Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 26, 2017, 08:17:16 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10

 on: Today at 06:24:30 am 
Started by politicus - Last post by jaichind
Kyodo News poll post-Diet testimony (some slight drop but not dramatic)

Abe cabinet approval/disapproval 52.4 (-3.3) / 32.5 (+1.Cool

New approval average curve

Prime Minister Abe, including Mrs. Akie, denies involvement in connection with Morihito Gakuen's problem
It is Convincing 28.7%
Not Convincing 62.6%

Should Akie Abe go to the Diet to testify under oath Yes 52.0% No 42.8%

The significant number of those polled not for Akie Abe to testify in the Diet tells me there will be damage for Abe  but he should ride this out if nothing else emerges.

 on: Today at 06:19:29 am 
Started by UWS - Last post by UWS
The Washington Post

Political Geography: Tales from the campaign trail

New York

Home sweet home
Donald Trump is favored to win his home state of New York where he is born and where he built the Trump Tower.

The South
Even though the New York state is likely to be won by Donald Trump, Marco Rubio hopes to have his share of delegates in this primary. The Florida Senator focused most of his efforts on New York City, where he could get important support from minority voters. His foreign policy experience could favor him in the Orange County (home to West Point) due to connections with military recruits and personnel.

Not welcomed
Partly due to his controversial comments on New York Values , Ted Cruz is not polling well in New York. Right now, he's focusing more on the next primaries in Pennsylvania, Maryland and Connecticut.

 on: Today at 06:18:25 am 
Started by Gass3268 - Last post by EnglishPete
according to current rumours, not Ryan but Priebus is going to fall on this sword.

Source close to @POTUS says he's being advised to replace @Reince45 & is open to possibility -- healthcare was last straw
Its not either/or. They could be both on their way out.

The President tweeted the following last night

Watch @JudgeJeanine on @FoxNews tonight at 9:00 P.M.

Its unusual for Trump to tweet out specific TV program recommendations like that. And how did Judge Jeanine start her show that evening?


 on: Today at 06:17:05 am 
Started by Beagle - Last post by DC Al Fine
Yeah, you're right. There is also the ancestral communist/anticommunist tribal division, which results in some rather counter-intuitive voting patterns. It would be wrong to say that ideology plays no role in Bulgaria's politics, however. And the ethnic identity factor is, well, debatable, but this debate is something that I don't have time for - I said that I am not writing 6000 words on corruption in my first post in this thread.
Could you elaborate on this?

 on: Today at 06:09:59 am 
Started by publicunofficial - Last post by MT Treasurer
I guess Quist, even when you factor in the Libertarian candidate and the runoff. I could see it being somewhat close, though.

 on: Today at 06:07:44 am 
Started by Bannon's Brigade - Last post by MT Treasurer
@Spenstar: Those are all good points, and I know my comment sounded harsh, but if this was happening to you guys in Vermont, Hawaii, Delaware, etc. and cost you the Senate, you'd go crazy as well. Tongue Actually.. Yes, I think voters who vote for style or personality over issues and party are dumb. This applies to both Democrats and Republicans, it just doesn't happen that often in blue states (the reasons you listed have something to do with it, but not everything). Montana isn't really a red state and there's a strong progressive base here, so that's something of a special case (although it still frustrates me that there are Republican-leaning Independents who vote for Tester).

Heitkamp is hardly a "moderate", but what matters is how voters perceive her. People forget that she basically ran as a conservative in 2012 (I believe she even said that she would be pro-life), and... surprise, surprise! Her voting record isn't moderate or conservative at all. She's way to the left of her state. But then again, like Scott said, so were Dorgan and to a lesser extent Conrad.

 on: Today at 05:48:53 am 
Started by DavidB. - Last post by DL
Forgive me for asking a question that may have been answered a long time ago, but what is the difference between CDA and CU? Why aren't they one party?

 on: Today at 05:47:49 am 
Started by Beagle - Last post by Beagle
First leaked exit polls as of 12:00 (another 8 hours to go)

GERB: 32.5/33.5
BSP: 29.6/28.7
DPS: 11.4/9.6
UP: 8.5/9.1
Volya: 5.2/5.2
RB: 3.9/4.0
DOST: 2.3/2.2
New Republic: 2.3/1.4
ABV/,m21: 2.2/1.8
Yes Bulgaria: 1.8/2.0

There are another 3 pollsters, at least one has the BSP ahead, at least one has Volya under the threshold... we'll see.

 on: Today at 05:37:12 am 
Started by DavidB. - Last post by mvd10
A new peil poll

Not much changes since the election. But what's more interesting is the preferred coalition per party. 73% of VVD and CDA voters prefer a coalition with CU over a coalition with GL. But 80% of D66 voters want to work with GL. I think D66 will lose seats when we inevitably end up with VVD-CDA-D66-CU. Pechtold will become a minister (and probably also deputy PM, but that's purely symbolical) and especially if he is replaced by someone less charismatic the next election might be very ugly for D66. Which is funny because D66 would get a lot of it's policies in a VVD-CDA-D66-CU coalition, they only would have to give up on some ethical issues. But the problem is that a lot of D66 voters don't really agree with some of D66's neoliberal economic policies and that would become painfully clear once D66 actually joins a centre-right coalition.

 on: Today at 05:36:39 am 
Started by MM876 - Last post by ○∙◄☻tπ[╪AV┼cV└
I think he needs to do exactly what he did in Illinois and California during the Democratic Primaries, where he performed quite well among racial/ethnic minorities....

Most of his worse performances among minority populations were relatively early on in the primary season, in particular among older African-American voters in Southern states.

I suspect to some extent that was more of a factor of the popularity of the "Clinton brand", than any major issues with a lot of Bernie's policy positions, combined with a significantly higher name recognition factor for Clinton, as well as the "electable factor" that the Clinton campaign used against him early on.

One could certainly make a decent argument that Bernie struggled a bit as well with minority voters in the larger Metro areas of some Northern States as well (NYC & Philly spring to mind), but it does appear that as the primary season developed his numbers performed much better.

Obviously how any hypothetical 2020 contest would play out among any Democratic voter demographics would be dependent on how is running and what themes are accentuated by the respective candidates trying to cobble together a winning electoral coalition.

We have to talk about all areas. In NYC for example, Bernie's best numbers were among Asian Americans (even better than Whites), same in Michigan - Look at Dearborn. Hawaii is full of Asians & Bernie won big. In Illinois, Nevada, CO, MN, the exit poll showed Bernie winning hispanics. He won the native American votes in Washington, Alaska, Oklahoma, etc. It is just that he really did poorly among the black community.

Look at Michigan, Illinois, Ohio etc - He was getting between 30-40% of the black votes while in the South he was being decimated with 10-15% of the Black votes. He improved massively with time or it is perhaps a geographical divide (more likely).

I do think he wouldn't have many of the handicaps that he had in 2016 - Socialist, Independent, Unelectable, perception of being anti-Obama, Northern White guy with no connect to Blacks etc etc.  

In a divided field it will be hard for any candidate to unite the Black vote like Clinton did - Only Booker to some large extent can if he tries to run as Obama II. Biden definitely has the opportunity to unite the black vote, he is Obama's VP & almost a brother & Obama may tacitly endorse him (with many interviews). But Biden did worse than Edwards last time, so it's difficult to predict his support.

The only case where I see a Bernie/Warren losing is in a - Bernie vs Warren vs Booker/Biden with 2 people of the Bernie/Warren wing splitting the votes & 1 guy uniting the Southern black & establishment vote.

I didn't realize that Bernie performed better among Asian-Americans in NYC than "Anglos".... that's actually an interesting point that I haven't seen before, and quite fascinating to see not only the original source of the data, but what particular Asian-American demographics in the Big Apple were most receptive to the Bernie message. Looking forward to seeing your source material, since it slipped under my radar, most likely because I was slightly depressed that my "horse in the race" didn't win, and realized after the NY primary the deal was likely over, excepting some massive late shift dynamics in the race, which would effectively have required something of the equivalent of a Bernie landslide in Cali to maybe convince some super delegates to reconsider....

Sure, Dearborn makes sense, and I suspect (Although unfortunately we don't have many data points regarding Arab-American voters overall (Heavily Christian and to some extent Muslim) vs South Asian/ East Asian voters, etc) ) outside of some relatively isolated areas that Clinton significantly won the extremely complex and diffuse "Asian-American" vote by significant margins nationally.

I was looking at the "Asian-American" Democratic Primary vote primarily from a "West Coast" perspective, where if one were to examine certain precincts in the major cities of the West Coast (Seattle & Portland, as well as San Francisco), and not to mention some of the data that I pulled from other places such as Sugarland Texas (Fort Bend County), not to far from where I lived for four years, where overwhelmingly Asian-American precincts basically voted similarly to their Anglo neighbors, it appears that Clinton won among this Demographic overall (Although this is heavily confused since not only are many West Coast Asian-Americans registered independent, and ineligible to vote in the Democratic Primaries (Especially among younger voters) ).

That being said, Asian-American Working-Class and Middle Class populations are harder to identify, since this population frequently much more dispersed, within heavily Anglo or extremely ethnically diverse population centers. Still it's pretty much completely impossible for Bernie to win Oakland California, without a significant Black, Asian, and Latino level of support, especially since the data is well established that upper-income and wealthy Anglos in California, and the Bay Area in particular generally supported Clinton by Yuuuge margins.

So, to wrap back around to the original posters thread....

It is definitely clear that that Bernie's performance improved dramatically over the course of the primary season, with a combination of both greater name recognition, increased dialogue and outreach to a wide variety of ethnically diverse communities in America, as well as much greater receptiveness to the fundamental message of the campaign once it shifted outside of the initial IA/NH/SC and later Super Tuesday.

Bernie if he decides to run, just needs to keep being Bernie. Authentic, town hall Forums in local media markets, addressing the concerns and issues of Working Class America, and stay true to what the fundamental issues are in America, what needs to be done to fix it, and continuing dialogue with various communities from McDowell County West Virginia (Where he was at last week), to Detroit Michigan, Fresno California, not to mention small rural communities of family farmers in places like Minnesota, South Dakota, and Georgia....

He's not a politician.... not a man of rank and privilege, just a humble person who is old enough to get a ton a respect all around the block for speaking his mind, and nowhere close to the typical flip-flop politician that speaks outside of both sides of their mouths for political gain.

It's kind of odd in a weird way.... so many of the Trumpistas still believe that Trump is actually that way, but the reality is that Trump has yet to take one single principled position on any of his key "One Page triple spaced paragraph" key line item "core policy platforms".

Bernie will do just fine if he chooses to run in 2020 among a wide variety of Democratic voters, in fact if the current Trump nuclear meltdown continues, I would not be surprised to see a significant shift in party affiliation numbers come 2018 and then further into 2020, when what really Americans are seeking most is an honest political figure that is not a politician, who can effectively communicate and deliver a message that resonates with a large majority of Americans.

Bernie landslided heavily Asian Hawaii, some heavily Hispanic areas of Washington and California, but the most ignored thing was how he did with Native Americans. I think he did better with Native Alaskans than non Native Alaskans, even having Hillary fail the 15% viability in many areas, and his Alaska performance was damn good to begin with. And while it wasn't that kind of blowout landslide, he did well in Native American areas of eastern Oklahoma, northern Minnesota, and other places.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10

Login with username, password and session length


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines