Never too early to make bad predictions!
Damned if we know how many of the seven battleground states anyone will win. Ol’ Sparky is no help. The darn thing is reciting “Mary had a little lamb” over and over. But it’s fun guessing.
We build off a real fun website called “270 to Win” — which is the number of electoral votes needed to (wait for it!) … win! The website gives Kamala/Walz 226 electoral votes from safe states to 219 for Trump/Vance. That gives 93 votes from the seven states to play with.
If we mastered html coding, click the “Download” button to access the spreadsheet that will do your math for you. (Must use entire number listed for each state.) If your total does not equal 270, Trump/Vance lose and the Democrats win (and vice versa). Share your guesstimates with the peanut gallery. Winners with the earliest entries and most accurate predictions will be recognized with some future, undetermined and likely, under-whelming honor.
At 270 to Win, you can plug in various scenarios based on Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball, Cook Political Report, Fox News, etc. Our numbers are based on the default 2024 Consensus tab. The website is like a bouncy castle for politics nerds. Fun for the whole family!
Blaska’s Bottom Line: Asking who you think will win, not who you want to win.
7 responses to “How many battleground states will Trump win?”
It’s an interesting coincidence that the electoral votes of the first three toss ups listed (Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia) when added to 219 equals 270. I’ll go with that.
Who will win what battleground states? I’m waiting until Sept. 17 to divine the answer. That is the date of the next full moon, when I will consult the tarot cards and scry intensely into my handy crystal ball.
May the stars smile favorably upon our merry band of commenters. 🌟 🌙 🌞
Somewhat off topic here, but the image you identify as being by Edward Hopper is, in fact, someone’s idea of a Hopper painting (very possibly a robot’s). It contains the basic elements (woman staring out of window of a nondescript room at a generic landscape, etc.) but the style is all wrong–details too precise, too many objects in the room. And the existential loneliness that instantly overwhelms the viewer of a genuine Hopper painting is absent. The Stately Manor needs a new curator.
I think you’re probably correct. It was listed as a Hopper but, you are correct, too precise. The Manor’s visual arts curator has been reassigned to kitchen patrol.
Whatever it is Moms For Liberty will have it banned in Florida.
Wow, impressive Gary!
All of them.