Most of Mitt Romney’s Narrow Roads Lead Through Colorado

The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza takes a hard look at Mitt Romney’s winning map.

Such as it is:

A detailed analysis of Romney’s various paths to the 270 electoral votes he would need to claim the presidency suggests he has a ceiling of somewhere right around 290 electoral votes…

Romney’s relatively low electoral-vote ceiling isn’t unique to him. No Republican presidential nominee has received more than 300 electoral votes in more than two decades. (Vice President George H.W. Bush won 426 electoral votes in his 1988 victory over Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis…)

In 2000, Bush won 271 electoral votes – one more than he needed to claim the presidency. In eking out that victory, Bush not only carried the South and Plains states with a near sweep but also claimed wins in swing states such as Nevada, Colorado, Missouri and the major electoral-vote prizes of Ohio and Florida…

In 2004, Bush won reelection with 286 electoral votes, losing New Hampshire from his 2000 map but adding wins in Iowa and New Mexico.

Under the 2012 map, Romney would win 292 electoral votes if he replicated the Bush 2004 victory. But New Mexico seems like a very tough place to win – not to mention the fact that he would again need to carry Ohio, Florida, Colorado and Nevada as well as North Carolina and Virginia.

Cillizza does note that the number of safe Republican states means Romney’s minimum guaranteed electoral vote count looks a little better in relation to his “ceiling”–meaning the victory scenarios involve combinations of only a few swing states, most including Colorado. One caveat for that exists if Romney can pick up any of several states that Republican presidential candidates have not carried recently, like Michigan or Pennsylvania.

But just about any way you look at it, we’re crucial to the outcome of this thing.

19 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. ArapaGOP says:

    And it’s a good thing, because polling shows Colorado is swinging back to its conservative roots.


    Romney – Obama are tied at 47% with 6% undecided here in Colorado.

    We have a real Colorado horse race here, but Obama’s horse is carrying a lot of penalty weight in voter concerns about his performance, past and future.

    Neither is beloved by Colorado voters. 53% downcheck Obama’s job performance (worse than any other state); 51% see Romney unfavorably, with 14% still undecided (to Obama’s 6% undecided). Romney’s April favorability in all 12 states surveyed is the best it’s been since Purple Strategies began polling on him – so voters are beginning to put the nasty primary in perspective.

    The poll shows Obama’s weaknesses in Colorado:

    54% say today’s jobs are worse than those we lost (23% say better);

    73% say jobs are difficult to find (18% say there are plenty of jobs);

    49% say their kids’ jobs will be worse than their own current jobs (24% say better).

    Coloradans are equivocal about whether the state’s economy is improving; 37% say yes, 35% say no. But given the jobs results, those who see improvement probably do so because they thought the past four years were truly awful.

    I’m proud that Colorado is going to have the chance make the decision. To dethrone Obama.

    • cunninjo says:

      The Obama campaign machine is just now starting to get revved up here in Colorado, whereas the Romney campaign has been working here for a year now. Romney will never match the grassroots organization of President Obama and his campaign.

      Although, when Romney’s billionaire buddies buy the election with blatantly slanderous political ads, who knows if grassroots campaigning is even a valuable asset anymore.  

    • Early Worm says:

      the last election Romney participated in in this state he lost, to a guy named Santorum. Romney held a 40 to 26 lead to Santorum in the polls less than a week out of the caucus. But you can go ahead and count your chickens now.

    • VanDammer says:

      what a turd statement … what an idiotic TeaBaggin’ meme but then what should we really expect from Repubs.  

      I’m proud everyone in US has a chance to make the decision and let’s hope young & old, male/female, any & every ethnicity can honestly answer when asked are they better off today than they were in ’08.  

      Have women denied contraception services and cancer screenings due to right wing defunding answer that question.

      Have debt-saddled students looking at the prospect of further Republican cuts to education grants and education funding answer that question.

      Have legal citizens concerned by SB 1070 laws enabling legal racial profiling answer the question.

      Have women facing forced ultrasound procedures or the prospect of mandatory transvaginal probes answer that question.

      How do ya think those constituents are gonna decide given the choice between Mitt or Obama?

      • ArapaGOP says:

        1. I know the answer. NO. They are not better off now than they were in 2008.

        2. When did that happen?

        3. Republicans funded education better than Hickenlooper’s budget.

        4. The Supreme Court is about to uphold SB-1070. Suck it up!

        5. See #2.

        6. I am confident today that Obama is a one term president.

          • ArapaGOP says:


            Republican priorities secured in the Long Bill include:

               Fighting for Colorado’s seniors by restoring the senior homestead property tax exemption and increasing funding for the old age pension program and dental services for seniors;

               Investing in our students by increasing funding for K-12 and higher education;

               Saving for our future by maintaining a balance of over $100 million in the State Education Fund;

               Protecting severance tax dollars for vital water and infrastructure projects around the state;

               Protecting Amendment 35 dollars for cancer research, prevention and treatment.

            Because it’s IMPOSSIBLE for Republicans to care about education and health care!

        • Gilpin Guy says:

          How did that work out for you?

          Oh that’s right Republicans couldn’t win a senate seat that was there for the taking in a Republican wave election.

          Economies coming back.

          Obama is going to own the lily liveried hide in Paris when it was his time to serve Romney on security issues.

          Obama is hands down the more likable candidate.

          From health care to sustainable energy, Obama has better policy proposals than Romney’s gut all regulations, kill the planet and worship the rich retread ideas.

          The Swiftboating is going to be met with some immediate responses.

          You tell me how a totally fucked up candidate like Romney is going to persuade the majority that he’s got the right stuff by simply repeating that Obama is a bad person.

          It might happen but if I was a betting man A-Bot, I’d bet Romney gets his balls crushed and being the ugliest campaigner of our generation isn’t going to matter.

        • ClubTwitty says:

          Just who they need to elect to…

          Oh wait, never mind.  

          #5. Virgina–Swing state.  

          #6. If I recall, you were feeling pretty good about Ken Buck about this time two years ago…

          Your confidence interval is worthless given your previous posting…

    • SSG_Dan says:

      RomneyBot 1 & 2 have different views on the road about taking care of vet health care – one wants to eliminate it and replace it with vouchers, the other wants to fund the Big Govt Healthcare system.

      The Romney campaign hasn’t quite figured out what their multiple positions are, so until they give the Etch-a-Sketch a good shake, they’ve decide not to mention Veterans on the campaign website:

      Still nothing there – so if you find it, please let us know.

      This is important because Colorado has the highest per-capita numbers of veterans of the US – about 12%. Vets vote in higher numbers than any other demographic, and I know which way the numbers went in 2008.

      BTW, ArapaPunk, you missed responding to my diary where I call out your two candidates – ever going to answer?  

    • Ralphie says:

      Here’s your candidate.

      Excited yet?

  2. Tom says:

    It’s pretty obvious that we’re due for a shit blizzard of advertising. I’ll keep my snow shovel handy when I check the mail so I can manage the drifts of flyers.

    I don’t envy Nevada with their relatively inexpensive media market and contested Senate race.  

  3. DaftPunk says:

    for Multiple choice Mitt to be asked about the personhood initiative.  Lose-Lose.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.