President Obama carried
Ohio by nearly 3 percent in 2012, slightly less than he did four years earlier.
Clinton is seen as negatively here as in Florida. The Democratic front-runner
is a sure loser against GOP Presidential hopeful John Kasich, the popular Ohio
Governor and in a statistical tie against any credible Republican opponent.
Obama won Virginia in
2012 by nearly 4 percent—his biggest margin among these three crucial swing
states. The Virginia GOP is on the decline, without any Republican in statewide
office or the U.S. Senate for the first time in 45 years. Yet in the latest
polling, Mrs. Clinton would have trouble besting any credible Republican
nominee due to her negative image.
Florida (29), Ohio (18)
and Virginia (13) collectively have 60 electoral votes. Adding these Obama
states to the Romney 24 gives the next GOP presidential standard-bearer 266
electoral votes, four short of the magic 270. But had the House of
Representatives been apportioned by citizen-only figures, the GOP nominee would
get 270 electoral votes by carrying these 27 states. There would be no need to
win an additional Democratic leaning state.
But under the current
system, they must. Which one of the 23 remaining might it be? President Obama
carried D.C. and 16 states by double-digit margins. Four other states were
carried by comfortable percentages and demographically appear very likely in
the Democratic column without a major shift from the near quarter-century
statistical norm. The GOP’s best hopes would seem to be Colorado (9 electoral
votes), Iowa (6), and New Hampshire (4).
The Centennial State,
once a reliable Rocky Mountain Republican bastion, seems to have flipped due to
a growing Hispanic population. Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers have been
particularly bad there recently, but they may well recover before Election Day.
Compared to once dependably Republican Nevada, Colorado seems the easier Rocky
Mountain state for the Republicans to flip next time, but it is far from a sure
bet.
Iowa’s Democratic
leanings continue to baffle farm state Republicans. But starting 1988, the GOP
presidential nominee has lost the Corn State every time since except for
President Bush’s 0.7 percent win in 2004. Against a credible Democratic
nominee, history puts the GOP candidate in the underdog position.
This leaves New
Hampshire, once an erstwhile reliable GOP State. George H.W. Bush won the
Granite State by 26 percent in 1988. But since then, Democrats have won every
time but once: a slim 1 percent win by GOP nominee George W. Bush in 2000. The
2016 GOP nominee will again need to beat the statistical tide.
The Electoral College
math suggests two plausible paths for a narrow GOP win next year. The
Republican nominee wins every Romney state, all three key swing
states, and either Colorado, Iowa or New Hampshire. In the alternative, the
historical numbers give the GOP standard-bearer 272 electoral votes by (1)
carrying all the Romney states, (2) winning Florida and Ohio, (3) losing
Virginia but (4) pulling off a Colorado, Iowa and New Hampshire trifecta. This
last scenario is very unlikely.
***
This is why counting illegal immigrants and noncitizens
significantly reduces the chances of the GOP winning the presidency. Given
Obama’s winning margins last time in Florida, Ohio and Virginia, a GOP path to
winning 27 states is credible at this point in the presidential cycle. But due
to the Electoral College math, this only gives Republicans 266 electoral votes,
not 270.
We understand counting
illegal immigrants and noncitizens in the census. Accurate population counts
are essential to sound decision-making. Census numbers are used to allocate
governmental resources. But we fail to find any persuasive reason to allow the
presence of illegal immigrants, unlawfully in the country, or noncitizens generally,
to play such a potentially crucial role in picking a President. Choosing a
nation’s leader should be a privilege reserved for her citizens.
There are, however, no
quick fixes to this situation. There seems little chance the states will ratify
a constitutional amendment dumping the Electoral College in favor of voters
directly electing the President. Amending the 14th Amendment to
change the “whole persons” formulation for apportioning House of Representative
seats is equally unlikely.
If the United States
elected its chief executive as it is done in Mexico—direct election by those
citizens eligible to vote—then the inclusion of noncitizens in the census
wouldn’t result in any impact on the presidential winner. In Mexico, a U.S.
non-citizen illegally or legally in the country isn’t counted in the
presidential election math. Any other result would create an uproar among
Mexican citizens. And rightly so. If counting illegal immigrants and
noncitizens in the Electoral College decides the presidency next year here in
America, there would rightly be an uproar on this side of the border as well.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/10/illegal-immigrants-could-elect-hillary-clinton-213216?o=1
No comments:
Post a Comment