Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 25, 2016, 03:17:45 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 ... 516
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Jeb Bush to Endorse Gary Johnson Next Week? on: July 22, 2016, 06:12:15 pm
A vote for Johnson is only a half vote against Trump, while a vote for Hillary is a full vote against Trump.

Bullsh**t.  A vote for Johnson is a vote for Johnson.  I probably won't vote for Johnson, but I certainly won't vote for Clinton or for Trump, and you may not count my opposition to Trump or to Clinton as half of anything.  It is full-on, raging opposition, just as those who will vote for Johnson fully oppose Trump and fully oppose Clinton.

Anyway, I don't care whether any of the Bushes endorses Johnson, but I'm glad to know that they're not supporting Trump.  Fully and completely.



Kinda surprised you aren't for Johnson. A pot-smoking, drug legalization favoring libertarian Republican seems like your type. ;-)
2  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: ATTN MODS: one of your forum members is demanding that others commit suicide on: July 22, 2016, 12:45:38 pm
Let's be clear here.  This is really about an unpopular poster saying something mean (and under very rare, specific circumstances, dangerous) to a popular poster whom Atlas has collectively decided has baby brother syndrome and must be protected at all costs.

It will likely be another case where a person is banned 90% for being unliked...and 10% due to some questionable action.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I consider the case on the merits, and not based on the identity of either the poster or the recipient of the threat.

A poster's entire past history is considered when deciding whether or not to ban them, as opposed to just the specifics of one incident.

I should probably also clarify what I meant by saying that we are dealing with the matter: a warning has been sent to the poster in question saying that the conduct is unacceptable (this really should have been done a couple years ago when they initially made such statements, but I don't think it was). They have not been banned, and have the opportunity to correct their behavior.
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Could Dukakis have won? on: July 22, 2016, 11:58:36 am
A better campaign could have made it closer. He wasn't all that far from getting over 200 electoral votes and making the race competitive.

Bush's percentage of the vote was about in line with Reagan's approval rating, which helps disprove the notion that Dukakis was a horrible candidate (unless you believe Bush was, as well, and the two canceled each other out). Dukakis consolidated the anti-Reagan vote, but he was unable to convince the country that the Reagan administration had been a failure and that a change was needed.

I agree that he ran a bad campaign, but there is a difference between that and being a bad candidate.
4  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: ATTN MODS: one of your forum members is demanding that others commit suicide on: July 20, 2016, 12:38:54 pm
Badger, one thing to consider is not just how a statement of "kill yourself" might be interpreted by you, I, or other posters not at risk of committing suicide, but rather how it can be interpreted by those who lack the ability in the moment to parse the nuances of communication lost via the internet and who are already in a vulnerable state.

I get your point about "don't interpret things so literally/seriously" but things that are obvious and clear to most are not always to others.

When we make statements in a public forum (as opposed to if this had just been a joke between friends in a private setting/medium) we have a responisbility to consider how our words can impact others.
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Process / Re: How inaccurate do you think national popular vote totals are? on: July 20, 2016, 12:04:36 pm
In 1960 it really comes down to how you count the Democratic vote in Alabama. Voters didn't have the seperate options available to vote for Kennedy or Democratic unpledged electors like they did in Mississippi....the Democratic ticket had 6 unpledged electors and 5 Kennedy electors. So should the Democratic votes all be attributed to Kennedy (in which case Kennedy wins the national popular vote) or should only 5/11 of them count for Kennedy (in which case Nixon wins the national popular vote)?

There is no clear answer to this question as it is impossible to divine the intent of those voters regarding whether they intended to vote for Kennedy and/or "unpledged Democratic electors".
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2012 U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Obama/Biden falling back to Generic D Levels in IL and DE on: July 19, 2016, 05:28:42 pm
This is not historically uncommon at all; incumbent Presidents and VPs have almost always had less of a home state advantage when running for reelection than in their initial run prior to assuming national office.

Makes sense as they are more of a national figure when running for reelection and less associated with their home state.
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Could Dukakis have won? on: July 18, 2016, 06:51:51 pm
A stronger Democratic candidate could have won, but not Dukakis.
8  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: ATTN MODS: one of your forum members is demanding that others commit suicide on: July 18, 2016, 06:49:28 pm
This is unacceptable conduct and the matter is being addressed. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump announces Pence will be his running mate -- discussion thread on: July 15, 2016, 11:58:43 am
There is zero evidence that running mates help in the region that they are from. They help a little in their own home states, a couple of percentage points. They also don't hurt much either, even when they are clearly unqualified/unprepared (Quayle, Palin, etc.)

So it really makes the most sense to pick someone that the Presidential candidate has a good personal rapport with, and can work well with once in office. Picking them for political reasons is almost never a good idea.
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Obama 2008 primary/Obama 2008 general/Obama 2012 general/Sanders 2016 counties on: July 10, 2016, 08:51:42 pm
Lots of counties with a major university, and otherwise a cross-section of areas that are liberal/Democratic and have a high "floor" of Democratic votes (like Wisconsin and Minnesota). Among the states, Colorado is the one Obama won by the narrowest margin.
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: When was the last time a "lean" or "likely" state went the opposite way? on: July 08, 2016, 11:41:19 am
Back in the 80's and 90's, there were a lot fewer state polls than there are today, so it was harder to determine in advance which states were safe, likely, or lean. The 2000 election is when statewide polls really started to proliferate.

This might have something to do with the fact that none of the elections in the 80's or 90's were close enough for the Electoral College math to be worth worrying about.
12  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: ATTN Dave or Nym - Wiki editing privileges on: July 01, 2016, 03:56:38 pm
Unfortunately he's the only one who can help you with this.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Nate Silver predicts Clinton will win on: June 30, 2016, 04:41:59 pm
Perhaps Clinton going after NE-2 is their backup plan in case Trump wins ME-2. That would be pretty crazy outcome withe the race coming down to NE and ME and their weird rules.  You can bet the NE legislature would be kicking themselves for not going through with the idea of switching to WTA.

Makes sense, though the odds of it coming down to one EV are quite slim. But with a vulnerable incumbent D congressman in NE-02, it's definitely worth spending money there.
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Nate Silver predicts Clinton will win on: June 30, 2016, 12:39:16 pm
The reason Silver got the primaries wrong was because he was just winging it and had no model. You'll notice his models predicting each indvidual primary were quite good.

That's one of the big ironies of Trump's winning the nomination....the numbers were telling us ever since July of last year that he was the favorite, it's just that no one believed the data. In their defense though, early primary polls had quite often been wrong before, so there was good reason to be skeptical and think that Trump was another Herman Cain or Rudy Giuliani, but it's something to keep in mind. The polls this year have actually been more accurate than normal, which is the opposite of what your intuition might tell you about such an unconventional candidate as Trump.
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Nate Silver predicts Clinton will win on: June 30, 2016, 12:26:49 pm
If you sort the states by Trump's %chance to win, then NH is actually the tipping point at 32.8% vs 27.6% for VA. 

So Trump's narrow path ( sorted by % chance to win) is Romney + OH + CO + IA + FL + NH


Delving a little deeper he has a better chance of winning ME-02 (currently about 40% according to polls-plus) than most of those states. The really narrow Trump path would be Romney plus OH, CO, IA, FL and ME-02 which gets him to 269 EVs and then the GOP House majority elects him President (or would they?).

Realistically though, I doubt Trump would win Maine's 2nd district if he can't win New Hampshire, although there are reasons to believe the former could be more favorable to him than the latter since it's more rural.
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Popular vote vs electoral vote maps on: June 28, 2016, 12:49:01 pm
Agreed, Beef. People who don't understand the Midwest tend to lump Wisconsin in with Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania as the generic "rust belt" that Trump can theoretically sweep to compensate for losing Virginia, Florida, and Colorado but the western Midwest is definitely very distinct from the eastern Midwest.

Despite being less Democratic ever since 1992, Wisconsin will likely be harder for Trump to carry this time than Michigan (not that I think he has much chance in Michigan either, but comparitively speaking).
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: 1988/1992 swing voter on: June 28, 2016, 12:35:38 pm
The economy of the Great Plains/farm belt was if anything possibly better in 1992 than it was in 1988, which helps explain why all of the counties that Bush gained were in this swath. Many of the Dukakis 1988 voters in these areas may have been voting for him as a generic protest vote rather than for ideological reasons and thus switched to Perot in 1992.

The fact that Clinton received about 3 percentage points less of the popular vote nationally than Dukakis shows that the Dukakis '88/Perot '92 voters were actually more numerous than the Bush '88/Clinton '92 voters nationally.

I doubt there were very many voters who actually switched from Dukakis to Bush, but obviously there are always some in any election who switch in either direction. Voters who cared about ethics/honesty above all else would have been the most logical (remember that the Iran Contra scandal sullied Bush in this regard 1988, and then of course Clinton's ethical issues were already well known by 1992).
18  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Capitals of states on: June 27, 2016, 01:00:20 pm
Travel was far more difficult 200-odd years ago when most state capitals were chosen, so a central location between population centers was a major factor in their selection. Much the same logic applies to why Washington was chosen as the US capital instead of say New York or Philadelphia.

County seats are often centrally located within counties also for the same reason.

It's interesting that there has never been a major effort to try to move the capital of any of the states since establishment, however. I suppose it would be more trouble than it's worth.
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If African American voter turnout falls to 1996-2004 levels.... on: June 27, 2016, 12:56:41 pm
Remember that even though Obama won't be on the ballot:

1) He'll campaign hard for Hillary
2) He'll make it known through surrogates that he supports Hillary
3) Hillary is running against a guy who hedged on accepting the endorsement of the LITERAL HEAD OF THE KKK
4) Expanding on point 3, Trump's popularity among Open Racists, White Nationalists, and Confederate Flag Wavers isn't lost on the Black Community.

Not all African Americans care that Duke supported Trump. Herman Cain doesn't.

Then I guess it's good for Hillary that she doesn't need 100% of the African American vote to win. Smiley
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If African American voter turnout falls to 1996-2004 levels.... on: June 27, 2016, 12:52:17 pm
Black turnout was rising before Obama ran, so it's very unlikely to drop back to 1990s levels. Maybe it could drop back to its 2004 level sans Obama, but the KKK's endorsement of Trump will be enough to keep black turnout energized IMO.
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: How Can Trump Win Without Florida or Wisconsin? on: June 27, 2016, 12:31:07 pm
This gets him to 272:



This gets him to 270:



Both very unlikely if he can't win Florida or Wisconsin.
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump's Brexit response on: June 27, 2016, 11:47:22 am
Comedian Simon Brodkin crashed Donald Trump's Scottish golf course opening and tried to present him with swastika golf balls.

Watch the video and see the swastika golf balls here, via CNN :
http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016/06/24/donald-trump-comedian-simon-brodkin-orig-dlewis-vstan.cnn

You just cant make this stuff up.
LOL.
Love it.

Surprised Trump didn't accept the balls and then claim that he has no idea what a swastika symbolizes and that the media is being very unfair to him by portraying this as being in any way, shape or form an endorsement of Nazism. And making sure to mention that lots of people, smart people, the best people, are saying they agree with him.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: The Upshot's new demographic tool on: June 13, 2016, 10:59:27 am
I would take the small sample size results with a huge grain of salt. I'd be shocked if hispanic men in the South actually vote Republican, for example.
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democrats, would you have voted for a Democrat version of Trump? on: June 13, 2016, 10:39:46 am
We had our chance with Al Sharpton in 2004 and soundly rejected him.
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Process / Re: Single Day Primary vs Current System on: June 09, 2016, 02:30:46 pm
I would prefer single day primaries but later in the election season; the first Tuesday of May would work well (before summer vacation for schoolchildren and allowing a full six months for the general election campaign). The primary season wouldn't be any shorter; in fact usually the nominations are decided before then so it would lengthen it more often than not. This would also ensure that every vote counted equally, as opposed to the current system where Iowa and New Hampshire in particular have inordinate influence. Larger states wouldn't necessarily dominate campaign attention or appearances, any more than larger cities dominate attention or appearances in statewide races.

All open primaries to maximize participation.

All proportional allocation of delegates. If no candidate receives a majority, a contested convention is the result. Delegates bound to their candidate on the first ballot but all released on a second ballot or later. This would ensure that the nominee would be broadly acceptable to the party and a candidate couldn't win the nomination with only plurality support of the voters.

If I had my druthers, I would design the general election in a similar fashion. All electoral votes allocated proportionally, and if no one achieves a majority, revote until one candidate gets to a majority.

This system would result in the best balance IMO between giving all of the people an equal voice but also having a check and balance against candidates winning with a plurality of committed supporters against a divided field (in either the primaries or the general).
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 516


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines