Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 18, 2017, 08:59:35 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 55 56 57 58 59 [60] 61 62 63 64 65 ... 181
1476  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Are Reagan Democrats beginning to turn to Trump? on: April 27, 2016, 04:23:21 am
What about Eisenhower Republicans?
1477  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Are Reagan Democrats beginning to turn to Trump? on: April 27, 2016, 04:07:00 am
Geesh, Holmes is voting Trump I take it?
1478  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Acela Corridor Tuesday results thread (all polls close at 8pm ET) on: April 27, 2016, 04:05:07 am
Quote
I'm just going to keep repeating this until you understand it.  You're claiming that your model indicates what Trump "needs" in each state to be on track to win 1,237 pledged delegates.

I'm sorry, the math was done long before Wisconsin, and before Wyoming and Colorado. Trump has been in trouble for a long time, since he lost Ohio to Kasich. Said it then, say it now.

We are just about done the primary season. Romney had it wrapped up by Wisconsin, and his run was very late. Trump has not managed to do that. By losing in Wisconsin, he assured that he would not mathematically be able to clinch pledged delegates before California. Cruz now has no incentive to drop before California.

Quote
However, your model also assumed Trump would keep Cruz and Kasich under 10% in both Rhode Island congressional seats.  That is a huge overperformance.  If Trump overperformed in every subsequent state to that extent, he'd easily win more than 1,237 pledged delegates.  In other words, a delegate sweep of Rhode Island isn't "on-track" to win 1,237 pledged delegates.  It's way overboard.

You're assuming that each state is linked to each other. I am not. I am treating each state as it's own mini-election. Trump's strongest states are in this corridor, ergo I assign delegates to his strong states before assigning them to his weak states.

Quote
That's not a model of what Trump "needs."  It's not a model of what keeps him "on-track."  It's a theoretical scenario you've created where Trump falls short of 1,237 pledged delegates while winning a freakish super-victory in Rhode Island for no reason.  It's nonsense.

It's not nonsense. I'm sorry you can't understand that Trump has been behind since he lost Ohio. Those delegates need to be made up. It's like Alice and Wonderland. He has to run twice as hard to catch up.

Quote
Things that have nothing to do with the validity of my logical criticism of your model:

1. Whether you predicted delegates accurately in past races.

2. Whether I predicted delegates accurately in past races.

That it predicted the delegate counts correctly is a solid indicator that my model is working well.
1479  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Acela Corridor Tuesday results thread (all polls close at 8pm ET) on: April 27, 2016, 03:58:25 am
Quote
The majority of the unpledged can vote for Cruz, while Trump still wins *some* of them.  He already has endorsements from ~30 from Pennsylvania alone.  Why would all of them now decide not to vote for him?

Would we have predicted after Florida, South Carolina and Super Tuesday that Trump would still be fighting off Cruz?

They are unpledged meaning they don't have to cast their vote until the convention. Lots can change in the meantime.

Quote
On the first ballot Trump could, for example, get the votes of 1200 pledged delegates and 40 unpledged delegates.  The majority of unpledged delegates go with Cruz, but with 40 going for Trump, Trump still wins the nomination in that scenario.  When you say that Trump needs 1237 pledged delegates alone, you're saying that Trump will win zero unpledged delegates.  Not just that he'll fail to get a majority of them, but that he'll get zero.  That doesn't make sense to me.

If it goes to the convention, (and it should), lots can happen. PA vote was today. Convention won't be until August. That's 4, 5 months.

Trump has to win 1237 before the convention in pledged delegates. If it's even *close*, the majority of Republicans who did not vote for Trump will want their say.

They will also be more likely to dump Trump because of his inability to close it out. We shall see.

Indiana will be crucial. If Cruz wins we'll be going to a contested nomination.
1480  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The Delegate Fight: 2016 on: April 27, 2016, 03:53:18 am
The reason why black voters are pretty much irrelevant to the Republican party - even with 0 percent black voters, all you need for a republican win is an increase in the turnout of whites without a degree, to 71 percent, and a slight increase in the percentage of whites with a degree voting Republican to 61 percent.

That... actually breaks the freiwall.

Blacks have made themselves demographically irrelevant in American elections.
1481  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The Delegate Fight: 2016 on: April 27, 2016, 03:49:31 am
Quote
In the medium to long run, ~80% of Trump supporters + ~30% of the black vote is a winning coalition for the GOP.  Cruz simply has nowhere to get the last 2-4% from in a general, and that gap will widen each year going forward as more non-religious voters turn 18.  After a Trump nomination, Democrats should have a lock on >75% of Hispanics and the "libertarian" type of white moderate for the foreseeable future.  It's time for the GOP to drop free trade and get a lot more serious about public education reform.     

Changing none of the sliders, even with 30 percent black support, the Firewall holds. Right now Republicans are getting 7 percent. Republicans pick up Ohio, Virginia and Florida.

If he drops to 25 percent of Hispanics (from the 29 percent that Romney got), that doesn't change.

If he gets 30 percent of blacks, 25 percent of Hispanics and 80 percent of Romney's whites (with 20 percent not showing), he loses Florida.
1482  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The Delegate Fight: 2016 on: April 27, 2016, 03:43:39 am
Quote
If the GOP is smart they will go for more primaries. Trying to suppress the inevitable shift driven by demographics within the GOP base will only lead to heads on pikes. They need to run realists who accept the modern reality, quit trying to pretend it is 1980 all over again and map a path that accrues both base support and competitiveness in the general. There is no other way this works.

And Trump's the Candidate that will get there? I don't see it. 11 percent support among Hispanics pretty much dooms Trump in the General.

If he only polls 80 percent of the Romney whites, he's blown away in the election.
1483  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump: 'It's over' - What folks think? on: April 27, 2016, 03:40:57 am
Quote
The last point is irrelevant to the question.

The GOP voters have made their wishes clear for a contested convention.

In any case, if nominated, Trump will be the weakest Republican nominee in the history of the party.

Republican's haven't won an election without a candidate with more than 60 percent of Republican primary support.

Dole, Romney and McCain all fell short and lost. Bush Jr and Reagan got more than 60 and won. Trump? Well, he's in a league of his own.
1484  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Acela Corridor Tuesday results thread (all polls close at 8pm ET) on: April 27, 2016, 03:37:30 am
Quote
You argued that Trump "needed all the delegates tonight" to hit 1237.  You argued this based on your model.  I'm asking why your model assumes Trump's most likely (let alone necessary!) route to 1237 involves a sweep in Rhode Island.

Because my model predicts that Trump falls about 50 delegates short of the nomination.

Quote
A Trump delegate sweep in Rhode Island would have required an epic overperformance -- obviously a much more unlikely outcome than Trump overperforming enough in other upcoming states enough to hit 1237.

The delegates have to come from somewhere. I didn't feel comfortable predicting a sweep of NY, and I felt more comfortable in predicting a sweep tonight. I come out just about right, and more right than 538.

Quote
which makes it effectively useless except as an obscure hypothetical.

So far it's called Wyoming (Cruz sweep), Colorado (Cruz sweep), Wisconsin within a point, and got the delegate totals correct for NY and the corridor tonight.

You're right, that perhaps Indiana will be a win for Trump, but I'm predicting a Cruz victory here.

What were your predictions tonight?
1485  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Acela Corridor Tuesday results thread (all polls close at 8pm ET) on: April 27, 2016, 03:33:37 am
Quote
I don't understand why you think that.  Again, a candidate needs 1237 total delegates in order to be nominated on the first ballot.  Total delegates, not pledged delegates.  I guess the exact number of unpledged delegates is still undetermined, because of varying rules from state to state about what happens to delegates pledged to candidates who've dropped out, or candidates like Kasich who don't reach the Rule 40b threshold.  But Erc estimated it at ~180 or so.

So when you say that Trump needs 1237 pledged delegates, that means that you're predicting that Trump will get the votes of zero of the ~180 unpledged delegates?  You think all of them, including those who've already endorsed him, will not vote for him?

One, Kasich delegates are not going Trump. Cruz has already secured them. Same with Rubio.

Two, I think that the vast majority of unpledged will go Cruz. Cruz probably already has a plan to win them over. Trump can't keep his own delegates. Why would this change now?

Trump has to win on the first ballot, or he will lose and the Republican party will choose someone else.

Trump has what, 37 percent of Republican voters now? That's why he has to win on the first ballot from pledged delegates. It's also why he's gonna get screwed when delegates are free to vote for whomever they want.
1486  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Trump exceed 50% of the vote in every primary tonight? on: April 27, 2016, 03:27:01 am
Quote
Momentum will bring him home now.

US voters love a winner.

Which is why they are voting Hillary in the general?
1487  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump: 'It's over' - What folks think? on: April 27, 2016, 03:26:01 am
Actually, this is the denounement of a rather sad election.

Trump is at 37 percent of the total republican votes this primary.

The lowest previous are the successive 52s scored by McCain and Romney. Both of whom lost.

Trump can no longer get to 50 percent plus one in the total remaining GOP electorate. So, no. It's not over.



1488  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Acela Corridor Tuesday results thread (all polls close at 8pm ET) on: April 27, 2016, 03:18:35 am
Quote
No, that isn't true.  Unpledged delegates also get to vote on the first ballot.  Some of them will vote for Trump.  Maybe not a majority, but some of them.  So he could very well have fewer than 1237 pledged delegates, and still win the nomination on the first ballot if he wins a sufficiently large number of unpledged delegates.

He needs to get 1237 pledged delegates on the first ballot. If he doesn't get them he will not be the nominee.

That is the problem that Trump has at this point. Enough Republicans will not vote for him and will not support him.

The other problem is that he's irreparably damaged at this point. There has never been a nominee with fewer than 50 percent of the overall republican votes.

McCain got 52 percent. Romney also got 52. Bush Jr got 62. Dole, 58. Bush Sr. 68 percent, Reagan, 60 percent. Ford got 53 percent.

68, 62, 60 were winners. 58, 52, 52, 53 were all losers.

Basically, Trump is looking at a Goldwaterish landslide loss, just looking at the ballot boxes.
1489  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Trump exceed 50% of the vote in every primary tonight? on: April 27, 2016, 02:55:41 am
Quote
Yeah, it's over. Trump even winning Montgomery and Prince George counties in Maryland is an indication that Republican primary voters are done and have settled. I foresee a bigger than expected win in Indiana next week, and probably a victory in Oregon.

We shall see. I suspect the less blue parts of America will have a say in that.
1490  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Are Reagan Democrats beginning to turn to Trump? on: April 27, 2016, 02:51:01 am
Pretty much. What we're seeing are the most liberal parts of America voting for Trump. I'm not sure how we can read much of anything into the republican electorate in the North East, other than that they are 100 percent irrelevant.

That's the sad part of the nomination process.
1491  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Acela Corridor Tuesday results thread (all polls close at 8pm ET) on: April 27, 2016, 02:47:19 am
Quote
I'd agree that there's a good chance that Trump gets less than 1237 pledged delegates, but since he's inevitably going to get the votes of some of those unpledged delegates as well, it's hard to see how he's not currently favored to win on the first ballot.

Your two statements contradict each other. If he's under 1237 pledged delegates, he will not be the nominee.

Right now, he's odds on to fall short. He's hardly the 'presumptive nominee', less than 50 percent chance of taking the nomination.
1492  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Acela Corridor Tuesday results thread (all polls close at 8pm ET) on: April 27, 2016, 02:38:00 am
Quote
But, again, unless I'm missing something, that makes no sense.  You're saying he fell short of what he "needed," but you had him winning all delegates in Rhode Island.  A world in which Donald Trump wins Rhode Island by enough to win all of its delegates, is a world where Donald Trump obviously wins California and Indiana by enough that it doesn't matter.  You're incorrectly modeling what Trump "needs."

Again, no I'm not. Trump needs 1237. To get there, there are several paths, but all of them have him at 1k delegates at this point in the race.

This is why he threw his trumpertantrum over Colorado's delegates. He did the math and realized that even with a sweep tonight - which he was denied, he would fall short.
1493  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Would Cruz/Fiorina be the most hideous ticket in the history of the Republic? on: April 27, 2016, 02:29:37 am
Quote
I'd say she looks pretty good for a lady pushing 70.

Boomers have been in power since 1992. That's 24 years already. Way too much.

They've had control of the SCOTUS since Souter retired in 2009 as well.

Breyer - Ginsburg - Kennedy are the only non-Boomers on the court.
1494  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Does Lyin' Ted regret stealing Colorado now? on: April 27, 2016, 02:22:21 am
Quote
One of the things that is forgotten, because it will be near-meaningless in the presidential race, is how low Hillary's own favorabilities are. The presidential race will be a referendum on Trump (proceeding in the assumption that even he is incapable of ing up the nomination at this point). Congressional races don't have to be a referendum on Trump -- a skillful campaign can make it a referendum about Hillary. This is probably the best bet for keeping the Senate.

Nah. It's happened before with an unpopular nominee - see what McGovern did in South Dakota. He ran to the right. Senators need to run to the right to keep their seats and ignore Trump. If pressed, say that you're running on your record not Trump's.
1495  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Acela Corridor Tuesday results thread (all polls close at 8pm ET) on: April 27, 2016, 02:17:42 am
Quote
Are you counting PA's unpledged delegates?

Given Trump's inability to retain his own delegates, I can't see him picking up the unpledged PA delegates.
1496  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Trump exceed 50% of the vote in every primary tonight? on: April 27, 2016, 02:16:03 am
Quote
Well, so much for the "TRUMP CAN'T REACH 50%!!!!" talking point.

He is still the worst frontrunner. Every other frontrunner and major challenger was over 50 by the end of march.
1497  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Acela Corridor Tuesday results thread (all polls close at 8pm ET) on: April 27, 2016, 02:12:06 am
Quote
Trump surely didn't lose ground tonight. 538 has him ahead of pace to get to 1237 by five (5) delegates.

538 has him winning Indiana. I do not. I was closer than 538's predictions.
1498  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Acela Corridor Tuesday results thread (all polls close at 8pm ET) on: April 27, 2016, 02:11:10 am
Quote
You just told me nothing about your methodology and didn't answer the concern I raised

I ran off the delegate totals and estimated that Trump would be regionally stronger in the NE, with additional Kasich support and Cruz support. You're right, he wasn't expected to do as well in RI, but that was the only path I saw to him getting to 1237.

I was not far off. I had him under in NY and so the numbers come out correct. He still needed to be at 1k to be on course for the nomination.
1499  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Acela Corridor Tuesday results thread (all polls close at 8pm ET) on: April 27, 2016, 02:03:25 am
Quote
I haven't looked at your methodology, but really?  It seems like it would make more sense to estimate where Trump is at in remaining states, and keep increasing his performance in each state linearly until he hits 1237.  That obviously wouldn't have involved winning every delegate in Rhode Island (unless I misremember their allocation methodology), because that would require such an absurdly strong performance that he would have clinched via big victories in Indiana and California first.  No?

He needed to be at 1k after April and the NE.  Getting zero delegates in Colorado and Wyoming and losing Wisconsin bigly hurt him badly for the nomination.

Coming into WI and CO put him right at 1235. Right now I have him at 1185, falling short of the nomination.

I had him winning every delegate tonight and 75 in New York. So my prediction ran about spot on.
1500  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Does Lyin' Ted regret stealing Colorado now? on: April 27, 2016, 02:00:56 am
Quote
The question is how many Romney/McCaskill voters there are; or, Hillary/R for Congress. The House is probably safe, both because of the gerrymander and because of how many winnable races Democrats have failed to recruit warm bodies for, but the Senate is probably lost without a lot of luck. McGinty and not Sestak getting nominated tonight was a break.

Best case scenario I have for Trump gets him to 253. Virginia is now completely lost to Trump, as is Colorado, Iowa and Pennsylvania.

Trump is very close to having Ohio be safe Democrat.
Pages: 1 ... 55 56 57 58 59 [60] 61 62 63 64 65 ... 181


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines