The Road To 270: its the demographics stupid.

[DCBob]

from TPM:

<snip>
The good news for Obama is that even though he’s heading for a tough fight, few of his 2008 swing states have moved off the board entirely. Indiana, a narrow and surprising blue state that year, is likely unwinnable. But other states that moved into the Democratic column for the first time in decades — namely and Virginia and North Carolina — are still looking like competitive races.

In 2010, however, Democrats were destroyed in large part because the electorate that showed up was older, whiter, more conservative, and less-educated. With Obama on the ticket, turnout is likely to be much higher among Democratic base voters than in the midterms, but losing the white vote big is still a major concern. The biggest danger might be Republican gains in states that Democrats had begun to treat as more durable holds, especially in the Rust Belt. Pennsylvania, which Democrats won twice against President Bush, is a particular problem. A sagging approval rating among less educated white voters creates potential problems with additional states, including Wisconsin and Michigan. Smaller state that are wavering: New Hampshire, where Romney’s close ties would give the GOP an added boost as well should he secure the nomination, and Iowa, where Republicans are currently getting intense local media coverage for their primary.

But the demographic trends that buoyed Obama in 2008 — namely, a growing base of Hispanic voters, and an influx of educated professionals into the South — have only gotten stronger. At the liberal Center for American Progress, Ruy Teixeira and John Halpin recently put out a detailed study analyzing Obama’s strengths among the three most distinct major voting groups: minorities, college-educated whites, and whites with lower levels of education. Obama’s strength in the last presidential election was his ability to rack up huge margins and turnout with the first group, split the vote with the second, and keep the third from becoming a total wipeout. And because the share of the electorate in 2012 is likely to include more minority voters and more college educated voters, he has more leeway to underperform with white voters and still win re-election.

<snip>
Looking at this in this in terms of states, it means Democrats might be able to offset the loss of a state like Ohio that’s more dependent on the white working class vote by winning big out West, where the growing Hispanic population plays in their favor. Colorado looks to be a crucial player once again and Democrats are eyeing Arizona, which went for native son John McCain in 2008, as a potential pickup thanks to a backlash over its anti-immigration crackdown. And in Virginia, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania, the Obama campaign thinks a less significant but growing Hispanic population will give them a boost as well. But even in the Rust Belt, Democrats get a demographic bump: the CAP study shows a higher concentration of college educated whites in Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin versus 2008. If Obama can keep these voters from abandoning him, he can survive some erosion elsewhere.

more: http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/11/the-road-to-270-team-obama-maps-out-their-victory-plan.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

=========

Demographic trends certainly help the President but the people still have to show up at the polls. I suspect the GOP candidate whoever that might be will be more than enough motivation to vote.

[AlinPA]

1. PA will be tough to win. Just elected a teabagger US senator and governor and they

now own both the state house and senate. Teabaggers are all over the place in W. PA now.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

3. How popular are they though?

2010 was (rightly) considered a disaster for the Dems but I've always believed that the "silver lining" of that defeat could be that, as people begin to see for themselves what the Republican Tea Party is all about, they'll be more motivated to turn out to vote against them in 2012 (and re-elect President Obama). Outside of the South (which was never really Obama's territory to begin with), which Republican Tea Party-controlled states really like their teabagger governors and representatives? For instance, Wisconsinites don't like Walker and may recall him this upcoming year and Ohio voters just gave Kasich a major rebuke over his union-busting attempts. The only major concern I have is their attempts to disenfranchise likely Democratic voters.

[AlinPA]

5. Corbett (Gov) is somewhat unpopular, mostly with Democrats because of his cuts to education and his

sellout to the drilling companies. With Toomey, it's hard to say. He is on the deficit committee and is very outspoken on reducing the deficit (he is a big Norquist operator). I see a huge teabagger presence in W. PA (not Pittsburgh) and it was pretty much blue 6-10 years ago. Most of the counties around Pittsburgh are going teabagger. The entire central and much of NW PA and S. Central PA are red.

[Dawson Leery]

6. The Eastern part of PA, especially the southeast is key to Obama's win in the state.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

7. I suppose it will largely depend on the GOP nominee ultimately

Thankfully, Obama still has a good amount of time to turn things around in PA and the Republicans' scheme to change the EC vote apportionment is not moving forward, so there is still a good chance of winning PA again. People were concerned about him winning in 2008 too and he still won (was it even close?)

[DCBob]

4. TRue, but eastern PA is blue and as long as they show up to vote Obama wins.

Turn out will be the key once again.

[tabbycat31]

8. the keyword is show up

[Tarheel_Dem]

2. K & R

:kick: