Electoral Votes

Prediction That Four States Will Decide Presidential Election—Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina, Florida–Is That Legitimate?

Ronald 4 Comments

Many political observers are saying that four states are the true battleground that will decide who is inaugurated President on January 20, 2017.

Those states are Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina, and Florida.

The question is whether that belief is legitimate.

This blogger thinks it is much more complicated than those four states, and that two of them–Pennsylvania and Florida—are assured for the Democrats as it is.

Yes, it is true that Pennsylvania west of Philadelphia and east of Pittsburgh is often called “Alabama”, but Pennsylvania has been reliably “Blue” or Democratic for six straight elections from 1992 onward, and that is not likely to change. If “Alabama” really mattered as much as some think, then how did our African American President win the state both in 2008 and 2012? If anything, with the economy far better now than it was in 2008 and 2012, and with Barack Obama’s public opinion rating now at 58 percent, the highest since his first year in office (2009), Pennsylvania is assured to go “Blue” again. Remember, all that is needed is to win the most popular votes to win the electoral votes, not necessary to win a majority, but just a plurality.

Florida, despite being Republican in state elections, went for Barack Obama twice, and now there are many more Puerto Rican citizens who have moved from the island to central Florida in particular, due to the tough economic times in Puerto Rico. Puerto Ricans are citizens who just need to re-register at their new address, and the vast majority of them are Democrats, and therefore now lessen the Cuban influence on the state vote. And many younger Cubans are not automatically conservative or Republican as their elders are. With the I-4 corridor (Central Florida) becoming more likely Democratic, add much of South Florida to the equation (Broward and Palm Beach Counties), and the influence of North Florida and Miami-Dade County (where many immigrants turned citizens from Brazil, the Dominican Republic, and other nations in Latin America have migrated and not generally Republicans) are therefore outweighed, and with the better public opinion ratings of Obama added to the mix, the odds are that Florida will go “Blue” again.

Ohio is more difficult, and history tells us that every elected Republican President has won Ohio, so this is truly the crucial state but with Hillary Clinton having the edge in most polls. And one must remember Hillary has a built in edge in “Blue” States, and does not have to win Ohio, while Donald Trump must win it or have no chance to win the White House.

North Carolina went for Obama in 2008 but went “Red” for Mitt Romney in 2012, but polls now indicate that Hillary is favored, but again is not essential for Hillary to win the Presidency.

I would say beyond these four states, there are the states of Georgia and Arizona and Utah, all “Red” states, that indicate close races, with the possibility that they could go “Blue” for this election, and possibly beyond, particularly true for Georgia and Arizona, due to the increase in Hispanic and Latino population and voters.

So Hillary Clinton still has an overwhelming advantage, with eight weeks out from Election Day, to win the Presidency.

Donald Trump Could Be On Way To Worst Major Party Candidate Popular Vote Percentage Since William Howard Taft In 1912 And John W. Davis In 1924!

Ronald Leave a comment

As Donald Trump moves forward, proving ever more his ability to alienate traditional Republicans and conservatives, and his racism, nativism, misogyny, and xenophobia leading to a likely low percentage among African Americans, Hispanic and Latino Americans, Asian Americans, Muslim Americans, Jews, Social Justice Catholics, women, college educated, environmentalists, gays, disabled, and every other conceivable group, the likelihood that he might be on the way to the worst possible major party candidate popular vote percentage since 1912 and 1924 seems a strong possibility.

In 1912, President William Howard Taft, challenged by former President Theodore Roosevelt and the Progressive Party, ended up third, the only time a major party nominee ended up other than first or second, and only received 23.2 percent of the vote, winning 2 states and 8 electoral votes, and Woodrow Wilson winning the election. TR as the third party nominee won six states and 27.4 percent of the total national vote that year.

Once we get past that unusual situation, the next worst performance by a losing major party candidate is John W. Davis , who lost to Calvin Coolidge in 1924 and won only 28.8 percent of the total popular vote, winning twelve states and 136 electoral votes. However, Progressive Party candidate Robert M. La Follette Sr won 16.6 percent of the vote in that election.

Next was James Cox, who lost to Warren G. Harding in 1920, receiving only 34.2 percent of the vote, winning eleven states and 127 electoral votes.

Next was Alf Landon, who lost to Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1936, winning only 36.5 percent of the vote, and two states and 8 electoral votes.

Next was George H. W. Bush who won only 37.4 percent of the vote in 1992 against Bill Clinton, but Ross Perot won 18.9 percent of the vote that year as an Independent nominee. Bush won 18 states and 168 electoral votes in that election.

Next on the list is George McGovern who won 37.5 percent of the vote in 1972 against Richard Nixon, winning only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia and 17 electoral votes.

Next is Alton B. Parker who won 37.6 percent of the vote in 1904 against Theodore Roosevelt in 1904, but also won 13 states and 140 electoral votes.

Barry Goldwater, losing to Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964, won only 38.5 percent of the vote, and had 6 states and 52 electoral votes.

Finally, President Herbert Hoover, losing to Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932, had only 39.7 percent of the vote, and won 6 states and 59 electoral votes.

So nine times, a major party nominee since the Civil War has won less than 40 percent of the total national popular vote, but with three times, 1912, 1924, and 1992, being complicated by a strong third party vote.

Five of these candidates who won less than 40 percent of the vote were Republicans—Presidents Taft, Hoover and the first Bush, and also Landon and Goldwater.

The other four were Democrats—Davis, Cox, McGovern, and Parker.

The South’s Continuing Impact On Impeding Democracy With Voter Restriction Laws

Ronald Leave a comment

The South lost the Civil War, but they continue to dominate American politics.

It used to be that the South was Democratic, and that they promoted slavery, Jim Crow segregation, and lynching.

Then, we had a Southern President, Lyndon B. Johnson, who accomplished the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, with the Southern wing of Democrats in Congress bitterly opposing it, and many of them, plus much of their population, abandoning the party and going to the Republicans.

Under Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, they found a home, and worked to undermine voting rights and civil rights, often with the support of those Presidents.

The state governors and legislatures became Republican controlled, and worked to limit civil rights and voting rights, and the Republican majority Supreme Court in 2013 cut back on enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.

As a result, Southern states and many midwestern and mountain states under Republican governors and legislatures started to pass new restrictive laws designed to undermine voting of minorities, particularly African Americans and Hispanics-Latinos.

This led to law suits and now decisions by federal circuit courts in North Carolina, Wisconsin, Kansas, and earlier, Texas, to declare such restrictive laws unconstitutional, a major victory which could affect the Presidential Election of 2016.

There will likely be an appeal to the Supreme Court, a clear cut reason to make sure that the Democrats win the White House and the US Senate, as the outcome for this election is uncertain, and the future of the Court and voting rights in the future hangs in the balance.

It seems likely that the present Court might split 4-4 without Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February, and that would uphold the lower court decisions declaring such laws to be unconstitutional, but no certainly of that.

The South is crucial in our nation’s politics as they hold 22 seats in the US Senate, 31 percent of the seats in the House of Representatives (138 out 435), and 162 electoral votes in the Presidential race. And this does not include the Border states such as Kentucky, West Virginia, Missouri, and Oklahoma, which tend to the same politics of exclusion toward minorities and voting rights.

The Rapidly Growing Population Of North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, Texas Bode Well For Democrats By The 2020 Presidential Election!

Ronald 12 Comments

Four states are rapidly growing in population, according to the Census Bureau, and all four, while “Red” states in the 2012 Presidential election, have the potential to turn “Blue” either in 2016 or certainly by 2020.

North Carolina seems most likely to go for Hillary Clinton, followed by Georgia and possibly Arizona. Longer term, there is Texas.

With North Carolina having 15, Georgia having 16, Arizona having 11, and Texas having 38 electoral votes now, it is certain that all four will have MORE electoral votes starting in 2024.

And Florida, a “swing” state with constantly growing population, particularly of increased Puerto Rican migration, has 29 electoral votes through the 2020 Presidential election, and assuredly will have more in 2024.

So it is highly likely that the Democratic Party will have, for sure, over 400 electoral votes by 2020, and if not, by 2024, an Electoral College landslide for the long term!

Add the present 80 electoral votes of the four presently “Red” states to the 332 that Barack Obama had in 2012, and you get 412 electoral votes, and again, more by 2024 after the reapportionment of seats in the House of Representatives and in the Electoral College after the Census of 2020!

Add the Midwestern states of Indiana (11) and Missouri (10) and you get 433 electoral votes to 105 for the Republicans, but again with probably more total electoral votes by gaining of population in the four Sunbelt states, even with the chance that Indiana and Missouri will not gain, and might lose a seat each.

So expect the chance that the total number of electoral votes could, and with the addition of Florida and California gaining seats as well, be in the high 430s!

The Mormon Factor In The Electoral College Prognostications

Ronald 2 Comments

The Mormon Church (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) is an important factor in the American West.

Usually, Mormons as a group are conservative Republicans, but the odds are growing that states that would usually vote Republican might not vote for Donald Trump, due to his religious bigotry displayed toward Muslims, as Mormons suffered persecution in the 19th century on their trek to Salt Lake City, Utah, and Mitt Romney, himself a Mormon, is vehemently against Trump.

60 percent in Utah, 24 percent in Idaho, and 9 percent in Wyoming are Mormons,with 4-5 percent in Nevada, Arizona, and Montana. Only about 2 percent in America are Mormon, similar to Jews in population and percentage.

The most Mormon states are Utah, Idaho, and Wyoming, with a total of 13 electoral votes. Nevada, Arizona, and Montana follow, with a total of 20 electoral votes. All of these six states, except Nevada, have been reliably Republican.

So we are talking about a possible loss of 27 electoral votes, not counting Nevada’s six electoral votes.

Donald Trump cannot afford to lose these states, but he could, indeed, some or all of them going to Democrat Hillary Clinton over the religious issue!

Could We Be Facing Another 1824 Presidential Election, And Use Of The “Ugly” 12th Amendment Once Again, Where The House Of Representatives Selects The Next President?

Ronald Leave a comment

There is growing concern that if we have a third party candidacy of Donald Trump, that we could end up with a scenario of the House of Representatives choosing the next President of the United States!

In 1824, in the first participation by all white males in the election, Andrew Jackson was first in popular votes and electoral votes, but lost the election to second place finisher, John Quincy Adams, because Jackson did not have a majority of the electoral votes, and the House chose Adams over Jackson, pure politics!

With a theoretical race of Democrat Hillary Clinton,  Republican Ted Cruz, and Donald Trump, Clinton could end up having the most popular and electoral votes, but fail to reach 270, the number required to win the White House.

The outgoing House of Representatives, with a clear cut Republican majority, would have each member have his or her own vote, and assuredly in that scenario, Ted Cruz would be elected President, even, in theory, if he ended up third in both popular and electoral vote, as the 12th Amendment provides for a choice of the top three candidates!

This would be unconscionable, but could happen, another quirk of the Presidential election process, that has not been used for 192 years, but could rear its ugly head once again!

Could Ted Cruz Be William Howard Taft Vs. Donald Trump Being Theodore Roosevelt In 2016 Presidential Race?

Ronald 2 Comments

There is now a good chance that Donald Trump will refuse to back the Republican Presidential nominee, if he is not the nominee, and will run on a third party line in November.

That will further insure that the Democrats, who are already heavily favored in the Electoral College, will win an even bigger one sided victory!

Donald Trump cannot win the Presidency, but he could win a few states and end up second, like Theodore Roosevelt did in 1912, while Ted Cruz, could, as the GOP nominee, end up winning fewer states and electoral votes, and end up third, as William Howard Taft did in 1912!

Trump could surpass George Wallace in 1968 with five states and 46 electoral votes, and Strom Thurmond in 1948 with four states and 39 electoral votes.  He could also surpass Theodore Roosevelt who won six states in 1912, but highly unlikely to gain anywhere near the 88 electoral votes that TR won.

So the 2016 election could repeat the Presidential Election of 1912, with the Democrats benefiting, as they did in 1912!

Of course, this blogger is not trying to compare Cruz to Taft or Trump to TR, as both Cruz and Trump have far from the accomplished public records of both the 26th and 27th Presidents of the United States!

Long Term Political Projections For 2016 And Beyond!

Ronald 1 Comment

As 2016 arrives tomorrow, some long term projections for the upcoming year politically.

Next December, we can see how accurate these projections are:

Donald Trump will NOT be the Republican Presidential nominee, and he will lose both the Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire Primary.  He will be a sore loser there, and will announce a third party movement, but will win NO states in November, but take away votes from the Republican nominee, similar to Ross Perot in 1992.

The Republican nominee for President will be Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who will select Ohio Governor John Kasich as his Vice Presidential running mate.

Hillary Clinton will win the Democratic Presidential nomination, and will select Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown as her running mate for Vice President to blunt the effect of Ohio Governor John Kasich as the Republican Vice Presidential nominee.  And remember Ohio is the crucial state historically in the Electoral College, as NO Republican has won the White House without Ohio!

Hillary Clinton will become the 45th President of the United States , and Sherrod Brown will become the 48th Vice President of the United States, winning by a substantial margin in the Electoral College, keeping the 242 electoral votes of 18 states (Maine, Vermont, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii) and the District of Columbia, PLUS the following “swing states”—Ohio (18); Virginia (13)–thus insuring an Electoral College majority of 273 when 270 are required;  but also, in addition, the following:  Colorado (9); Iowa (6); Nevada (6); New Mexico (5); New Hampshire (4)–a total of 25 states and 303 electoral votes.

The only loss for the Democrats will be Florida, which will go to Rubio, a home state favorite, and taking away 29 electoral votes, from the 332 of Barack Obama in 2012 to the 303 of Hillary Clinton.  So Hillary Clinton will win 25 states, instead of the 26 that Obama won in 2012. The final electoral vote will be 303-235.

Hillary Clinton will name Vice President Joe Biden her Secretary of State.

Hillary Clinton will gain the opportunity to select FOUR Supreme Court nominees in her four year term, as follows:  Ruth Bader Ginsburg,  Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer–but of course, this cannot be proved to be correct until that next four year term is completed!

The US Senate will go back to the Democrats, gaining the seats up in Florida, Ohio, New Hampshire, Illinois, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Missouri, going from 44 seats plus two Independents (Maine, Angus King; and Vermont, Bernie Sanders) to 51 plus 2, effectively 53 seats to 47 for the Republicans, from the present 54 seats for the GOP.  Senator Chuck Schumer of New York will be the Senate Majority Leader as a result.  The President Pro Tempore position will go back to Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, the longest serving Senator with 42 years and another elected term beginning in 2017.

The US House of Representatives will go from 247 Republicans to 188 Democrats, to a gain of 17 seats, and a new total of 205 Democrats and 230 Republicans.  Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin will remain Speaker of the House of Representatives.

So the line of succession will be President Hillary Clinton; Vice President Sherrod Brown; Speaker of the House Paul Ryan; Senate President Pro Tempore Patrick Leahy, followed by the cabinet officers, beginning with Joe Biden.

We shall see in a year how accurate my prognostications are!  Happy New Year 2016!

Donald Trump: A Mix Of Wendell Willkie, George Wallace, And Ross Perot

Ronald Leave a comment

Donald Trump’s Presidential candidacy has brought back memories of three other Presidential candidates.

First is Wendell Willkie, a corporate leader and Wall Street industrialist from Indiana who had never run for public office, who wowed the Republican convention in 1940 with his charisma, rhetoric, and attack on “career politicians”.  He was able to win the Republican Presidential nomination in 1940, and run a good but losing race against the master politician, Franklin D. Roosevelt, running for an unprecedented third term.

Next is George C. Wallace, Governor of Alabama, who formed the American Independent Party in 1968, rallying those opposed to the Civil Rights laws passed under Lyndon B. Johnson.  He attracted angry working class whites, and won 13.5 % of the popular vote, the fourth best percentage for a third party in American history.  He also won five Southern states and 46 electoral votes, making him the second best in total states and electoral votes in American history, only behind former President Theodore Roosevelt, who won six states and 88 electoral votes as the nominee of the third party known as the Progressive (Bull Moose) party, in 1912.  TR also is the only third party nominee to end up second, rather than third in the election results.  His campaign in 1912 decimated the Republican Party under President William Howard Taft, and helped to elect Democrat Woodrow Wilson.

And then we have Ross Perot, a billionaire businessman who had never run for public office, who ran an independent race twice, winning nearly 19 percent of the vote in 1992, and 8 percent of the vote in 1996, while winning no states in the Electoral College.  He appealed to those who were disgusted with the federal government, and worried about the growing national debt.  His candidacy undermined the Republican Party nominees, President George H. W. Bush in 1992 and Senator Bob Dole in 1996, and elected Democrat Bill Clinton twice.

Now we have Donald Trump, a billionaire, who has developed an appeal to those who are disillusioned with politics and the federal government, making him similar to Perot.  But Trump also appeals to the baser instincts in many people, those who dislike African Americans, Latinos, immigrants in general, in these ways having similar views  to Wallace.  These Trump supporters  also think women should not be treated equally, preferring the old image of women who should cook, clean, and be available for the sexual satisfaction of their men, but with no rights over their bodies and reproduction,  similar to the Tea Party Movement.  Also, there is a distaste for labor rights, and for the environment, and an orientation toward absolute belief in religion as the gospel, and a repudiation of science.

Can Trump “storm” the Republican Party, as Wendell Willkie did in 1940; or will he run on a third party, like Ross Perot, and make it impossible for the GOP to win the White House?  And will Trump continue to appeal to the George Wallace type voters, and promote a right wing populism as Wallace did?

This is what is yet to be evolving, but in many ways, Trump is a combination, right now, of Willkie, Wallace, and Perot!

Florida The Ultimate Battleground For 2016

Ronald Leave a comment

The state of Florida is the ultimate battleground for 2016, as it was in 2000, 2008, and 2012, and Hillary Clinton, at this point, the presumed Democratic nominee, is clearly ahead in polls, even over Florida Senator Marco Rubio and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, the two leading Republicans in the state, other than Governor Rick Scott.

The argument for either Rubio or Bush is that they can win the Sunshine State in 2016, but that is far from certain.

Bush has not run for office in Florida since his second term election in 2002, and Rubio won his seat in a midterm election, and may face primary opposition, as well as strong Democratic challenge in the next Presidential election and or his Senate reelection campaign.

The fact that more than one million Floridians have signed up for ObamaCare, despite the opposition of Florida Governor Rick Scott and Senator Marco Rubio, and much of the Republican dominated state legislature, is an indication that Florida is up for grabs, and former Florida Governor Charlie Crist, now a Democrat, is running ahead of Scott in the polls, and is a strong supporter of ObamaCare.

Ironically, if Crist wins the Governorship a second time, now as a Democrat, he could, in theory, challenge Rubio for his seat, a race that he lost to Rubio in 2010, but could run for without losing his Governorship if he lost, and would probably love to try to unseat Rubio and become a national figure in the Senate, delayed six years, but never too late!

Hillary and Bill Clinton are well regarded in Florida, and the Cuban community, particularly the younger generation, is no longer a guaranteed GOP vote, even as it might have been in 2010, when Rubio beat out Crist and Congressman Kendrick Meek.

So Florida, the third largest state any day now, and with 29 electoral votes, is very much a likely Democratic win, which would insure that Hillary Clinton, or arguably, any other Democratic nominee, victory in 2016 for the White House!