Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 29, 2015, 03:24:42 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 ... 463
1  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 2016 Senate Ratings and Predictions on: May 28, 2015, 03:20:00 pm
https://cola.unh.edu/sites/cola.unh.edu/files/research_publications/gsp2015_spring_senrace052715.pdf

Ayotte 45
Hassan 43

Ayotte approval: 48/28

"48" supplants a "40".





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       3      0
40-44    3      0
45-49    2      2
50-54    2      0
55-59    0      0
>60       0      2
retire    1       3 
indict     0      1
other   12      2

2  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: PA-PPP: Toomey leads Democrats by 4-11 on: May 28, 2015, 03:17:07 pm
As for the other Senator from Pennsylvania:


Q16
Do you approve or disapprove of Senator Bob
Casey’s job performance?
 43% Approve
..........................................................
 33% Disapprove
......................................................
 24% Not sure
3  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Cory Gardner's Crusade to Ban Condoms Continues on: May 28, 2015, 03:14:07 pm
The GOP wants a baby boom -- I wonder whether it's for cannon fodder or cheap labor.
4  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Gubernatorial approval, incumbent governors, Election 2014 - Election 2016 on: May 28, 2015, 03:12:20 pm
PPP, Casey, D-PA


Q15
Do you approve or disapprove of Governor
Tom Wolf’s job performance?
 40% Approve
..........................................................
 35% Disapprove
......................................................
 25% Not sure
..........................................................

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_PA_52715.pdf

Positive, but support under 45% -- I must treat this as a tie.






A positive approval rating under 45% is treated as a tie.

blue -- Republican incumbent with positive or neutral approval
20% --  tie (less than 1%) or positive approval under 45%
40% --  approval 45 - 49%
50%  -- approval 50 - 54%
60%  -- approval 55 - 59%
80% -- approval over 60%

green --  Republican incumbent with negative approval

20% --  approval 45 - 49%
40%  -- approval 40 - 44%
50%  -- approval 35 - 39%
80% --  approval under 35%


red --Democratic incumbent with positive or neutral approval
20% --  tie (less than 1%) or positive approval under 45%
40% --  approval 45 - 49%
50%  -- approval 50 - 54%
60%  -- approval 55 - 59%
80% -- approval over 60%

orange --  Democratic incumbent with negative approval

20% --  approval 45 - 49%
40%  -- approval 40 - 44%
50%  -- approval 35 - 39%
80% --  approval under 35%

No governor, governor in transition,  or non-partisan governor -- white.

Positive approval under 45% -- yellow for either party (now treated as if a tie).

The newest poll takes precedence, but no internal polls or polls commissioned by a partisan entity, trade group, or union. 
  
 * -- appointed Governor.

[/quote]
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread on: May 28, 2015, 02:58:29 pm
Hillary Clinton.................................................. 46%
Marco Rubio ................................................... 45%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 46%
Rand Paul ....................................................... 43%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 45%
Scott Walker ................................................... 41%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 47%
Mike Huckabee ............................................... 42%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 46%
Chris Christie .................................................. 41%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 48%
Ben Carson..................................................... 42%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 49%
Rick Santorum................................................ 42%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 49%
Ted Cruz ......................................................... 41%

Hillary Clinton.................................................. 49%
Jeb Bush......................................................... 38%



http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_PA_52815.pdf


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

6  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: PA-PPP: Toomey leads Democrats by 4-11 on: May 28, 2015, 07:46:30 am
Turnout will be everything for this Senate race in 2016. I cannot see Toomey expanding his support from 2010. Can you?
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread on: May 28, 2015, 07:44:05 am
National poll, Quinnipiac

In a general election matchup, Clinton gets 46 percent of American voters to 42 percent for Paul and 45 percent of voters to 41 percent for Rubio. She leads other top Republicans:

    46 - 37 percent over Christie;
    47 - 40 percent over Huckabee;
    47 - 37 percent over Bush;
    46 - 38 percent over Walker;
    48 - 37 percent over Cruz;
    50 - 32 percent over Trump.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2228
8  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Democrats Face a Grim Future -National Journal on: May 27, 2015, 06:25:27 pm
Unless a bunch of House seats change their nature (let us say R+7 to D+5)  before then, it is highly unlikely that the Democrats will have a House majority before at least 2023. With America polarized as it is and gerrymanders intact, Democrats must win the total vote for the House by about 54-46.

We do not live in a democracy. We live in a plutocratic oligarchy.
You keep using those words. I don't think you know what they mean.

I do.

Plutocracy -- government in practice by the wealthiest and most powerful.

Oligarchy -- few people shaping political life, with others effectively passive.

Real power is in secretive groups like ALEC that seek to transform the USA from a democracy into one in which only those politicians who most fully support the rich and powerful have a chance in politics.

Our democracy has become window dressing. We are basically in pre-WWI Germany without a Kaiser.     
9  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Ann Coulter: Immigrants are worse than ISIL on: May 27, 2015, 06:20:32 pm
Too bad the First People did not deport her ancestors.
10  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 2016 Senate Ratings and Predictions on: May 27, 2015, 06:19:39 pm
Pennsylvania, Pat Toomey (R-PA)...PPP

30% of voters approve of the job Toomey is doing to 37% who disapprove. Those numbers are little changed from when we polled the state in January and found 28% approving to 35% who disapproved. Throughout his first term we've consistently found Toomey with about a third of voters approving of him, about a third disapproving, and about a third having no opinion either way.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/05/toomey-leads-sestak-by-4-in-rematch.html

Close to his ceiling? If so, Pat  Toomey loses. He must campaign to win, and he will need to show what he believes. He has played things closely to his vest so far, avoiding controversy. He will have to take sides on some controversial issues, especially if he is to get the financial support that he will need.

He seems like a fairly good politician, at the least in keeping a potentially-toxic agenda concealed well enough, but that will not be enough should there be anything like a D wave.  His approval is in the league with Johnson in Wisconsin, and Wisconsin and Pennsylvania have some similarities.

He is not the new Rick Santorum -- that is beyond any question.





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       3     0
40-44    4     0
45-49    1      2
50-54    2      0
55-59    0      0
>60       0      2
retire    1       3 
indict     0      1
other   12      2

11  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: PA-PPP: Toomey leads Democrats by 4-11 on: May 27, 2015, 06:10:01 pm
Weak for an incumbent. Pat Toomey has been carefully low profile, steering close of the most controversial issues.

Lean R for now, and very much on probation.
12  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: PA-PPP: Toomey leads Democrats by 4-11 on: May 27, 2015, 05:57:28 pm
42-38 at this point?  Weak. Low approval suggests that 42% is close to his ceiling.  
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which would be harder? on: May 27, 2015, 08:22:04 am
Realistically, both are equally impossible.

Hypothetically, I think it'd be harder for the Republicans to get to 538, mainly because of their abysmal performance in the District of Columbia. Consider, Obama managed to get over 24% of the vote in Utah, whereas Romney got only over 7% of DC!

Non-Mormons in Utah are very liberal in their voting. Non-Mormons in Utah vote much like non-Mormons in California. 
14  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Ann Coulter: Immigrants are worse than ISIL on: May 27, 2015, 08:18:29 am
To the extent that what she says is a current within the republican party... she guts the credibility of the Republican party.

American has a large and fast-growing Hispanic middle class, and in some states the bulk of that Hispanic middle class is of Mexican origin. To be sure, every ethnic group has its resentful, greedy losers who turn to crime... but that is far from the whole story. The big stats say that Mexican-Americans are far less likely to get into trouble than most other groups at the same level of income. Their life expectancy is higher; they smoke less and are less likely to binge-drink. Texas, not a rich state, fares better than states comparable in income (like Oklahoma, Alabama, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Georgia) on measures of public health because its poor people are more likely to be Hispanic. In the 1995 Chicago heat wave, Hispanics were 'only' 2% of the heat-related deaths -- despite being much poorer and thus less likely to have an air conditioner. But this could reflect that Mexican-Americans are more likely to look out for each other. Maybe they are more likely to keep the windows open and run a fan because they less fear crime than the danger of heatstroke. Maybe they are more likely to make sure that someone in trouble gets help.

Not smoking; not binge-drinking; looking out for each other... such sounds promising.   

Keep insulting Mexican-Americans, and the Republican Party can face more widespread and severer defeats.   
15  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Non-Christian President on: May 27, 2015, 07:48:24 am
In view of the success of Jews in American politics, a Jewish President is highly likely.

Of course, a Mormon, whom many consider non-Christian because of the Book of Mormon that many Christians consider heretical, got the Republican nomination for President and seemed at times to have a chance to get elected. 

Yeah, but Mormons see themselves as Christian. And the Book of Mormon literally has "another Testament of Jesus Christ" on it. So if the religious right think that Mormons aren't Christian, they can stuff it.

As a liberal, I can say with full confidence that the Religious Right can 'stuff it' when it seeks to determine who is a Christian and who isn't based upon political beliefs, let alone establish a political order in which people whose heritage is in any way different lack validity.

Much about contemporary American life and American economic reality is depraved, and I would challenge anyone claiming to be a Christian to test his political and social beliefs against the Sermon on the Mount. That especially includes those who say that we are to give everything to the rich so that we can be saved.     
16  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Non-Christian President on: May 26, 2015, 09:44:51 pm
In view of the success of Jews in American politics, a Jewish President is highly likely.

Of course, a Mormon, whom many consider non-Christian because of the Book of Mormon that many Christians consider heretical, got the Republican nomination for President and seemed at times to have a chance to get elected. 
17  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Gubernatorial approval, incumbent governors, Election 2014 - Election 2016 on: May 26, 2015, 07:06:24 pm
Andrew Cuomo, D-NY, Siena

Cuomo Favorability & Job Performance Ratings Hit Low Point in Five Years as Governor


Cuomo's favorability rating is 53 - 44 percent, down from 56 - 39 percent last month and 63-31 percent in June 2014. He has a negative 41 - 59 percent job performance rating, down from a negative 44 - 55 percent last month and 49 - 50 percent in June 2014.

https://www.siena.edu/assets/files/news/SNY_May_2015_Poll_Release_--_FINAL.pdf





A positive approval rating under 45% is treated as a tie.

blue -- Republican incumbent with positive or neutral approval
20% --  tie (less than 1%) or positive approval under 45%
40% --  approval 45 - 49%
50%  -- approval 50 - 54%
60%  -- approval 55 - 59%
80% -- approval over 60%

green --  Republican incumbent with negative approval

20% --  approval 45 - 49%
40%  -- approval 40 - 44%
50%  -- approval 35 - 39%
80% --  approval under 35%


red --Democratic incumbent with positive or neutral approval
20% --  tie (less than 1%) or positive approval under 45%
40% --  approval 45 - 49%
50%  -- approval 50 - 54%
60%  -- approval 55 - 59%
80% -- approval over 60%

orange --  Democratic incumbent with negative approval

20% --  approval 45 - 49%
40%  -- approval 40 - 44%
50%  -- approval 35 - 39%
80% --  approval under 35%

No governor, governor in transition,  or non-partisan governor -- white.

Positive approval under 45% -- yellow for either party (now treated as if a tie).

The newest poll takes precedence, but no internal polls or polls commissioned by a partisan entity, trade group, or union. 
  
 * -- appointed Governor.
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Congrats, Phil: Santorum 2016 announcement coming on Wednesday on: May 25, 2015, 10:22:59 pm
He's less controversial than Huckabee for religious conservatives at this point.

I didn't know that religious conservatives are soft on crime.

You just can't judge a sociopath or psychopath "safe". They know how to pull the con.
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Rubio vs. Clinton would be a thriller. on: May 25, 2015, 10:20:52 pm
In a less polarized electorate, I could actually see this scenario happening, or coming close to happening.  Rubio making big inroads with Hispanics, but Hillary making big inroads with white working class.  Montana, Georgia, and NC would still be GOP with this scenario

As a right-wing, anti-intellectual Cuban-American he is the wrong sort of Hispanic to appeal to non-Cuban Hispanics. It makes about as much sense as having expected Joe Lieberman to win the German-American vote because he has a German-sounding name.
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who are Walker's main base of support? on: May 25, 2015, 07:30:53 pm
Anti-union and anti-environmentalist interests; those who want the potentially-profitable assets of government sold off cheaply; people in contempt of the college-educated.


 
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: My wild prediction -- Election Night, 2016: The Presidency. on: May 25, 2015, 01:57:28 pm
Fix

Colors

Please

For the love of everything good and holy....

We are the only ones who use the 'right' colors.  I am depicting someone operating a pirate TV station.   
22  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Democrats Face a Grim Future -National Journal on: May 25, 2015, 08:26:04 am
Unless a bunch of House seats change their nature (let us say R+7 to D+5)  before then, it is highly unlikely that the Democrats will have a House majority before at least 2023. With America polarized as it is and gerrymanders intact, Democrats must win the total vote for the House by about 54-46.

We do not live in a democracy. We live in a plutocratic oligarchy.
You keep using those words. I don't think you know what they mean.

Do you trust the Koch family with democracy? I don't.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: My wild prediction -- Election Night, 2016: The Presidency. on: May 25, 2015, 08:22:57 am
385-153

Pickups in AZ, GA, MO, NC, & NE-02

Arizona, Georgia, Missouri, and North Carolina have contested Senate races.

One of the telling aspects of this scenario is that Indiana is called as late as it is called. No Democrat has ever lost a Presidential bid while losing Indiana by less than 11%. Indiana has obvious similarities to Ohio except that instead of having several huge urban areas, Indiana has only one giant urban area (Indianapolis) and basically areas that spill over from urban areas of other states (from Chicago and Louisville). Rural Indiana and rural Ohio are similarly right-wing -- but the vote in such cities as Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Dayton, and Toledo can overwhelm the rural vote in a good Democratic year. The urban vote in Indiana can go slightly ahead of the rural vote only in great Democratic years or if the Republican nominee is a complete turkey.

This scenario does not show percentages, but in view of the time in which Indiana was called, the state looked as if it may have had about a 7% lead for Walker that would be whittled down to 5% or so.  A Democratic nominee losing Indiana by a small margin  (like Truman in 1948, Bill Clinton in 1992 or 1996) by Indiana standards is winning nationwide.

Could Hillary Clinton win Indiana? Maybe -- but only if everything goes right. One is that the Republicans nominate someone who scares Americans as a fire-breathing militarist who would gut Social Security and Medicare to give tax cuts to people who do not need them. Such is Goldwater in 1964, something possible but unlikely.


...I had good cause for the anticlimax. I wanted more discussion, and I got it.   
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Huckabee defends admitted child molester on: May 25, 2015, 07:11:21 am
Child molestation is damnable and inexcusable. Children need to develop some wholesome trust in humanity as a whole, and child sexual abuse utterly destroys such trust.

Children of a certain age (latency) have no interest in sex. Sex can only hurt them; they cannot enjoy it. I think that we can all agree on this: adults must repress any urge to mess with a child sexually. This is an absolute, and there are no excuses.  Not alcohol or drugs, and certainly not religion.
25  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Why is SSM such a big deal? on: May 25, 2015, 05:43:40 am
1.  Marriage is a civil right granted by the government.

2.  Everyone should have the same civil rights under the law, regardless of their sexual orientation.

3.  Same-sex marriage hasn't been recognized in every state, so it is not settled. 

4.  Same-sex marriage has come to symbolize the greater struggle for acceptance and legal equality for LGBT people.  It raises the basic question of whether it's OK to treat people differently because of the sexual orientation and whether being gay is wrong/a choice.  So, the fight for SSM has advanced acceptance and equality for gay people across the board. 

5.  The US still has tons of homophobia and mistreatment of gay people so we have a lot of work to do in general to make acceptance of homosexuality a social norm.  We've come a lot way in the past 10 years, but there are still anti-gay hate crimes, conversion therapy and bullying of gay kids going on.  We can't accept second-class citizen status on any issue or be complacent even when we've had some political success in recent years.  As if it's OK to be homophobic or legally discriminated against in some states.  It's never OK and we shouldn't have to take it any longer.


I have a reasonable counter here.

1. Marriage and the family was instituted before the concept of human government. Thus goes beyond civil rights. (Look at Genesis 2-4 on this)

2. Those who want to change that are trying to undermine cultural and societal norms that have always existed. Thus the burden of proof to change roughly the whole of human history is on the ones trying to change that incontrovertible fact.

3. The Founders to a man agreed with the Biblical view of marriage and family life and shouldn't we at least consider the wisdom of the founders even if many of you want to cast off the Bible and its role in American jurisprudence.

4. For the courts to undermine the will of the people specifically expressed through their legislatures or through voter referendum to codify traditional marriage as the only acceptable marriage in said state is a stain on the very courts themselves

5. The state's who had bans on SSM who had them overturned by federal courts (yes I'm looking at you too California and Prop Cool should have said bans restored and all said "unions" voided from the state records at minimum.




My counter-counter.

1. Argument to antiquity. The ancients could be wrong -- very wrong.  Slavery and aggressive war used to be acceptable; they are now recognized as horrible crimes.

2. If love is a good thing, and some people are capable only of love within their own gender, maybe we would be wise to accept marriage based upon love and without overt exploitation if it is same-sex. If the government can promote marriage among heterosexuals for benign reasons it can accept marriage among homosexuals for benign marriage.

3. The Founding Fathers were all white male property owners.  They were not radical reformers. They accepted what they liked about the old way of politics in the British colonies as the norm for subsequent times and rejected a capricious, despotic King. White supremacy, male domination, and the institution of slavery would remain. Government would represent property owners and certainly not paupers.

We know the consequences of slavery. Women got the vote and are not going to give it up. The poor have as much right to representation in government as do the rich.

4. Re;publican state legislatures in Michigan and Ohio did not put same-sex marriage on the ballot as initiative and referendum during the 2014 election. They could have, but lacked the political courage to risk offending a big part of their constituency of Christian Protestant fundamentalists.

5. Mistakes of law in good faith by officials are adjudicated to the benefit of individuals unless gross wrong results.   
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 463


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines