Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 10, 2016, 03:57:20 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 433
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Strongest Dem swings outside of Utah and Idaho on: Today at 03:50:45 am
BTW - the Arlington and Alexandria numbers demonstrate how Virginia is gone for Republicans. 

This is what typically happens in Virginia that is spurring population growth. 

Step 1) People move into DC from wherever.

Step 2) They move to Arlington/Alexandria (sometimes this is Step 1)

Step 3) They want more space and move to Fairfax

Step 4) They want more land and move to a county further out.

Those insane D vote margins in Arlington and Alexandria will be Fairfax voters in 5-10 years.  They will also be replaced by DC people who are super liberal.

NOVA = getting more populated + getting more Democratic.  Republicans have NOTHING to counter this in Virginia.  They are already maxed out downstate and Southwest Virginia is losing population.  This is why I am 100% confident Republicans won't win Virginia anytime soon.



I mean, if one were to look at this map of VA - understanding the concept of swing but not necessarily the exact population density of the state - then they'd likely assume that the state was won by the Democrat by less than it was 4 years ago, if the Democrat won at all.

I think most would be shocked to learn that the Democrat won the state by 1.5 points more than the Democrat did four years ago. That swing map really says it all.
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Teenagers born after 9/11 will get to vote in this election on: Today at 01:18:42 am
It would be nice if there was an upper end to voting.  Right now you can't vote til you're 18.  Perhaps you should stop being allowed to vote when you're 80.  Old people are generally out of touch and disproportionately impact elections then die off.  I'm just saying...

That number should definitely be lower if the primary goal is to reduce the old farts' reckless influence on those who'll inherit the country.

Compulsory voting in other countries has a varied range, but 18-70 isn't uncommon. We should borrow a page from our friends across the aisle's playbook and say "if you're no longer contributing to society, then you can't vote!". After all, why should those on the government dole have a disproportionate share of the say in our elections? We of course could allow for exceptions for those 70 and older who are still working.

Additionally, we could also consider setting those 18-70 parameters but instituting core mental competency and civics tests for anybody under 18 or over 70 who wishes to vote. If they pass, they get to vote, regardless of age. Then we'll finally have minimum (and maximum) voting ages that make sense.
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Teenagers born after 9/11 will get to vote in this election on: December 09, 2016, 08:56:59 pm
The continued and increasing prevalence of the internet is doing a good job at making conservative youth seem like a greater share of the population than they are. The same reason why Bernie Sanders won the social media primary by 80 points is why the Pepe Patrol seems so large. Passion in an echochamber more than makes up for sheer numbers.

They'll be less Republican than their grandparents, and that's all that matters.
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Georgia trendline on: December 08, 2016, 01:17:20 am
No - Georgia is obviously total fool's gold for the Democrats and we should continue to pump hundreds of millions of dollars into uber swing-state NC!

Quote
Dem % in GA, Compared to NC:

2000: -0.22
2004: -2.24
-----Begin Half-Billion Dollar Dem Investment in NC-----
2008: -2.80
2012: -2.96
2016: -0.28

NC Election Results
GA Election Results

Truly inspiring!
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Some Clinton electors lobbying for EC protest votes? *UPDATE* 7 Dem electors going faithless on: December 06, 2016, 05:00:59 pm
As someone who holds a low-level party office, I can't tell you how many kooky mass emails I've been getting the past month on a daily basis from random people across the country convinced that the Electoral College is winnable; as if I'm in some sort of position to make that happen. Halfway coherent ramblings with lists of elector contact information, "strategies" and stupid clickbait included. I'll be very glad when this is over, for my inbox's sake.
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton Allies Plot Anti-Trump Insurgency on: December 04, 2016, 11:45:15 am
reminder that 18-29 year old whites actually voted for trump 47-43. the younger generations are more progressive primarily because they're less white

Romney won 'em by 7 in 2012, so...progress?

Good work in this thread guys.

The party's chances in 2018 and 2020 are certainly looking up with this sort of impeccable unity.

7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Monkey Cage: Donald Trump did not win 34% of Latino vote in Texas. on: December 04, 2016, 11:10:21 am
The issues regarding the Rio Grande Valley remind me of the issues I ran into when making my 2012 White Obama Lovers by County map last year.

With Texas specifically, I had to continue tweaking, and tweaking, and tweaking...and tweaking my formulas to get something that looked believable for most of rural Texas. In most states, a rather uniform formula could be used; where there are Latinos, it doesn't work. With TX in particular, it was even worse. I had to create a whole range of scenarios to balance out everything.

In the northern part of the state, I kept running into issues with white support for Obama being negative - even when bumping down Latino turnout and support for Obama to ungodly levels even by Latino standards. There are still counties on the map where white Obama support is at like 1-2% after all of that, including bumping Latino support for Romney up to 60-70% in some cases.

In South Texas, it was the opposite. White support for Obama kept producing ungodly levels of support that were showing up as majorities in some counties. It doesn't help that white population in some of these counties is so small that moving Latino support by 5-10 points shifted Obama's white support by 50 points. I continued to increase Latino turnout and (mostly) support to levels comparable to black voters in order to get something halfway realistic. Even then, the share of white support on the map still sticks out compared to the rest of the state, lingering between 25-30%.

(It's worth noting that this broader trend - whites seeming to be more in favor of Obama in the more heavily minority rural counties than in neighboring rural counties with smaller minority populations - was something I ran into to varying degrees quite consistently throughout the country, including in heavily Black and Latino areas, the former of which is much easier to project in terms of turnout/support)


Anyway...I'm wondering if there might have been some truth/accuracy to my initial projections for the map, in that whites were actually unusually Democratic in these heavily Latino counties and that - when combined with drop-offs (potentially? haven't looked yet) in Latino turnout in these areas - a huge swing among the otherwise small white vote to Trump there was enough to swing the Rio Grande overall to Trump, even though Latinos may have been more Democratic this time around and/or turned out in larger numbers? It's worth noting again though that in many of these Rio Grande counties, I had Obama at 90% among Latinos...so I'm not sure how they could have gotten much more Democratic there than they were in 2012.

And maybe that's why there's a swing to Trump there: they didn't, but the whites swung to Trump by a very large amount and Latino turnout (at least in raw numbers) was either down or there wasn't enough of an increase to cancel out white swing. I do have a hard time believing Trump improved among Latinos overall, whether in TX or nationally.
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: a winning clinton map on: December 01, 2016, 01:53:34 am
9  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Government / Re: Senate Confirmation Hearing: Gass3268 for Supreme Court Justice on: November 30, 2016, 06:58:04 pm
Aye
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Michigan elector is receiving death threats on: November 30, 2016, 06:57:35 pm
Quote
"While being selected as an official elector is a big responsibility, it also comes with hardships."
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Hillary Clinton win the South Atlantic? on: November 30, 2016, 09:51:50 am
Womp womp womp:



Still kind of cool that his margin grew by less than one point compared to Romney's (Thanks, GA).
12  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Dave's Redistricting App Changes on: November 30, 2016, 06:14:58 am
UPDATE (11/29): As some of you probably heard, complete functionality of DRA was scheduled to end on 11/30. Dave (Bradlee) has been working to fix this problem and transfer the old data to a new source. There is now a new link below (DRA 2.5) that will serve as the future DRA app, although there are no plans to add new data post-2008 to it. There are still glitches and some lack of functionality, but he intends to fix this with time.

Quote
Hi everyone,

The current app (DRA 2.2) still works as of this moment, but I have uploaded a new version that works without Bing Maps and should continue to work after December 1st, when the Bing Maps Silverlight control ceases to work.

Go to the Launch Page (http://gardow.com/davebradlee/redistricting/launchapp.html) and there's a link to the new app and a description of differences and known issues. Please let me know of other issues you run into. Right now it has no background map at all. I would like to add at least static map images, but that will take more time.

Happy Mapping!

13  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Dave's Redistricting App Screwed? on: November 30, 2016, 06:10:42 am
bump

is DRA still screwed come 11/30?

Got this from Dave the other day:

Quote
Hi everyone,

The current app (DRA 2.2) still works as of this moment, but I have uploaded a new version that works without Bing Maps and should continue to work after December 1st, when the Bing Maps Silverlight control ceases to work.

Go to the Launch Page (http://gardow.com/davebradlee/redistricting/launchapp.html) and there's a link to the new app and a description of differences and known issues. Please let me know of other issues you run into. Right now it has no background map at all. I would like to add at least static map images, but that will take more time.

Happy Mapping!
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: a winning clinton map on: November 30, 2016, 12:10:14 am


Or hey, even better:

15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Texas Electoral College Member Resigns on: November 29, 2016, 07:22:45 pm
Keep drinking that Kool-Aid, "Malcolm X".  LOL. 

Someone's testy!
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump claims "millions of people" voted illegally. on: November 28, 2016, 07:33:01 pm
I'm sure that some illegal immigrants do find a way to vote, but it's hard to see this number being remotely close to "millions." There are about 10 million illegal immigrants of voting age; saying that 20% of them are somehow registered and voting seems absurdly high given the risks and restrictions. I could see maybe 1-2% at most going for it.

You'd have to believe that non-citizen voter turnout is at or near levels of citizen Latino turnout (as a share of their total populations). Anybody who knows the first thing about how non-citizens behave with regard to government institutions would find this laughable.

Then, you'd have to have African-American levels of support among non-citizen voters for Clinton just for Trump to break even in the popular vote.  
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: First Likely Entry Into The 2020 Election on: November 27, 2016, 06:47:32 pm
Isn't O'Malley basically broke and heavily in debt? I think he'll get a job for at least a year or two before starting to campaign again.

CHECK OUT HIS PLAN
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Did the Sanders challenge cause HRC to lose the general election? on: November 27, 2016, 06:40:56 pm
Did Sanders' presence in the primary possibly make the difference and fuel enough anti-Clinton sentiment through Election Day to cost her the Rust Belt? Yes. God knows how many Obama '12 voters were persuaded into voting third-party or voting for Trump because they saw the same critiques coming from both right and left constantly, which is increasingly rare in American politics.

Is it fair to assume Clinton had some sort of inalienable right to a conflict-free primary and therefore was rudely and selfishly robbed of an election win? No. Politics isn't bean-bag and nobody is guaranteed an easy election win - or any win at all - just because of who they are or however much support they may have within certain segments of the party or electorate.
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump claims "millions of people" voted illegally. on: November 27, 2016, 06:35:31 pm
The "3 million illegals" talking point is funny, because Clinton is rapidly closing in on a 2.5 million-vote lead.

Trump got close to one-third of Latinos, so...even if Clinton won 90% of these "illegal voters", that'd only be a net gain of 2.4 million votes for Trump. I guess they better find another million or two to throw into the mix, LOL.
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton Campaign Counsel: "We'll participate in recount" on: November 27, 2016, 06:28:57 pm
The "3 million illegals" talking point is funny, because Clinton is rapidly closing in on a 2.5 million-vote lead.

Trump got close to one-third of Latinos, so...even if Clinton won 90% of these "illegal voters", that'd only be a net gain of 2.4 million votes for Trump. I guess they better find another million or two to throw into the mix, LOL.
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Are Democrats better off with an African-American candidate? on: November 27, 2016, 05:21:06 am
Obama was a very special candidate. It wasn't inherently because he was black, though that certainly helped with black turnout and support. It was that he was able to glue together so many pieces to the broader Democratic coalition, including elements that wouldn't have otherwise been there (that should be obvious now). Nobody would have thought Obama to be a transformative political figure or exceptional candidate if he had merely generated 08/12 numbers among black voters but generated 04 numbers among every other group. Hell, he might not have even won. Democrats have a much bigger puzzle to solve than nominal turnout/support among a minority group.

There isn't a single black Democrat - or arguably any Democrat, for that matter - who could command the kind of coalition he did as of right now. Thinking that "we need to run a black candidate!" is a viable solution to turnout/support woes is akin to how the AJC talks about every generic black candidate for statewide office "exciting the state's black electorate", as if it's just that simple.

Let's also remember that - while we shouldn't be making blanket generalizations with regard to a candidate's race and chances for success - it cuts both ways. Obama was able to get himself elected, as well as many of the same people who were on the ballot with him, but the Democratic Party is effectively a smoldering heap of dung in part because of the reaction to him, and it was largely like this before 2016. We've lost a dozen Governors, a dozen Senators, dozens of House members and almost 1,000 state legislative seats under his tenure. Who cares if you win the battle but lose the war?
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What will be Jill Stein's best state? on: November 27, 2016, 04:22:36 am
It was actually Hawaii, where she got 2.9% of the vote. She did not do as well in Vermont because of a lot of people decided to write in Bernie Sanders instead of voting for her.


So she did well among Asians there?

I imagine it was more the "rich, white and well-insulated from economic collapse and/or the social ramifications of the by-product of a 'I'm not voting for the lesser of two evils'" vote. You've got a lot of 'em in Hawaii.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: 'White working-class' vote in 1964 on: November 27, 2016, 04:08:55 am
I understand what you're trying to do here, but are you really going to try to compare the New Deal Coalition - many of whom arguably suffered more economically than any other group in relevant American history - to the cretinous Baby Boomers and Gen Xers, who arguably prospered more economically (at least relative to their efforts) than any other group in American history?

One group had every reason in the world to vote from the cradle to the grave for the Democratic Party based on economics after what they had experienced. The other group inherited the fruits of that, had arguably every advantage possible given to them, and are now pissing their pants because they already let it all get pissed away and want a scapegoat.
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: PEOTUS reacts on recount request on: November 26, 2016, 05:23:49 pm
Yes, bragging about the Electoral College - especially in the context of having a "mandate" when you failed to carry 54% of the nation's votes - is meaningless BS. You only get to brag about the EC legitimately if you also won the popular vote.

Of course, the GOP does the same bragging with its gerrymandered House "mandate" every two years, so nothing new for the oligarchs who hate democracy.
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Putting NPVIC into Effect by 2020? on: November 26, 2016, 03:43:35 pm
Already Passed
Via State Legislature
Via Initiative




There are an additional 36 EVs where this could theoretically be passed via initiative over the next 2-3 years.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 433


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines