Electoral College Tie Analysis (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:14:03 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  Electoral College Tie Analysis (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Electoral College Tie Analysis  (Read 19665 times)
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« on: April 05, 2008, 02:47:12 PM »

It is quite unlikely that there will be an exact 269-269 tie in the Electoral Vote...but my current prediction for the race (quite by accident) has one.  If Obama, for example, picks up NV, NM, and IA, and nothing else, we have a tie.

What happens in the event of a tie?

The race gets thrown to the House, which gets to vote on the top 3 (in this case, top 2, although a faithless elector could throw a third option open) candidates.  They vote by state, with each state getting one vote.  A candidate needs to win a majority of states (26) in order to win the presidency, with a quorum of at least one member from two-thirds of the states (34).

The only precedent we have (1824) suggests that, within each state, a majority of present representatives is required for the candidate to win the vote of the state---although, somehow, every single state in that race managed to avoid deadlock.

This is probably a fruitless exercise, but it could prove quite important if it does happen.  I'll be going through each of the states, seeing if there's any hope for a deadlock.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #1 on: April 05, 2008, 03:06:06 PM »
« Edited: April 05, 2008, 04:16:00 PM by Erc »

Alabama: Safe Republican

Currently 5-2 Republican.  At worst, it could become 4-3.

Alaska: Lean Republican

Don Young, being the only Congressman in Alaska, casts Alaska's vote.  If he is unseated by a Democrat (as is quite possible), the Democrats pick up the state.

Arizona:  Lean Deadlock

The delegation is currently 4-4, a deadlock scenario. 

If AZ-01 (Rick Renzi's open seat) falls to the Democrats, they could take the state.  However, there are two potentially vulnerable Democratic freshmen in AZ-05 and AZ-08 (Mitchell & Giffords), and McCain might have big coattails in this state.

Arkansas: Safe Democrat

Currently 3-1 Democrat.  All 3 Democrats are safe.

California: Safe Democrat

Currently 33-19 Democrat, with one vacant seat (formerly Democratic).  Only one Democrat (McNerney) is potentially vulnerable.

Colorado: Safe Democrat

Currently 4-3 Democrat.  Despite Mark Udall running for Senate, his House Seat seems safe, as do those of the other 3 Democrats.

Connecticut: Likely Democrat

Currently 4-1 Democrat.  (Prior to 2006, this had been a majority-Republican delegation).  Unless there's a huge wave that sweeps both Democratic freshmen out of Congress, Connecticut is remaining in the Democratic column.

Delaware: Safe Republican

Mike Castle (R) casts the single vote here.  If he retires, this may become competitive, but it is otherwise safe.

Florida: Likely Republican

16-9 Republican, currently.  If the Democrats got extremely lucky, taking FL-08,13,15, and 24, while retaining FL-15, they could take the state.  Barring such a quintuple-fecta, Florida remains Republican.

Georgia: Safe Republican

7-6 Republican, currently.  Barring something extremely strange occurring in GA-10, all 7 seats are safe Republican, while 2 Democratic seats are at least somewhat vulnerable.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #2 on: April 05, 2008, 03:07:13 PM »

The current state delegation split is

Democrats 26
Republicans 21
Tie 3

However, it would be the next Congress that would be voting, not the current one.

Thanks, I should have mentioned that explicitly.  Essentially, I'm seeing how likely it is that one (or more) of those Democratic delegations ceases being Democratic, on net.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #3 on: April 05, 2008, 03:23:38 PM »
« Edited: April 05, 2008, 04:18:03 PM by Erc »

Hawai'i: Safe Democrat

2-0 Democratic.  Neither incumbent is vulnerable.

Idaho: Safe Republican

2-0 Republican.  (Sali's still not unpopular enough to be unseated).

Illinois:  Likely Democrat

11-8 Democratic.  2 Democrats are potentially vulnerable (Bean in IL-08 and freshman Foster in IL-14).  Of course, there are also 3 potentially vulnerable Republicans (freshman Roskam in IL-06, Mark Kirk in IL-10, and LaHood's open seat in IL-18).  If the Republicans have a very good day, the state could flip, though it's quite unlikely.

Indiana:  Lean Democrat

Currently 5-4 Democrat, after the landslide in 2006.  Good news for the Republicans is that they've lost all the seats they're going to lose.  If they can take just one of four potentially vulnerable seats (the most likely being IN-9, perhaps?), they take the state.

Iowa:  Safe Democrat

Currently 3-2 Democrat.  The Democrats have two freshmen, but neither appear vulnerable.

Kansas: Lean Deadlock (potentially Republican)

Currently a 2-2 tie.  Both Democrats are potentially vulnerable, with freshman Nancy Boyda (KS-02) in particular danger.

Kentucky: Safe Republican

Currently 4-2 Republican.  No Republican is vulnerable, while one Democrat (Yarmuth) theoretically could be.

Louisiana: Likely Republican

Currently 3-2 Republican, with 2 open seats (formerly occupied by Republicans).  The Democrats have a mild chance if they win both the special election in CD-06 and take McCrery's open seat in CD-04.

Maine: Safe Democrat

Currently 2-0 Democrat, with both incumbents safe.

Maryland: Safe Democrat

Currently 6-2 Democrat, with all Democratic incumbents safe.

Massachusetts: Safe Democrat

Currently 10-0 Democrat.  Let's not kid ourselves here.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #4 on: April 05, 2008, 03:26:58 PM »

On the split states, is there a chance that something similar to 1800 happens, in which one member doesn't vote, allowing the state to go for one candidate?

Entirely possible, as only a majority of the votes cast is needed for a candidate to win the state (under the 1824 rules, as decided by Congress on February 7th, 1825 [Link]).
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #5 on: April 05, 2008, 03:44:11 PM »
« Edited: April 05, 2008, 04:37:16 PM by Erc »

Michigan: Likely Republican
9-6 Republican, currently.  If both Tim Walberg (MI-07) and MI-09 (Joe Knollenberg) fall to the Democrats, they could take the state.

Minnesota: Likely Democrat (distant possibility of a Deadlock)

Currently 5-3 Democrat.  If the Republicans take Walz's seat in MN-01, while holding onto MN-03 (Ramstad's open seat) and MN-06 (freshman Bachmann), they can achieve a deadlock.  They have no possibility of taking the state outright, however.

Mississippi: Safe Deadlock.

Currently 2-1 Democrat, with 1 vacant (Wicker's old seat).  All incumbents are safe, and CD-01 is essentially guaranteed to the Republicans.

Missouri: Likely Republican

Currently 5-4 Republican.  Two Republican seats (MO-06 & MO-09) are potential pickups.

Montana: Safe Republican

Danny Rehberg has the only vote, and is popular, safe, and Republican.

Nebraska: Safe Republican

3-0 Republican.  This is safe.

Nevada: Lean Republican

2-1 Republican.  Republican Jon Porter, in CD 3, is somewhat vulnerable, and the state flips if he loses his seat.

New Hampshire: Lean Democrat (possibility of Deadlock, distant possibility of Republican)

2-0 Democrat, a complete flip since 2006.  If the Democratic wave reverses itself, Shea-Porter could lose her seat, making NH a deadlock.  If the Republicans make a comeback of immense proportions, Hodes could be unseated, returning NH to the Republican column.

New Jersey: Safe Democrat

7-6 Democrat, but all the Democrats are safe and the Republicans have two open seats to defend.

New Mexico:  Leans Democratic [pickup]

Currently 2-1 Republican.  With all 3 Congressmen running for the Senate seat, this will be quite interesting.  However, Udall's seat is still safely Democratic no matter what happens, while Wilson's seat leans Democratic without her to defend it, and Pearce's seat is somewhat vulnerable itself.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #6 on: April 05, 2008, 03:58:12 PM »
« Edited: April 29, 2008, 11:28:00 AM by Erc »

New York: Safe Democrat

23-6 Democrat.  Let's not kid ourselves.

North Carolina: Likely Democrat

7-6 Democrat.  If Heath Shuler (CD-11) falls and Robin Hayes (CD-03) retains his seat, the Republicans pick up the state.

North Dakota: Safe Democrat

Earl Pomeroy is a Democrat.  And he's not leaving office until he's dead.

Ohio: Lean Republican (possibility of Deadlock or even Democratic)

Currently 11-7 Republican.  However, the Republicans have two tough open seats to defend in CDs 15 and 16, and need to worry about defending CDs 1, 2, and 14, while the Democrats' only potentially vulnerable incumbent is Zack Space in CD 18.  If the Democrats net 2, they throw the state into Deadlock.  If they net 3 or more, they take the state.

Oklahoma: Safe Democrat Republican

4-1 Republican.  Everybody's safe.

Oregon: Safe Democrat

4-1 Democrat.  Although CD-05 will be competitive, none of the other Democratic seats are, so this is remaining Democratic.

Pennsylvania: Likely Democrat

11-8 Democrat.  There are enough potentially vulnerable Democrats that the Republicans could pick up the state in a good year, by unseating 2 of them (while holding on to their own seats)

Rhode Island: Safe Democrat

2-0 Democrat, both safe.

South Carolina: Safe Republican

4-2 Republican.  Everybody's safe.

South Dakota: Safe Democrat

Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin has this seat as long as she wants to.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #7 on: April 05, 2008, 04:08:43 PM »
« Edited: April 05, 2008, 04:24:47 PM by Erc »

Tennessee: Safe Democrat

5-4 Democrat.  All incumbents are safe.

Texas:  Safe Republican

19-13 Democrat Republican.  No vulnerable Republicans.

Utah:  Safe Republican

2-1 Democrat Republican.  Everybody's safe.

Vermont: Safe Democrat

Yup.

Virginia: Safe Republican

8-3 Republican.  At worst, it becomes 6-5 Republican.

Washington: Safe Democrat

6-3 Democrat, with all Democrats safe.

West Virginia: Safe Democrat

2-1 Democrat, with all Democrats safe.

Wisconsin: Lean Democrat (possibility of Deadlock, cannot be Republican)

5-3 Democrat.  All Republicans are safe, while freshman Steve Kagen (WI-08) is potentially vulnerable.

Wyoming: Safe Republican

With Cubin retiring, Wyoming remains safely in Republican hands.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #8 on: April 05, 2008, 04:13:26 PM »

Have you considered that some representatives might buck their party and instead choose the winner of the state, or abstain from voting? The at-large members from states likely to go the other way for the presidency (Castle, Herseth, Pomeroy) and others who would be under similar pressure (say, Taylor in Mississippi) might be potential wildcards.

It's entirely possible, though, for right now, I'll just assume people are voting along party lines.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #9 on: April 05, 2008, 04:33:39 PM »
« Edited: April 05, 2008, 04:42:51 PM by Erc »

The analysis of individual seats is blatantly stolen from Cook, by the way, as I know next-to-nothing about House races.  If anyone has any better analysis to offer, please feel free.

Net results:



Safe Democratic (18)

Likely Democratic (5): MN, CT, IL, PA, NC

Lean Democratic (4): WI, NH, IN, NM

Lean Republican (3): AK, NV, OH

Likely Republican (4): LA, MI, MO, FL

Strong Republican (13)


Lean Deadlock (possibly Republican): KS

Lean Deadlock (possibly either): AZ

Strong Deadlock: MS


Of the states possibly in contention, only MN, WI, NH, OH can become deadlocked.  (And note that the first two cannot feasibly flip to the Republicans).
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #10 on: April 05, 2008, 04:47:59 PM »

But the people in question also have primaries to consider.  If you're a Democrat and have the deciding vote, your primary voters will hate you far more for electing McCain than everyone else will hate you for electing Obama (after all, it would be expected).  They'd also be rather ostracized within their own party (especially within a large state delegation).  Only if a candidate is very sure of their support among their own party, are from an At-Large state, or are under an extreme amount of pressure to do so, would they consider flipping.

I think we can safely say that any Representative in a CD which Obama wins will be voting for Obama (regardless of how the state votes)...they should be able to play the 'I'm representing my constituents' card if they come under pressure.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #11 on: April 05, 2008, 05:09:16 PM »

How do Republicans have a shot of getting a deadlock (let alone winning) in 2009?

The Democrats are currently favored in 27 delegations (the 26 they now have + NM).  So, they need to lose at least two.

This means the Republicans need to hold on to AZ-01, AK-AL, NV-03, and not lose more than 1 of the Ohio seats.

Additionally, they must win 2 out of the following 4 seats: WI-08, NH-01, IN-09, or either of the two NM seats.  (Or pick up a surprise, like NC-11 or MN-01, or convince Herseth-Sandlin to jump ship).

Remember, this is just to prevent the Democrats from winning on the first ballot.  Assuming they make this pre-condition, how do they win outright?

If they've done this, they'll have at least 20 states under their control.  Winning IN-09 and a NM seat will get them 22.  Winning KS-02 and either AZ-05 or AZ-08 will get them 24.

Getting the two more needed would be quite difficult.  They could get NH with NH-02 (but that's highly unlikely if Obama wins NH, as he does in this scenario---although CO to Obama but NH & [NV or NM] to McCain would give a tie, as well).  They could get NC with NC-11.  That gets them 26, but that's an awful lot of close wins for the Republicans to get in a tight national race.  Alternatively, they pick up a couple of defectors, or they have a good day in PA (or a ridiculously good day in CT).
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #12 on: April 05, 2008, 05:10:16 PM »

I think there'd be intense pressure to give the Presidency to whoever won the popular vote, as a sort of "tie-breaker."

And (for a variety of reasons), I'd bet that would be Obama.  So it would be incredibly hard for the Republicans to pull it off, as any Democrat under pressure can fall back on that excuse (and their own convictions).
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #13 on: April 05, 2008, 06:04:41 PM »
« Edited: April 05, 2008, 06:08:45 PM by Erc »

Democratic Congressmen in Districts won by Bush by a >3% margin:

Earl Pomeroy (ND-AL): +27%
Gene Taylor (MS-04): +27%
Brad Ellsworth (IN-08): +24%
Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin (SD-AL): +21%
Nancy Boyda (KS-02): +20%
Bart Gordon (TN-06): +20%
Chris Carney (PA-10): +20%
Baron Hill (IN-09): +19%
Lincoln Davis (TN-04): +17%
Tim Holden (PA-17): +16%
Alan Mollohan (WV-01): +16%
Heath Shuler (NC-11): +14%
Joe Donnelly (IN-02): +13%
Mike McIntyre (NC-07): +12%
Dennis Moore (KS-03): +11%
John Salazar (CO-03): +11%
Steve Kagen (WI-08): +11%
Harry Mitchell (AZ-05): +9%
Jason Altmire (PA-04): +9%
Bob Etheridge (NC-02): +8%
Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-08): +7%
Nick Rahall (WV-03): +7%
John Tanner (TN-08): +6%
Marion Berry (AR-01): +5%
Tim Walz (MN-01): +4%
Vic Snyder (AR-02): +3%
Mike Ross (AR-03): +3%
Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01): +3%

This is not everybody; some in states that are otherwise solidly Democratic have been omitted, as they will have no effect on the final result in the state.

So, which states are vulnerable to pressure (in this direction):

Obviously, both ND & SD (with Herseth-Sandlin having committed herself to voting for Bush in '04).

MS, where Gene Taylor probably has an interest in staying alive.

IN, where the Democrats hold a 5-4 margin, has three CDs which voted for Bush with over a 10% margin.

KS, where both voted for Bush with over a 10% margin (& Boyda is particularly vulnerable)

AZ, McCain's home state and with two reasonably vulnerable (7%, 9%) Democrats.

TN, where the Democrats have a slim 5-4 margin and 2 Democrats in heavily Bush districts (>15%), and 1 in a lean Bush district (6%).

NC, where the Democrats hold a 7-6 margin, with 2 Democrats in Bush districts (Shuler at +14 and Etheridge at +8).

CO, only if Salazar (+11 Bush) feels vulnerable.  The state as a whole should be close enough that he doesn't jump ship.

WI, only if Kagen (+11 Bush) feels vulnerable.  As Obama should win this state in this scenario, I wouldn't expect him to jump ship.

PA, possibly, if one of the Democrats loses their seat, and another one (presumably Holden or Carney?) feels vulnerable.

WV should be solidly Democratic.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #14 on: April 05, 2008, 06:23:42 PM »

On the flip side of things, there are very few Republicans in a similar situation, who could be pressured to move to Obama.  In fact, after 2006, there are only 8 in the entire country, and none are worse off than Chris Shays.  Of those 8, four are in states that are solidly Democratic (Shays [CT-04], Kirk [IL-10], Walsh [NY-25], and Reichert [WA-08]), and thus don't need to be pressured.

Of the remaining 4, two are in PA (Gerlach in CD 6 & Dent in CD 15), which was always a stretch for the Republicans to win anyway.

One is Heather Wilson's seat in New Mexico, which the Democrats are likely to just pick up outright.

In all of these cases, the margin for Kerry was small (Purple heart%), so the margin for Obama likely won't be more than 6% or so, so there can't be an incredible amount of pressure.


The only Republican who matters who is in serious danger of flipping over is Michael Castle (DE-AL), though he's personally popular enough that he probably doesn't have to (though there might be some pressure if Herseth-Sandlin switches over for him to do the honorable thing, as well).
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #15 on: April 05, 2008, 06:37:40 PM »
« Edited: April 05, 2008, 06:43:12 PM by Erc »

A Map taking into account switching possibilities:



Switching Possibilities:
D -> R
Decent Probability:
SD, ND, IN
Possible:
TN, NC
Long-Shot:
CO, PA

D -> Deadlock:

Long-Shot:
WI

Deadlock -> R:

Decent Probability:
KS, MS, AZ

R -> D:

Decent Probability:
DE


But, when it comes down to it, you really have to consider this:

If the Republicans do win in the House, they are (most likely) going to win on the votes of one or two defectors.  Can Earl Pomeroy (or any of the others under consideration) really look themselves in the mirror each morning, having known it was them (and them alone) who deprived Obama the White House, by having voted for John McCain?  Most defectors probably won't be able to bring themselves to do it.

The ones who are most likely to defect are the ones who can simply defect by not showing up...i.e. Gene Taylor, Nancy Boyda, and Harry Mitchell.  It might be harder to get the other possible defectors to switch over to McCain (though two of the Democrats in IN abstaining is a possibility).
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #16 on: April 05, 2008, 06:54:00 PM »
« Edited: April 05, 2008, 06:56:48 PM by Erc »

Boyda would never vote for McCain. The woman is incredibly liberal and has basically told the DCCC to go screw themselves and let her run her campaign. She doesn't really care about re-election, she's completely devoted to her ideology. I would be absolutely stunned if she voted for McCain in this situation.

A question - what if two faithless electors, in an attempt to get a third candidate into the House election, both voted for different people. We'd have like a 268-268-1-1 or 269-267-1-1 race. What happens then with the top three candidates?

Boyda wouldn't have to vote for McCain, she'd just have to abstain.  But, if what you say is true, she probably wouldn't.  Of course, Dennis Moore could do the same thing, as well.  Or, she could lose re-election.

The thought that a faithless elector could prove important here had occurred to me.  If one voted for (let's pick a likely scenario) Gore, having a third option there could prove important if there's a serious deadlock.

If there were two candidates with 1 electoral vote each...I don't know what would happen.  The relevant Constitutional provision is "...then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President..."  My bet is, they'll use the "not exceeding three" clause to their advantage and just allow votes for only the top two candidates.  (Remember, the Democrats have control of the House as a whole, and can set the rules, and things will likely happen too fast for the Supreme Court to be involved).

Of course, faithless electors are rare enough, so having two is pretty unlikely.  Though if the thought of being able to put another candidate on the ballot occurs to enough people, some might be tempted.  (If I were a Republican elector, I might be tempted to vote for Mark Warner as a possible compromise candidate).
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #17 on: April 05, 2008, 10:35:14 PM »

Boyda would never vote for McCain. The woman is incredibly liberal and has basically told the DCCC to go screw themselves and let her run her campaign. She doesn't really care about re-election, she's completely devoted to her ideology. I would be absolutely stunned if she voted for McCain in this situation.

A question - what if two faithless electors, in an attempt to get a third candidate into the House election, both voted for different people. We'd have like a 268-268-1-1 or 269-267-1-1 race. What happens then with the top three candidates?

Thinking about it a bit more...it'd probably be pretty easy to get one (or both) of the extra names thrown out on a technicality (see the "John Ewards" vote in 2004...death by bad handwriting?)
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #18 on: April 06, 2008, 06:12:32 PM »

I highly doubt Obama would lose in the event of a tie. Regarding potential political backlash for voting the party line, I don't think this would be a big problem for very many members of the House. They would have all just won reelection, and thus would have two years to overcome any negative effects. It is unlikely it would remain a big issue for many voters for two whole years.

As an example, I don't think anyone argues that Republican Senators who represented states that voted for Clinton ultimately put themselves in much of any political trouble by voting to convict Clinton in his impeachment trial, even those who were up for reelection in 2000. I remember it was suggested at the time that it might be problematic for some such as Santorum, but certainly no evidence suggests it really was.

I sincerely doubt that McCain has a shot of winning it outright, and I really don't think that defections will make any sort of difference (excepting perhaps Herseth-Sandlin).  The main point of this exercise was to see what sort of gains the Republicans would need to force a deadlock.  The deadlock might force Obama to make some concessions...or might convince a few defectors if McCain had won the popular vote.  In the most extreme scenario, they could simply keep the deadlock going indefinitely, which would mean the VP-elect (presumably, Obama's pick) would act as President come January 20th (though I'm not sure whether such a move would completely shut down the House---although in any case it would be a bad PR move).
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #19 on: August 19, 2008, 12:03:31 PM »
« Edited: August 19, 2008, 12:08:48 PM by Erc »

As we get closer to November, time for a brief re-analysis of the tie scenario.

Also, apparently, 538.com linked to this thread in its own analysis, referring to the analysis of defection possibilities.

Previous Analysis can be found here.

Alabama: Likely Republican
Cook now rates AL-03 as "Likely Republican."  If the Democrats somehow manage to win there, while Bright wins in AL-02 and the Democrats hold onto AL-05, the Democrats could flip the state.

Alaska: Tossup
Again, whoever wins Young's seat decides the result here.

Arizona: Tossup between Deadlock and Democrat.
If vulnerable Democratic freshmen in AZ-05 and AZ-08 hold on, and Renzi's seat (AZ-01) falls to the Democrats, the Democrats could take the state.  If the Republicans hold onto AZ-03, and take 2 of the three above seats, they could take the state (seems unlikely, though possible).  If the three seats split 2-1 for the Democrats, the delegation remains at 4-4, a deadlock.

Arkansas: Safe Democrat
No change here.

California: Safe Democrat
No change here.

Colorado: Safe Democrat
No change here.

Connecticut: Safe Democrat
As Joe Courtney is now listed by Cook as Safe, Connecticut seems that it will remain in Democratic hands this year.

Delaware: Safe Republican
No change here.

Florida: Likely Republican
The Democrats have a distant possibility of picking up the state here, if Mahoney holds on in FL-16, and they pick up FL-8, 21, and 24, plus one of FL-9,13,18, or 25.  However, such a Democratic sweep seems unlikely if McCain is to win Florida (which is basically required for a tie).

Georgia: Safe Republican
No change here.

Hawai'i: Safe Democrat
No change here.

Idaho: Likely Republican (possibility of a Deadlock)
If Sali somehow loses, this could become a deadlock state.

Illinois: Likely Democrat
If they hold on to all their seats (including IL-10 and IL-11), retake IL-14 and unseat Melissa Bean in IL-8, Republicans can take the state.  Unlikely, though, with Obama at the top of the ticket.

Indiana: Lean Democrat
If the Republicans win the Hill-Sodrel matchup this time around, they can retake the state.

Iowa: Safe Democrat
No change here.

Kansas: Tossup between Deadlock and Republican
All eyes on KS-02 here.  If Boyda holds on, this state remains in deadlock.  Otherwise, Republicans retake the state.

Kentucky: Likely Republican (slight possibility of Deadlock)
If Democrats hold onto both of their seats, and take KY-2, they could throw Kentucky into a deadlock.  No possibility that Democrats lose the state.

Louisiana: Lean Republican
This one's changed a bit since last we talked.  If Cazayoux can hold on in LA-06, and take LA-04, Democrats could flip the state.

Maine: Safe Democrat.
No change here.

Maryland: Safe Democrat.
No change here.

Massachusetts: Safe Democrat.
No change here.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #20 on: August 19, 2008, 12:40:51 PM »
« Edited: August 19, 2008, 02:08:41 PM by Erc »

Michigan: Lean Republican
If both Walberg (MI-07) and Knollenberg (MI-09) fall, the Democrats could flip the state.

Minnesota: Likely Democrat (slight possibility of Deadlock)
If Republicans hold onto all of their seats and unseat Walz (MN-01), they can force a deadlock.

Mississippi: Tossup between Deadlock and Democrat.
"CD-01 is essentially guaranteed to the Republicans," I said a few months ago.  Well, things have changed a bit.  If the Democrats can hold onto their by-election victory there, they can make the state Democratic come January.

Missouri: Lean Republican
If Democrats can take either MO-6 or MO-9, they can flip the state.

Montana: Safe Republican
No change here.

Nebraska: Safe Republican
No change here.

Nevada: Tossup
NV-03 seems to have become more competitive.  Whoever wins this district wins the state.

New Hampshire: Tossup between Democrat and Deadlock, distant possibility of Republican
If Republicans can take NH-01 (Carol Shea-Porter's seat), they force a deadlock.  If they somehow take NH-02, as well, they can return the state to Republican control.

New Jersey: Safe Democrat
No change here.

New Mexico: Tossup
Whoever wins Wilson's old seat (NM-01) wins the state.

New York: Safe Democrat
No change here.

North Carolina: Safe Democrat
With Heath Shuler looking safe, North Carolina appears to be a lock for the Democrats.

North Dakota: Safe Democrat
No change here.

Ohio: Tossup (could be Democrat, Republican, or Deadlock)

The three seats in question here are OH-01, OH-15, and OH-16.  If Republicans hold on to 2 of these, they hold onto the state.  If they hold on to 1 of these, it's a deadlock.  If they lose all 3, the Democrats take the state.

Oklahoma: Safe Republican
No change here.

Oregon: Safe Democrat
No change here.

Pennsylvania: Lean Democrat
If the Republicans can hold onto all of their own seats, and unseat Carney in PA-10 and pick up either PA-4 or PA-11 (or PA-7 or PA-8), they could take the state.

Rhode Island: Safe Democrat
No change here.

South Carolina: Safe Republican
No change here.

South Dakota: Safe Democrat
No change here.

Tennessee: Safe Democrat
No change here.

Texas: Safe Republican
No change here.

Utah: Safe Republican
No change here.

Vermont: Safe Democrat
No change here.

Virginia: Likely Republican
If Democrats pick up Davis' seat in VA-11, as well as VA-02 and one of VA-05 and VA-10, they could take the state.

Washington: Safe Democrat
No change here.

West Virginia: Safe Democrat
No change here.

Wisconsin: Lean Democrat, possibility of Deadlock.
If the Republicans can take WI-08 from Kagen, they can force a deadlock.  No possibility of the Republicans taking the state outright.

Wyoming: Likely Republican
If the Democrats can take the At-Large seat here, they can take the state.  With Cubin retiring, however, that seems unlikely.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #21 on: August 19, 2008, 01:10:39 PM »



Safe D: 20

Likely D: 2
MN*, IL

Lean D: 3
WI*, PA, IN

Tossup: 8
MS*, AZ*, NH*, NM, NV, AK, OH*, KS*

Lean R: 3
LA, MI, MO

Likely R: 6
AL, FL, VA, WY, ID*, KY*

Safe R: 8

* Represents states with a possibility of deadlock.  If the asterik is colored, that means that the best the opposing party can do is force a deadlock (e.g., in Mississippi, Republicans can force a deadlock but cannot win the state, while in NH, they could either force a deadlock or win the state).
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #22 on: August 19, 2008, 01:54:59 PM »
« Edited: August 19, 2008, 02:08:02 PM by Erc »

Key Seats to watch out for:

MI-09: Democrats likely win MI if they take Knollenberg's seat.

LA-04, LA-06: Republicans win LA if they take either seat.

MO-06, MO-09: Democrats win MO if they take either seat.

AK-AL: Democrats win AK if they take Young's seat.

NV-03: Democrats take NV if they win the seat.

NM-01: Democrats take NM if they take Wilson's old seat.  

NH-01: Deadlock if Republicans defeat Carol Shea-Porter.

MS-01: Deadlock if Republicans defeat Childers.

AZ-01: Democrats likely take AZ if they pick up Renzi's old seat.

IN-09: Republicans take IN if they defeat Hill.

PA-04, PA-11: Republicans likely take PA if they beat either Altmire or Kanjorski.

WI-08: Deadlock if Republicans defeat Kagen.

IL-08: Republicans likely take IL if they defeat Bean.

MN-01: Deadlock if Republicans defeat Walz.  


How do Republicans force a deadlock?

First, make sure the Democrats don't pull off any surprises on Republican turf.  This means, hold onto AL-03 and WY-AL, and don't have horrendous days in Florida, Virginia, or Ohio (losing 4, 3, and 3 seats respectively would lose the state to the Democrats).  This keeps 16 states from Democratic hands.

Then, hold onto the seats that you should win:  both the Missouri seats (MO-06 and MO-09), MI-09, and either LA-04 and LA-06.  This pushes the count up to 19 states.

Then, win the key tossup seats:  AK-AL, NV-03, NM-01, NH-01, and MS-01.  There are now 24 non-Democratic states.

Then, for a bit of a stretch, win any of the three competitive seats in AZ (AZ-01, AZ-05, and AZ-08) or IN-09.

If the Republicans can somehow pull off all of these seats, they can force a deadlock (it's made easier if they make some less likely gains, such as picking up 2 seats in PA, 3 seats in IL, MN-01, or WI-08).  

How do Republicans win without defections?

This is a much harder goal.  They need to pull off everything mentioned in the prior section (including picking up IN and deadlocking AZ), except that winning in MS-01 is no longer as necessary.  In addition, they must:

Win ID-01 and KY-02.
Defeat Boyda in KS-02 and lose no more than one seat in Ohio.

Doing this puts the total count at 23 Republican states, 25 Democratic states, and 2 deadlocked (AZ & NH), here counting MS-01 for the Democrats.

To pick up the remaining 3 states necessary to win outright would require:

Winning another seat in AZ.
Winning NH-02.
Winning PA-10 and either PA-4 or PA-11.

There is very little room for error here, as the only other possibly accessible state is Illinois, where they would need to win IL-10,11,14, and 08.

So, it seems a very tall order for the Republicans to win outright without defections, though not entirely impossible.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #23 on: August 19, 2008, 02:06:55 PM »
« Edited: August 19, 2008, 02:12:56 PM by Erc »

Competitive Seats that Republicans need to win to get 26 state delegations:

(where "Competitive" means Lean Republican or worse).

MO-06, MO-09
MI-07 or MI-09
LA-04 or LA-06
Two out of the four of OH-01, OH-15, OH-16, OH-18
NV-03
AK-AL
NM-02, NM-01
KS-02 or KS-03
IN-09 or IN-08
NH-01, NH-02
Two out of the three of AZ-01, AZ-05, AZ-08
Three out of the six of PA-03, PA-10, PA-04, PA-11, PA-07, PA-08

Alternatively, any of the above lines may be substituted for winning:
IL-10, IL-11, IL-14, IL-08
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


« Reply #24 on: August 19, 2008, 05:01:35 PM »

An Absurdly Long List of Defection Possibilities by State:

Boldface indicates an incumbent.
The number in parentheses after the name of the state is the number of seats listed below the Republicans have to get the votes of to win the state.

For each seat: the Democratic candidate is listed, followed by Bush's margin of victory, followed by Cook's rating for the Seat.

Alabama: (1)
AL-02: Bobby Bright, +33.8%, Tossup
AL-05: Parker Griffith, +20.3%, Tossup
AL-03: Josh Segall, +17.1%, Likely R

Even if Democrats do win all three of these seats in November, McCain's large win in the state and in each of these districts makes a defection likely should things go sour for Congressional Republicans.

Alaska: (1)
AK-AL: Some Democrat, +25.5%, Tossup

Should Young (or some other Republican) be defeated, whichever Democrat who wins here may be tempted to vote for McCain anyway, especially if his win was quite narrow.  Of course, if Obama performs much, much better than Kerry (which is definitely possible), this decreases the likelihood of a defection.

Arizona: (2 to deadlock, 3 to win)
AZ-03: Bob Lord, +16.4%, Likely R
AZ-05: Harry Mitchell, +8.8%, Lean D
AZ-01: Some Democrat, +8.3%, Lean D
AZ-08: Gabby Giffords, +6.4%, Lean D

The temptation to defect (or at least abstain) may be larger in McCain's home state, especially for the incoming freshman in AZ-01.

Arkansas: (1 to deadlock, 2 to win)
AR-01: Marion Berry, +4.5%, Safe D
AR-02: Vic Snyder, +3.9%, Safe D
AR-04: Mike Ross, +3.9%, Safe D

These are ultra-safe seats that aren't really primed for a McCain blowout.  Unless Obama is destroyed in Arkansas, or any of these three have a personal fallout with Obama, any defection/abstention is unlikely.

California:
Not Winnable by Defection.

Colorado: (2)
CO-04: Betsy Markey, +16.7%, Tossup
CO-03: John Salazar, +11.4%, Safe D

John Salazar may abstain here, throwing the state into deadlock, but it's unlikely.  Markey may be tempted to defect if she defeats Musgrave, as she would be vulnerable in 2010.

Connecticut:
Not Winnable by Defection.

Delaware: (1)
DE-AL: Sacrificial Lamb, -7.6%, Safe R

Carper is the only Republican whose possible defection has a non-negligible chance of making a difference.  He and Herseth-Sandlin may simply exchange votes, especially if Biden is on the ticket.

Florida: (4)
FL-09: Some Democrat, +13.9%, Likely R
FL-21: Raul Martinez, +13.9%, Lean R
FL-25: Joe Garcia, +12.6%, Likely R
FL-13: Christine Jennings, +12.3%, Likely R
FL-24: Some Democrat, +10.5%, Lean R
FL-08: Some Democrat, +9.3%, Lean R
FL-18: Annette Tadeo, +8.8%, Likely R
FL-16: Tim Mahoney, +8.5%, Lean D
FL-02: Allen Boyd, +8.4%, Safe D

If Florida Democrats somehow do gain a majority of seats here, they would be in rather strong McCain districts...making the likelihood that at least one of them defects rather high.  Though memories of 2000 may complicate matters especially here (Democrats may not want to give up a chance at the state when they have it, or, conversely, they may not want to overturn the elected result).

Idaho: (0 for deadlock, 1 for win)
ID-01, Walt Minnick, +38.3%, Likely R

A prime candidate for an abstention (handing the state to the Republicans), should he somehow defeat Sali.

Illinois: (6)
IL-18: Colleen Callahan, +16.1%, Likely R
IL-08: Melissa Bean, +11.8%, Likely D
IL-14: Bill Foster, +11.6%, Lean D
IL-11: Debbie Halvorson, +7.3%, Lean D
IL-06: Jill Morgenthaler, +6.8%, Likely R
IL-10: Dan Seals, -5.5%, Tossup

Being Obama's home state (and a state which Obama will win by a large margin), the chances that any Democrat doesn't vote for Obama is minimal, to say the least.  More likely, perhaps, would be a Mark Kirk abstention or defection, preventing any chance the Republicans have of taking the state outright.

Indiana: (2)
IN-03: Mike Montagano, +36.8%, Likely R
IN-08: Brad Ellsworth, +23.7%, Likely D
IN-09: Baron Hill, +18.6%, Lean D
IN-02: Joe Donnelly, +12.8%, Safe D

Definitely a state to watch out for in terms of defections (or, at the very least, an abstention, throwing the state into deadlock).

Iowa:
Not Winnable by Defection.

Kansas: (0 for deadlock, 1 for win)
KS-02: Nancy Boyda, +19.7%, Tossup
KS-03: Dennis Moore, +10.5%, Likely D

Only an abstention is necessary to throw the state to the Republicans.  Though I find it unlikely that either will, Boyda may be tempted if she only narrowly squeaks out re-election.

Kentucky: (0 for deadlock, 1 for win)
KY-02: David Boswell, +30.7%, Likely R
KY-06: Ben Chandler, +17.1%, Safe D
KY-03: John Yarmuth, -2.0%, Lean D

Should Boswell somehow win in KY-02, he'd be very tempted to abstain, guaranteeing the state for the Republicans.  Conversely, should Northrup win her rematch, however, she'd be highly unlikely to defect to Obama, even if he should win her district.

Louisiana: (1)
LA-04: Some Democrat, +19.0%, Tossup
LA-06: Don Cazayoux, +18.8%, Tossup
LA-03: Charlie Melancon, +16.8%, Safe D

If Cazayoux and the LA-04 Democrat both win narrowly, there may be serious temptation for at least one of them to abstain, throwing Louisiana into deadlock.

Maine:
Not Winnable by Defection.

Maryland:
Not Winnable by Defection.

Massachusetts:
Not Winnable by Defection.

Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.093 seconds with 13 queries.