Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 26, 2016, 12:19:56 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 532
101  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: FL-Public Policy Polling: Trump 41 Clinton 40 on: June 07, 2016, 03:33:32 pm
One thing that nobody can deny -- Donald Trump riles people up. Multitudes like to be riled up.


...Romney led in Florida up to the last week. Hillary Clinton cannot lose if she wins Florida, but she can win without it. That's how things were in 2008 and 2012, too. 
102  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Cleaned-up 2016 Presidential election map. on: June 07, 2016, 11:23:30 am
Quinnipiac, CT

Hillary Clinton (D): 45%
Donald Trump (R): 38%


http://www.qu.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/connecticut/release-detail?ReleaseID=2355

Florida, PPP: Trump 41, Clinton 40

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2016/06/pennsylvania-close-sanders-supporter-unity-would-make-it-not-close.html
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_PA_60816.pdf

Clinton 41
Trump 40
Johnson 6
Stein 3

Democrats lead a generic ballot question for President 45/41

Head to head, they're tied at 44-44.

Sanders vs Trump head to head is 51-39.

Only 72% of Sanders supporters support Clinton. If Clinton got half of them, her lead over Trump head to head would be 47-40.


Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump




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



103  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Clinton-Trump-Johnson on: June 07, 2016, 11:20:18 am
New. Quinnipiac, Connecticut:

Hillary Clinton (D): 41%
Donald Trump (R): 36%
Gary Johnson (L): 6%
Jill Stein (G): 3%



White is for ties. Even leads in the twenties of 1% or more will be shown in the color of the winner.


Clinton (D)
Trump (R)
Johnson (L)





104  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Clinton-Trump-Johnson on: June 06, 2016, 08:31:13 pm
Backtracking.

Gravis, Utah.
Georgia, PPP.
Florida, ARG.
Michigan, Glengariff.



White is for ties. Even leads in the twenties of 1% or more will be shown in the color of the winner.


Clinton (D)
Trump (R)
Johnson (L)





105  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Clinton-Trump-Johnson on: June 06, 2016, 08:07:19 pm
Blank map.



I am showing a color and shade only for States in which someone gets a majority or leads by 10%; electoral breakdown for states in which neither condition is met, in D-R-I order. D will be one color; Maine and Nebraska districts will not be so separated. White is for a tie at the top. To show how this works I will show a Democrat winning Maine 52-28-20 but losing the Second district, an Independent winning New Hampshire each with more than 40%,  a Republican winning Vermont, a 46-46-8 tie in California, a Republican winning Nevada 38-33-29, a Democrat winning 40-37-33 in Arizona, a Libertarian winning New Mexico 42-35-23. Illustrative to show the color scheme and nothing else.

White is for ties. Even leads in the thirties of 1% or more will be shown in the color of the winner.

Solely for showing the color scheme



Clinton (D)
Trump (R)
unnamed conservative independent (I)




106  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton or Sanders/Trump/a conservative independent on: June 06, 2016, 08:01:20 pm
I hereby revive this thread because I have seen several polls suggesting a three-way choice. I can easily imagine Gary Johnson getting 10% or more of the popular vote in some states.

Note that unlike in the binary polls I have no reserve minimum of 40% for a potential win. One can win one of the states involved 38-34-28.

I will use green for the libertarian candidacy of Gary Johnson and William Weld.   
107  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Utah Gravis: Trump 29 Clinton 26 Johnson 16 on: June 06, 2016, 07:50:14 pm
I'm going to need to put out or revive a three-way map. I see good cause to believe that Gary Johnson will fare far stronger than the usual independent or third-party candidate.

2000 Nader          2.7
1996 Perot           8.4
1992 Perot         18.9
1980 Anderson     6.6
1968 Wallace      13.5
1948 Thurmond    2.4
1948 Wallace       2.4
1924 LaFollette    2.4
1920 Debs           3.4
1916 Benson       3.1

...This will not be a repeat of 1912.
108  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Sen. Sasse May Support Johnson on: June 06, 2016, 07:33:54 pm
One of the electoral votes of Nebraska could be in play with this endorsement -- for Gary Johnson.

...So far we have practically no polling of the High Plains states. Although these states (the Dakotas, Nebraska, and Kansas) have few electoral votes altogether (17) they could show some interesting patterns in 2016. They may be conservative, but they just aren't crazy. 
109  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Jiggle the vote, according to 538.com on: June 06, 2016, 07:25:12 pm
The real swing vote this year, if there is any, will be the educated white vote. It still votes 56R-44D, but it is huge and elastic. The under-educated white vote might swing a little now that the potential horror of a black President (irony intended)  is no longer a threat. But the under-educated white vote looks heavily atomized and more likely to be swayed on visceral appeals than on moral suasion or even economic self-interest.

Now what would happen if the educated white vote went back to about 75R while other votes are unchanged? This could be more relevant to 2020 than to 2016.



Trump (R) 334
Clinton (D) 204


(Do I really believe that Donald Trump could lose Florida while winning Massachusetts and Minnesota? That's what the device shows). 

Now let's see what happens if the college-educated vote really turns against Donald Trump. A shift of 2% flips North Carolina. At just over a majority D among educated white voters, Georgia flips. At 53% among educated whites for Hillary Clinton, Arizona and Indiana go to her. Then around 55D, South Carolina and Missouri flip D. Mississippi and Texas go D around 57D for white educated voters.



Clinton (D) 448
Trump (R) 90


A post-mortem of such an election is that educated white people must have thought that Donald Trump is an unreliable and potentially dangerous demagogue while minorities voted as usual. 
110  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Jiggle the vote, according to 538.com on: June 06, 2016, 06:50:00 pm
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-swing-the-election/

This should be well known to us all: the 2012 Presidential election.




Obama (D) 332
Romney (R) 206


I can quickly dispense with jiggling the black vote because reducing its participation level nationwide to 28% (from 66%) would flip four states necessary for a Trump win. Those would be Florida, Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Colorado and Nevada would still go for Clinton. Getting the black vote to go 30% for Trump, which is probably about what Eisenhower got in the 1950s, would still not bring about a Trump win.





Trump 286
Clinton 252


which would happen if black participation in the election went down to just below 30% (which isn't going to happen, because such would depend upon tampering with electoral laws) or if Trump got 32% of the black vote (which isn't going to happen because Donald Trump isn't Dwight Eisenhower). 

If Hispanics voted with the partisan intensity and at the level of participation of blacks (93%D, 66% participation, then the 2016 map would flip only three states:



Clinton (D) 396
Romney (R) 142


But the states to swing would be North Carolina, Arizona, and

TEXAS
111  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Could John McCain have won in 2008 if the DNC in Denver was brokered? on: June 05, 2016, 11:09:42 am
The economy was entering an apparent freefall and the military situations in Afghanistan and Iraq were getting worse. The election would have been closer, but not close enough to allow McCain to win either Iowa or New Hampshire.

Pick off the states that went by less than 9% for Obama, and one still ends up with 269 electoral votes -- in order, North Carolina,  NE-02, Indiana, Florida, Ohio, Virginia, and Colorado. Obama wins because the House delegations of the time vote for him.

Besides, Obama was a good campaign strategist, and Hillary Clinton had the usual Democratic interest groups well on her side.
112  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: IA-DMR: Judge +17 on: June 05, 2016, 04:26:21 am
Much of Senator Grassley's electoral success has resulted from his reputation as a moderate. That reputation has been gutted. He endorses Donald Trump and he has gone along with Senator Mitch McConnell on obstructing a nomination to the Supreme Court for partisan purposes.

Early this year he seemed a lock for re-election; that is over. 
113  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: FL-Mason Dixon: Clinton 45 Trump 42 // Biden 50 Trump 40 on: June 03, 2016, 07:08:18 am
There is no way for Donald Trump to win the without Florida  unless he can win a state that has not gone for a Republican nominee after 1988. That's figuring that he wins Iowa, New Hampshire, and New Mexico.
114  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Jiggle the vote, according to 538.com on: June 02, 2016, 07:57:14 pm
I'm guessing that college-educated white people were about 80% Republican in the 1940s. There were also far fewer of them.
 
Jiggling the vote for white educated people to 80R but leaving all other votes alone I get this result:



(I am not showing the districts of Maine and Nebraska because 538.com does not mention them).

Suppression of the Latino vote hasn't happened often, but suppression of the black vote has been common. The four states in which such could make a difference are in order Florida, Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Not Colorado, which would still go D even if the percentage of the black vote went down to 28%.  Possible? Not with the Obama-era Justice Department.   


115  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Jiggle the vote, according to 538.com on: June 02, 2016, 07:44:17 pm
538.com has a remarkable tool for showing how differing patterns of participation and partisanship by different groups of people (blacks, Latinos, "Asians and others", "college-educated whites", and non-college-educated whites would vote in the 2016 Presidential election.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-swing-the-election/

Here's 2012:



(I am not showing the districts of Maine and Nebraska because 538.com does not mention them).

The "Asian and other" category includes Asians and Pacific islanders, primarily; the second-largest group of them are what Canadians call First Peoples -- Native Americans and Alaska natives. These are heavily concentrated in non-swing states (AK, AZ, CA, HI, NM, OK, OR, TX, WA) generally nowhere near being close in 2012. Cut their participation to zero or raise it to 100%, and one gets roughly the same electoral results as in 2012. No map needed.

 I start jiggling the amount for educated white people, and states start appearing in the Democratic column. At a 52R-48D, North Carolina goes D. At an even split, Georgia goes D. Around 55%, one starts to see Missouri, Indiana, Arizona, and South Carolina go D.  At 57% among educated white voters, only two states slip away from the Republicans, but one of those is Texas. 




2012 wins for the Democrat 332
at 50-50 among educated white voters (40% saturation) 363 (Obama got 365 in 2008)
at 55D-45R among educated white voters (30% saturation) 404
at 57D-43R among educated white voters (20% saturation) 448

I'm not going to show it on the map, but if well-educated white people voted like Asian-Americans, Hillary Clinton would end up with about 500 electoral votes and all states except Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kentucky, and West Virginia. 
   
116  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Your Reaction if This is the Result on: June 02, 2016, 07:42:17 am
Sad that we have lost America.  It will be a bastion of leftism and political correctness (anti-white, anti-business) and multi-culturalism.  It will be a hate crime to be a white opposite sex married couple within 10 years.

The "Real America" that Sarah Palin so lauded still exists. There remain some very lily-white, politically-conservative bastions: most obviously white rural America. Of course that is not where the opportunities and culture lies (unless your idea of culture is what you can buy at Wal*Mart).   

117  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: MI-Glengariff Group/WDIV-TV: Clinton up 4, Sanders up 19 on: June 01, 2016, 08:08:35 pm
The 19% margin involving Sanders suggests the perfect storm as a political disaster for the GOP.  Michigan went 57-41 in 2008. probably a max-out for any Democratic nominee not facing Barry Goldwater.
118  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Cleaned-up 2016 Presidential election map. on: June 01, 2016, 06:18:11 pm

Glengarriff, Michigan

2-way:

43% Clinton (D)
39% Trump (R)

52% Sanders (D)
33% Trump (R)

3-way:

37% Clinton (D)
33% Trump (R)
12% Johnson (L)

...

Favourable Ratings:

50-40 Obama
43-41 Sanders
33-49 Snyder
31-57 Clinton
27-60 Trump

...I got polled on this one! I'm guessing that "43" is the floor for Clinton -- and in view of the large number of blacks in Michigan, "39" is close to the ceiling for Trump.

At this point I see three-way races in which Gary Johnson gets more than 10% of the vote in Michigan. He's probably getting more support from the usual voters for Republican nominees. 33% Johnson and 12% Trump is close to what we would expect near the top for the non-Democratic vote in Michigan.

California, Marist, NBC/Wall Street Journal

Clinton 55, Trump 31

https://www.scribd.com/doc/314520082/NBC-News-WSJ-Marist-California-Poll-Annotated-Questionnaire-June-2016

Georgia, PPP:

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2016/06/trump-has-solid-lead-over-clinton-in-georgia.html

Trump: 45%
Clinton: 38%
Johnson: 6%
Stein: 2%


Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump




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



119  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: MI-Glengariff Group/WDIV-TV: Clinton up 4, Sanders up 19 on: June 01, 2016, 03:01:18 am
As a point of reference, Obama was polling worse at this time in MI in 2008:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/mi/michigan_mccain_vs_obama-553.html

Rasmussen   6/9 - 6/9           500 LV   --   42   45   Obama +3
SurveyUSA   5/27 - 5/27   529 RV   --   41   37   McCain +4
Detroit News   5/19 - 5/22   600 RV   --   44   40   McCain +4
Rasmussen   5/7 - 5/7           500 LV   4.5   45   44   McCain +1

Final Result in November: Obama+16.4

Of course the economy had yet to go into an undeniable tailspin...
120  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: MI-Glengariff Group/WDIV-TV: Clinton up 4, Sanders up 19 on: June 01, 2016, 01:56:37 am
Obama's approvals are better than Reagan's at the same point in 1988. If he sits at 52-53% come October then it's hard to imagine Clinton or any other Democrat losing.

Eisenhower had at least a 60% approval rating for most of 1960.

Eisenhower was still admired more for his generalship than for his Presidency.  The 60% approval is consistent with his landslide wins in 1952 and 1956.

I have my theory on why Nixon lost in 1960: he was ugly. Not in behavior, but in appearance. Hillary Clinton doesn't look all that bad.

Add to that, few Vice-Presidents ever succeed their predecessor as President by through an election after the completion of the predecessor's term.
121  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Stephen Hawking: Trump is a demagogue on: May 31, 2016, 08:27:08 pm
If I were a Trump supporter, the disdain that one of the greatest theoretical physicists shows about my political hero would be worth as much as the disdain that the greatest living linguist (Noam Chomsky) likely holds against Donald Trump. Proof that brilliant people can be completely wrong about politics, which is more a moral choice than anything else.

Well -- think about it. Would the negative endorsement of the greatest theoretical physicist since Newton have caused a Nazi to reject Hitler? That physicist was Albert Einstein.

OK, Donald Trump really is an unprincipled demagogue, which is a very good reason to vote for a very flawed opponent of him.   
122  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Kentucky a Lean D state this year? on: May 31, 2016, 05:33:29 pm
Kentucky goes D for the Presidency only in a general collapse of the Republican Party, the sort in which Hillary Clinton threatens to pick up a map that looks as if she has pieced together the Carter coalition while keeping the Obama coalition.

I can say this: Kentucky is one of the first states to fully close its polls on Election Night. If it is too close to call at 7PM, then we are going to see her win about 400 electoral votes -- minimum, and Kentucky will not have to offer any of them in the end.   
123  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hillary says she can win TX on: May 31, 2016, 05:27:57 pm
She wins North Carolina, Arizona, Georgia, Missouri, Indiana, and NE-02 before she wins Texas.  She probably also wins Montana and the Dakotas, too.

Texas will be the difference between about 395 and 435 electoral votes in a Democratic win.
124  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: WI- Public Opinion Strategies: Clinton +12 on: May 30, 2016, 10:03:53 am
Scott Walker is very much an Establishment Republican. 
125  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: WI- Public Opinion Strategies: Clinton +12 on: May 29, 2016, 12:02:51 pm
Wisconsin up 12 D -- Wisconsin must be very close to a Republican win if not a state voting R if the Republican nominee is to win the Presidency.

Wisconsin, 56-44 D? 2008 redux. That means that Florida and Ohio are both going for the Democrat.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 532


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines