patrick.net

This just popped up:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/brad-pitts-mother-pens-anti-345647

I don't give two shits about Brad Pitt or his wife or his mother but my point is that Ohio (and Pennsylvania for that matter, excepting the area around Philadelphia) is highly predominated with people like his mother...and they VOTE. They determine races there and for that reason I don't think Obama can win Ohio this year.

rootvg says

Obama can't win without Ohio and Florida. If he doesn't win them it's game over.

Ohio has not failed to predict a presidential race since 1960 and this year will be no different. Why do you think he's spending so much time there?

Obama really only needs to win Ohio or Florida. But I do agree that who ever wins Ohio will probably win the election.

http://www.270towin.com/

Looks pretty easy this time. Play along!

rootvg says

Out of sixteen districts, Ohio will only have three Democrats in its entire House delegation in the next Congress. Why? The 2010 elections and then reapportionment/redistricting. You and I know that won't last forever but for that trend to not continue in 2012 (especially considering that Ohio is, due to its demographics, Tea Party fucking central) does not make sense. It will continue. It may intensify.

Fair enough.

Here's the aggregate from RCP:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/oh/ohio_romney_vs_obama-1860.html

I think RCP leans to the right too, but that might not be just because they are conservatives, but because they include the outlier, Rasmussen polls.

Quick note on the electoral math:

Ohio is do-or-die for Obama. Florida is do-or-die for Romney. They're both competitive, but lean differently: if Romney takes Ohio then he'll almost certainly have Florida and clinch the election; and if Obama takes Florida then he'll almost certainly have Ohio.

Michigan is another important swing state, and will probably go whichever way Ohio does. They're both heavy manufacturing states where the auto bailout will be a key issue. That's not enough to clinch it for Obama if he takes both, but gets him pretty close. He'd only need to pick up something like 10 electoral votes out of Virginia, Wisconsin, Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada. Romney would have to sweep (or nearly sweep) these states if Obama takes Ohio and Michigan.

The strategic texture of the electoral college probably favors Obama by a reasonable margin; but the economic picture is shaping up to benefit Romney. Far too close to call right now.

msilenus says

Michigan is another important swing state, and will probably go whichever way Ohio does.

I really don't think Michigan is in play. Romney is more likely to get Colorado, Nevada, or New Hampshire than Michigan.

zzyzzx says

msilenus says

Michigan is another important swing state, and will probably go whichever way Ohio does.

I really don't think Michigan is in play. Romney is more likely to get Colorado, Nevada, or New Hampshire than Michigan.

If the homeowner isn't insulted by your offer...you didn't bid low enough!!!

I think that's right. But does Ohio go the way Michigan does, which is likely towards Obama? If so, I'd say Romney is getting trounced.

You know, Romney is a really upstanding guy, family man, smart businessman, extremely generous with his time and money ... so why does he scare me so much? Maybe it's the last decade of being screwed over by smart businessmen who do the sort of things that made him rich that's making me shy away from this paragon of capitalism. Not that I don't believe capitalism has its place, it surely does as a motivator for imperfect people to make a society produce while serving individual self interest. This is vital, and most people understand it intuitively, if they haven't had intuition educated out of them yet. But the kind of crooked business we've seen lately has us calling foul and theft, and practically nobody in government seeming to give a rip. Romney fits snugly into the role of the guy who sent our jobs overseas, and so, regardless of his moral superiority over the president, we are scared of what he may do to further consolidate the stranglehold big banks have on our America, that he may actually hand out the jackboots that hedge fund owned business presses down on our necks.
Has the Obama administration failed to help the economy back to its feet? Absolutely! Obama has no clue what he is doing when it comes to the economy, and furthermore is too proud to take suggestions from those who do. I'd like to see him gone for any number of arrogant self serving things he's done with his term.
But, at least in thEory, he's the candidate for the working class, ready to uphold worker rights against big business.
So that's why I'm waivering here. Sometimes the devil you know is less scary than the devil you don't.
I voted Ron Paul, the the Main stream media demonized him effectively and he had no chance.

Quigley says

Has the Obama administration failed to help the economy back to its feet? Absolutely! Obama has no clue what he is doing when it comes to the economy,

What do Presidents do to cure the economy? What role does Congress play in all of that? And most Presidents are not macro-economists. They surround themselves with people who do know, and seek counsel from people their team identify with. Obama has Volcker on his team, praised by Dems, Republicans and Ron Paul. Bush et al have had the troglodyte neocons who got us where we are.

It's too easy to say, "A pox on both your houses".