Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 04, 2015, 09:25:37 pm
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 ... 476
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread on: Today at 04:32:35 pm
Minnesota, PPP.

Clinton: 43%
Paul: 42%

Clinton: 44%
Bush: 42%

Clinton: 44%
Huckabee: 42%

Clinton: 42%
Rubio: 40%

Clinton: 44%
Fiorina: 33%

Clinton: 46%
Walker: 42%

Clinton: 44%
Carson: 39%

Clinton: 44%
Cruz: 39%

Clinton: 44%
Trump: 39%

Clinton: 43%
Christie: 38%

...Consistent with Quinnipiac results last week. E-mail gets resolved without a cover-up, or Hillary Clinton is in deep trouble.  These are very shaky results for a Democrat in a state that has not voted for a Republican nominee for President since 1972.

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush





Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee



Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul





Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio



Hillary Clinton vs. Scott Walker



30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more


[/quote]
[/quote]
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Santorum campaign in crisis? on: Today at 05:07:01 am
After 2006, did he ever have any credibility as a nationwide politician?
3  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: MO: House Speak John Diehl in inappropriate relationship w/ 19 year old intern on: August 03, 2015, 03:15:56 pm
Poplar Bluff -- where US 60 and US 67 meet -- due south of St. Louis, about due east of Springfield, and a bit west of due north from Memphis.
4  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Texas AG Indicted on: August 03, 2015, 02:16:51 pm
Paxton turned himself in in Collin County, Collin County is a very politically-conservative county; it went 65-34 for Romney in 2012 and 62-37 for McCain in 2008. For a suburban county this is extremely conservative, being approached by some counties of metro Atlanta.
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Quinnipiac National: Close race between Clinton and Bush/Walker on: August 03, 2015, 02:07:14 pm
If one goes with basically a 2014 electorate, then few Democrats can win. In 2014 only one open seat in the Senate went D -- a Democratic hold in Michigan.

With a 2012 electorate far more Democrats (and D-leaners)  than Republicans (and R-leaners) add their votes to the vote. The 2016 electorate will look much more like the 2012 electorate than like the 2014 electorate. 
6  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: What's going on with the Democrats in Nevada? on: August 03, 2015, 09:59:23 am
What's up with the Democrats in Nevada? They haven't held the governor's mansion since the 1990s and they've lost Richard Bryan's Senate seat in 2000, a Democratic year. They've lost control of the legislature and at least one House seat in Congress. The only thing they've managed to accomplish is holding onto one Senate seat despite the fact that Harry Reid is sitting in it and occasionally taking back one or two House seats.

Nevada is a swing state. That means it will elect Republicans and Democrats at different times and to different offices. Look it up! Nevada voted for Obama TWICE.

I think you're missing the point. The Democrats have been having crappy luck lately in Nevada.

Also, Nevada voted for George W. Bush both times.

Demographic change -- more Hispanics. Note also that Mexican-Americans (the bulk of Nevada Hispanics) were hurt worst by the real-estate meltdown that Dubya sponsored. Mexican-Americans, who had been trending R as they started to join the middle class, reversed that trend in Colorado and Nevada in 2012. 
7  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Texas AG Indicted on: August 03, 2015, 09:54:49 am
Lol, what is up with DA's in Texas?

There are Democratic DAs in Austin, Dallas, El Paso, Houston, and San Antonio... and they can crusade against some allegedly-corrupt statewide pol.

Statewide politics in Texas is now a snake-pit because (for now) just about any nominated Republican can get elected.   Texas' giant cities are slightly D; rural Texas is strong R. What makes the difference between Texas and most other states is that the suburbs are still strong R.

When quality matters far less than partisan identity, scandals like this are near certainties.
8  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 2018 Michigan Senate (PPP) - Stabenow has large leads despite lukewarm approval on: August 03, 2015, 09:47:20 am
I'd love to see Land go for it again.

She'd lose by double digits again.
You think so?  Most of the reason she lost so badly to Peters is because she never found her campaign message and let Peters smear her with sexist attacks.  If she runs again, she will have hopefully learned from her mistakes last time.

Terry Land did not dare show that she would be a Koch puppet -- which she was. She also lacked the interesting curriculum vitae that Joni Ernst (who is a Koch puppet) offered.
9  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 2016 Senate Ratings and Predictions on: August 03, 2015, 09:43:18 am
SAFE R:

Alabama
Idaho
Iowa (unless something happens to Grassley)
North Dakota
Oklahoma
South Carolina
South Dakota
Utah

LIKELY R:

Alaska (unless Murkowski loses in a primary -- see Lugar in 2012)
Arizona (assuming that nothing happens to McCain)
Arkansas (despite low approval for Boozman)
Georgia
Kansas (close at times in 2014)
Kentucky (should Paul run for the Presidency and abandon the Senate)
Louisiana (depends upon the jungle primary)

LEAN R:

Arizona (health of octogenarian incumbent)
Indiana (potential trouble)
North Carolina (unless Burr gets a competent opponent, then LEAN D)

TOSS-UP:

Florida
Nevada
Ohio
Pennsylvania

LEAN D

Colorado

LIKELY D:

New Hampshire (flip)
Wisconsin (flip)

SAFE D:

California
Connecticut
Hawaii
Illinois (flip)
Maryland
New York
Oregon
Vermont




10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread on: August 03, 2015, 09:24:44 am
The polls showing Senators Portman and Toomey with approvals around 50% seem to involve a 2014 electorate.

Ron Johnson is extremely vulnerable in Wisconsin. Burr (NC) would bet in a Blanche Lincoln situation should he face a strong opponent. He loses to a strong Democrat with an electorate resembling that of 2008 or 2012. 35% approval? Not good enough for a slightly-R state.  Please take any further discussion of Senate seats as affected by a Presidential election to

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=209635.msg4674395#msg4674395
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread on: August 03, 2015, 09:20:05 am
This (with some verbal changes for clarity because the post is better understood in context) is my most recent (as of August 3, 2015) post on approval of Senators up for re-election.

Quote
Mark Kirk, R-IL

Approval 25%, disapproval 42%, undecided 33%

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_IL_72915.pdf

I have waited for a poll (involving Senator Kirk before projecting his political demise in 20a16). I don't see him sticking around a 25% approval, but I see no possibility of him getting in the range for winning re-election. He was elected under freakish circumstances that will not be repeated in 2016. (He is simply a terrible) mis-match for the state -- just as a slightly-liberal Democratic Senator from Oklahoma who won election in poisoned circumstances would be a terrible mis-match for Oklahoma).



Approval polls only.


White -- retiring incumbent or (should it happen) an incumbent defeated in a primary, with "D" or "R" for the party in question.
Yellow -- incumbent under indictment or with a terminal diagnosis short of the completion of his term, with "D" or "R" for the party in question.

Light green -- Republican incumbent apparently running for re-election, no polls.
Light orange --  Republican incumbent apparently running for re-election, no polls.

Blue  -- Republican running for re-election with current polls available.
Red --  Republican running for re-election with current polls available.


Intensity percentage shows the first digit of the approval of the incumbent Senator --

"2" for approval between 20% and 30%, "3" for approval between 30% and 39%... "7" for approval between 70% and 79%.

Numbers are recent approval ratings for incumbent Senators if their approvals are below 55%. I'm not showing any number for any incumbent whose approval is 55% or higher because even this early that looks very safe.

An asterisk (*) is for an appointed incumbent (there are none now) because appointed pols have never shown their electability.

Approval only (although I might accept A/B/C/D/F) -- not favorability. I do not use any Excellent-Good-Fair-Poor ratings because "fair" is ambiguous. A fair performance by a 7-year-old violinist might impress you. A 'fair' performance by an adult violinist indicates something for which you would not want to buy a ticket.

NO PARTISAN POLLS.

This shows less than many would like to see. I'm not rating the strength of the opponent or the likelihood of the incumbent seeing himself in good-enough health to last into the election.


What I see so far with incumbents:

App      Rep  Dem

<40      4      0
40-44    2      0
45-49    2      2
50-54    3     0
55-59    0      0
>60       0      2
retire    1       3 
indict     0      1
other   10      2

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=209635.msg4674395#msg4674395

I am not showing approval ratings on the map for retiring incumbents. Note that with the indictment of Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) I see the possibility of his current seat becoming available in 2016 because an appointed Senator must be re-elected.

"Other" means no credible polls.
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread on: August 03, 2015, 09:04:12 am
Portman is behind.

Except he isn't. Still a Toss-up, probably tilt R.

The most recent poll has him behind Strickland.

Quote
Toomey? depends upon the pollster.

So if 6 out of 7 pollsters show him up by margins between 3-20 points, it "depends"? Also LOL@saying it depends on the pollster in PA but not in OH.

I see the wild range in approval ratings for Toomey. One is not going to win re-election with approval in the 30s in a state whose opposition to the incumbent is strong. High 40s? Tough. That's how things are in Ohio.

Quote
McCain? Trump has savaged him pointlessly, and those words will not go away.

There is no proof yet that Trump's remarks have damaged McCain.

...The Democrats will not use those. They have too much respect for military service. As I see it the big question mark on Senator McCain is his health due to his age. 

Quote
It is easier for challengers emerge and defeat pols with weak approvals than it is for pols with weak approval ratings to become solid. Think of Blanche Lincoln.

None of these Senators have really weak approval ratings (except Kirk, of course). Also, that means that Michael Bennet is in trouble as well.

I have a thread for Senate approvals for incumbents up for re-election in 2016. See that. 

Quote
You're a hack.

Aren't we all? Sure I want Democrats to win everything possible in 2016.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton vs Walker on: August 03, 2015, 08:57:16 am
Virginia is very close to the national average. If I am predicting any state to be the tipping-point state in any election even nearly close, it is Virginia -- following Florida in 2000, Ohio in 2004, Iowa in 2008, and Colorado in 2012.

If the Democrat gets over 350 electoral votes, then Pennsylvania might be. 
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread on: August 02, 2015, 07:05:28 pm
pbrower, do you mean to have Indiana as solid D on the Clinton vs. Walker map?

No. It's Illinois that would be solid D.  Sorry about that.

If anything, I would expect Indiana to be "weak Walker".

I still think that Quinnipiac assumes a 2014 electorate, which would practically ensure a Republican win of the Presidency and a hold on the Senate. A 2012 electorate dooms any Republican Presidential candidate and practically assures a Democratic win of the Senate.

Not necessarily on the Senate. Toomey is looking very strong, Portman is a great fundraiser and campaigner, Ayotte is likely okay unless Hassan runs, Burr has no serious challenger, McCain is in the right state politically. IL, WI, FL is only 3 gains, 2 if Dems lose NV. They need 4 to reach 50 seats.

Portman is behind. Toomey? depends upon the pollster. Ayotte? Depends upon the competition. McCain? Trump has savaged him pointlessly, and those words will not go away.

It is easier for challengers emerge and defeat pols with weak approvals than it is for pols with weak approval ratings to become solid. Think of Blanche Lincoln.



15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread on: August 02, 2015, 05:51:07 pm
pbrower, do you mean to have Indiana as solid D on the Clinton vs. Walker map?

No. It's Illinois that would be solid D.  Sorry about that. Correction made.

If anything, I would expect Indiana to be "weak Walker".

I still think that Quinnipiac assumes a 2014 electorate, which would practically ensure a Republican win of the Presidency and a hold on the Senate. A 2012 electorate dooms any Republican Presidential candidate and practically assures a Democratic win of the Senate.
16  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: New Left Watch on: August 02, 2015, 04:42:50 pm
Does the fact that on tumblr recently I saw somebody in all seriousness describe Hitler as 'someone who believed very deeply in inequality and privilege' count for this thread?

Hitler did so believe and put his beliefs into reality to the extent possible, did he not?
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Gilmore candidacy is official: he files paperwork w/ the FEC on: August 02, 2015, 03:14:51 pm
Yawn!
18  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of liberals bashing conservatives as "stupid" on: August 01, 2015, 01:04:35 pm
A childish argument that does nothing to convince anyone of anything. That said, when a conservative (or a liberal, for that matter) says something that is blatantly counterfactual, they deserve to be called out for it.

The point. I'd like to see conservatives go back to promoting an economic order and educational practices that give more people a stake in the system.
19  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Should wild animals be banned from circuses? on: August 01, 2015, 01:01:39 pm
The Big Cats seem to like it because they get treated like dogs. 
20  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Rate the Presidents, Installment #44: Barack Obama on: August 01, 2015, 12:59:13 pm
FOUR.

Best President since Eisenhower, a surprisingly-good analogue. Cautious; got America out of a bungled war without disgrace; no scandals; Obamacare = Interstate Highway System.

FIVE is reserved for Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, TR, and FDR.

ONE is for Buchanan, Fillmore, George W. Bush, and Andrew Johnson.
21  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Should the age of consent be lowered to 14? on: August 01, 2015, 12:52:07 pm
No, but I think that we should change the sex offender registry laws to provide mitigating factors for age differences. An example is a 19-year-old here in Michigan who met a girl on a dating app who said repeatedly that she was 18. Turned out she was lying out her ass and she was really 14, and so the 19-year-old boy spent 90 days in jail and will be on the sex offender registry for life. The girl and her mother testified at trial that she lied about her age repeatedly the entire time, and he testified that if he'd known her age, he would have shut the whole thing down from the start. That guy doesn't deserve to be labeled for life the same way that a 40+ year-old man who abuses a child deserves to be.

Deceit by the younger 'partner' should be a mitigating or even exculpating factor.

If I were over 21 and dating someone who in any way looks or acts like a teenager I would insist upon identification before 'getting physical'.  Teenagers can lie convincingly... and anyone dating a teenager needs be careful.

Forged or misappropriated (older sibling?) ID? The person in technical violation of an age-of-consent statute should get away with it. An innocent state of mind and due caution makes one innocent so far as I am concerned. (That explains why simply being wrong is not perjury).   After all, we are talking about something less trivial than hiring someone for a job. The sex-offender register is rightly for sexual predators.  
22  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: The so-called "Demise" of the Republican Party is way overblown on: August 01, 2015, 10:11:22 am
The Republicans have the money, the organization, and the fanatics.

That is enough.
23  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Non-Christian President on: August 01, 2015, 09:46:01 am
We already have a non-Christian president right now. Have you ever seen what is written on Obama's wedding ring? 'There is no God but Allah' in Arabic. That's just shameful that we elected him.


All devout Christians worship Allah, anyway. 
24  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Current status of SSM in the holdout states (MAP) on: August 01, 2015, 09:34:09 am
Do Alabama and Kentucky have any Native American counties?

No.
25  Forum Community / Survivor / Re: Interactive Historic Ranking of President Single Elimination Tournament on: August 01, 2015, 09:33:13 am
Arthur -- no qualifications to be President. Perfectly suited to an era in which the President was nearly a triviality.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 476


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines