Electoral Math: The Big Three

[DFLer4edu]

I've been doing electoral math at http://www.270towin.com/ and I see virtually no way that either party can win without two of the following states : Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania. If we were to win all three along with Michigan, they could pick up every other swing state and we'd still win. It seems to me that whoever obtains a 2 out of 3 record in FL, OH, and PA wins. Anybody else been doing electoral math?

[HereSince1628]

1. What happened to the old Big 3, CA, TX and FL?

[DFLer4edu]

3. CA and TX are locked

There is a new big three!

[HereSince1628]

5. Yer sure of that 23 months out? Things happen you know

[DFLer4edu]

8. I'm sure that I'm not sure

The democrats can't win without CA, the republicans without TX. If things change and Texas opens up, great. If California opens up, we've got work to do. But go do the math with those two locked in and it takes two of my big three to win in pretty much scenario.

[Pithy Cherub]

6. The Governor of CA is...

At your peril, keep thinking California is Blue. All it takes here is star power and you will see a rush to whomever has it. How long did news media and the national mindlessness take center stage here during the recall? We, Californians have minds of our own and rarely listen to the collective will. We do what we want for good or for ill.

[AntiCoup2K4]

2. We can't concentrate on Florida and Ohio as long as both are corrupted....

...It's impossible to win in states where Secretaries of State are the chairs of the Republican candidate's campaign (and arguably his brother's mistress, in Florida's case)

[DFLer4edu]

7. I'm just doing math

Part of the strategy to winning in these two states would be working towards election reform. I'm just playing with an electoral calculator right now. It looks like we're going either Florida or Ohio to win. Do the math for yourself, if you come to the same conclusion it is even more of an incentive to push harder for election reform in these states, not to write them off.

[tkmorris]

22. Good point, HOWEVER

That brings up a second point. Both of those states have gubernatorial elections this year, and the incumbents are term limited. The Republican Party in Ohio has a lot of baggage to carry around but the Dems there are disorganized from what I hear.

Here in Florida, Jeb is leaving office. Who will contend to take his place is somewhat up in the air but the Dems here are quite energized. We have an excellent chance to retake this state.

Winning Governor's Mansions this year, as well as making inroads in Congress and every other local election from state races down to town dogcatcher will have an impact on the 2008 Presidential race. So let's get busy and win some.

[Blue Shark]

4. We need to win battles AGAINST the big three of Diebold, Sequoia, and ES&S

[Rebellious Republican]

11. Ding Ding Ding, you are so correct! Nothing else matters!

[BeFree]

14. Welcome to DU, Blueshark

None of our efforts will mean a damn thing if we don't first get rid of the private and secretive vote counters running the election process.

The whole vapor vote question is coming to a head -- it finally made a front page, the front page of the LA Times, no less. Check it out:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2017834

[skipos]

9. I disagree.

First of all, no one has any idea who the nominees are going to be for either party. The states that a party "typically" wins changes over the years. Carter won by carrying almost exclusively the south. There are no guarantees that dems will win the usual west coast, northeast and great lakes regions.

Regardless, I hope that we can get a ticket with good candidates from a flippable red states. For example, if Warner was the nominee and was able to win the same states that Kerry did (252 electoral votes) and add his own state of Virginia (13 electoral votes) he would only need 5 more. If he won either of the states that Gore won but Kerry lost, Iowa and New Mexico, he'd be president. Maybe if the ticket had Schweitzer from Montana, the west could be in play too.

A lot can happen in three years, who knows? :shrug:

[HillDem]

10. We have to think much bigger

Like all 50 states. We must be competitive in every state and try to build the party everywhere.

Remember only like 5 or 10 states have exclusively republican leadership. I think only Alaska, Texas, South Carolina, Missouri, Georgia, and Utah are the only states that have 2 puke senators, a puke governor, and a puke legislature.

Thats only six states where Democrats have no power. We need to shoot much higher than 270 electoral votes, IMHO.

[Nimrod2005]

12. Can please do some math for 2006 elections first?

We will worry about math for 2008 later...

[HillDem]

13. Good thinking

We'll see what states are in play for 08 after the outcome of 06. Who knows, maybe TN, OH, MT, AZ, MO and a few others will be trending blue thanks to Senate victories.

[riffraff]

15. Think positive

but anything can still happen. Elections are a political lifetime away.

[DaveinMD]

16. we win if we hold PA

and add Virginia behind Governor Warner.

[skipos]

19. See my post #9. By my math you are wrong.

Kerry's 252 plus Warner's 13 from Virginia means Warner still needs 5 more to win.

[Hippo_Tron]

21. New Mexico or Iowa

Kerry should have won these states

[Hippo_Tron]

17. AZ + Iowa + Nevada + NM

That puts us over 270. The problem is that Ohio and Florida were both closer than Arizona.

[Nimrod2005]

18. Would love to see CO, NM, and AZ turn blue...

[arewenotdemo]

20. that WOULD be lovely

a beautiful turqoise.