Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 31, 2015, 03:50:10 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 447
1  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: MO-GOV: Schweich dead from gunshot wound on: Today at 03:37:27 pm
Political violence is terribly unpopular in America. That includes Missouri.
2  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 2016 Senate Ratings and Predictions on: Today at 03:01:54 pm
http://gravismarketing.com/polling-and-market-research/current-nevada-polling/?utm_source=Copy+of+sc+poll&utm_campaign=SC+Poll&utm_medium=email

Except if popular Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval runs for Harry Reid's current seat, Nevada is slight-D for the Senate for now. 
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread on: Today at 02:55:52 pm
Nevada, Gravis:

President:
Hillary/Bush: 48/38
Hillary/Paul: 50/42
Hillary/Christie. 48/38
Hillary/Walker: 49/41
Hillary/Sandoval: 46/45


https://strehlspresidentialelection2016.wordpress.com/
  

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush




Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie

 

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee



Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul



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





4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread on: Today at 02:50:34 pm
Quinnipiac, gold mine (FL, OH, PA)

Florida

Bush: 45%
Clinton: 42%

Rubio: 44%
Clinton: 46%

Paul: 43%
Clinton: 46%

Christie: 39%
Clinton: 44%

Huckabee: 40%
Clinton: 48%

Walker: 40%
Clinton: 46%

Cruz: 39%
Clinton: 48%

Ohio

Clinton: 46%
Paul: 41%

Clinton: 47%
Bush: 38%

Clinton: 45%
Christie: 39%

Clinton: 49%
Huckabee: 39%

Clinton: 47%
Rubio: 38%

Clinton: 49%
Walker: 38%

Clinton: 48%
Cruz: 38%

Pennsylvania

Paul: 45%
Clinton: 44%

Christie: 40%
Clinton: 45%

Bush: 40%
Clinton: 46%

Huckabee: 41%
Clinton: 47%

Rubio: 42%
Clinton: 46%

Walker: 41%
Clinton: 46%

Cruz: 39%
Clinton: 48%

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/sw/ps03312015_sgt63kd.pdf

I find the idea of Rand Paul being ahead of Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania... a bit suspect.
  

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush




Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie

 

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee



Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul



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




5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: FL/OH/PA-Quinnipiac: Hillary strong in OH, weaker in FL and PA on: Today at 02:43:34 pm
Winning two of Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania is clearly enough for Hillary Clinton even without Colorado and Virginia. The Republican must win two of the three to have anywhere near an even change of winning the Presidency; all three seals it for the Republican.

So it's 'choose how to lose' for Republicans.   
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Hillary Clinton win any counties in Utah? on: March 30, 2015, 10:35:56 pm
The Republican nominee will not be a Mormon -- so Salt Lake, Summit, Grand, and San Juan are possibilities.
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Scenario: Joe Biden wins it all 2016 on: March 30, 2015, 10:31:24 pm
I'd still be very sad about the untimely demise of President Barack Obama, because that is the only way in which Joe Biden is elected President.
8  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 2016 Senate Ratings and Predictions on: March 29, 2015, 08:21:09 pm
Iowa is Safe R unless Chuck Grassley leaves or retires due to health. He is past 80. Anyone else in Iowa? Lean D.

I'd call David Young a potential Lean R - being Grassley's Chief of Staff and all could help especially if Walker is on the top line. I know he's only had one term, but he could start off pretty well.

Latham could do well too, but I suppose he's probably done. He might have a bit of a hard time in the east, but he led Braley and Loebsack (trailed Vilsack) in 2013 when he was getting lobbed out as a candidate last time.

Dunno what kind of quality could potentially come out of the state legislature, but I think those are probably the top 2 potential replacements.

Here's the problem with Scott Walker:


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

NO potential Republican nominee for President is doing well in Iowa. Here I am showing what Walker does, which suggests that he would lose like McCain in 2008 or Romney in 2012.  If Scott Walker cannot win Wisconsin, he is not going to help Republicans in Iowa.

Senator Charles Grassley has approval in the 60s and would win re-election if he seeks it.  (On the other side, Chuck Schumer in New York is about as secure... and both are obviously much more secure than incumbents with ratings in the 30s)  but he cannot devolve such an approval onto any Republican should he retire.

I saw the approval rating for Joni Ernst... and it isn't very high. Iowans basically elected a Sharron Angle in 2014... and she could be the worst drag on any Republican candidate for Senate from Iowa other than Charles Grassley.
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread on: March 29, 2015, 08:09:09 pm
St. Leo College, Florida

http://polls.saintleo.edu/clintons-numbers-slip-but-she-maintains-frontrunner-position/

Clinton 47
Bush 44

Clinton 50
Rubio 42

Clinton 51
Christie 37

Clinton 52
Paul 38

Clinton 51
Walker 35 

I'm not going to change or even the recent PPP poll to accommodate this one. Really, this one looks better for Hillary Clinton than do the PPP polls.

Needless to say, if polls consistently show bare to solid wins for Hillary Clinton in Florida, then ... how do I adapt the bromide about being up to one's eyeballs with alligators in the swamp?
  

Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush




Hillary Clinton vs. Chris Christie

 

Hillary Clinton vs. Mike Huckabee



Hillary Clinton vs. Rand Paul



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



10  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 2016 Senate Ratings and Predictions on: March 29, 2015, 08:01:35 pm
Approval polls only.



White -- retiring incumbent, 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.
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: IS this map possible on: March 29, 2015, 07:41:15 pm
Extraordinarily likely if Walker is the nominee and improves his standing in his home state. Colorado and NH may be in contention too, but I feel like both of those states are going to be prone to underperformance vs. polls, particularly CO.

Walker is projected to lose his own state. Iowa is extremely close to Wisconsin in its voting; Walker projects to lose it, too.
12  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 2016 Senate Ratings and Predictions on: March 29, 2015, 07:35:54 pm
Iowa is Safe R unless Chuck Grassley leaves or retires due to health. He is past 80. Anyone else in Iowa? Lean D.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Graham: global warming is real, but Al Gore politicized it on: March 28, 2015, 05:27:35 pm
Isn't every controversial issue politicized?
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Would Hillary be as strong in 2016 if she'd stayed in the Senate? on: March 28, 2015, 05:26:49 pm
No. She proved that she could perform adequately in a legislative office, and Secretary of State is about as responsible position as one can get without being a Justice of the Supreme Court short of the Presidency. 
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Paul LePage for VP? on: March 28, 2015, 05:24:55 pm
Abrasive as sandpaper.
16  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: DEA agents have sex parties in public buildings, paid for by drug cartel leaders on: March 28, 2015, 05:23:45 pm
What do you expect them to do with all that coke they seize? Throw it away?

They should put it in an evidence locker and leave it there... I'm pretty sure it's not admissible in court if the agents snort it first.

They need to test the quality, duh.

There are chemical tests. 
17  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Ohio Senate advances bill that could deter college students from voting. on: March 27, 2015, 05:28:54 pm
Do you actually believe that crap?

I regret that I must.  The Republican Party is becoming an authoritarian party, one intent only on consolidating power on behalf of its financial backers. If anything it is the front groups (like Club for Growth, Freedom Works, and Americans for Prosperity that flood the airwaves with Orwellian propaganda as the election approaches. That Republican pols accept the aid of such groups
indicate that winning means more than service.

I wish that I could believe otherwise. May I be proved wrong on Election Night 2016. I have read of democracy dying in other countries, and I see much of the same pattern here.
18  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Ohio Senate advances bill that could deter college students from voting. on: March 27, 2015, 03:07:12 pm
In many countries it's a value in itself that people vote.

The GOP will not be happy until it has an effective monopoly on political power. There will be tolerated minor parties that know their places for window-dressing, but 70% of all votes will go you-know-where. People will know how their employers expect them to vote, although there could be safe places where Democrats might win House seats -- like the South Bronx, Harlem, the South Side of Chicago, Watts, maybe a rural district here and there in Mississippi or Alabama all to create the illusion that the United States still has some pluralism. Parties might be divided along ethnic or religious lines so that there is a "black" Party, a "Hispanic" party, and maybe a "Chinese", "Jewish", or "Muslim" party. Maybe on 'professional' lines, as in distinct parties for accountants, engineers, teachers, or physicians.

But if one works for a big corporation one knows how to vote... maybe one's employer makes the decision for you in secret. After all, there will still be a secret ballot -- one so secret that even the voter dares not know how he 'votes'.     
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If the Democrats win 3 in a row, what will the media narrative be? on: March 27, 2015, 11:50:41 am
1. From the Right:

This is the time to redouble our efforts to convince Americans of the need for faith, freedom, and patriotism so that America can recover from what will surely be twelve years of political disaster in the White House.

2. From the Center-Left:

Americans liked what President Obama promised and still do. Republicans were fools to resist everything, as such ensured that Democrats would remain in the White House until Americans got what they wanted. Republicans got the House back in 2010 and the Senate in 2016... and lost both in a resounding election.

3. Me:

Before we get complacent, Hillary Clinton could well be what the elder Bush was in 1992 -- a 'successor' President offering a Third Term in all but name. Like the elder Bush she could get signature achievements yet have no idea of what to offer as a Second Act.       
20  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Approval of incumbent US Senators up for re-election on: March 27, 2015, 10:38:38 am
Democrats should probably Kay Hagan Pennsylvania and just spend insane sums of money on attack ads to sink Toomey's favorables underwater.

"Unless you are a billionaire, Senator Toomey is not your friend".

21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: FL-PPP: Hillary leads all Pubs on: March 27, 2015, 10:34:31 am
I'm surprised that in a sample of voters in which a majority disapprove of Hillary Clinton, 47% would still vote for her over Jeb Bush.

A majority of Kentucky voters disapproved of Mitch McConnell and he had very low favorables, yet the Bluegrass State still elected him by 15-16 points. Not that surprising. High favorabilities (if that's even a word) does not guarantee a safe election.

I find it hilarious how despite how "polarizing" she is, she still defeats the establishment candidate.

It is Barack Obama who is so polarizing. That becomes much less of a factor in 2016.
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: 2016 Official Polling Map Thread on: March 27, 2015, 10:26:39 am
For now I do not take Ted Cruz seriously. He has yet to align a part of the GOP base as have others. He would be at most someone whom Republicans would settle on if their favorites (probably Bush, Huckabee, and Walker) would falter and Christie loses the apparent ability to win moderate Democratic voters. "Bomb Teheran now!" might attract the warmonger faction of the GOP, but it would scare about everyone else into something safer.

He could lose almost as badly as Goldwater in 1964 except for the huge difference in electoral votes between Arizona in 1964 (only five) and Texas (38). 
23  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Approval of incumbent US Senators up for re-election on: March 27, 2015, 09:18:22 am
Franklin&Marshall College, Pennsylvania (Pat Toomey, R-PA)

Quote
Nearly one in three (31%) registered Pennsylvania voters believes Senator Toomey is doing an “excellent” or “good” job as US Senator. About half (49%) of Republicans rate his performance as “excellent” or “good.” Senator Toomey is still viewed more favorably (30%) than unfavorably (23%) by the state’s registered voters. Senator Toomey currently leads Democrat Joe Sestak by a five point margin, 34% to 29%, although most voters (37%) are still
undecided about this race. Joe Sestak’s name recognition is relatively low, with nearly two in
three (63%) of the state’s registered voters saying they do not know enough about Sestak to have an opinion of him.

http://www.fandm.edu/uploads/files/943825657393157904-franklin-marshall-college-poll-march-2015.pdf

Damning with faint praise!

Not in the approve-disapprove format or in something that one can relate to it (like grades of A, B, C, D, and F).

"Excellent", "Good", and "Poor"  are clear enough... but "Fair" is ambiguous. "Fair" performance by a seven-year-old violinist is something that one praises a child for. "Fair" performance by an adult on stage is something that you would feel cheated for buying a ticket to see. 

Not usable for my purposes. But a combined 31% "excellent" or "good" isn't good for an incumbent Senator.

High turnout sinks Pat Toomey in 2016. If he hasn't been the sick joke that Tom Cotton or Marco Rubio have become, he is far from solid.



24  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: PA-Franklin & Marshall: Toomey up 5, tons of undecideds on: March 27, 2015, 08:48:36 am
Damning in faint praise!

Not in the approve-disapprove format or in something that one can relate to it (like grades of A, B, C, D, and F).

"Excellent", "Good", and "Poor"  are clear enough... but "Fair" is ambiguous. "Fair" performance by a seven-year-old violinist is something that one praises a child for. "Fair" performance by an adult on stage is something that you would feel cheated for buying a ticket to see.

Not usable for my purposes. But 31% "excellent" or "good" isn't good for an incumbent Senator.

High turnout sinks Pat Toomey in 2016. If he hasn't been the sick joke that Tom Cotton or Marco Rubio have become, he is far from solid.
25  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Approval of incumbent US Senators up for re-election on: March 27, 2015, 08:38:24 am
Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) announces that he will not run for re-election:

Quote
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will not seek re-election, he said in an interview with The New York Times published Friday. Reid has led the Senate Democrats since 2005.

....

In the video, Reid said he will work to help the Democrats take control of the Senate again, noting he felt it was "inappropriate" to "soak up all those resources on me, when I can be devoting those resources to the caucus." Reid also warned Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) he'd be working hard until the end of his current term.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/27/harry-reid-retirement_n_6954262.html


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 447


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines