250 EV
Thomas E. Dewey 48.4% 281 EV

Oregon and Maryland go to the Republicans. Massachusetts goes to the Democrats.

1940

Franklin D. Roosevelt 51.3% 233 EV
Wendell Willkie 48.2% 298 EV

North Dakota goes to the Republicans, Delaware goes to the Democrats.

[Gunnar Larsson]

Interesting,  from this perspective the 1984 is an important realigning election, as the ones after are quite similar to the current one, whilst earlier elections have more of an east/west-split :-)

Sort of. 1972 was much closer to the modern pattern, and 1968 is difficult to describe with much certainty (but, since those same areas of the South had gone hard for Goldwater in 1964, it's possible that they would have favored Nixon over HHH given HHH's stronger association with Johnson and Civil Rights). When done, 1964 will of course strongly resemble the modern map.

On the longer view, 1964 is probably more clearly the realigning election than 1984, with 1976 and 1980 explained as a brief renaissance of the Democrats in the South with Carter as the candidate rather than a continuation of past strength. (House, Senate and state legislature results tell a different story, of course, but they tend to be lagging indicators of partisan changes.)

I guess the choice of 1972 or 1976/80 depends on which one is considered the odd one out (and I also guess the period can be seen as a transition period, when candidates were more able to change the geographical distribution more than today). Wonder why California leaned Democrat in 1972 though, considering that Nixon was from the state. Perhaps 1972 was (compared with other elections) more on social values than on economic values?

Mm, in 1964 the Democrats lost the south and in 1960 the Republicans lost the north east.
And back in the 30s and 40s Oklahoma and Utah trended Democrat!

Another fascinating thing is how very static things have become since 2000. Apart from the tipping state, which per definition changes hand if the other party takes over there is just a change of one state per election or so. Looking at the numbers, in the last election 15 states were within 5 % of the national average (looking at the Democrats, though logically it should be something similar for the Republicans). In 1960 that number was 35 states!

[SPC]

1936

Franklin D. Roosevelt 50.5% 258 EV
Alfred Landon 46.8% 273 EV

1932

Franklin D. Roosevelt 48.6% 259 EV
Herbert Hoover 48.5% 272 EV

1928

Herbert Hoover 50.9% 264 EV
Al Smith 48.1% 267 EV

1924

John W. Davis 42.1% 273 EV
Calvin Coolidge 40.7% 212 EV
Robert LaFollette 16.6% 46 EV

[Antonio the Sixth]

This is great! Can we also have the winning scenario for LaFollette?

[Nichlemn]

1936 doesn't look much like a winning map at a glance. It's quite impressive how concentrated the US population used to be in the North. I wonder what the (proportionally) geographically smallest possible winning map was.

[SPC]

Alternate 1924:

Robert LaFollette 46.1% 266 EV
Calvin Coolidge 39.3% 139 EV
John W. Davis 14.1% 126 EV

1920

(And yes, these are Atlas colors)

James Cox 49.7% 269 EV
Warren G. Harding 44.7% 262 EV

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Surprised Adlai doesn't win Maryland either time, and Smith doesn't win Florida.

[SPC]

Since I did Perot and LaFollette, I may as well do Wallace:

Alternate 1968

George Wallace 39.4% 279 EV
Richard Nixon 30.5% 124 EV
Hubert Humphrey 29.8% 135 EV

[Antonio the Sixth]

Thank you. NY is part of La Follette's winning strategy? And NJ and AK of Wallace's? Surprising.

[SPC]

1916

Woodrow Wilson 49.1% 259 EV
Charles Hughes 46.3% 272 EV

1912

Theodore Roosevelt 38.5% 282 EV
Woodrow Wilson 36.3% 249 EV
William Howard Taft 17.6% 0 EV

Alternatively,

Woodrow Wilson 36.0% 220 EV
William Howard Taft 34.9% 281 EV
Theodore Roosevelt 21.5% 30 EV

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Awesome stuff! Will we be seeing a Taft victory scenario as well?

[SPC]

1908

William Jennings Bryan 48.2% 243 EV
William Howard Taft 46.4% 240 EV

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Bryan did that poorly in the West that year?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Silver was largely a spent issue by 1908 and the West was where Debs did best.

Green 30 to 80 % = Debs 3 to 8%
Yellow 30 to 50% = Debs 0 to 2%
Grey = Debs not on the ballot

[SPC]

1904

Theodore Roosevelt 47.1% 236 EV
Alton Parker 46.9% 240 EV

[Antonio the Sixth]

Hillarious how horribly Roosevelt performed in his home State, even compared to a standard Republican for the time.