Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2015, 11:04:44 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 63
1  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Political Quiz List. Are you a Quiz Whiz? on: March 27, 2015, 01:32:29 pm
The questions were still a bit difficult to understand despite translating them, but:

1. FG
2. EELV
3. PCF
4. NPA
5. PS

Yeah they're a little tough, but it's helpful to go and look at the party's responses so as to to get an idea of what each answer is getting at.
2  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Political Quiz List. Are you a Quiz Whiz? on: March 27, 2015, 12:30:30 pm
This is the best test I've seen pertaining to French political parties. It's in French, so it requires either a knowledge of the language or Google translation (just right-click and hit "translate to English.") This quiz is particularly good in that it gives a variety of options and doesn't try to apply American/British issues and responses to France.

Unsurprisingly, I'm closest to the UDI and MoDem.

http://www.politest.fr/
3  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Maryland 2016 elections on: March 13, 2015, 11:00:30 am
I'm interested to see if Kathleen Matthews runs in the 8th. It would definitely make for a higher-profile race.

Also, keep your eye on Dutch and Delaney. 
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: National Journal: The Emerging Republican Advantage on: February 12, 2015, 01:53:05 pm
Most "emerging majority" talk is premature. Those assessments tend to assume that would happened in the last election will happen in the next. They also tend to assume that a voters demographic makeup determines how they will vote. Sometimes it does, but these trends change overtime (and there is always one election where they filp).

As for 2016, the Democrats are still the favorites based in large part on structural factors (the economy, a huge GOP field, a very solid campaign infrastructure for Hillary) and demographic factors, but any talk of being able to govern for eight years by simply duplicating the Obama coalition is unrealistic. The Democratic Party has advantages, but they are by no means the "majority" party in America.
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: If Hillary will win in 2016, what will happen in 2020? on: February 12, 2015, 01:47:33 pm
If the GOP nominates Jeb Bush (or any establishment conservative) in 2016: The right-wing/Tea Party crowd will be in a much stronger position then they are today. Very possible that a Tom Cotton or Rand Paul-esque candidate wins the nomination. If that's the case, then Hillary will be the favorite (but again, winning the White House in four straight elections is pretty remarkable.)

If the GOP nominates a Tea Partier in 2016: The Republicans turn to a more establishment type (Snyder, Ayotte, someone of that mold) and is the favorite. As others have noted, the economy is probably not going to be as strong in 2020 as it likely will be in 2016. If the Republicans nominate a solid candidate, they will have a great shot at winning.

So overall the candidate and the economy matter the most. If the economy is good and the GOP nominates a fringe candidate than Hillary is the favorite. If the reverse is true than she is the underdog. If the economy is strong and the GOP nominates an establishment candidate, Hillary is the slight (very slight) favorite. Same if they nominate a weak candidate and the economy is weak.
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: TNR: Democrats Have a White Working Class Problem and Not Just in the South on: August 08, 2014, 08:34:05 pm
I think it's pretty clear that the Democrats need to develop a strong message to these voters (and I think this definition is pretty good, compared to most others) and I think Clinton's the one to do it.
7  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Sabato: IA now tossup, MN a sleeper in the making? on: July 26, 2014, 12:46:44 pm
Sabato's ratings on GA and KY seem related to what Chuck Todd said this morning on MSNBC: Basically that Grimes and Nunn have a really good chance at getting to 48%-49% in the general election, but that he's having a hard time seeing them get to 50% with their state's demographics.

 Comparable to Dan Mongiardo, Tony Knowles, and Brad Carson in 2004, where they ran really good campaigns but the national mood and the simple reality of the states prevented them from winning.

Not that I agree with that assessment, but that what I see Sabato saying here.
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: How Would Mark Warner Do With the PV/EV If He Is Dem Nominee? on: July 26, 2014, 12:34:29 pm
Depends on what kind of strategy and theme Warner employs. In the 2012 climate, and running on a moderate, job-creator platform, I see this as the best case scenario.





9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: video of 1992 Clinton veep speculation on The McLaughlin Group on: July 26, 2014, 10:00:22 am
Haha! Interesting to see how different politics was just twenty years ago. "West Virginia is a Democratic state" and "New Jersey always goes Republican!"
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: WI President Adlai Stevenson? on: July 25, 2014, 04:55:17 pm
'52. Basically I'm asking how you think the '50s would have turned out if Stevenson, not Eisenhower, was in charge.
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / WI President Adlai Stevenson? on: July 25, 2014, 12:10:50 pm
Ignoring the obvious question of how he would win, how do you imagine President Adlai Stevenson would preform as President?
12  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: What would you pick as your campaign theme song? on: July 25, 2014, 11:57:05 am
As a first time candidate: Home, by Dieks Bentley or We Take Care of Our Own by Bruce

As an Incumbent: I Won't Back Down by Tom Petty

13  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Summary of political beliefs on: July 24, 2014, 11:45:09 pm
As of now, socially and fiscally center-left. Foreign policy really can't be classified in left-right terminology, but I'd call myself a neo-liberal ala Bill Clinton.
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Past Election What-ifs (US) / Re: 2000: What about President Gore? on: July 24, 2014, 09:13:04 pm
Gore probably wins. It's a lot harder to run against an incumbent President than a sitting VP. Gore would use the power of the office to make a name for himself (probably on HMO or campaign finance reform) before running. It's possible the Republican field is thinner than OTL (maybe Bush waits until '04). Either way, Gore wins.
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Past Election What-ifs (US) / Re: 1964: Kennedy/Johnson vs Goldwater/Tower on: July 24, 2014, 09:11:09 pm
The CRA probably doesn't pass Congress in 1964, as it took a series of lucky events to get it passed when it did IOTL. I see it passing in early 1965 after Kennedy trounces the anti-CRA Goldwater. Dirksen will move to break the filibuster to avoid continued problems on Civil Rights. Here are my predictions for a second Kennedy term on major LBJ items:

-VRA: Can get passed at any point between 1965-1969. Much less controversial than the CRA. Comes down to how much effort/political capital Kennedy wants to spend on it.
-Medicare/Medicaid: Good chance of Medicare passing once Harry Byrd, Sr. passes away/steps down as Senate Finance Committee Chairman. IOTL he was dead set against passing it until Johnson gave him the 'treatment.' His sucessor, Russell Long, was much more supportive, as was House Ways and Means Chairman Wilbur Mills, who will get it passed with bipartisan support after the '64 elections. Medicaid may or may not get added to the package. 1966-'67
-Tax Cuts: Kennedy will have to agree to Byrd's proposed budget cuts if he wants it passed before the election, which he will. 1964.
-War on Poverty: One of JFK's last notes was 'POVERTY.' He also asked the head of the Census Bureau to analyze how taking on poverty would help him in 1964. That being said, JFK lacked the same emotional commitment to fighting poverty than LBJ, along with the lack of legislating skills. I'd expect greater funding for existing programs (Appalachia development, Food Stamps, AFDC, etc.) rather than the creation of new bureaucracies and programs.
-ESEA: Unlikely to pass for a few reasons. Mostly because JFK was trapped between Northern Catholic Democrats who wanted aid for parochial schools, but Dixiecrats wanted nothing of the sort. LBJ ultimately tied funding to students and not schools, and was largely successful because he wasn't Catholic.  Hard to see Kennedy pulling this one off.


Overall Kennedy can probably get most of the big items of the 'Great Society' passed in 1964 and 1965, but not everything. He also won't push for, nor would he get passed, as large of a War on Poverty than LBJ. I'm not touching Vietnam here, as that's a whole nother can of worms.
16  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: The Rehabilitation of Martha Coakley on: July 24, 2014, 03:20:44 pm
There's a big difference between a race for governor and a race for the Senate. In 2010, Brown won largely because of controversy over the ACA and Coakley's weak campaign. Alone, neither of these factors would have cost her the election, but combined they did. In that sense, Coakley can run a weak campaign and still win, though it'll be tough. There are no national issues at play in this election, and will probably win based on party affiliation.
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: What States Would Have Remained Swing States If Bush Had Won In '92 on: July 24, 2014, 03:16:40 pm
To answer this question, we first must see what states Bush would have won in 1992 to defeat Bill Clinton. According to the Atlas, the narrowest victory for Bush involves him swinging Colorado, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana,  New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Tennessee, and Wisconsin. In this scenario, all of New England besides New Hampshire stay blue, joining New Jersey as the only Northeastern states in the Republic column. Ultimately, this creates a scenario pretty similar to the political map today, more or less. Therefore, I don't see a lot of changes.
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: Battleground Georgia: Democrats see 2014 flip on: July 24, 2014, 12:07:13 pm
Actually, the best comparison I can think of for Nunn for someone currently in the Senate is Mark Warner.
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: Battleground Georgia: Democrats see 2014 flip on: July 24, 2014, 12:04:15 pm
On the question of Nunn and Carter's political ideologies, they are both pretty moderate and actually break with the Democratic leadership on some big issues:

Nunn: Fiscally conservative, pro-entitlement reform, supports corporate tax reduction and reform, free trader, pro-small business deregulation, opposed to defense spending cuts.

Carter: Pro-small business tax reform, pro-gun, pro-charter school.

In both cases, they've embraced the necessary niche to be competitive in Georgia. They've taken pro-business, socially moderate stances, without alienating their base. Nunn's actually quite a bit like her father on all the big issues, though she seems slightly more liberal.
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: IF David Perdue wins in Georgia this year..... on: July 24, 2014, 11:52:51 am
I'm rooting for Michelle Nunn obviously, but Perdue probably doesn't have much of a future outside of the Senate if he wins. That being said, the GOP leadership will probably try to put him forward as an economic spokesperson considering that he's much more palatable than Ted Cruz or Rand Paul.
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Alternative Elections / Re: 1994 New York Governor on: July 22, 2014, 05:27:52 pm
Pataki also played up negative stereotypes about the City, which probably helped to convince Giuliani to endorse Cuomo. Pataki and Giuliani's rivalry continued for quite some time.
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Political Lions on: July 22, 2014, 05:21:46 pm
Not sure if Kennedy would run without Carter in the race, but still interesting start!
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: A Proven Winner in '68 on: July 22, 2014, 05:14:37 pm
The lack of peace talks may actually benefit Kennedy, as it allows him to keep criticizing the war in good faith. If the talks were to begin, it would largely undercut his message among many moderates.
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International What-ifs / Re: How would you have voted, Israeli edition on: July 21, 2014, 01:53:47 pm
Four years later and after reading much more about Israeli politics:

1949: Progressive Party
1951: Progressive Party
1955: Progressive Party
1959: Progressive Party
1961: Liberal
1965: Independent Liberals
1969: Independent Liberals
1973: Independent Liberals
1977: Dash
1981: Shinui
1984: Shinui
1988: Shinui
1992: Meretz
1996: Meretz
1999: Shinui
2003: Shinui
2006: Kadima
2009: Kadima
2013: Yesh Atid

1996: Shimon Peres
1999: Ehud Barak
2001: Ariel Sharon
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International What-ifs / Re: How would you have voted? Republic of Ireland edition on: July 21, 2014, 01:07:32 pm
Somewhere in-between Fine Gael and Labour.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 63


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines