Advocacy / Election Coverage

Election Whiz Reveals the 7 States That ‘Actually Matter’ When It Comes to Winning Presidency

from – IJR Review – by Chris Enloe

Despite the 2016 presidential election being 18 months away, Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia Institute of Politics says 43 of 50 states have already decided which party they will back in the Electoral College.

Sabato unveiled his 2016 predictions on Thursday, when he said only 7 states are true “swing states.” He told the Daily Mail:

“Of the 50 states, 40 or more are almost set in stone politically. Just seven are true swing states.

Image Credit: Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia Institute of Politics

Image Credit: Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia Institute of Politics

According to Sabato’s map, Republicans have a lock on 20 states — with 4 more states either leaning towards the GOP or likely GOP states. The Democrats on the other hand have 19 states on their side.

Don’t let those numbers fool you. While the GOP may have more states on their column, the Democrats have many more electoral votes locked up than the GOP – 247 to 206. This could mean that Democrats are only 23 votes away from winning the election.

The seven states which Sabato says will decide the election:

  • Florida
  • Virginia
  • New Hampshire
  • Ohio
  • Iowa
  • Colorado
  • Nevada

Those 7 states hold a combined 85 Electoral College votes.

Sabato said that two of those states are must-wins for the GOP:

“If the Republicans want to win, they absolutely need a ticket that can carry Ohio and Florida.”

Sabato believes that if Democrats want to win, they only really need to carry Florida, even if Republicans capture the other six toss-up states.

Democrats have history on their side when it comes to winning Florida, as they’ve won the state in the last two presidential elections. However in 2000 and 2004, the GOP carried the coveted state.

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter
and Download the AMAC News App

Sign Up Today Download

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Cheri Schmidt
7 years ago

Yes , I agree that winning the national popular vote would guarantee that
the election wouldn’t depend on pandering to a particular state, person(s)
or even money. Our system just isn’t working now, except that low information voters
or votes being bought (which will be on the increase) (same as pandering)will increase
as this type of voter increases.

7 years ago

Presidential elections don’t have to continue to be dominated by and determined by a handful of swing states besieged with attention, while most of the country is politically irrelevant.

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country.

Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps of pre-determined outcomes. There would no longer be a handful of ‘battleground’ states where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 80%+ of the states that have just been ‘spectators’ and ignored after the conventions.

The bill would take effect when enacted by states with a majority of Electoral College votes—that is, enough to elect a President (270 of 538). The candidate receiving the most popular votes from all 50 states (and DC) would get all the 270+ electoral votes of the enacting states.

The bill has passed 33 state legislative chambers in 22 rural, small, medium, large, red, blue, and purple states with 250 electoral votes. The bill has been enacted by 11 jurisdictions with 165 electoral votes – 61% of the 270 necessary to go into effect.


Would love your thoughts, please comment.x