<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"><channel xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"><title>HotAir</title><link>https://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2012/12/21/what-2012-population-could-mean-for-the-2020-election/feed/</link><description>HotAir is the leading conservative blog for breaking news and commentary covering the Biden administration, politics, media, culture, and current elections.</description><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 02:45:26 -0400</lastBuildDate><item><title>What 2012 population could mean for the 2020 election</title><description>&lt;![CDATA[It’s worth noting that the overall trend continues to be one from blue states to red states. Under the first scenario, Romney would have picked up two electoral votes over his 2012 totals. Under the second, he would have picked up four electoral votes over his 2012 totals, and the “sweep the South, plus Ohio, plus one other state” strategy would have dropped the “some other state” part. Some argue that Texas and Arizona will be purple by 2024 (the first presidential year under these numbers), but I am skeptical. This is an argument for another article, but it is worth noting that, despite the demographic shifts, the Republican vote shares here haven’t budged in the past eight years.]]&gt;</description><pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:40:58 -0500</pubDate><creator xmlns="dc">&lt;![CDATA[Allahpundit]]&gt;</creator><enclosure url="" type="image/jpeg" length="123" /><link>https://hotair.com/headlines/2012/12/21/what-2012-population-could-mean-for-the-2020-election-n98491</link></item></channel></rss>