from Rasmussen Reports
New state polling from New Hampshire has moved that state from "Toss-up" to "Leans Democrat" in the Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator. In addition, changes in Rasmussen Markets have shifted Michigan from "Leans Democratic" to "Likely Democratic". With these changes, Obama leads in states with 217 Electoral College votes while McCain is ahead in states with 174 Electoral College votes. When “leaners” are included, it’s Obama 264, McCain 185.
Currently, states with 58 Electoral College votes are leaning slightly in one way or the other. Six states with a total of 89 votes -- North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada, and Virginia -- are pure toss-ups.
State-by-state rankings are summarized in the following table:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/election_2008_electoral_college_update
Friday, October 3, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
The real issue is not how well Obama or McCain might do state-by-state, but that we shouldn't have battleground states and spectator states in the first place. Every vote in every state should be politically relevant in a presidential election. And, every vote should be equal. We should have a national popular vote for President in which the White House goes to the candidate who gets the most popular votes in all 50 states.
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral vote -- that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
Because of state-by-state enacted rules for winner-take-all awarding of their electoral votes, recent candidates with limited funds have concentrated their attention on a handful of closely divided "battleground" states. In 2004 two-thirds of the visits and money were focused in just six states; 88% on 9 states, and 99% of the money went to just 16 states. Two-thirds of the states and people have been merely spectators to the presidential election.
Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide.
The National Popular Vote bill has passed 21 state legislative chambers, including one house in Arkansas, Colorado, Maine, North Carolina, and Washington, and both houses in California, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The bill has been enacted by Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These four states possess 50 electoral votes-- 19% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.
See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com
There are no grounds to have a popular vote at this point in time. We need to see a national movement to get out and vote. Only after we have a massive percentage of voter turnout could we have any grounds for it and only if for some reason the electoral college votes do not reflect the popular. Things need to change and people need to vote. For example, in the United States, approximately 70% of the eligible population registers to vote, which may be an important contributing factor in the low average election turnout, which in recent decades just barely has topped 50% of voting age population in presidential elections. However, in 2004, the presidential election turnout was up to 56.70% of all US citizens old enough to vote. That is not enough to base a popular vote argument on.
Post a Comment