Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 22, 2017, 01:50:34 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 64 65 66 67 68 [69] 70 71 72 73 74 ... 389
1701  Election Archive / 2016 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: NBC/WSJ/Marist Senate polls IA/ PA/ OH McGinty Leading, Ohio Tied, Grassley +10 on: July 13, 2016, 03:19:55 pm
McGinty 47-44

That's unpleasant

LOL@PA. Junk poll!

What's junk about Toomey running +6 of Trump? You think it's more than that? Unlikely.

I don't believe Clinton +8 will be the case on election day.

Why not?
1702  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Who are your family and friends voting for in November? on: July 13, 2016, 01:08:10 am
Most of my immediate family will be voting for Johnson, after supporting Rubio in the primary for the most part. My extended family (who arrived here in the early rather than late 20th century) tend to be flaming liberals, and will mostly transfer from Sanders to Clinton, though one person voted for Stein in 2012 and will presumably therefore be doing so again; she may take some others with her this time. The elderly extended family is pretty solidly in Trump's corner.

A result of Johnson in first and Stein in second for my family is actually decently possible, though this'll depend on who exactly votes and who exactly doesn't.

Among my friends, in the primary there was a split with (counting only those who post about politics; likely to be pretty skewed but whatever) maybe 60% of my Facebook feed being pro-Sanders (essentially all of whom have gone over to Hillary by now; I'm not sure I've ever heard Stein's name outside of family reunions and Atlas); about 30% being vocal Republican #NeverTrumpers (only a very small number of whom have gone to Trump; these have split pretty evenly between no longer speaking about politics or voting for Johnson) and about 10% having been Trumpies from the start (this group skews older, with family friends and whatnot). I'm not sure I knew anyone vocally pro-Hillary during the primary, which is sort of amusing.

Generally speaking, among all my acquaintances, Trump and Hillary are locked in a narrow race among people above about 30 years old. With those below, Hillary has a massive lead, but Johnson supporters definitely outnumber Trump's. I know no one for Johnson over the age of 30 outside of my own family (who were all introduced to his campaign by me). Under 30, it's not a particularly uncommon position to hold. Support for Trump is also generally fairly tied to just "being a Republican" among the over-30 set, while I'd say a majority of self-identified under-30 Republicans have not decided to vote for Trump.
1703  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: TX-23: Anzalone-Liszt (D): Rep. Hurd (R) losing rematch on: July 13, 2016, 12:45:05 am
Not surprised, but isn't the PVI of this district R+3? Romney won it 51-48 in 2012.
Yes, but Canseco always manages to overperform.

The GOP should have renominated Canseco in 2014.

You just can't win that district as a Republican unless you get the "Hispanic Surname Bump."

I'm sorry, but this is pretty silly. Canseco lost this district in 2012 with an environment almost certainly better than it will be this year (Romney, who had no Hispanic last name, ran ahead of him and in fact won outright). Hurd won in 2014, as a Republican, without a "Hispanic Surname Bump".

This is the sort of rural, heavily-Hispanic area that is prone to extremely large swings between presidential and midterm elections normally, and where Trump is going to play very poorly and exacerbate that trend even further. I don't think any Republican could've defended this with Trump at the top.
1704  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of Theresa May on: July 12, 2016, 12:43:03 pm
Cautiously optimistic about how this'll go. FF.

Sad that Cameron is done, of course. I was a big fan.
1705  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: IN-SEN: Bayh reportedly in. on: July 12, 2016, 10:53:42 am
When was the last election that all the toss-up and close Senate races didn't go to the winning party? I see Toomey being like Kay Hagen, someone who is leading or close in the polls until the end but gets pulled under by the wave if Trump collapses.

Maybe 1996?  That's the last time I can think of when the tossups split basically evenly.
Also 2002, I think.

Democrats also won LA (indisputably a tossup), NJ (which looked at least strongly R-favored as late in the race as September), AR and IA (maybe not tossup races, but both should've been closer if there was some sort of movement towards the Rs).

2002 is the correct answer, I think.
1706  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: IN-SEN: Bayh reportedly in. on: July 11, 2016, 01:37:19 pm
This is a guy who has never fallen below 61% in a statewide race with a golden last name and $10 million in the bank. This should be at Leans D now, and that's a conservative estimate.

Evan Bayh, in my view, is exactly what the left-wing opposition in America should be like...I'd love to see him return to the Senate, but it would be a real shame if it was at the expense of the Senate majority. I'd still vote Young, obviously, but I'd love to see Bayh back as long as McConnell was still Majority Leader.
1707  Forum Community / Forum Community / Excited to say I will be protesting the RNC! on: July 10, 2016, 07:45:25 pm
Very excited to say that I will be protesting the Republican National Convention with the Johnson/Weld campaign, and getting to meet both of the Governors!

Living in the Cleveland area this summer has been unusually fantastic Cheesy
1708  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What would things be like if Kasich was the Republican nominee? on: July 10, 2016, 01:36:03 pm
I think the R+7 polls were always somewhat exaggerated, but Kasich really would be leading by high single digits or low double digits in Ohio, and the state would only be on the edge of competition. That would be a very significant blow to Democratic chances.
1709  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: In the event of an electoral college tie, who does the House vote for? on: July 10, 2016, 01:33:13 pm
Enough strategically placed Republicans abstain that Trump does not win (although a majority of the House by numbers almost certainly votes for Trump). Ryan is sworn in as Acting President on January 21.
1710  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Were your parents born in the same country as you were? on: July 10, 2016, 01:17:17 pm
Nope. Both of my parents were born in Kiev, Ukrainian SSR, Soviet Union. I was born in New York City.
1711  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Australian Federal Election- July 2, 2016 on: July 09, 2016, 11:35:57 am
So, have you guys seen the Senate forecasts on the website blog.geeklections.com.au ? The author seems very bullish on preferences flowing to the Nick Xenophon Team -- he's very confident of Luke Bolton (the top WA NXT candidate) overtaking Rachel Siewert on preferences, and seems to think Aidan Dalgliesh (the NSW candidate) has a very real chance of defeating David Leyonhjelm for the last seat.

He also thinks a Shooters Senator is likely to be elected in Tasmania (God willing), but that forecast might be off because the very high levels of BTL voting aren't being taken into account, and only 1 Green Senator being elected off of 1.46 quotas seems like an unlikely result to me.

How likely are Bolton/Dalgliesh/Allen to actually win?
1712  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Is Trumpism going to die off after Donald Trump loses the election? on: July 07, 2016, 11:01:35 pm
"Trumpism" as in support for the policies Trump espouses? Obviously they're not going to die off; they've been around for decades and at least in some form they're going to stick around for the foreseeable future, though generational trends suggest that within 10-15 years they will be relegated to permanent minority status. (A candidate with Trump's views, but without Trump's numerous hang-ups, could've done very well indeed in 2016, though getting past the Republican primary would've been tough. 2020 is probably still on the table. Past that, unless the worldwide anti-globalization movement actually manages to radically change the status quo, the future looks bleak indeed for them). First World youth, in America and western Europe, on the left and on the right, support globalization to a far greater extent than their ancestors, and they are unable -- and will continue to be unable -- to conceive of a world without it.

"Trumpism" as in the style of campaigning Trump uses, with large-scale rallies, little fundraising, and media domination? This is a style that can only work for a politician with near-100% name recognition who enters the race. Such comes along only very infrequently, and the Trump experience will make others less inclined to try it, especially if they do not align with Trump ideologically. So that dies as soon as Trump is not himself physically a candidate.

"Trumpism" as in the cult of personality around Trump himself? This one is tough. There are about a third, perhaps a little more, of the party that totally unquestioningly buy into Trump's shtick. If the election is a comic McGovern/Mondale style defeat most of that will peel off, but if it's not meaningfully worse than McCain and Romney most of that will stick by him. Trump may be able to play a role in endorsing candidates he likes for minor office and being a valuable surrogate in 2020 (or running again himself). This would survive for about 10 years or so after the 2016 election, but would struggle to gain new adherents and would eventually simply atrophy (or disappear suddenly upon the man's death). So...we are unlikely to see a die-off right after the election, but in the somewhat longer run this will die, too.

In summary...voted no, but "Trumpism" is a mixture of several different phenomena (political positions, a campaigning style, and adoration for a certain person) that do not necessarily need to be connected to each other. One looks certain to survive in some form, one looks certain to die immediately, and the last has an uncertain future but will probably continue to exist in some way in the near-term.
1713  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which result is more likely: Trump in 3rd in VT or Clinton in 3rd in UT? on: July 07, 2016, 08:48:29 pm
I voted for the latter, but I think Trump in third in Utah is likelier than either scenario. Polls have repeatedly shown that Johnson is very likely to break 15% in Utah, and considering his national numbers he should be >20. There is no actual polling evidence showing Stein actually doing so well in Vermont, even though logic suggests it should be the case.
1714  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Could Trump do anything to lose Paul Ryan's support? on: July 07, 2016, 07:56:16 am
I don't think the people in this thread understand what the phrase "empty suit" means, for a start.

Anyway, no, because he clearly doesn't have it. Paul Ryan's entire shtick for the past two months have been a winking acknowledgement of the fact that he actually doesn't support Trump at all, while keeping a plausible deniability for the rubes. Trump cannot lose something he doesn't actually have.
1715  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Australian Federal Election- July 2, 2016 on: July 05, 2016, 11:16:47 am
Some pretty awful postal flows in Queensland - Flynn 65/35 LNP, Herbert and Longman 58/42 LNP. Could just be a bad batch, but if they continue the Liberals will probably end up gaining majority government. And the Liberal government will be far smoother sailing than what I thought earlier this week.

Is this likely to continue? If the remaining vote looks like postal numbers then the LNP will have ended up not losing a single seat in Queensland after all the sturm und drang. (As an aside, it looks like the margin in Hindmarsh -- which didn't shift at all in 2013 -- has been halved).
1716  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of Justin Trudeau on: July 03, 2016, 07:49:55 pm
Not the biggest fan, but at the same time I approve of his vision of exactly what First World left-wing politics should be like. Tilt HP (and voted HP), but at the same time there's a part of me that does like him. If he hadn't beaten someone as fantastic as Stephen Harper, it might have been FF.
1717  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Is the destruction and annhiliation of culture in China inevitable? on: July 02, 2016, 10:24:40 pm
I opened this prior to the BRTD thread and was confused in the extreme.
1718  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Raw Story: Trump Hasn't Voted in the Last 6 Presidential Elections on: July 02, 2016, 10:11:23 pm
Wonder if he does this time.
1719  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which of these #NeverTrump folks will hold the line? on: July 02, 2016, 10:09:59 pm
All except Rubio, who is not NeverTrump.
1720  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Australian Federal Election- July 2, 2016 on: July 02, 2016, 09:42:05 pm
What percent chance does Shorten have of becoming the next PM?

If things hold as they are now, the ALP will lead the Coalition 73-72 with 5 independents who would mainly prefer Shorten to Turnbull. Later counts seem to be going against the Coalition, with the ALP gaining. I might say Shorten is narrowly favored at this point over Turnbull.

If the ALP can gain one more seat in later counts (Gilmore seems likeliest?) and the NXT pulls it off in Grey, then they'll lead the Coalition 74-70, with strong pressure on the NXT to back the ALP. They'll even be able to keep their promise of not coalescing with the Greens.

Of course this depends on guessing what the late returns will be like and what the crossbench will think, so it's all very unclear.

In the Senate, assuming preferences won't shift the margins between parties around by more than 0.15 quotas (which I think is a pretty safe assumption in most circumstances), then the following results seem baked in:
Territories: 2 Coalition, 2 Labor
NSW: 5 Coalition, 4 Labor, 1 Greens, 1 One Nation, 1 unclear (tossup between LDP/CDP)
Victoria: 4 Coalition, 4 Labor, 2 Greens, 1 Derryn Hinch, 1 unclear (extremely unclear; One Nation seems best-placed on first prefs, tho)
Queensland: 5 Coalition, 4 Labor, 1 Greens, 1 One Nation, 1 Liberal Democrats
Western Australia: 5 Coalition, 4 Labor, 2 Greens, 1 One Nation
South Australia: 4 Coalition, 4 Labor, 3 Nick Xenophon Team, 1 Greens
Tasmania: 5 Labor, 4 Coalition, 2 Greens, 1 Jacqui Lambie Network

Total:
29 Coalition
27 Labor
9 Greens
3 Nick Xenophon Team
3 One Nation
1 Liberal Democrats
1 Jacqui Lambie Network
2 unclear (but 2 more minor right seats of some sort seem likeliest)

Point is, ALP+NXT+Greens is very likely to be a majority in the Senate, as well, which could influence how the House crossbenchers pick the next Prime Minister.
1721  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Australian Federal Election- July 2, 2016 on: June 30, 2016, 01:03:53 pm
My predictions were horribly, terribly off in 2013 and are likely to be so again, but here goes nothing:

Queensland:
HoR: Fairfax from PUP to LNP; Capricornia, Forde from LNP to ALP. Total: LNP 21 (-1), ALP 8 (+2), KAP 1 (-), PUP 0 (-1).
Senate: 5 LNP (-1), 4 ALP (-), 1 Greens (-), 1 ON (+1), 1 GLT (-).

New South Wales:
HoR: Werriwa from ALP to Coalition; Paterson, Barton, Dobell, Page, Robertson, Eden-Monaro, Macarthur from Coalition to ALP; Cowper from Coalition to independent. Total: ALP 23 (+5), Coalition 23 (-7), Independent (Oakeshott) 1 (+1).
Senate: 5 Coalition (-1), 4 ALP (-), 2 Greens (+1), 1 LDP (-).

Victoria:
HoR: Murray from Libs to Nats; Batman from ALP to Greens; Chisholm, Bruce from ALP to Coalition. Total: Coalition 18 (+2), ALP 16 (-3), Greens 2 (+1), Independent (McGowan) 1 (-).
Senate: 4 Coalition (-1), 4 ALP (-), 2 Greens (-), 1 NXT (+1), 1 Derryn Hinch (+1), 0 John Madigan (-1), 0 Ricky Muir (-1).

Tasmania:
HoR: No change. Coalition 3 (-), ALP 1 (-), Independent (Wilkie) 1 (-).
Senate: 4 Coalition (-), 4 ALP (-1), 2 Greens (-), 2 JLN (+1).

South Australia:
HoR: Mayo, Barker, Grey from Coalition to NXT; Adelaide from ALP to Coalition. Coalition 4 (-2), ALP 4 (-1), NXT 3 (+3).
Senate: 3 Coalition (-2), 3 ALP (-), 3 NXT (+2), 2 Greens (-), 1 FF (-).

Western Australia:
HoR: Burt, Cowan from Coalition to ALP. Coalition 11 (-1), ALP 5 (+2).
Senate: 5 Liberal (-1), 4 ALP (+1), 2 Greens (-), 1 National (+1), 0 PUP (-1).

Territories:
HoR: Solomon from Coalition to ALP. ALP 4 (+1), Coalition 0 (-1).
Senate: 2 Coalition (-), 2 ALP (-).

HoR total:
Coalition (Malcolm Turnbull) 80 (-10)
Labor (Bill Shorten) 61 (+6)
Nick Xenophon Team (Nick Xenophon) 3 (+3)
Greens (Richard DiNatale) 2 (+1)
Katter's Australian Party (Bob Katter) 1 (-)
Palmer United Party (Zhenya Wang) 0 (-1)
Independents 3 (Rob Oakeshott, Cathy McGowan, Andrew Wilkie)

Senate total:
Coalition (Malcolm Turnbull) 29 (-4)
Labor (Bill Shorten) 25 (-)
Greens (Richard DiNatale) 11 (+1)
Nick Xenophon Team (Nick Xenophon) 4 (+3)
Jacqui Lambie Network (Jacqui Lambie) 2 (+1)
Liberal Democratic Party (David Leyonhjelm) 1 (-)
Family First Party (Bob Day) 1 (-)
One Nation Party (Pauline Hanson) 1 (+1)
Glenn Lazarus Team (Glenn Lazarus) 1 (-)
Justice Party (Derryn Hinch) 1 (+1)
Palmer United Party (Zhenya Wang) 0 (-1)
Manufacturing and Farming Party (John Madigan) 0 (-1)
Motoring Enthusiasts Party (Ricky Muir) 0 (-1)
1722  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton going on the ground and on the air in Nebraska's 2nd district on: June 30, 2016, 11:05:20 am
I hope so, I really hope so. And if 538 is any indication, MO, SC and MS are real possibilities. We just need more public polling from these places. I imagine PPP well test the waters there.

MO maybe, SC highly unlikely, and MS no way in hell. You can't win a state where you have a county (Hinds County, MS) that went 71-28 Obama, and then a county literally right next to it (Rankin County, MS) that went 76-23 Romney. There is just way too much polarization among whites and blacks in these deep south states.

You do it by convincing the whites not to turn out. If the county voting for you 71-28 casts way more votes than the one that goes 76-23, you win. I doubt it'll work (and if I were Hillary I would focus on states with competitive Senate races and just try to run up the score there), but if Hillary wants a large EC victory to demonstrate that she has a mandate it might be worth a shot.
1723  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: God help me, I almost respect Mike Lee on: June 30, 2016, 10:59:38 am
1724  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: FiveThirtyEight best case scenarios for both candidates on: June 30, 2016, 10:58:22 am
I decided to see, as of today, what would happen if each candidate won every state they had at least a 25% chance of winning, according to the fivethirtyeight.com prediction (edit: using "polls only"):

Trump:



Trump 273
Clinton 265


Clinton:



Clinton 468
Trump 70

So, basically, these two events have equal probability?  Smiley

What's the rationale for ME-02 going for Trump, in his best case scenario, while PA does not? ME-02 has a Dem PVI of 3%, while PA has a Dem PVI of 1%, for starters.

Probably there's been more polling of PA then ME-2, so the model is more confident of Clinton's chances in PA.

UT and KS need flipped in Trump's worst-case scenario. Indeed, I suspect the other Rocky Mountain states (ID and WY) probably flip before Kansas; there's more persuadables there.

1725  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who will Johnson voters come home to? on: June 30, 2016, 10:55:14 am
Neither. Who will they go for in 2020 is a better question but it's difficult to speculate until we know just who the nominees are.
Pages: 1 ... 64 65 66 67 68 [69] 70 71 72 73 74 ... 389


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines