Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 09, 2016, 02:50:25 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 1186
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Could Trump pull off this map if he makes ALL promises in 2020? on: November 12, 2016, 11:43:19 pm
I'd flip Virginia


This, but CT is a possibility. 
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: H. A. Goodman: Bernie to run again in 2020 on: November 12, 2016, 11:39:13 pm
I know this is crass but will he even be around by then?

This is a major concern of mine. In four years Bernie will be 79 (which is the US life expectancy). We need someone who represents a new generation and the new Democratic Party, not just one.

But if he does get the nomination, he'd better pick a good VP. It will be important.

This.

For some reason, both parties nominated olds.  I frankly questioned how likely it was that either candidate to survive this terms (and I liked Pence more than Kaine).

When my father was my age, he was roughly the same age as the incumbent President.  In this election, both candidates were old enough to be my parents (though Hillary would have been a teenage mother). 
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Do Dems have a losing platform or was Hillary just a bad Candidate? on: November 12, 2016, 11:29:40 pm
She was a bad candidate. Period:

1. No charisma
2. Not very likeable
3. Comes off as an opportunist
4. Seen as a huge liar. For whatever reason Trump seemed to get a pass (or more of a pass) on this despite lying far more than her, and far more shamelessly. But, you know, it is what it is.
5. Seen as corrupt
6. For so many people, seemed to embody almost everything they hated about politics, a problem which was magnified in an election built around populist anger / a repudiation of business as usual.


And (drum roll please)  last but not least:

7. She had 54819290056 problems/scandals/whatever! Whether or not you consider these "scandals" real or just blown out of proportion, people thought they were important and it contributed immensely to her character problems. She spent almost the entire election defending herself against one scandal after another!


You could say the same thing about Trump, except perhaps the first one.  Smiley

I would however add these two things:

8.  Moved too far to the left.  She was basically running against Bernie Sanders, still.  She need to pivot and never did.

9.  This might come into the charisma aspect, but Trump seemed human, and a bit spontaneous.  Flawed, but human. Clinton seemed  rehearsed, at times robotic. 

10.  Clinton looked incompetent.  Looking at her email situation, she was either lying or incompetent.  She chose incompetent.  Look at the state of foreign relations, she looked incompetent.  Clinton was a known quantity, but in looking at her record, it frankly was not a successful one as Secretary of State.  The seeds of her defeat were planted in the Arab Spring. 
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: How did we get this so wrong? on: November 12, 2016, 01:26:57 am
Where? 
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / How did we get this so wrong? on: November 11, 2016, 11:31:01 pm
How did nearly everybody fail to predict at somewhat strong Trump victory?

Seriously, everybody, the posters here, the pollsters, and apparently both campaigns.

In looking at PA and MI in particular, did anyone predict this?
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Process / Re: GOP Sets Out to Prevent Another Donald Trump in 2020 on: November 10, 2016, 12:12:31 pm
You could permit county committees to nominate candidates for delegates, then a regional committee could select from those members, and a state committee can elect from those.

It could be done in states where they don't have party registration. 
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Process / Re: Opinion of Electoral Vote Allocation by Congressional District on: November 10, 2016, 11:59:20 am
How is a presidential gerrymander different than a presidential gerrymander? 
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Process / Re: Does the US have a legitimate electoral system? on: November 10, 2016, 11:52:47 am
Lest we forget, we should that the winning candidate in 1992 and 1996 did not have a plurality of the popular vote, along with 2000 and 2016.  There were three presidential elections in a row where the majority of voters did not vote for the person elected. 
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Lackawana County and Luzerne County, PA on: November 10, 2016, 11:48:19 am
Hillary Clinton happened.

No.

Take a look at Cambria County (where I use to live).  I think Obama carried it in 2008 and lost it in 2012, but fairly closely. 

Trump broke 70% this year.

It has been Trump's appeal to working class and non-urban, non-suburban populations. 
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: Two Guesses on: November 09, 2016, 04:15:29 am
The deluge may be upon us (not that I'm thrilled about it).
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Home-stretch polling on: November 09, 2016, 04:10:13 am
If there is a 1980 style shift, it will go for Trump.

How many more elections until you stop jacking off to Reagan's 1980 win?

Until the next realignment.  I was talking about 1932 in 1980. 

lol Virginia is a safe D state and the First Lady of Arkansas is losing it by 20 points. there's been a realignment.

Can you say "realignment?"  Good, I knew you could. 
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: PA: Trafalgar (R) - Trump + 1 on: November 09, 2016, 04:01:39 am
Did Sucksquehanna change its name to Trafalgar? 

Maybe Susquehanna should change its name to Trafalgar.  LOL. 
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Trump actually appoint a special prosecutor to imprison Clinton? on: November 09, 2016, 03:59:56 am
Obama will pardon her. 
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: PA: Trafalgar (R) - Trump + 1 on: November 08, 2016, 06:13:19 pm
Did Sucksquehanna change its name to Trafalgar? 
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Home-stretch polling on: November 08, 2016, 06:11:02 pm
Ah, King, here is my map.

I am not using the map for percentages.  The lighter shades are my tossups, showing a guess of how each will go. 



I am assuming a slight trend to Trump, and looked as past elections.  I have it at:

Clinton:  269
Trump:  269


Where do you get the idea that I have Virginia even as a tossup?  I would be more stunned at Trump winning PA or MN than I would with him winning VA. 
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Home-stretch polling on: November 08, 2016, 05:57:00 pm
If there is a 1980 style shift, it will go for Trump.

How many more elections until you stop jacking off to Reagan's 1980 win?

Until the next realignment.  I was talking about 1932 in 1980. 
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Auto Alliance/ESA/Pulse Opinion: Trump +6 in FL, Clinton leads in NH/OH/PA/NC/NV on: November 08, 2016, 05:55:03 pm
Are they trying to win the award for worst pollster of the year? 
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: IBD/TIPP Daily Tracking Poll thread FINAL - Trump + 1/ Trump + 2 on: November 08, 2016, 05:46:15 pm
I think they had Hillary up yesterday?
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Opinion of Nate Silver's Forecast Map on: November 08, 2016, 05:42:57 pm
Someone explain to me how Hillary has a chance in North Carolina if black turnout is truly down and Obama couldn't even win the state in 2012 with his level of turnout; don't see how it's possible.

Looks good to me otherwise.

College whites.

In North Carolina? 
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: turnout reports, voting problems, and last minute dirty tricks on: November 08, 2016, 05:38:36 pm
Philadelphia, North Philia, turnout was 156 at 1:30 PM.  That is certainly down from 2008 (when it was over 210), and possibly down from 2012.    It is more than 90% African American and Democratic.  The Philadelphia suburbs are the major area where Clinton could win.

News reports are that the burbs are voting heavily. 
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: PA: Harper - TIE on: November 05, 2016, 08:20:12 pm
It is closer, but Hillary has the Phila suburbs.  She takes it, though we might not know until late. 
22  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election Predictions / Re: 2016 Presidential Predictions (General) on: November 02, 2016, 05:10:32 pm
I am not using the map for percentages.  The lighter shades are my tossups, showing a guess of how each will go.  



I am assuming a slight trend to Trump, and looked as past elections.  I have it at:

Clinton:  269
Trump:  269

I was not trying to come out with a tie.

A stronger trend to Trump and he wins; the tide shifts slightly to Clinton, she wins.  A tidal wave and well ....  If there is a 1980 style shift, it will go for Trump.

I would also be watching to see what the CD's in Maine and Nebraska do.  It may come down to one of those.

23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Home-stretch polling on: November 02, 2016, 05:06:38 pm
I am not using the map for percentages.  The lighter shades are my tossups, showing a guess of how each will go. 



I am assuming a slight trend to Trump, and looked as past elections.  I have it at:

Clinton:  269
Trump:  269

I was not trying to come out with a tie.

A stronger trend to Trump and he wins; the tide shifts slightly to Clinton, she wins.  A tidal wave and well ....  If there is a 1980 style shift, it will go for Trump.

I would also be watching to see what the CD's in Maine and Nebraska do.  It may come down to one of those.

24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Susquehanna - PA: Clinton +2 (4-way) on: November 02, 2016, 03:51:51 pm
Their final result in 2012 was Romney 49-45, so they aren't reliable. Trump is likely to win PA though.

I refer to them as Suxquehanna.  They have had a terrible track record in PA.

I'd pay more attention to the Franklin and Marshall poll, but I'd like to see them poll this weekend. 
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: PA-Monmouth: Clinton +10 and at 50 on: October 04, 2016, 10:32:08 pm
I wouldn't trust Monmouth, but I would trust F & M, which had Clinton up by 9. 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 1186


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines