The 2024 GOP Presidential Race.

Just kidding. There is no 2024 GOP presidential race. Donald Trump will be the nominee of that party next year. It does not matter that he has been indicted four times. It will not matter that he will likely be a convicted felon by Super Tuesday. It does not matter that he is a corrupt, incompetent drama queen. The Republican party likes him. They like him because he gives them license to vocalize their prejudices and take pride in their ignorance. They like him because he tells them that they are victims, which is very comforting. 

Most all they like him because he is their guy. They chose him seven years ago and there is an entire echo chamber that exists for the sole purpose perpetuating this status for him. Some pieces of this machinery wish to move on, but the masses say otherwise. He is currently polling at 55% of the field in a race with a dozen candidates.  He will win early. He will win often and the only thing that can stop him is the right Twinkee clogging the wrong artery between now and March 1st or so. If Donald Trump is capable of breath and basic mobility, he will be the Republican party for president next year.

Nevertheless, we are about 48 hours out from the first "Debate" of this presidential cycle. This event will look more like auditions for the vice-presidency than a traditional debate. The front-runner is staying home. Only one guy is expected to say anything mean or critical about him from the stage. He will be booed heartily when he does so. 

So this post is a look at the dozen or so other people who have decided to pretend the last three paragraphs are not so set in stone. They are worth looking at, at least once. After all, they pretend to think they're going to be president in 17 months. That's wild.

For each candidate,  I will ask three questions: Is he qualified?, Why is he running?, and what would a successful campaign look like for him? Then I'll make a brief prediction about how I think they will do in this sham of a primary. 

I have already squeezed the suspense out of who will win. But maybe these questions can help us begin to understand how this ill-fated clown car got quite so jammed.

TIER ONE: The Nominee Presumptive.

1. Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States.

National Polling Average among Republicans: 54.8%.

a. Is he qualified? Well, he's the first former president to seek the office since Grover Cleveland so, I guess technically....no. The answer is good lord, no.

b. Why is he running?  To fill the love-shaped hole in his heart.

c. What would a successful campaign look like for him?

To be elected President of the United States again. The full Grover Cleveland experience. It is the only thing that will ever make him feel a moment's happiness. And he has a chance. I would say he has about a 35% chance of achieving this, which is based entirely on the fact that Joe Biden's approval ratings remain stubbornly low. I think those numbers will change when the country accepts that we only have two options, but Biden is not as popular as he should be given the state of the economy, lack of meaningful scandal and his various successes in passing domestic legislation and forging foreign policy successes. But that is the subject for another post.

Trump will be the nominee and he has a chance of winning the election. We will go to the polls in 441 days and we won't be certain who the winner is until late that night.

TIER TWO: The Plausible Alternative.

2. Ron DeSantis, Governor of Florida.

National Polling Average among Republicans: 14.3%.

a. Is he qualified? Yeah, sure. He's the governor of a big state and he was in congress before that. 

b. Why is he running? Because he assumed that his success in Florida would translate to a national mandate as the alternative to Trump. This was stupid. He should have waited until 2028 when he could have waltzed to the nomination. But I guess he had FOMO. Or an overly ambitious wife.

c. What would a successful campaign look like for him? 

Being the nominee. It is still possible. Trump's likely convictions could start happening early in 2024 and maybe that will give some voters pause about whether he can beat Biden. (One small problem there-Republican primary voters all think that Joe Biden is awful and assume that the rest of the country share that sentiment.)  At the risk of being morbid, there is also the fact that Donald Trump could die in the next six months. But short of that, DeSantis is probably fated to get his ass kicked in the early primary states and return to Florida with his national brand deflated.

It's worth noting that DeSantis has already done something very stupid. Instead of running a traditional campaign he has decided to let his Super PAC do most of the fundraising. This means that he can't "coordinate" with the Super PAC openly, so they have to talk to each other through the public press releases. It really is as stupid as anything any presidential candidate has ever done. If you want the details, Josh Barro does a great job with them here:  https://www.joshbarro.com/p/memo-to-ron-desantis-be-smarter

So this is where the GOP golden boy stands. He's still second in most national polls but he has hopelessly destroyed his relationship with Trump and he has exposed himself as a terrible retail politician. He might be able to have a comeback in 2028 but as of now it looks like no one will lose more political capital in this cycle than Ron DeSantis.

Prediction: Second in Iowa. Third in New Hampshire. Dead after South Carolina. 

Tier Three: The Quadrennial Flash In the Pan.

3. Vivek Ramaswamy, Media Gadfly.

National Polling Average Among Republicans: 7.2%.

a. Is he qualified? Not on your life.

This stupid motherfucker is an insult to American democracy. It's early days but I think he might be less qualified for the presidency than Donald Trump. He started the campaign without having ever held a job in government and without even knowing what the nuclear triad is. His biggest "ideas" are for the United States to befriend Vladimir Putin and he thinks 9/11 may have been an inside job. I hate this prick. tl;dr:No.

b. Why is he running? To become famous. Did I mention that he is a prick and that I hate him? Because he is and I do.

c. What would a successful campaign look like for him? Mission accomplished. He is the only candidate in this horrible field who is exceeding expectations. Of course, starting as 3o-something whose only accomplishment was to start a business that has never turned a profit, expectations were not exactly high. But he knows how to talk to old white people and make them feel good. That's a valuable commodity if your goal is to be a guest on Joe Rogan and maybe set up a reverse mortgage concern. 

This vapid asshole has already gotten tons of free press. The people who watch Fox News have picked him as their official token minority for this cycle. He is in the Alan Keyes-Herman Cain-Ben Carson fraternity for life. Two years from now he'll be writing books and hosting a podcast and being an irritant in our national life.  It beats working. 

Prediction: he'll finish 2nd or 3rd in Iowa. Then 4th in New Hampshire. He'll probably bow out before South Carolina, in order to stay in Trump's good graces.

TIER FOUR: Garden Variety Losers.

4. Mike Pence, 48th Vice-President of the United States.

National Polling Average: 5.2%.

a. Is he qualified? Yeah, sure. 

b. Why is he running? It's what vice-presidents do.

c. What would a successful campaign look like for him? 

Second or third place. Staying in past New Hampshire. Maybe staking some claim to his legacy as having done the bare minimum to keep our republic in place?

Primary Prediction: 4th in Iowa. 5th in New Hampshire. Extremely boring concession speech.

5. Nikki Haley, former governor of South Carolina.

National Polling Average: 3.4%.

a. Is she qualified? More than most in this field.

b. Why is she running? Because she is a try-hard who is in denial about the racist, sexist nature of her party.

c. What would a successful campaign look like for her? Proving me wrong about the racist, sexist nature of her party by coming in second and/or winding up on the ticket.

Primary Prediction: She will not run a successful campaign. But she will burn through a lot of money that would have otherwise been spent on second boats and fourth golf club memberships. But she'll probably cling on to her place in the national discourse-going on Sunday talk shows to prove that the Republican party is not racist and sexist. Someday she'll probably be a cabinet secretary.

6. Tim Scott, Junior Senator from South Carolina.

National Polling Average: 2.8%.

a. Is he qualified? Yeah, I guess.

b. Why is he running? Because a lot of rich people told him that the party is dying to nominate a never married black man to be president. And he probably thinks he can wind up being Donald Trump's running mate. 

c. What Would a Successful Campaign Look Like For Him? Being on the ticket. 

Primary Prediction: He seems like a nice enough guy. He'll get some traction in Iowa. If he can finish second there, then he will just need to survive New Hampshire and probably come in second again in South Carolina. That could be a strong enough performance to get Trump's attention. 

7. Chris Christie, former governor of New Jersey.

National Polling Average: 2.6%.

a. Is he qualified? Yes.

b. Why is he running? He seems to think he can out bully Donald Trump. But he has no idea the difference between being a Jersey caliber asshole and a world-class malignant narcissist. I genuinely believe that if Donald Trump participated in even one debate, he would make Chris Christie cry on the stage. That's the only thing I will regret about Trump not doing these debates.

c. What Would a Successful Campaign Look Like For Him? I suppose he thinks he can rehabilitate his image. And be there in case the party wakes up to how weak a general election candidate Trump is because of his baggage. But the party will never nominate him.

Primary Prediction: 4th in New Hampshire, out of the race soon after that. He'll probably go back to a cushy media job although I personally hope it's a peg or two lower than the one he had at ABC before entering this race. We need to stop making presidential candidate a good thing to have on your resume.

TIER FIVE: The Dreggs.

8. Doug Burgum, governor of North Dakota. 

a. Is he qualified? Yes.

b. Why is he running? He is a rich guy that wants to be a national player. He actually has one admirable quality-he believes in climate change. (Although being from North Dakota, he also loves the fossil fuel industry, so that's kind of a wash. But I hope he gets to make that point on the debate stage this week because more Republicans need to hear it.

And he's a patron of the arts. Which is nice. But he also signed a sever abortion ban for his state, so fuck this guy after all. 

c. What Would a Successful Campaign Look Like For Him? Try not to blow too much of that fortune, Doug. Who knows, you might want to do this again in 2028.

Primary Prediction: Maybe the field thins out after Iowa and he wins some delegates in New Hampshire. If he really wants to burn a hole in his billion dollar fortune, he can hang on and win some more delegates in the early primaries. +

9. Asa Hutchinson, former governor of Arkansas.

a. Is he qualified: Almost.

b. Why is he running? He thinks he can govern like an old-school mainstream Republican free from the taint of Trumpism. That ship has sailed, but he's going to go down swinging.

c. What Would a Successful Campaign Look Like for Him? Qualifying for all the debates Not dropping out before Iowa. He also has shown some glimmers of independent thought on the subject of Trump's corruption, so he might be able to have a moment in this first debate. 

Primary Prediction: Hopeless.

TIER SIX: Sludge and Slugs.

There are some other dirt bags running in this race. The mayor of Miami. Lawrence Elder. One or two rich weirdoes (besides Trump and Ramaswamy.) Oh, and Will Hurd, who is sort of decent guy that is gaining all the traction you would expect a sort-of decent guy to get among these swine. I won't waste your time with them but I'll leave this a place holder. There is one scenario worth thinking about-what if Trump clobbers this field in the early states but then gets convicted of a crime and the party tries to turn on him? Well then we'll probably need a compromise candidate.  If DeSantis has done okay in the first few primaries, it could be him. But he'll probably alienate a lot of people in the coming months by spending a lot of money to get his ass kicked.  

If I had to pick someone to be the nominee who is not in the current field, I would go with Glenn Younkin, the governor of Virginia. He's a lightweight but he doesn't offend any of the major constituencies and the the party will probably fall for the hype of possibly winning Virginia for the first time in 20 years.

But brokered conventions and white-knight candidates are the stuff of history books and West Wing fan fiction. This is the real world and we are stuck with Trump v. Biden II. 

\

First General Election Forecast: Hillary 50, Trump 44, Johnson 4, Stein 2. (Electoral College 348-190)

The Original Splash Brother, Manute Bol

I have been meaning to write a post about the general election race for weeks. It's not a very exciting topic this far out but I wanted to put my "morning line on the record and now that Nate Silver's forecasts are up, it's time to write.  Nate's forecast is Hillary 49, Trump 45, Johnson 5. That leaves a little more than 1 percent for Jill Stein, the Green Party candi anddate.  (When writing abot 538.com's models, I will, unless otherwise indicated, refer to their Polls-Plus Forecast, because I believe it's most accurate.)

My morning line is HIllary 50, Trump 44, Johnson 4, Stein 2, with the Electoral College at 348-190.

My central thesis for this election is that Hillary Clinton is the favorite for two broad reasons: the fundamentals of the election favor the incumbent party and the Republican nominee is unlikely to persuade many voters to vote for him over Clinton who didn't already vote Republican four years ago. As for fundamentals, I mean the fact that Barack Obama is liked by more voters than he is disliked. The economy is generally solid and the opposition party has nominated a dumpster-fire. That dumpster-fire said things to get the nomination that probably preclude mutliple paths to the White House.

This shold make Hillary Clinton the clear favorite, and she is that.  But she comes with her own baggage and has some highy unfavorables.  As a betting matter she has been right about a 3-1 favorite ever since both parties settled on their respective nominees.  I think that accurately reflect the state of the race, and is consistent with the 538 model.

1. Specific States.

In 2012 Barack Obama won 332 Electoral Votes. Mitt Romney won 206. President Obama won 10 out of 11 close states that year. That's actually good news for the GOP.  The only state they really have to defend is North Carolina, which Romney won by just two points. The next closest margins of victory was Georgia by eight, Arizon and and Missouri by nine. Clinton needs to worry about Florida (less than one point in 2012), Ohio (three), Virginia (4), Colorado and Pennsyvlania (5) and New Hampshire (six).

So Donald trump needs a net gain of 64 Electoral Votes.  The quickest distance to that, using 2012 margins of difference is to win Florida (29 EV), Ohio (18), Virginia (13) and Colorado (9). I think that Trump's racist comments about undocumented immigrants will translate into atrocious numbers among Latino voters. That probably puts Florida and Colorado out of reach. If so, he will need to win some blue states in the Upper Midwest.

Think of Trump as having three paths to 270 Electoral votes. Each is based on the assumption that he doesn't lose any Romney states. The crucial states are Florida and Colorado, because they have high numbers of Latino voters and I think they will be hard for Trump to win.   :

A. Direct Line: Florida, Ohio, Virginia and Colorado.

B.  Without Colorado:  If he wins FL, OH & VA but loses Colorado, he will have 262 Electoral Votes. He could get the remaining eight by carrying one of the below configurations;
        i. Pennsylvania
        ii.Iowa and New Hampshire
        iii Minnesota or Wisconsin. (Or Michigan, which is extremely unlikely.)

C. Without Florida.  If he wins OH & VA but not CO or FL, Trump is in a huge electoral hole. He would have 237 electoral votes and need to win. To dig out of that hole, he probably needs to win either Michigan or Pennsylvania. Winning both PA & MI would be enough to win, but that's unlikley to happen.  If he wins Pennsylvania, he gets within 13 votes and needs two more upsets among New Hampshire, Michigan and Wisconsin. If he wins Michigan but loses Pennsyvlania, then he needs to win both Wisconsin and Minnesota.

If Trump loses both FL and CO,  He would probably need to win Pennsylvania and Michigan. That's very unlikely.

The forecasts on 538.com show some traditionally red states as being competitive. At the moment, Nate gives Hillary a 25% chance of winning Arizona, Missouri and Georgia. But as the election gets closer, I think those states will tend to move in Trump's diretion.  My official prediction is depressingly familiar. I think Clinton will win back North Carolina and I think she will win Nebraska' 2nd congressional district. That will get her 348 Electoral Votes.


2.  Vice Presidential Choices.

Way back in November of last year I wrote that Tim Kaine would be the Democratic nominee for Vice-President.  I'm sticking with that. He's the safe, sensible choice with experience in the senat and the exective. He also helps win one of the most competitive states, Virginia  Hillary has the lead and she's a small-c conservative by nature. This is the safe pick.

The Republican running mate sweepstakes have come down to a handful of choices. Chris Christie would be absurd. Newt Gingrich would be terrible, but I think he's good at telling people like Donald Trump what they want to hear.  That can't hurt when wooing a narcissist. I think General Flynn disqualified himself when he said today that he was tepidly pro-choice.  I think Trump wold face a delegate revolt if he chose Flynn.

That leaves Governor Mike Pence of Indiana.  The biggest question about this pick is whether Pence wants to give up being governor of Indiana.  He's up for re-election and can't be on the ballot there twice.  I don't know if he wants to give up being Governor for a 25% chance of being Vice-President. But he has to know that this will elevate his name recognition and it will allow him to play the grown up for the next 18 weeks.  When 2020 comes around, he will have credibility with the people who loved Trump and perhaps with the establishment if he is thought to have made the race more competitive than it should have. He also has to consider the possiblity that should they win this thing, Trump might resign after a few months to cash in on his new fame. (This is a real prospect.)

So I think Pence is the smart choies of the remaining candidates. And really, how exciting can it be to govern Indiana?  So we are looking at Clinton-Kaine and Trump-Pence.  Neither of these choices affect any of my electoral college predictions, but they probably make Virginia and Indiana slightly more likely to stay with the party that they chose in 2012.


3. Worst Case Scenarios.

So I'm writing that there is a 25% chance that Donald Trump will be the next President-elect of the United States. Let's try to break down that that means.

First let me say that I'm always open to the idea that the Trump campaign is a giant scam and that the candidate will back out at some point rather than face ignoble defeat.  But I don't think he will do this before the convention. He can't pass up that much free air time. But if things look bad in September, he might invent an excuse for him to dropout and say that his electors should just vote for Pence instead of him. I know this is crazy. The stuff of a bad novel by a political beat reporter. But what part of 2016 has not been just that?  So let me clarify that I think the odds of the election winner are something like this: Clinton 75%, Trump 23%, somebody else, 2%.

But that leaves Mr. Trump with a 23% chance of winning. To put that in sports terms that's roughly equivalent to Manute Bol's three point field goal percentage. Sounds crazy but some of those shots went in. A more common sports analogy would be an NFL team with a 7 point defecit halfway through the third quarter. So Trump can win this. It's just not very likely.

My operating assumption for the past several months was that Trump's best chance of winning involved something horrible happening on American soil, most likely a terrorist attack that makes people willing to try out his ridiculous idea of banning Muslims and building a wall along the southern border. The mass shooting at the Orlando night club did nothing to move the prediction markets. So far the the mass shooting of Dallas police officer has also had no effect. But I'm leaving the room open for an October surprise. If we have multiple ISIS-linked or insipred attacks on the homeland in October, Trump's odds will improve.

He also has some issues to make hey with. He is running, contra the mainstream of the Republican party against free trade. He's going to promise people a return to the economy of the 1950 and 60s. He's also going to imply a trunt ot the culture of the 1950s. That does has some appeal. He is currently leading white men by more than 20 points. (Makes you proud, doesn't it?)

I think a Trump victory means four things happened:
1. Major terrorist attack on American soil or extended instances of violence against police officers.
2. A "scandal" of some sort that tarnishes Hillary more than Benghazi or the Email server have.
3. Tepid economic numbers in the fall.
4. Trump rebranding his message for the general electorate in a way that accentuates the economic insecurity of working class people while simultaneously convincing Wall Street that he won't actually impose any of his whackadoo economic poliices.

That last one is quite the typerope to walk. I don't think he has political chops or interpersnal skills to do it.  That's why I'm an optimist.

4. Best Case Scenarios

This election cycle is already a wasted opportunity. When Hillary's only meaningful challenge came from a 74 year old socialist, it meant that the party was not about to change. And when the Republicans nominated Donald Trump they doomed themselves to four years of bleating the No True Scotsman Fallacy.  When Trump loses,people like Ted Cruz will say "It's because we didn't nominate a real conservative."  And in four years, they probably will do just that.

Hillary's vote margin over Trump will probably be bigger than the 3.95% that Obama's beat Romney by. But I don't think he will win by a bigger margin than the 7.3% that Obama beat McCain by in 2008. Even if she does, I think the only red states that become competitive are Georgia, Arizona and Missouri.  A sweep of all the battlegrounds plus those three would get her up to 384 Electoral Votes. That's close to a route, but not quite the stuff of history. A truly historic meltdown by Trump might make Kansas, South Carolina and Montana competitive. But even adding them to the Blue pile would leave Trump far short of Goldwater-McGovern-Mondale territory.

A Clinton blowout probably involves for things happening;
1. A relative lack of serious terrorist activity.
2. Trump being unwilling or incapable of toning down his campaign rhetoric.
3. A massive fund raising dsparity because rich people determine that they are better off with Hillary for four years than the dumpster-fire.
4. Television ads that rehabilitate Clinton's image and cement Trump's imge among indpendents.

The hardest part is rehabilitating Clinton's image.  I think there's 40% of the population that will vote for her opponent no matter how dangerous that opponsent is.  That's why I'm not too excited about Kansas or Mississippi turning blue or even purple.  Hillary won't play aggressively enough to make them copetitive.

5.  Third &; Fourth Party Effects.

Gary Johnson is approaching double-digits in polls that include him. A lot of this is the result of Trump and Clinton both being so unpopular. But as people begin to take their vote seriously, they will not turn to Libertarians in huge numbers. I think his ceiling is eight percent and will have to fight like hell to get five percent.  His best chance of making a dent is that Trump becomes so odious that many Republicans just can not vote for him and look their neighors in the eye.  But I don't see the groundswell happening this year.  Mid single digits it is.

Jill Stein of the Green Party recently offered to ste aside so that Berne Sanders coud instead run as the Green Party candidate. Okay, that was difficult to type with a straight face. What she actually did was she pretended that she would step aside for a candidate who she knew full well intends to endorse Clinton because she things it will curry her favor with disaffected lefties.  It might, but they are small in number. Bernie supporters are already telling pollsters they will vote for Mrs. Clinton in higher numbers than Clinton supporters were saying the same of Barack Obama in 2008.  But to be fair, these Sanders voters are from the left-wing of the party whereas the Clinton supporters of 2008 were from the rightwing of the party. Voting Green was never an option for them. But it will be for about 5% of the population, especially if the polls indicate that Clinton is certain to win the election and prevent a Trump presidency.  Her ceiling is three percent. People still remember the Nader effect. It will kee her number down.  (As will her pseudoscientific opinions about GMO and vaccines, among other things.)

6.  What to Look Forward To:
A quick run down of the major events of the next 17 and a half weeks.

i. Trump's VP announcment: Probably No Later than July 15th. (That's when Pence has to decide between running for Governor or running for Veep.  I think he's say Veep.)

ii.  GOP convetion in Cleveland (and the ensuing riots). This is really Trump's best chance to put a new spin on his shtick. His one big asset as a candidate is that he knows how to use the medium of television to his advantage.  I think the convention will be more variety show than politcal theater.  People will talk about it. And there will be lots of confrontation in the streets. Here's a big prediction: on July 22nd pundits will be calling this a toss-up election. (Bettors will not.)

iii. Hillary's VP announcement. Probably Kaine but maybe some other boring white guy.

iv. DEM convention in Philadelphia (and the ensuing floor debates). I think Bernie's delegation will vote for HIllary. I also thin it will include enough young Occupy types to make the convetion less boring and sanitized than the Democratic conventions have been ever since Bill and Hillary took the reigns of the party 25 years ago.  But Hillary and Kaine will both give great speeches that no one will be offended by or remember 2 months later and she will get her bounce and the pundits will say she's the favorie again.

v.  First Presidential Debate, September 26th in Dayton, OH.

Circle your calendars for this one.  The Quantum unknown in this election will be how Hillary reacts to debating a sociopath. If Bobby the Brain Heenan were not in ill health, I would want the Dems to hire him for debate preparation.  She has to be ready for the worst of it. But Trump's big advantage is that he can also probably benefit from being (relatively) sane at this forum.  He will be on stage, one one one with someobe that's been in the national political scene since before I could vote. He can probably do 50% crazy and 50% relatively calm and come away scoring points. Or he might call her something horrific and storm off the stage  30 minutes in.  Like I said, circle your calendars.

vi. Vice Presidential Debate October 4th in Farmville, VA
I lived in Virginia for like 4 years. No idea where Farmville is.  And I can't be bothered to Google it. Becuase that's how important the Vice Presidential debate is.

vii. 2nd Presidential Debate in St. Louis, MO.
Probably less compelling TV than the first, but Trump might act from the other end of the crazy scale just to keep her guessing this time.

viii. 3rd Presidential Debate in Las Vegas, NV
Perfect location but I shudder at the lame analogies about who needs to win the big jackpot and roll box cars on top of split aces in order to parlay a oh,, fuck it. We'll all be so sick of these two people by then.  Trump might sneak in one last attempt to look normal in order to hold onto a state or two, The big questioin will be which stattes are in play by then.

ix.  Election Day, November 8th.
Don't forget to vote. And then the polls will close and we'll find out that we have elected our first president.  The only concession will probably come in the form of a deranged Tweet storm of obscenities  And won't hat be worth watching?

The Fun Stuff: General Election Matchup Speculation

Things Change.

Note: a draft of this post was accidentally posted on October 5th. The final version was written on October 18, 2015.

The above map looks very different than our current political alignment. But it wasn't so long ago. That election was held 2 days before my 3rd birthday.  In 2012, only 20 states voted the same way they did that night. And only 8 states (plus DC) have given all of their electoral votes to the same party in every election of my lifetime.  (Minnesota and DC for the Dems, Alaska, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas and Oklahoma for the GOP. Nebraska has been won by the Republican candidate in all those elections, but Obama did win one electoral vote from there in 2008.)

In my last post I made the case for why I believe the Democratic nominee is likely to win the next presidential election. My premise is that Democrats have a small but significant and growing advantage with the current presidential electorate.  To demonstrate this advantage, I categorize all of the states based on how they have voted in the past four presidential cycles.

True Blue (18 states that voted Dem in all four Bush/Obama Elections):  241
Baby Blues (3 states that voted Dem 3 out of 4 times)                                 15
Purple States (5 states that voted for the winner 4 times:                              75
Pink States (2* states that voted for the GOP 3 out of 4 times)                     27
Deep Red (23 states that voted GOP in all 4 Bush/Obama elections:         179
Note: Nebraska's second district is counted with the pink states.

So there are 256 votes likely to vote for the Democrat and 206 likely to vote for the Republican in a close election.  These 206 votes are the exact votes that Romney won in 2012.

But it's not all good news for Team Blue. In 2012 the Democrat won every close state except North Carolina. That is actually good news for the next Republican nominee. He or she will only have to really defend one state in a close election. Everywhere else they will be on offense.  So the biggest question is what is the quickest path for them to get to 270.  The simplest way to compute this is to flip the states they came closet to winning last time.

Here is every Baby Blue, Purple and Pink State, Red font indicates jurisdictions won by Mitt Romney in 2012.

Competitive States
Votes	State	Margin 2012
29	Florida	0.88%
15	N. Carolina	2.04%
18	Ohio	2.97%
13	Virgnia	3.87%
9	Colorado	5.36%
4	New Hamp.	5.58%
6	Iowa	5.81%
6	Nevada	6.68%
1	Nebraska-2nd	7.17%
5	New Mexico	10.15%
11	Indiana	10.20%

So the Republican nominee can get to 235 by just adding Florida, 253 by also adding Ohio and 266 by flipping Florida, Ohio and Virginia. Beyond that they only need to pick up one more state. Colorado, New Hampshire and Iowa were all decided by less than six points and would be competitive if the Republicans run a better candidate and campaign than they did last time.

Establishing a Baseline.

Incumbent candidates tend to be re-elected but incumbent parties running a new candidate lost more often than they win. Since 1952, Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Clinton and Bush 43 were all re-elected. Jimmy Carter and Bush 41 were the only incumbents to lose. That's 5 out of 7. In that same span, Adlai Stevenson, Dick Nixon, Hubert Humphrey, Gerald Ford, Al Gore and John McCain all lost when running as candidates of the incumbent party who were not running for a second term. Only Bush 41 succeeded in that role. That's 6 out of 7.

But that is a small sample size and I think the historical trends discussed in an earlier post make the Democrats favorites to win next year.  Another factor that has to be considered is the effect of race. Some credible analysis of the election returns suggest that Barack Obama' race cost him about 4 points in the 2008 election.  (Source)  But that effect was strongest in states that were not particularly competitive, with Missouri being the only state that might have gone blue but-for the Democrats nominating a black candidate. Missouri was not competitive in 2012 and as we've already seen, Barack Obama carried most of the close states in 2012. The only additional state that probably would have been carried by Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden was North Carolina.  I also think Hillary will outperform Obama in that state next year. But for sake of simplicity, we'll stick with 332-206 as our baseline.

Match-ups with Hillary Clinton

1. Marco Rubio. I think Rubio is by far the strongest candidate that the Republicans might nominate. If he is the nominee, he has a very high likelihood of carrying Florida, which would get the Republicans to 235 electoral votes.  He would do well to consider John Kasich for a running mate and that will help in Ohio.  That would get them up to 253. Then they would have to win Virginia and one more Obama state. That is the best scenario for them and why I think Clinton is likely to choose Tim Kaine or Mark Warner as her running-mate. In any close election scenario, Virginia becomes extremely important.

Official Prediction:  Clinton 303, Rubio 253.  

2.  Jeb! Bush.  Jeb! is also more likely than not to win Florida but it will be very competitive there and I think the Bush name will hurt him in the rust belt. He also should pick Kasich to make Ohio competitive but Jeb! has already shown himself to be a lackluster (read: low-energy) candidate and I don't think he will make the race as close as handsome, charming Rubio.  I suspect he's pick up Florida but lose North Carolina.

Official Prediction: Clinton 318, Bush 220. 

3.  Donald Trump.  Let's put Trump mania in some perspective. In 2008 Dean Cain was the polling front runner for about three weeks.  Donald Trump has now led the Real Clear Politics Polling Average (RCPA) for more than 11 weeks. After the 2nd debate his poll number slipped a little. And then they rebounded.  He has a clear and often commanding lead in every national poll and almost every state-specific poll.  All very impressive.  But he averages about 25% in recent national polls. Consider that around 20 million people voted in the Republican primaries in 2008 and 2012. So 25% of the likely Republican primary voters is around 5 million people. In 2012 Mitt Romney got just over 10 million primary votes and 60 million votes in the general election.

So Trump holds sway over a plurality of Republican voters but those translate into a small sliver of the general election electorate.  If he is nominate he will get most Republican votes and some smattering of quirky independents. But his shtick would run very thin. Clinton will wipe the map with him.  She will win North Carolina, she will win Nebraska's 2nd congressional district and she will have the luxury of campaigning in places like Georgia, Missouri and Indiana in hopes of running up the score on election night. She might make Mississippi competitive if she can match the black turnout from 2012.

Official Prediction: Clinton 374, Trump 164.  (That's Clinton winning NC, NE-2, MO and GA but not Indiana. I think her husband will be an asset in MO, having carried the state twice and having been a long term governor of a neighboring state.)

4. Ted Cruz.  Senator Cruz is taking an interesting tact in this election.  He plans to run to the far-right in the primaries and hope to be the last man standing. Then he will try to increase voter turnout among working class whites in states like Pennsylvania to win the general election.  He seriously overstates his charms.  He may succeed in making some places like PA and WI competitive, but he will not flip any of them, although Ohio would probably be a true toss-up.

 (This prediction is rooted in my belief that those working class whites he thinks he speaks for are actually unlikely to be motivated to vote for a Canadian of Cuban ancestry who drips with Ivy league snobbery.)

Official Prediction: Clinton: 348, Cruz 190 (NC and NE-2 go back to blue.)

5. Carly Fiorina.  She'll fight hard and she'll sell herself well. But Hillary will savage her with commercials about outsourcing and layoffs. This will be a blow out.

Official Prediction: Clinton 363, Fiorina 175 (NC, NE-2 and GA go blue.)

6. John Kasich.

I think he'll win his home state of Ohio and be competitive in all the right places but I don't see him flipping Florida or any other battle ground. Clinton should also be able to carry NC against him.

Official Predicition: Clinton 329, Kasich 209.

And the Rest.

It's very difficult for me to imagine any of the other candidates being nominated, but I'll humor them with an official prediction.

Same Result as Trump:

7. Ben Carson: Clinton 374, Carson 164 

8. Chris Christie: Clinton 374, Christie 164 (Same result as Trump)

Same Result as Romney in 2012:

9.  Mike Huckabee: Clinton 332, Huckabee 206

Same Result as Cruz

10. Rick Santorum Clinton 348, Romney 190.  (With a lot of  wasted resources in Pennsylvania.)

11. Rand Paul Clinton 348, Romney 190

Why are the Bothering?

12.  Pataki: Clinton 385, Pataki 153 (That's the Trump result minus Indiana)

13. Jindal:  Clinton 396, Pataki 142 (Trump minus Indiana and Arizona)

14.  Lindsay Graham; Clinton 385, Pataki 153

15. Jim Gilmore: Clinton 372, Gilmore 165. (I'm giving him his home state of Virginia. This blog post is the high-watermark of Gilmore 2016.)

Match-ups With Bernie Sanders.

I think Sanders' identification as a democratic socialist is at least as big a handicap in a general election as Barack Obama's race was in the past two cycles.  If Clinton would have outperformed Obama in 2012 by carrying NC, then I think it's equally true that Sanders would have under performed by not winning Florida. So his baseline is 303 to 235.  

But I would still favor him against most likely Republican nominees. I think he cold beat Jeb! like a drum by using his family name against him and he probably salivates at the idea of running against an actual plutocrat in the form of Donald Trump.  But Rubio will play the commie card deftly. And he is a handsome young latino that listens to Jay-Z, not an aging Hippy who probably does not own an Ipod.  I think he would carry the truly close states: FL, OH, NC and VA. That gets him to 266 and he just needs to win Colorado or Iowa or Nevada.  My official hunch: he wins one of those states and sneaks into the White House.

Here are the Sanders matchups:

Rubio 272, Sanders 266

Sanders 285, Jeb! 253 (picking up FL and OH)

Sanders 332, Trump 206 (repeat of 2012 Results)

Sanders 303, Cruz 235 (Cruz wins Florida)

Sanders 285, Fiorina 253 (same result as Jeb!)

Sanders 272, Kasich 266 (Kasich wins the three big battle grounds of OH, FL and VA but fails to pick off PA or any of the western battle grounds or Iowa.)

Cason, Christie and Huckabee would probably put up a Romney and lose 302-236. Santorum and Paul might do the same although I think Bernie wold be able to pick off NC against those mediocrities. The sad-sacks would also get crushed but probably win one or two more states than they would against Hillary Clinton.

Musing on Long Shot Scenrios.

• Joe Biden's numbers would be virtually identical to Secretary Clinton's. Elizabeth Warren would start with a stronger baseline and would be most likely to win back NC and to make places like Indiana and Missour competitive. But all of them would be in a dog fight with Rubio, and a semi-comfortable place against all other potential nominees.

• If Scott Walker is the GOP running mate there will be endless talk about Wisconsin becoming competitive but I think his early exit means he won't be on anyone's short list.  (Kasich and Susan Marinez will always be a better option for any candidate on this list.)

• Trying to think of real long shot scenarios, one might be tempted to think that Hillary Clinton could win Arkansas.  She was first lady of that state for more than a decade. But that was a long time ago. In 1992 Bill Clinton won 53% of that stat's votes in a 3 way race. Four years later his share of the national vote went up by more than six points but only by one point in his home state.  Since that high water mark of 5.38% in 1996, the Democratic nominees have gotten 46, 45, 39 and 38 percent.  Obama's share of the vote dropped that much compared to Gore and Kerry. This is the most obvious case of Obama's race affecting his poll results in a non-competitive state. I think Hillary will return the Democratic number to something closer to 45 percent but 50% seems like a very long shot. Arkansas has become a pretty conventional Red State in presidential elections. I don't think the Big Dog can change that for his wife.

• Missouri is more fertile ground for an Ozark upset. In 2008 Barack Obama came within 4,000 votes of winning that state and chose not to pursue a recount because it would not have affected the election result. In 2012, he lost by 9 points. This pattern is similar to Indiana, where he won a squaker in 2008 and lost by 10 points in 2012. Nationally Obama's vote share dropped by less than 2 points, but by more than 10 points in these states. The difference of course is that Obama actively campaigned for those states in 2008. The closer polling numbers during his re-election made it necessary to spend resources elsewhere.  If Hillary is in blowout mode, she might be able to pick off Missouri, especially if she thinks she can help some marginal Democratic house candidates or the race for Roy Blount's senate seat becomes competitive. (If for instance he loses a primary to a Tea Party fringe candidate.)
• Arizona should be ripe for a competitive race. Obama lost by 7.3 points to John McCain in 2008 and by 9.0 points to Mitt Romney in 2012. That fall off, 1.7 points was slightly less than the national trend, which makes sense since he was not running against a candidate from Arizona. But Arizona politics are warped by immigration policy more than any other state. Texas is a hopelessly red state but Arizona should be competitive. Fear of illegal immigrants has led to some ghastly laws being passed and the repeated election of a clown like Joe Arapaio as sheriff responsible for a major American city. In the long run, demographics will make this a purple state and eventually a blue one, assuming the GOP doesn't change course on some of it policies. But for the immediate future, I think immigration leaves the state off of the competive list.
• New Mexico might be the decisive state in 2016. Obama carried it by double digits twice. But Bush carried the state in 2004 and lost it in 2000 by just 370 votes. If a Republican wants to win, his or her best option is this:  Romney States (206) + Ohio, Florida and Virginia (60 to get to 266. Then one more state among Colorado, Nevada, Iowa or New Mexico. New Mexico could be influenced by having a native daughter on the ticket. The GOP may need Kasich to carry Ohio but that might be all for naught if they do not win one of these small states. Susana Martinez remains a very strong candidate for the Vice-Presidency. And under at least one plausible scenario, she could win the White House for the Republicans.