Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 02, 2014, 04:30:12 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Election What-ifs? (Moderators: Bacon King, Dallasfan65)
| | |-+  Alternate US States
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 Print
Author Topic: Alternate US States  (Read 32324 times)
Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30642
France


View Profile
« Reply #75 on: May 20, 2010, 05:24:02 am »
Ignore

California del Sur and Big Sky could really use better names.

I still accept suggestions. Tongue


Can I request that metro atlanta be it's own state? It would be interesting to see who won it in 2008? A growing minority population coupled with conservative white suburbs would make it close for sure.

Well, don't know if it's a good idea. After all, GA had only 13 EVs, which is a bit low for a split. Plus, I'd be unable to precisely define Atlanta metro area, at least not before some research. But if you want, once I have finished my state-byState overview I can do that just for fun.



Indiana


Only five counties are taken away to Indiana : all those which are included in the Chicago Combined Statistical Area, and thus will be included to the Chicago State. However, those five cunties would reveal to have a big impact on Indiana's politics. They would deprive Obama of his narrow win in this State (even though McCain would only win barely too). In 2000 and 2004, Bush could easily have won by more than 60%. They would also cause Indiana to lose one seat, and thus one EV.
Indianapolis would remain the State's capital.

IN county map :


John McCain : 1,215,161 (50.50%) => 10 EVs
Barack Obama : 1,159,633 (48.19%)
Others : 31,535 (1.31%)


LNPI : -9.57 => likely rep.
Indiana would have difficulties to go democrat, even if very favorable circumstances like 2008. It seems that LaPorte and Porter county played an important role in the 2008 results, so that their loss is a disadvantage for democrats. However, there are a few elements that should lead us to relativize this comment. The RL Indiana's LNPI was 6.23, which means it still was a "likely rep" State. This 3-points trend towards the GOP can thus be considered as quite marginal, and while Obama was lucky to win the State in 2008 and would have been unlucky to loose it in this scenario, it wouldn't changed the Electoral College structure. In a situation of tie Indiana would go republican anywyas, and by comparable margins. Thus, while we have made Indiana even more difficult to carry for democrats, it couldn't help republicans when it's useful, ie in close elections. Plus, let's not forget that with its Nothwestern counties, IN also loses an electoral vote, which means the final result of this modification is a loss of one EV for republicans. Still, with the loss of AY, OH and now IN, Obama's victory in the Electoral College is clearly narrowing...
« Last Edit: May 20, 2010, 05:33:45 am by Antonio V »Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30642
France


View Profile
« Reply #76 on: May 21, 2010, 11:45:52 am »
Ignore

Well, I'm quite disappointed to see there is absoutely no comment about the new states themselves, their politics and if they fit with what you expected. IMO, Midwest is a quite interesting region regarding the State borders modifications...
Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
PASOK Leader Hashemite
Hashemite
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31366
South Africa



View Profile WWW
« Reply #77 on: May 21, 2010, 11:53:33 am »
Ignore

Gary (aka Lake County, aka Chicago-in-Indiana) played a very large part in turning Indiana red in 2008 (as did Indianapolis).
Logged

izixs
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 396
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.31, S: -6.51

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #78 on: May 21, 2010, 04:17:51 pm »
Ignore

I'm kind of curious how these splits would change the long term dynamics of these areas. For instance, if new Ohio ends up constantly electing republican governors for a few years and Erie keeps electing democratic one's, and then the economy collapses or one or both end up becoming corrupt one party states, how quickly might the voting preferences of the people change to counter this? And would such drifts reflect in the presidential results? If at all of course. You could end up with a Kentucky situation with 600,000 more registered Democrats whom lean republican on a national level but are more friendly to local dems.
Logged

I'll come up with one later.
bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13735
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

View Profile
« Reply #79 on: May 21, 2010, 04:31:21 pm »
Ignore

This is a pretty cool idea, but I feel obligated to nitpick your borders in the PNW. It seems you arbitrarily cut through the middle of Washington.

The Cascade mountains are universally accepted as the "border" between Western and Eastern Washington. I know that for a lot of states the borders between regions may be ambiguous, but this isn't the case in Washington. Everybody agrees the Cascades are the borders.

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Westernwashington.PNG

All of the counties in white should be in Big Sky, while the red should remain as Washington.
Logged

Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)
Vazdul
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4409
United States


View Profile
« Reply #80 on: May 21, 2010, 06:21:03 pm »
Ignore

Well, I'm quite disappointed to see there is absoutely no comment about the new states themselves, their politics and if they fit with what you expected. IMO, Midwest is a quite interesting region regarding the State borders modifications...

Part of the problem there is that you've essentially gerrymandered the state boundaries, so there are very few surprises. Everything is going as expected.
Logged

Seriously, it was time to change back to the real avatar.
Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30642
France


View Profile
« Reply #81 on: May 24, 2010, 01:39:55 pm »
Ignore

Well, I'm quite disappointed to see there is absoutely no comment about the new states themselves, their politics and if they fit with what you expected. IMO, Midwest is a quite interesting region regarding the State borders modifications...

Part of the problem there is that you've essentially gerrymandered the state boundaries, so there are very few surprises. Everything is going as expected.

Gerrymandered ? Roll Eyes
Every State change is based on intra-state regions, at least taking into account the State's size. If what you meant is that the new states created are more politically characterized, fair enough, but how to avoid it ? If you had to split NY in two States, wouldn't you do one State with NYC metro and the other with the upstate ? If you choose to split a state in a way which will make two new similar states, then you'd have to gerrymander.
And BTW, I perfectly know it's possible to give a kind of prediction of how the State will go. however, you can only make an aproximative prediction. You can imagine if a stae will be safe dem/rep or if he'll be close, but not precisely how much it will be dem/rep, if it will be more or less democratic than the national margin, etc. For example, I expected Allegheny to be far closer, and Indiana to remain democrat. And even now, would you be able to say precisely if Obama will win California above the national margin ? If Rio Grande will be a democratic stronghold, or just a dem-leaning State ? If you do, then you are far better than me.

To bgwah : you are right indeed, and I will try to correct this as soon as possible, as I realized that it was quite unfair. However, as I saw there, there is also a "central Washington" located between my separation line and yours. The reason why I chose to let central Washington to WA is because I didn't want to make it too small, and to make BS too big in terms of population. Anyways, I now think it is possible to find an arangement about this line. I'll start to work on it later.

And now, let's come back to another State.



Chicago


Corresponding to the biggest extension of Chicago Metropolitan area, CH would obviously be dominated by its homonymous city (and of course capital). This domination would play a determinating role in the State's politics, as the votes coming from Cook County represented half of its total votes in 2008. As a result, CH is an overwhelmingly democratic State, and would have been safe since decades. The 2008 results are pretty similar to those of NY (which isn't surprising considering their demographical similarity), though slightly closer.

CH county map :


Barack Obama : 2,720,995 (66.93%) => 16 EVs
John McCain : 1,296,268 (31.88%)
Others : 48,186 (1.19%)


LNPI : +27.78 => dem stronghold.
Obviously, and all the more that "home State effect" would play even better there, Obama would carry Chicago by an overwhelming margin, getting more than two thirds of the total vote. And obviously again, Cook county would make it impossible for any Republican to carry this State. Just immagine : in a situation of tie in the State, McCain would've carried every single county except Cook, and would be below 60% only in Cook, Will, DeKalb, Lake (IL), LaPorte, Lake (IN) and Kenosha counties. Despite that, Obama would still carry Cook county with 58.69% of the votes. The big question now is how the remaining part of Illinois will vote (perhaps you know that, Vazdul Wink), in order to determine which party will actually benefit to the split. Indeed, the inclusion of Chicago in Illinois IRL had secured it for democrats, and the separation with the rest of Illinois, while creating this democratic stronghold, may at last give "true" Illinois to the republicans.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2010, 01:45:34 pm by Antonio V »Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13832
Jamaica


View Profile
« Reply #82 on: May 24, 2010, 02:08:15 pm »
Ignore

Well, I'm quite disappointed to see there is absoutely no comment about the new states themselves, their politics and if they fit with what you expected. IMO, Midwest is a quite interesting region regarding the State borders modifications...

Sometimes people are too lazy to make comments.
Don't worry, people have been reading this.
Logged



23:19   Xahar   you're literally a white dude Mechaman
Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)
Vazdul
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4409
United States


View Profile
« Reply #83 on: May 24, 2010, 10:41:30 pm »
Ignore

Well, I'm quite disappointed to see there is absoutely no comment about the new states themselves, their politics and if they fit with what you expected. IMO, Midwest is a quite interesting region regarding the State borders modifications...

Part of the problem there is that you've essentially gerrymandered the state boundaries, so there are very few surprises. Everything is going as expected.

Gerrymandered ? Roll Eyes
Every State change is based on intra-state regions, at least taking into account the State's size. If what you meant is that the new states created are more politically characterized, fair enough, but how to avoid it ? If you had to split NY in two States, wouldn't you do one State with NYC metro and the other with the upstate ? If you choose to split a state in a way which will make two new similar states, then you'd have to gerrymander.
And BTW, I perfectly know it's possible to give a kind of prediction of how the State will go. however, you can only make an aproximative prediction. You can imagine if a stae will be safe dem/rep or if he'll be close, but not precisely how much it will be dem/rep, if it will be more or less democratic than the national margin, etc. For example, I expected Allegheny to be far closer, and Indiana to remain democrat. And even now, would you be able to say precisely if Obama will win California above the national margin ? If Rio Grande will be a democratic stronghold, or just a dem-leaning State ? If you do, then you are far better than me.

To bgwah : you are right indeed, and I will try to correct this as soon as possible, as I realized that it was quite unfair. However, as I saw there, there is also a "central Washington" located between my separation line and yours. The reason why I chose to let central Washington to WA is because I didn't want to make it too small, and to make BS too big in terms of population. Anyways, I now think it is possible to find an arangement about this line. I'll start to work on it later.

And now, let's come back to another State.



Chicago


Corresponding to the biggest extension of Chicago Metropolitan area, CH would obviously be dominated by its homonymous city (and of course capital). This domination would play a determinating role in the State's politics, as the votes coming from Cook County represented half of its total votes in 2008. As a result, CH is an overwhelmingly democratic State, and would have been safe since decades. The 2008 results are pretty similar to those of NY (which isn't surprising considering their demographical similarity), though slightly closer.

CH county map :


Barack Obama : 2,720,995 (66.93%) => 16 EVs
John McCain : 1,296,268 (31.88%)
Others : 48,186 (1.19%)


LNPI : +27.78 => dem stronghold.
Obviously, and all the more that "home State effect" would play even better there, Obama would carry Chicago by an overwhelming margin, getting more than two thirds of the total vote. And obviously again, Cook county would make it impossible for any Republican to carry this State. Just immagine : in a situation of tie in the State, McCain would've carried every single county except Cook, and would be below 60% only in Cook, Will, DeKalb, Lake (IL), LaPorte, Lake (IN) and Kenosha counties. Despite that, Obama would still carry Cook county with 58.69% of the votes. The big question now is how the remaining part of Illinois will vote (perhaps you know that, Vazdul Wink), in order to determine which party will actually benefit to the split. Indeed, the inclusion of Chicago in Illinois IRL had secured it for democrats, and the separation with the rest of Illinois, while creating this democratic stronghold, may at last give "true" Illinois to the republicans.

Perhaps the use of the word "gerrymandered" was a bit harsh, but:

1. You yourself have admitted to taking politics into consideration when determining where to draw the state boundaries, and
2. Like it or not, the new states that have resulted from your divisions are much more polarized than their RL counterparts.

Allegheny was not a very big surprise for me- it is a traditionally Democratic state that recently has seen rapid shifts toward the GOP, similarly to West Virginia.

Likewise, Indiana was no shocker either. RL Indiana voted for Obama only narrowly, and only because of his huge margins in the Chicago Metro area. Take that area out, and you're left with a very Republican state indeed.

I will admit that the most interesting states are yet to come, particularly Rio Grande, Nevada, and California. It looks as though Rio Grande might have enough of Republican central Texas to make things interesting. You've given Nevada some of California's most Republican areas, which could mean a competetive state becomes a Republican-leaning state. California looks fairly Republican to me, but I still think the results will be pretty interesting.

As for my prediction for the remainder of Illinois (since you called me out on it Wink ), I predict that Obama carried it, but that this result is an anomaly caused by a combination of the Favorite Son Factor and a favorable year for Democrats. In most elections, Illinois would be classed as Likely Republican.
Logged

Seriously, it was time to change back to the real avatar.
Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30642
France


View Profile
« Reply #84 on: May 25, 2010, 01:16:33 am »
Ignore

Indeed, the States I created are more politically polarized, but how to avoid it ? This political polarization is a direct consequence of demograhic/geographic factors (contrast between NYC and the Upstate, contrast between Philadelphia and Pittsburg's Pennsilvania...). And anyways, how is creating States which are politically coherent "gerrymandering" ? To me, it seems exactly the contrary : trying to avoid mixing areas which have nothing to do which one another, and make States the most homogeneous possible.

But obviously you are right that States have become quite easier to predict than IRL. And to be honest Wink :

You are right about Illinois.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2010, 01:18:17 am by Antonio V »Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)
Vazdul
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4409
United States


View Profile
« Reply #85 on: May 25, 2010, 12:23:01 pm »
Ignore

As I said above, "gerrymandering" was probably not the best choice of words. I was merely trying to get the point across that the states are more polarized, and for that reason there haven't been any real surprises thus far. I also agree with you that political polarization is rather unavoidable when using your other criteria for dividing the states.
Logged

Seriously, it was time to change back to the real avatar.
Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30642
France


View Profile
« Reply #86 on: May 29, 2010, 06:18:42 am »
Ignore

Illinois


An Illinois without Chicago will be a totally different Illinois. Indeed, the loss of its biggest city will let the State with less than one third of its original Representative seats, 6 out of 19. A far less populouss Illinois thus, despite keeping most of its territory : as a result, it becomes smaller than Indiana in terms of population, though remaining bigger in terms of area. Politically, the new Illinois would reveal to be a swing State in 2008, even though as Vazdul pointed out, Obama's win here is only due to a combination of his nationwide margin and the home State effect.
Springfield could remain its capital.

IL county map :


Barack Obama : 958,595 (50.69%) => 8 EVs
John McCain : 897,007 (47.44%)
Others : 35,354 (1.87%)


LNPI : -4.01 => lean rep.
So far, Illinois is the first new State which would go to Obama but by a margin inferior to the national one. As a result, this State is deemed as republican even though Obama won it by an absolute majority. In terms of margin, the RL States more similar to it are Ohio and Florida. Plus, there is a thing which further complicates the analysis of this State : if we assume that home State effect benefits uniformly to the candidate in the entire State, then it means that Obama will doo far more poorly in Illinois (considering that his home State would be Chicago). However, how to estimate home State effect ? It may play more or less well depending to candidates (In 1972 for example, we can consider that it benefitted much more to McGovern than to Nixon). thus, Illinois remains a kind of enigma. Anyways, the result of the split will be a loss of 6 EVs for dems and a gain of 8 for reps.
Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)
Vazdul
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4409
United States


View Profile
« Reply #87 on: May 29, 2010, 11:14:36 am »
Ignore

These new states would also completely change the dynamics of Presidential campaigning. For example, with Illinois being a Republican-leaning state where Obama has a regional advantage, both parties would undoubtedly campaign harder to try to win the state. The true effect of TTL's Illinois' status as a swing state in 2008 and the resulting change of campaign strategy is difficult to determine, but it is entirely feasible for this version of Illinois to be a McCain state.
Logged

Seriously, it was time to change back to the real avatar.
Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30642
France


View Profile
« Reply #88 on: June 02, 2010, 12:53:49 pm »
Ignore

These new states would also completely change the dynamics of Presidential campaigning. For example, with Illinois being a Republican-leaning state where Obama has a regional advantage, both parties would undoubtedly campaign harder to try to win the state. The true effect of TTL's Illinois' status as a swing state in 2008 and the resulting change of campaign strategy is difficult to determine, but it is entirely feasible for this version of Illinois to be a McCain state.

Well, of course it could have been a McCain State in 2008, but when you look at Obama's campaign strategy in 2008, you precisely notice that it was a quite offensive one, focused on swing or even lean-McCain States (CO, FL, NC, IN...) instead of securing his own dem-leaning States (PA, MN, MI...). So if we assume that he keeps this behaviour (and all the more that the polarization will make the few Swing States left even more important), I'd guess he would have won there.
Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30642
France


View Profile
« Reply #89 on: June 04, 2010, 01:21:30 am »
Ignore

Sorry for the delay, I'm gonna do Wisconsin today.
Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30642
France


View Profile
« Reply #90 on: June 04, 2010, 05:52:54 am »
Ignore

Wisconsin


The addition of the Western part of Michigan and the removal of Kenosha county from Wisconsin would cause no major change in the State's politics, becoming only slightly more republican. The only important consequence of this modification being to add an Electoral vote to Wisconsin (despite Michigan wouldn't lose any), which could be seen as a good thing for democrats.
Madison would without any doubt remain its capital.

WI county map :


Barack Obama : 1,709,632 (55.95%) => 11 EVs
John McCain : 1,300,431 (42.56%)
Others : 45,555 (1.49%)


LNPI : +6.13 => likely dem.
The change in the State's LNPI, of only 1/2 point toward the GOP, is totally irrelevant. Despite a significative geographic change, the new Wisconsin is pretty much the same of the old Wisconsin. As I said above, the result is that democrats gain one EV. Just for fun's sake, here are the results in the former Michigan peninsula : Obama 51.83%, McCain 46.13%, Others 2.04%.
Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)
Vazdul
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4409
United States


View Profile
« Reply #91 on: June 04, 2010, 11:57:07 am »
Ignore

2004 results for Wisconsin:

John Kerry (D): 1,521,285
George W. Bush (R): 1,520,809
Others: 30,430

2000 results for Wisconsin:
George W. Bush (R): 1,278,644
Al Gore (D): 1,274,349
Others: 120,720
« Last Edit: June 10, 2010, 07:49:35 am by Vazdul »Logged

Seriously, it was time to change back to the real avatar.
Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30642
France


View Profile
« Reply #92 on: June 08, 2010, 02:33:25 pm »
Ignore

Michigan


Reciprocally to Wisconsin, the loss of Western Michigan would make what remains just slightly more democrat. The only interesting thing with all this is that, despite losing one third of its territory, the State keeps almost the same population, and the same number of EVs. As a result, the new Michigan is significantly more densely populated.
Lansing would remain its capital.

MI county map :


Barack Obama : 2,794,322 (57.51%) => 17 EVs
John McCain : 1,978,992 (40.73%)
Others : 85,890 (1.77%)


LNPI : +9.52 => likely dem.
The change here is even more irrelevant than for Wisconsin (0.34 points toward democrats to be precise), so nothing interesting there. Eventually, the whole Michigan/Wisconsin thing proved to be a mere geographical adjustment without any consequence, except Wisconsin's gain of 1 EV.
Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)
Vazdul
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4409
United States


View Profile
« Reply #93 on: June 08, 2010, 09:23:06 pm »
Ignore

I disagree with you about the lack of consequences for the alteration of Michigan and Wisconsin. Wisconsin, already a battleground state in close elections, becomes an even greater battlefield with the addition of the Upper Peninsula, with one more electoral vote at stake to boot. In case you didn't notice, that's a 476 vote margin for Kerry in 2004, and a swing to Bush in 2000.

Michigan, on the other hand, is a Democratic-leaning battleground state that becomes slightly more Democratic with the removal of the Upper Peninsula.

There are also consequences for Congressional races. With these boundaries, Bart Stupak likely represents the new district in Wisconsin, but Michigan still has the same number of districts as in RL. It's likely that Stupak's district would be replaced with a significantly more Republican district in Northern Michigan.
Logged

Seriously, it was time to change back to the real avatar.
Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30642
France


View Profile
« Reply #94 on: June 09, 2010, 05:14:43 am »
Ignore

I disagree with you about the lack of consequences for the alteration of Michigan and Wisconsin. Wisconsin, already a battleground state in close elections, becomes an even greater battlefield with the addition of the Upper Peninsula, with one more electoral vote at stake to boot. In case you didn't notice, that's a 476 vote margin for Kerry in 2004, and a swing to Bush in 2000.

Michigan, on the other hand, is a Democratic-leaning battleground state that becomes slightly more Democratic with the removal of the Upper Peninsula.

There are also consequences for Congressional races. With these boundaries, Bart Stupak likely represents the new district in Wisconsin, but Michigan still has the same number of districts as in RL. It's likely that Stupak's district would be replaced with a significantly more Republican district in Northern Michigan.

Yes, of course you are right about congressional districts. My comment was mainly aimed to the 2008 Presidential election, for which the change  was pretty irrelevant. As for previous Presidential elections, it would inteed have made WI extremely close in 2000 and 2004 (BTW, I'd be glad if you could add the number of "others" votes in 2000 and 2004, so that we could get the voting percentages and thus the LNPI). However, consider that, in 2000, Wisconsin was already a Bush-leaning State (Gore barely carried it), and to the contrary in 2004 it was already 3 points more democratic than the country. So in terms of EV structure the new Wisconsin is alway in the same category as the old one.

BTW, I guess than when my State-by-State tour will be finished, I will try to draw what the 2002-2012 Congressional districts for the new states could be. Might be interesting. Smiley
« Last Edit: June 09, 2010, 05:16:50 am by Antonio V »Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)
Vazdul
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4409
United States


View Profile
« Reply #95 on: June 10, 2010, 07:50:48 am »
Ignore

I edited the above post to include "others" votes for Wisconsin in 2000 and 2004.
Logged

Seriously, it was time to change back to the real avatar.
Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30642
France


View Profile
« Reply #96 on: June 10, 2010, 11:07:42 am »
Ignore

So for 2004, we have :

Kerry : 49.51%
Bush : 49.50%
Others : 0.99%

LNPI : +2.48 => lean dem
RL Wisconsin's LNPI was +2.84, so it's a 0.36 pts swing toward the GOP


As for 2000 :

Gore : 47.82%
Bush : 47.66%
Others : 4.52%

LNPI : -0.36 => lean rep
RL Wisconsin's LNPI was -0.3, so it's a 0.06 pts swing toward the GOP


Well, as you can see, the change in Wisconsin was even more irrelevant in previous presidential elections. Wink Of course, its relevance was reinforced by Wisonsin's "swing state" status in 2000 and 2004, but in both elections WI eventually kept the same status (repectively lean rep and lean dem.
Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Niemeyerite
JulioMadrid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6546
Spain


View Profile
« Reply #97 on: June 10, 2010, 02:28:08 pm »
Ignore

Those states are, by far, better than the real ones.
Logged

My evolution (by The Political Matrix):
E: -6.06 -> -6.97 -> -6.97 -> -8.13 -> -7.29 -> -8.26 -> -8.65 -> -7.03
S: -6.78 -> -6.09 -> -7.30 -> -7.13 -> -8.09 -> -8.35 -> -9.04 -> -8.61
Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)
Vazdul
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4409
United States


View Profile
« Reply #98 on: June 10, 2010, 03:53:11 pm »
Ignore

I've decided to spotlight some interesting elections from past years. I'll start with:

1988 Results for Chicago:
George H. W. Bush (R): 1,614,245 (49.72%)
Michael Dukakis (D): 1,607,587 (49.51%)
Others: 24,852 (0.77%)
Logged

Seriously, it was time to change back to the real avatar.
Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30642
France


View Profile
« Reply #99 on: June 11, 2010, 04:01:50 am »
Ignore

I've decided to spotlight some interesting elections from past years. I'll start with:

1988 Results for Chicago:
George H. W. Bush (R): 1,614,245 (49.72%)
Michael Dukakis (D): 1,607,587 (49.51%)
Others: 24,852 (0.77%)

What... Bush carried Chicago ?!? How comes ? Huh
Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines