A McCain Victory Requires What?

By: TJHalva | Comments [33] | Category: VFA Original | 10/29/2008 12:21:12 AM CT

I'm going to keep this simple because the results speak for themselves. I've taken the Presidential vote totals from 2004 and calculated the number of additional votes needed, beyond what our projection dictates, for the trailing candidate to reach the 50% threshold. The result of this arithmetic can be seen in the Votes Needed column. The EVs Per Voter (10^-4) column takes the Votes Needed and divides by the voting population of the given state in 2004. The results of this calculation are very small, with four zeros directly after the decimal point, but their meaning is very large.

Take a look at the data before I explain its significance; the results are ordered based on Obama's projection percentage in descending order.

State	Status	Total Votes	Obama %	McCain %	Votes Needed	EVs Per Voter (10^-4)
DC (3)	Safe Dem	227,586	82	13	84,207	0.356
Hawaii (4)	Safe Dem	428,989	67.5	28	94,378	0.424
New York (31)	Safe Dem	7,448,266	63.39	29.36	1,537,322	0.202
Maryland (10)	Safe Dem	2,384,206	59.79	36.87	313,046	0.319
Illinois (21)	Safe Dem	5,274,727	59.3	34.56	814,418	0.258
New Jersey (15)	Safe Dem	3,609,691	57.88	37.99	433,524	0.346
California (55)	Safe Dem	12,419,857	57.08	33.05	2,105,166	0.261
Delaware (3)	Safe Dem	375,190	56.07	41.33	32,529	0.922
Connecticut (7)	Safe Dem	1,578,662	55.78	32.64	274,056	0.255
Massachusetts (12)	Safe Dem	2,905,360	55.35	34.34	454,979	0.264
Michigan (17)	Safe Dem	4,839,247	55.16	37.65	597,647	0.284
Washington (11)	Safe Dem	2,859,084	54.41	35.84	404,846	0.272
Oregon (7)	Safe Dem	1,827,826	53.84	36.22	251,874	0.278
Vermont (3)	Safe Dem	312,309	53.8	27.93	68,927	0.435
New Hampshire (4)	Safe Dem	676,227	53.34	38.75	76,076	0.526
Maine (4)	Safe Dem	740,748	53.25	32.41	130,298	0.307
Pennsylvania (21)	Core Dem	5,765,764	52.76	45.01	287,712	0.730
Iowa (7)	Safe Dem	1,505,814	51.68	41.94	121,369	0.577
Wisconsin (10)	Core Dem	2,997,007	51.42	44.68	159,441	0.627
Colorado (9)	Weak Dem	2,130,330	51.17	45.87	87,983	1.023
Virginia (13)	Core Dem	3,192,894	50.99	43.27	214,882	0.605
Minnesota (10)	Safe Dem	2,825,866	50.78	39.22	304,628	0.328
New Mexico (5)	Core Dem	756,304	50.24	42.16	59,294	0.843
Nevada (5)	Weak Dem	825,899	50.11	44.71	43,690	1.144
Florida (27)	Core Dem	7,609,810	49.94	42.95	536,492	0.503
Ohio (20)	Core Dem	5,627,903	49.81	43.36	373,693	0.535
North Carolina (15)	Toss Up	3,498,746	48.15	47.9	73,474	2.042
Missouri (11)	Toss Up	2,731,364	46.91	46.46	96,690	1.138
Rhode Island (4)	Safe Dem	437,134	46.56	25.11	108,803	0.368
Georgia (15)	Toss Up	3,298,790	45.9	48.19	135,250	1.109
Montana (3)	Toss Up	450,434	45.29	44.32	25,585	1.173
Indiana (11)	Weak Rep	2,468,002	45.16	49.11	119,451	0.921
North Dakota (3)	Toss Up	312,833	44.54	42.8	22,524	1.332
Arizona (10)	Weak Rep	2,012,585	43.62	48.15	128,403	0.779
Texas (34)	Safe Rep	7,410,749	42.56	55.27	551,360	0.617
Kansas (6)	Core Rep	1,187,709	42.22	51.19	92,404	0.649
Kentucky (8)	Safe Rep	1,795,882	42.19	52.05	140,258	0.667
Mississippi (6)	Core Rep	1,152,145	42.19	49.92	89,983	0.570
Alaska (3)	Safe Rep	311,808	41.91	53.06	25,225	1.189
Arkansas (6)	Safe Rep	1,053,694	41.67	53.06	87,773	0.684
Tennessee (11)	Safe Rep	2,437,319	41.23	54.83	213,753	0.515
South Carolina (8)	Safe Rep	1,615,606	40.84	53.98	147,990	0.541
West Virginia (5)	Safe Rep	755,887	40.35	50.83	72,943	0.685
South Dakota (3)	Core Rep	388,215	40.29	48.95	37,696	0.796
Louisiana (9)	Safe Rep	1,943,106	38.63	51.65	220,931	0.407
Nebraska (5)	Safe Rep	777,255	36.84	57.15	102,287	0.489
Wyoming (3)	Safe Rep	242,948	36.36	57.58	33,138	0.905
Alabama (9)	Safe Rep	1,883,415	35.8	56.29	267,445	0.337
Oklahoma (7)	Safe Rep	1,463,758	34.56	61.84	226,004	0.310
Utah (5)	Safe Rep	912,728	27.75	64.93	203,082	0.246
Idaho (4)	Safe Rep	597,261	24.9	69.6	149,913	0.267

If you order the results by EVs per Voter the twelve most contested states fall within the top fifteen. This would be great news for McCain if eleven of these twelve states weren't states previously carried by Bush in 2004; Pennsylvania is the exception and ranks fifteenth. Within the eleven he must win, McCain is currently trailing in seven; North Carolina, North Dakota, Montana, Nevada, Missouri, Colorado and New Mexico. If we total the Votes Needed column for these seven states the result is 409,239; this is the absolute minimum number of additional votes (beyond our projection) McCain needs to win the Election.

McCain needs 409,239 votes in seven states to win the election, whereas John Kerry needed 118,599 votes in Ohio.

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

33 Response(s) to A McCain Victory Requires What?

Haywood Ublowmai

10/29/2008 4:15:10 PM CT

Your System is FLAWED. You make it seem like 400,000 votes is all John McClown needs to win the election. We all know that the general popular vote count means absolutely nothing if you dont win the vote count in each state. We all remember how flawed this was back in 2000.

Road to 400 (EV) Mark it down. GOP....RIP

Anonymous

10/29/2008 4:17:18 PM CT

Say What???

Anonymous

10/29/2008 4:52:44 PM CT

Haywood

Read it again: "McCain needs 409,239 votes in seven states to win the election."

"in seven states"

Not just anywhere.

jonl

10/29/2008 5:12:20 PM CT

Its close because even in a bad economy, Obama is a worse candidate to lead this country than McCain. Its sad when the voters choices are an old man and a bullshit artist.

cotton1979

10/29/2008 5:16:59 PM CT

What a crock?

Montana

10/29/2008 5:17:48 PM CT

I must be dense but I'm trying ... does this 409,239 in seven states mean he needs 409,239 votes in each of the seven states re: 406,239 X 7 = 2,864,673? If that's the case I may feel marginally better ... still think with all the vote manipulation/suppression that Republicans are known for, I won't rest easy until McCain concedes! The sooner the better!!

Obama/Biden '08

Politics is like driving, if you want to go backward you choose "R" and if you want to go forward you choose "D". (Unknown)

Anonymous

10/29/2008 5:31:30 PM CT

Politics is like driving, if you want to go backward you choose "R" and if you want to go forward you choose "D". (Unknown)

Wow good to see you have a great joke. Now to the real situation. If you want teh money left to you from family members to have a 45% tax put on it form teh government.....vote obama.

If you want small business's and their employee's to suffer for tax hikes and medicare hikes.....vot obama.

If you dont want any of that, well I think you get the idea.

McCAIN/PALIN

Anonymous

10/29/2008 5:50:17 PM CT

I can't believe how ignorant people in this country have become. Those who vote for Obama either hate Bush or have special interests at heart... ie., abortion rights, gay marriage, increased entitlements. They miss the big picture and so many lessons regarding national history. The economy will always go up and down, always has, always will. The only real issue is national security and McCain is the only logical choice - all the rest just BS. We need a well tested man of strengh for this challange, not a smooth talking rookie with no experience - the economic policies don't matter - because the forces that guide them will always move and adjust with supply and demand.

National defense is the monkey wrench - this cannot be left to inexperience because another attack with make this economy look like a holdiay at the beach...

Belinda

10/29/2008 5:50:49 PM CT

These counts are Not results they are surveys most everybody is not included. Votes count NOT Surveys. You won't know who wins until voting is over get over yourself and wait. You'll be stuck with who ever is voted in anyways so grow up.

This race is over

10/29/2008 5:52:40 PM CT

Listen, the race is over. You cannot compare this presidential race to the others simply because of its historic nature. This is not your average election. There are far more people that are going to vote in this election then anyother. Just the fact that Obama is only two points behind McCain in McCains own home state does not look good for McCain. All McCain can count on at this point is the "ignorant vote"...those are the people that have barely looked at the canidates plans for the nation, and will A.) not vote for Obama because he's black or B.) Just want to believe some of the smears and lies that McCain has put out there and don't want to check the facts (like the "Anonymous" that seem to not know anything about Obamas small business plan). Some people wont vote for Obama because they don't like his policies, which is fine, but its totally different when you see someone just trying to make up excuses just not to vote for him.

The thing I don't like about McCain is that throughout all his name calling and nonsense he has yet to talk about what he plans on doing for the nations FUTURE..he is still speaking in the "now", still thinking its okay to keep everything the same (Iraq, tax code) and just wish for a different result... this Country could look like a third world country within the next four years if we stay on this path. What I see in McCain and Obama is a 20th centry canidate running against a 21st century canidate. Sorry McCain, but its time for this country to progress and move on.

Anonymous

10/29/2008 5:53:44 PM CT

If I'm not mistaken, what the post means is that, if McCain wants to win, he needs:

73,474 more votes in North Carolina,
22,524 more votes in North Dakota,
25,585 more votes in Montana,
43,690 more votes in Nevada,
96,690 more votes in Missouri,
87,983 more votes in Colorado and
59,294 more votes in New Mexico

... than Bush got in 2004.

Stefan

10/29/2008 6:00:49 PM CT

if you want the middle class to continue to shrink and widen the gap between them and the upper class, do nothing... and leave things the way they are. corporations cant just keep sucking the life out of us.

the middle class at least needs a refuel...

Obama/Biden 08!

tyler

10/29/2008 6:26:22 PM CT

if you want a president who has a very good chance of "falling victim" to his old age, and leaving an unqualified, cocky GOVERNOR who's only been in politics (not counting PTA) for 2 years in the oval office, vote mcain/palin. of course hes not looking to the future. he wont be there for it, what does he care? he is nothing but a puppet, the face of the republicans who would be really in charge.

Anonymous

10/29/2008 6:32:00 PM CT

You are a moron. Where did you get your degree in statistics from? The Beavis and Butthead School of Advanced Calculator Math? Get lost.

purpledog

10/29/2008 6:59:17 PM CT

Does no one care that Obama refuses to disclose records concealing his past involvements, has proven associations with known hate peddlers and mob affiliates? And would anyone like to discuss WHERE HE GETS HIS
MONEY!! And please ask Michelle to spread the wealth before her AFTERNOON SNACKS AT THE WALDORF FOR OVER $400.00

DividedSucks

10/29/2008 7:15:36 PM CT

As a person who makes over 250 K, I have to admit McCain would likely be better on my wallet. However, Palin is just not versed enough to handle the VP or god forbid presidential duties. Just look at her interviews with Katie Couric...how would she decide on matters affecting millions of people if she can't think through difficult questions. That's the important part...thinking!

Sleepinggiant

10/29/2008 7:47:45 PM CT

I think all you Obama zombies have a big surprise coming your way Tuesday - Don't count your checks before they are printed. Every time more light is exposed on the group of "intellects"(and I use that term loosely) Obama has surrounded himself with over the years - it's pretty fun to watch them all react and shun the light - similar to a cockroach - running to hide under the cold damp lifeless ideology of SOCIALISM. Yuck it up now -- I can't wait to see your faces on Tuesday!

Kendall

10/29/2008 7:55:49 PM CT

John Mccain is running his campaign the wrong way. Any sensible person running for public office would spend most of their time trying to convince people why they should be elected. For the most part Mccain is only trying to convince people not to vote for Barack Obama.

Anonymous

10/29/2008 7:58:34 PM CT

Am I the only one that's concerned with McCain's proposed 'spending freeze' for everything except things associated with national security and the military? Can you say... "Military Dictatorship"? Not only that, but with Palin the religious zealot at the helm.

I can hear her annoying screechy voice now telling everybody how the idea of WWIII is okay because we want the world to end for jesus.

Sleepinggiant

10/29/2008 8:16:50 PM CT

Of the 19 Posts - I'd really like to know the education level of those who have posted - just curious. Anyone with economics under their belt? Poli-sci? Actually know differences in ideologies i.e. socialism,marxism? It would be interesting to know - some of these emotional, irrational blurts of just crass nastiness - make a resounding point to me that there is no rational thought - it's all emotional - sensationalism over substance. Has anyone ever thought of the possibility of a super majority government - with no filibuster capacity - and you mention dictatorship if McCain is put in office? If you see that possibility as a "non-threat" to democracy - I don't know what is. Oh, and why is it that from the liberal standpoint - tolerance is demanded - but, if someone expresses an opinion that is contrary to theirs - there is a backlash of ostracism towards those with differing views? Can you say hypocricy? I have a boss at work - that just because I'm not of the same political persuasion - I'm treated like *&@* - interesting ideological intolerance for other points of view on democracy. If that's the ultimate direction of this God Blessed country - New Zealand is looking mighty attractive... it's always about blame - name calling - ostracism etc. etc. here in a liberal America. I just want to live free - or find somewhere else where I can!

kobio

10/29/2008 9:35:13 PM CT

Sleepinggiant. Earlier you taunted liberals by stating you could not wait to see our faces Tuesday after we lose. In your last post you mentioned that that we're emotional and irrational with crass nastiness. I believe you are the one hurting and lashing out. Just remember when you move to New Zealand...Wherever you go, there you are. I am sorry your boss treats you like *&@* but maybe you'll feel better after the election when you get a tax break and your boss doesn't!

Sleepinggiant

10/29/2008 9:43:50 PM CT

A little banter on my part there kobio - but I do sense some nervousness in Obama's camp as I'm sure that McCain's is feelin also - either way, no hurt here - and if what you say does come to be as you say and Obama wins and follow's through - I'd be the first one to say I was wrong - I'm into taking this country forward probably just as you are - Peace! and may the election close as it may. Ultimately, we all are looking for leadership that helps this country move in a positive freedom loving way.

Palin FOR MAYOR!

10/29/2008 10:05:16 PM CT

Wow...... so much anger. I wonder why? Both candidates and their respective running mates are running such positive HONEST campaigns! I think you can boil your choice this year down to a simple dollars and cents (sense) questions......
If you're fortunate enough to have found your way to a position in life that puts you in the +$250,000/year bracket, then you should vote with the other 2-1/2% of americans that make that much money and VOTE REPUBLICAN
If you're like me and the other 97-1/2% of americans that don't make that much money, you should vote DEMOCRATIC. Speaking for the poorer portion of the equation, it's time americans stop being suckered into Ronny Reagan's trickle down theory. You're NOT rich, you'll NEVER be rich, SO stop voting like you're going to be rich. YES I do work, have worked every year of my life since I was 14, and unlike JOE THE PLUMBER, I pay my fair share of taxes. http://taxcut.barackobama.com/

Slitty

10/29/2008 10:25:12 PM CT

I am a liberal democrat. (So far leftwing i am almost an anarchist.) But this year the republican is by far the better candidate. But after hearing Obama talk out of his neck so many times, i hope he wins so that when he fails all you Obama supporters will shut up and realize you voted for the wrong guy. Although when he does fail, you Obama backers will more than likely put the blame on someone else.

Standingfortruth

10/29/2008 10:29:20 PM CT

WTF

10/30/2008 12:16:37 AM CT

Standingfortruth should check their facts

Standingfortruth

10/30/2008 1:07:12 AM CT

WTF what I stated is all FACT!!! The truth is...Obama is associated to all the names listed....deep and rooted! In fact, he lists them in his books and speeches. They are not just tied to his past or his history, they are associated to him now!! Continue in your blind ignorance. The next four years will be the Carter years...tenfold with Obama as president!

Anonymous

10/30/2008 1:56:59 AM CT

Anonymous

10/30/2008 3:05:25 AM CT

Yep, I'm scared.

Maybe you should be curious about the fear and listen rather than dismiss it so flippantly. If the fear is well-founded then sounding the alarm is a service even to those who have plugged their ears. Once the votes are cast there is no going back. Here is the real fear--not of Obama, but of the state of the nation: This is not a unifying campaign--it is filled with deep animosity and hatred. It is a charismatic leader making promises he will not keep to a public longing for change (I think I want a change from corruption-but we will only exchange old corruption for a new corruption), but who will keep promises to the ones who will divide the political spoils, those who paid to put him in office--special interests whose agenda is clearly extreme vis-a-vis the views of the average American ("It's about the economy, stupid" No, it's about the lust for power I would guess is common to most candidates for high office). One candidate is being anointed Leader before 90% of the electorate even have a chance to cast a vote. You complain about fear-mongering, but consider this forum, which completely lacks any civil discourse where reasonable people armed with the same facts can actually talk about the strengths and weaknesses of various alternatives. I talk about the campaign with people all the time and I find almost no one who knows what either of the candidates really believes, though information is abundantly available to any who can read and access the internet; what I hear in all these replies is rancor, anger, hatred and chest-thumping. And how about modeling self-control? I mean, what happened to the promise of campaign spending reform? How many of the poor could have been helped by the $142 million that was reported as spent on this campaign since the bailout (while the rest of us lay awake at night worried about the safety of our assets and our retirement plans)?We seem to have mildly accepted this extravagance as politics as usual, as mildly as we accepted the experts' rationale for the bailout and $4/gallon gasoline. And can you ignore the images of the woman who was lynched in effigy in Southern California? The only crime of the targeted woman was that she was running for public office. (But I'm uptight--it was "art".) It was a convenient violence. Yes, the problem is not our leaders--it is us. And that is plenty to be scared of.

Since it is apparently inevitable that Obama has won the election before the polls are even open, I am foolish to speak this way. But please...don't complain when you get the leaders you deserve.

blueinredstate

10/30/2008 10:16:16 AM CT

I'm scared that there are actually people out there who think an erratic old man with health and anger issues, and an inexperienced dimwit are the best choice to run our country at a time when it is in dire need of help. The only real issue is NOT national security. There are lot of issues going on here at home, and having McCain with his finger on the red button is not going to be the solution now or EVER. It's high time that we had a leader who lwho cares about the middle class. instead of their cronies with too much money. It's high time that we had a leader who considers negotiating and knows how, rather than just blowing things up. It's also time for a leader to bring us together, rather than someone who keeps on dividing us. I'm not voting for Obama because I hate Bush and have some special interest. I'm voting for Obama because I want to see something different than the Rethuglicans have offered for the last 8 years. I hope to be in a better place 4 years from now, and that WILL NOT come from 4 more years of Bush/Cheney McCain/Palin style of politics. I would hope that after 8 years of this crap that more people would realize what a mistake and an embarrassment Bush has been to our country.

Anonymous

10/30/2008 9:05:56 PM CT

Sleepinggiant - enjoy New Zealand! (and don't bother to write)

Slitty - I seriously doubt you're a liberal Democrat......puhleez.

Standingfortruth - get a life. Between McCain and Palin, I'm sure you wouldn't want to be illuminated as to their "associations". C'mon get real.

Anonymous

10/30/2008 9:28:13 PM CT

Since the Democrats ran Congress just about 3 years ago, everything went down the crapper!! Congress could of stopped the Fannie Mae disaster, but rather have had their thumbs up their asses - by the way the Fannie and Freddie disaster was started by yours truly Bill Clinton! Don't get me wrong - there is enough to point the finger at everyone on both sides, but to blame all this on Bush just shows everyone how moronic you really are. Obama has no "experience on anything!!! Not on the economy, not foreign relations, except for "changing" his mind on about every point he has made!! What do you expect from a corrupt attorney!

Standingfortruth

10/30/2008 9:50:25 PM CT

Obama is a Marxist, "spreading the wealth" doctrine comes from his deep seeded connections to those around him such as Ayers (holds the same ideologies and helped spread the 50 million Ayers received to radical education groups such as e.g. ACORN), Rev. Jeremiah's Wright (pastor of 20 years), Frank Marshall Davis (communist mentor), CAIR, Khalid al-Mansour (helped pay for his college education), Luqman Abdul-Haqq, Antoin "Tony" Rezko, Louis Farrakhan just to name a few of the questionable associations. The liberal media has turned a blind eye to this liberal corruption. So this video tape that the L.A. Times does not want to release doesn't surprise me. If there was nothing to hide...why bury it? American citizens are not stupid nor ignorant, well at least the "right" half isn't.

"Standingfortruth - get a life. Between McCain and Palin, I'm sure you wouldn't want to be illuminated as to their "associations". C'mon get real."

Typical ignorant liberal discounting the atrocious associations of Obama like they were some passing fad like torn jeans or something. The only thing you had on Palin was some lame "troopergate"(which was blasted by the media for weeks until somthing new came out like her $150,000 wardrobe - Obama spent more than that on his trip to Hawaii) which was so weak to begin with....wanting to fire a trooper that tasered his own kid and was drunk in his state trooper vehicle and killing moose illegally, etc. etc. - ohhhh that is so horrible. puuuhlease (she had the right to fire someone she didn't see fit and did nothing illegal or wrong)!!!! Like everyone I mentioned connected to Obama is either communist, pro-Muslim, anti-Israel, anti-America, corrupt, crooked, shady just to mention a few nice things! Obama was just in the Senate a few months before he ran for the presidency...ohhhhh that makes him an excellent choice for Commander in Chief! Next please!!!

A McCain Victory Requires What?

33 Response(s) to A McCain Victory Requires What?

Leave a Reply:

January 30Latest Polls

Top Stories

Archives

Categories

Links