Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 04, 2015, 10:46:39 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 508
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Donald Trump On Ben Carson: "Doctors don't create jobs" on: September 03, 2015, 02:24:00 pm
Well duh, clearly having effective doctors and a functioning health care system has nothing to do with having a strong economy....
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: How could Republicans win without Ohio? on: August 31, 2015, 03:56:54 pm


This seems to be the most plausible scenario.

I agree that's probably the most likely. This map could result if the GOP makes inroads with white voters in general, especially suburban whites, and Latinos, but the union vote and black vote are still strong for Hillary enabling her to carry Ohio  (presumably narrowly) as well as Pennsylvania.

Not too likely, but possible. I could see a Rubio vs. Clinton race resulting in this map.
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: How could Republicans win without Ohio? on: August 30, 2015, 01:38:22 am
I can't see the Democrat winning Ohio and losing Iowa, so I guess that's out. Pennsylvania is out - again, SW PA has largely trended with WV, but SW PA is in major decline, so it won't make up nearly enough of the difference. Forget Wisconsin also, especially if the Dem wins OH.

I think it's get back to NH, VA, NV depending upon how many EVs are needed. It's a pretty tough map without OH for the GOP. If a guy like Kasich wins OH governor pretty easily, and Dem governors of OH these days are almost unheard of, winning OH is utterly crucial.

Carter won OH and lost IA in 1976, even though IA was slightly better than average for McGovern in 1972.

IA is so hard for me to figure out.  It looks like core New Deal Coalition state that should have slowly slipped away, but it's Dem trend has all been post-1980.

Iowa does have an odd voting history, with seemingly random swings against the national tide.

In 1932 it was almost right at the national average, despite having been where Hoover was born and raised.

But in 1936 FDR won it by significantly less than in 1932, thus it was now a pretty solid Republican state. This continued in 1940 and 1944, when Willkie and Dewey carried it.

In 1948 however it goes back to nearly the national average and Truman wins it.

Then in 1952 it's back to strong Republican again, Eisenhower carrying it by significantly more than his national margin.

In 1956, back to swing state status again, Eisenhower winning it by a lot less than in 1952.

1960, back to solid Republican, Nixon wins easily, by only a few points less than Eisenhower.

1964, swing state once more, goes for Johnson by nearly his national average.

1968, back to Republican, Nixon wins quite easily.

1972, now Dem leaning, as Nixon doesn't win by much more than in 1968.

1976, back to GOP leaning as Ford carries it. This continues in 1980 as Reagan wins by more than his national average.

In 1984 though it's a pretty solid Dem state, as Reagan's victory margin is less than in 1980. Then in 1988 it's one of Dukakis's best states, hence very Democratic.

1992, back to swing state status, Clinton wins by less than Dukakis.

Iowa has finally calmed down in the past two decades, and behaved as bellwether (1996 and 2000) to a slightly Dem leaning state (since 2004).
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: When did you first hear of each of the candidates? on: August 29, 2015, 03:20:33 pm
Clinton - 1991 or 1992
Sanders - I didn't know his name, but sometime around 1990.
Biden - Maybe 2002
O'Malley - 2006
Chafee - 1999
Webb - 2006

Bush - 1998
Trump - late 1980s
Rubio - 2010
Walker - 2010
Kasich - 2010
Carson - 2013
Christie - 2009
Huckabee - 2007 or so
Santorum - 2000
Paul - 2009 or 2010
Cruz - 2012
Fiorina - probably 2009
Gilmore - 2014?
Graham - 2002
Jindal - 2005
Pataki - 1994
Perry - 2000

Hadn't heard of Biden before 2002? I guess you didn't watch the Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas hearings.
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / How could Republicans win without Ohio? on: August 29, 2015, 03:08:55 pm
No Republican has ever won the White House without winning Ohio. Interestingly this is the only state that either party, in this case the GOP, has ever carried in every election that they've won throughout the entire "current" two party era of Dem vs. GOP since 1856. (The longest streak of voting for every winning Democrat belongs to the trio of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Minnesota, which no victorious Democrat has failed to win since 1916.)

Here are the most plausible maps I can come up with for a GOP win without Ohio in 2016.

Jeb Bush/Pat Toomey vs. Hillary Clinton/Sherrod Brown. Ohio and Pennsylvania are both close, but the running mates manage to carry each for their tickets, producing a GOP win 277-261 with both states voting the opposite of how they would be expected to go in a close race.



Jeb Bush/Brian Sandoval vs. Hillary Clinton/Sherrod Brown

Again, Brown wins Ohio for the Dems, but Sandoval carries Nevada and Bush is able to win 273-265 without either Pennsylvania or Ohio.



Scott Walker/Kelly Ayotte vs. Hillary Clinton/Sherrod Brown

Ayotte brings New Hampshire, and Walker's "favorite son" status manages to barely win Wisconsin, thus enabling him to overcome Brown carrying Ohio for the Dems, and also to not need Iowa or Nevada like Bush did. Walker wins 271-267.



Scott Walker vs. Hillary Clinton, regardless of running mates

A huge union effort delivers Ohio for Hillary, but Walker's "home region advantage" bleeds across the border enough to carry Iowa, thus making New Hampshire (and Ohio) unnecessary. 273-265 for Walker.



Notice that Colorado in particular is a necessary component of all four GOP maps. Pretty hard to envision a scenario where a Republican could win without either Ohio or Colorado.
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Could the Republicans have won in 2008? on: August 19, 2015, 03:35:37 pm
Maybe if John Edwards was the Democratic nominee. Otherwise, no.

Yes, especially since the Rielle Hunter scandal exploded that summer.

Makes for interesting speculation as to what the Democrats would have done if Edwards had won the primaries. The scandal broke after the primaries but before the convention. Would there have been a movement afoot to convince his delegates to deny Edwards the nomination and vote for someone else?
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Could the Republicans have won in 2008? on: August 19, 2015, 10:44:23 am
No, but the Democrats could have lost if Obama had a scandal or major gaffe.
8  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Recent bans on: August 18, 2015, 12:22:06 pm
Temp bans = automatic reinstatement. Permabans do not. That is the difference.

But that's the point. In one case it's arbitrary, in the other it's explicit.

Also, shut up BRTD.

The issue is that one examines the circumstances at the time of the petition. Absent some rationale at the time for a reinstatement, there is no reinstatement. And anyone can apply for reinstatement. Of course, some petitions by some banees are more likely to be DOA than others. That certainly is the case where there has been socking in the interim.

Anyway, again these are solely my views. I am not speaking on behalf of anyone else.

Oh, just as an aside, I consider simfan to be quite a different poster in style and substance since his reinstatement than he was before, but I digress. The point is, is that some folks over time do mature and change and reflect, particularly those who are relatively young. When that happens, and can be demonstrated, then to me a petition has more merit.

Torie did quite a good job of summing up my own thinking. The actions taken (over multiple instances, not just this one time) justify banning without an automatic reinstatement. Threats to the safety of another poster are completely intolerable.

Banned posters may petition for reinstatement by emailing Dave directly. Clicking on the "email" link on the top of this page is the simplest way to do so. I will certainly abide by any decision he makes.

I apologize to sawx if he feels that I slandered or otherwise mischaracterized him. Mentall illness is a cruel affliction, and I can sympathize on a personal level with the struggle against it. As a fellow human, I am glad to hear that he is getting help and support his efforts to do so. However, as the modadmin of this site, my responsibility is not to sawx, but rather to the community at large to ensure all posters have a safe environment free from hostility, abuse and threat.

Bannings are not done due to personal animus. I pass no judgement on the overall character of anyone here in the execution of my duty. To do so would be substantially above my paygrade.
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: New Mexico and Nevada in the 60's on: August 14, 2015, 12:18:26 pm
Kennedy did surprisingly well with Mormons. Michael Barone in "Our Country: The Shaping of America from Roosevelt to Reagan" hypothesized they may have felt kinship with a fellow religious outcast.

Miners' unions were probably a factor in Nevada; not sure how strong they were in New Mexico but they were quite strong throughout the West for decades. The loss of jobs in the mining industry throughout the 20th century helped swing the West toward the GOP.
10  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Recent bans on: August 14, 2015, 11:04:55 am
Threatening another poster without remorse.
11  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Are there Any Politicians with Autism/Aspergers? on: August 12, 2015, 06:22:57 pm
Michael Dukakis seems a likely candidate.
12  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Recent bans on: August 12, 2015, 10:35:37 am
Yes.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: How did your grandparents vote? on: July 31, 2015, 11:08:22 am
I doubt any of my grandparents ever voted for a Dem. None of them were religious, but they thought they knew "sin" when they saw it, and Dems = sin in their minds.

Rum, Romanism, and rebellion? Smiley
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Describe a Hitler 1932, Sanders 2016 voter on: July 31, 2015, 10:28:54 am
Very few 102 year old people exist, and the ones that do probably aren't voting. Next.

In 2008, Obama got the votes of at least 3 people born in the 1800s.

Gertrude Weaver who died earlier this year at age 116, voted for him both times. She was 114 the 2nd time. She's the 7th oldest verified person on record.

Jeralean Talley, who died earlier this year at the age of 116.  She'll be the 13th oldest person ever after today.

Susannah Mushatt Jones who is still living and today ties for the 12th oldest person to ever live.

The latter two might have also voted for him in 2012, not sure.


So now we have the answer to "describe a Harding 1920/Obama 2012" voter.
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Which President reelection looked the most Bleak after their first midterm on: July 27, 2015, 05:38:29 pm
Definitely Clinton. There were serious calls for him to step aside and not even run for reelection. Being able to avoid a primary challenge was a minor miracle for him.
16  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Petition to unban Bacon King on: July 23, 2015, 04:07:43 pm
I should mention that Dave has indicated a willingness to possibly downgrade this to a temp ban, though there is no fixed time frame being discussed. That decision now lies with him.
17  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Are our forum account passwords encrypted? on: July 23, 2015, 03:57:12 pm
I certainly don't have access to any passwords. I don't know about Dave.
18  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: My thoughts to Dave Leip on Moderation/AAD, etc. on: July 23, 2015, 02:53:10 pm
Just to clarify one thing here: Unpopular opinions are only bannable if they are communicated in a hostile and/or irrational way, in such a way as to invoke a reaction as opposed to constructively contributing to debate. I get that there's subjectivity to that, and one can disagree with the standards, and discuss what they should be. Bans for violating this have not been given out lightly or without extensive and repeated provocation in the case of longer term posters, and without strong consensus from the mod team.
19  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: So, let's take a breath here and I'll try to explain about what's going on. on: July 22, 2015, 03:38:11 pm
It's not impossible, but we're a long way from being able to consider that.
20  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: So, let's take a breath here and I'll try to explain about what's going on. on: July 22, 2015, 03:24:47 pm
Thanks Snowguy. I apologize if I've been as cold as the waters of Lake Superior that lap at the shores of my hometown. It is not my intention to come across that way.
21  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Petition to unban adamgriffin on: July 22, 2015, 02:12:03 pm
I should add that it has now become clear that Griffin made a concerted effort to conceal the assistance he was giving to Tweed.
22  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Petition to unban adamgriffin on: July 22, 2015, 01:17:11 pm
Why and how would Dave Leip change his mind here?  He completely relies on you since he has completely fallen out of touch with the forum (as you yourself have also done). 

People don't want to interact with you on this forum.  They want to interact with Adam Griffin and BaconKing, who are valued parts of this community.

They didn't like how insular the moderator team and admins have become.  And the actions of the past couple days have only proven that further. 

You have no concept of mercy or understanding on this matter.  You just make things worse...divide and alienate the community further...And get dismissive.

Time for amnesty.

You're right, he'd be very unlikely to change his mind and say that it's acceptable for you to invade his personal property, since if he intended the "Modcave" to be publicly accessible, he would have made it so from the beginning, but if you think he was wrong to make it private, my point is that you are welcome to persuade him he made a mistake and that anyone who wants to should be able to see any and all postings there. Until and unless that happens, I'm obligated to fulfill his wishes.

And you are correct, both he and I have made this forum less of a priority in our lives than many members here do. I take full responsibility for that. I don't apologize for it, as the "real life" events that have caused it more than justify it, but it is an accurate assessment. The primary purpose of this website, and the reason I have visited it regularly since 1999, is because it is the finest source of US election related materials on the internet. That is Dave's first priority also, not this forum, and not the providing of a social club. That is only a secondary priority. I think some have lost sight of that, and also feel a sense of entitlement to expression/activity on someone else's property that I feel is not at all justified. He's made his wishes clear through the TOS regarding what is and is not acceptable behavior. Again, if you don't agree with those policies, you can attempt to convince him to change his mind, and to create new standards to replace those previously set forth and agreed to upon all users signing up here.

Regarding "mercy and understanding".....are you seriously suggesting that we should allow our website to be hacked and personal information compromised? If you can propose a compromise solution, I might be willing to consider it, but I can't see how "amnesty" is acceptable whatsoever. It would only encourage further attacks, potentially compromising the security of every user here.

I should also mention that Dave has been extremely active in helping to investigate the source of this leak, and providing technical material to prove the allegations made, all of which was obtained prior to action being taken. So now would be an excellent time to try to contact him, given that this matter has gotten his attention. You can either send him a PM, or click the "email" link at the top of this site.
23  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Petition to unban Bacon King on: July 22, 2015, 12:23:05 pm
He blatantly violated the trust placed in him by allowing others access to restricted material. That is completely unacceptable, regardless of any mitigating circumstances or past history. This ban will not be reversed by me. If Dave overrules, so be it, but I suggest making your case to him directly if your goal is to achieve his reinstatement.
24  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Petition to unban adamgriffin on: July 22, 2015, 12:18:50 pm
It's theft, pure and simple. Accessing, or in Adam's case assisting someone else to access with knowledge of what would occur, portions of Dave Leip's private property that he has chosen not to make available to you is akin to breaking into someone's house.
I'd guess you've never been robbed before, then.  I have...and I can assure you, this is nothing like that.

By that logic, then a good many of us must be banned for having viewed or possessed stolen goods, as well.

Unban him.

I actually have, but I don't intend to turn this into a war of anecdotes, or to compare one crime to another in terms of severity, since that doesn't change the fact that it's still theft, regardless of the amount, or what was taken.

No, viewing stolen material is not bannable, but actively assisting in theft, with knowledge of what one was assisting with, is most certainly bannable. If you disagree with that policy, take it up with Dave. If he overturns my decision, I will gladly abide by it.
25  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Petition to unban adamgriffin on: July 22, 2015, 11:24:22 am
It's theft, pure and simple. Accessing, or in Adam's case assisting someone else to access with knowledge of what would occur, portions of Dave Leip's private property that he has chosen not to make available to you is akin to breaking into someone's house.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 508


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines