Alternate US States
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:35:17 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderator: Dereich)
  Alternate US States
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23
Author Topic: Alternate US States  (Read 154610 times)
rpryor03
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,825
Bahamas


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #400 on: July 04, 2015, 05:38:49 PM »

My 2014 Senate Predictions

NE: Susan Collins (R HOLD)
MA: Ed Markey (D HOLD)
AD: Richard Hanna (R GAIN)
AY: Keith Rothfus (R GAIN)
SF: Marco Rubio (R GAIN)
TX: David Dewhurst (R HOLD)
ER: Tim Ryan (D HOLD)
CH: Lisa Madigan (D HOLD)
IL: Adam Kinzinger (R GAIN)
MI: Gary Peters (D HOLD)
LI: John Thune (R HOLD)
OR: Jim Risch (R HOLD)
PC: Anna Eshoo (D HOLD)
CS: Antonio Villaraigosa (D HOLD)
AR: Tom Cotton (R GAIN)
CO: Cory Gardner (R GAIN)
IA: Joni Ernst (R GAIN)
LA: Bill Cassidy (R GAIN)
NC: Thom Tillis (R GAIN)
WV: Shelley Moore Capito (R GAIN)
AK: Dan Sullivan (R GAIN)
Rest of holds as OTL.

Republicans: 60
Democrats: 42
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #401 on: July 18, 2015, 07:11:05 AM »

Sorry for the long break. As always at this point in the year, the vacations and the heat are turning me into a lazy slob. Tongue

Anyway, over the next days I'm going to go over all Senatorial elections from 2000 on. I don't always have names for Senators, but I'll make my best guess as to who would have won each of the new States. From 2004 onward I'll be able to track the evolution of the overall composition of the Senate.


2000



Democrats: 19 (+1)
Republicans: 15 (=)

(special elections are excluded from the tally for the sake of comparability)

Jim Jeffords wins in NE, Rick Santorum in AY, Bill Nelson in NF, Hillary Clinton in NY, Mike DeWine in OH, Richard Rush in CH, Kay Bailey Hutchinson in TX, Max Baucus in LN, and Dianne Feinstein in PC. Would Connie Mack work for SF?
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #402 on: July 20, 2015, 09:38:52 AM »
« Edited: July 20, 2015, 09:42:55 AM by Αλληλεγγύη »

2002



Democrats: 11 (-1)
Republicans: 23 (+2)

Susan Collins wins in NE, Dick Durbin in IL, Barbara Boxer in PC. In LN, Gov. John Thune narrowly defeats incumbent Byron Dorgan. I'm not sure about AD, AY, SF, CH and CS.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #403 on: July 26, 2015, 10:04:16 AM »

2004



Democrats: 14 (-1)
Republicans: 20 (+1)

Chuck Schumer wins in NY, Arlen Specter in PA (being moderate enough to prevail even in a more markedly left-wing State), George Voinovich in OH, Loretta Sanchez in CS.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #404 on: July 27, 2015, 03:33:45 AM »

And thus, we get to...


The 109th Senate (2005-2007)



Republicans: 58 (+3)
Democrats: 43 (-1)
Independents: 1 (=) - Jim Jeffords, caucusing with Democrats
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #405 on: July 27, 2015, 01:27:31 PM »

Should I continue this? I'm not sure if anyone is still following at this point. Tongue
Logged
Tayya
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 399
Sweden


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #406 on: July 27, 2015, 01:34:46 PM »

Yes. Yes, you should.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #407 on: July 28, 2015, 03:01:19 PM »

So I guess one person is following. Tongue Well, it's not very time-consuming at this point, so I might as well continue.


2006



Democrats: 22 (=)
Republicans: 11 (+2)
Independents: 1 (-1)

Patrick Leahy wins the open seat to replace Jim Jeffords after his retirement. Mike DeWine is also unseated. However, Santorum narrowly survives, lacking a sufficiently strong opponent.


The 110th Senate (2007-2009)



Republicans: 54 (+5)
Democrats: 47 (-2)
Independents: 1 (-1) - Joe Lieberman, caucusing with Democrats
Logged
Enderman
Jack Enderman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,380
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #408 on: July 28, 2015, 05:34:29 PM »

It's really cool so far!

One thing though, I would assume that people were interested in the 2010-2020 Senate elections. Though it does make sense that you would start in the '00s.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #409 on: July 29, 2015, 01:50:13 AM »

One thing though, I would assume that people were interested in the 2010-2020 Senate elections. Though it does make sense that you would start in the '00s.

Well, once I cover every past election, I can make Atlas-style predictions for 2016 races. Smiley I won't venture into 2018 or 2020 though, because trying to predict races more than two years ahead is utterly pointless IMO.
Logged
Enderman
Jack Enderman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,380
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #410 on: July 29, 2015, 07:26:53 PM »

One thing though, I would assume that people were interested in the 2010-2020 Senate elections. Though it does make sense that you would start in the '00s.

Well, once I cover every past election, I can make Atlas-style predictions for 2016 races. Smiley I won't venture into 2018 or 2020 though, because trying to predict races more than two years ahead is utterly pointless IMO.

Oh, okay, thanks!

One question, what do you think is going to be your next big project? Or is this your one big submission for us?

Also, back in 2008 when you started this (or so) did you make any timelines?
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #411 on: July 30, 2015, 01:35:24 AM »

There is one very big project I've been working on for several years now, and which is going to take me several more years before I eventually get around to posting it. It's going to be a far-reaching alternate-history timeline, but for now I can't really say more. Tongue Again, it will take a while.

As for TLs I've done before, nothing really worth reading, tbh. I had a half-finished "Confederacy wins the Civil War" project back in the days, but I've lost interest in it as I'm trying to focus on more fleshed-out storylines.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #412 on: July 30, 2015, 03:09:46 AM »

2008



Democrats: 21 (+1)
Republicans: 13 (=)

Boy, now that's what I call a landslide! If Obama's Senate wave was impressive on its own with 8 seats gained, here it would net the Dems 10 more seats (and control of the Senate, which they failed to achieve in 2006). Kirsten Gilibrand wins the open seat in AD, Ron Klint narrowly unseats an incumbent in AY, DWS easily takes the SF seat, and Antonio Villaraigosa claims CS's second seat for the Democrats. However, Susan Collins and John Thune resist the Democratic tide respectively in NE and LN.


The 111th Senate (2009-2011)



Democrats: 57 (=)
Republicans: 44 (+3)
Independents: 1 (-1) - Joe Lieberman, caucusing with Democrats

Here, Democrats fall four seats short of the 62 votes needed to override a filibuster, which means that, unless Reid is willing to go nuclear, Obama would have a very hard time enacting his agenda (even after Specter switches to the Dems). So, in short, Thank God I'm not in charge of drawing State boundaries. Tongue
Logged
hurricanehink
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 607
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #413 on: July 30, 2015, 09:55:03 AM »

But Obama wouldn't be president here! You have Rush and Madigan as Illinois's senators, so Obama never got to run in 04 (which wouldn't have been an election year anyway for Chicago). And it's not like he could've run in 2002. He had just lost a congressional campaign in 2000 and had to run for state senate re-election in 2002. I guess that makes for an easy Hillary win then? I'm not gonna make you speculate about the primaries though Tongue
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #414 on: July 30, 2015, 10:29:49 AM »

But Obama wouldn't be president here! You have Rush and Madigan as Illinois's senators, so Obama never got to run in 04 (which wouldn't have been an election year anyway for Chicago). And it's not like he could've run in 2002. He had just lost a congressional campaign in 2000 and had to run for state senate re-election in 2002. I guess that makes for an easy Hillary win then? I'm not gonna make you speculate about the primaries though Tongue

Yeah, sorry, I really can't can't think that far in the implications of these State changes. Tongue For the sake of simplicity, let's say Obama still got elected in 2002 somehow.
Logged
hurricanehink
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 607
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #415 on: July 30, 2015, 07:59:38 PM »

But Obama wouldn't be president here! You have Rush and Madigan as Illinois's senators, so Obama never got to run in 04 (which wouldn't have been an election year anyway for Chicago). And it's not like he could've run in 2002. He had just lost a congressional campaign in 2000 and had to run for state senate re-election in 2002. I guess that makes for an easy Hillary win then? I'm not gonna make you speculate about the primaries though Tongue

Yeah, sorry, I really can't can't think that far in the implications of these State changes. Tongue For the sake of simplicity, let's say Obama still got elected in 2002 somehow.
My mistake actually. Rush beat Obama in 2000, but if he was senator, Obama would've won in 2000. Meaning he could've primaried Rush in 2002 for senate (a mirror of ITL 2000) and won! Sorry to be pedantic about one particular person, but I really enjoy this timeline and the prospect of these additional states. Keep it up Smiley
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #416 on: July 31, 2015, 01:49:27 AM »

But Obama wouldn't be president here! You have Rush and Madigan as Illinois's senators, so Obama never got to run in 04 (which wouldn't have been an election year anyway for Chicago). And it's not like he could've run in 2002. He had just lost a congressional campaign in 2000 and had to run for state senate re-election in 2002. I guess that makes for an easy Hillary win then? I'm not gonna make you speculate about the primaries though Tongue

Yeah, sorry, I really can't can't think that far in the implications of these State changes. Tongue For the sake of simplicity, let's say Obama still got elected in 2002 somehow.
My mistake actually. Rush beat Obama in 2000, but if he was senator, Obama would've won in 2000. Meaning he could've primaried Rush in 2002 for senate (a mirror of ITL 2000) and won! Sorry to be pedantic about one particular person, but I really enjoy this timeline and the prospect of these additional states. Keep it up Smiley

No problem! Smiley It's actually pretty fun to think of all the butterflies that might result from reshuffling State borders, and it's likely that some politicians' careers would be hindered while others' would be favored in an almost random way.

As for Chicago, my idea was that Bobby Rush was first elected to the Senate in 2000, and subsequently reelected in 2006 and 2012 (hence why I indicated him as a Class-1 Senator). Obama, meanwhile, was elected in 2002 and served a full term in the Senate before running for President. Madigan would have run for the seat he left open in 2008 and win easily with his coattails.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #417 on: August 02, 2015, 01:25:28 PM »
« Edited: August 03, 2015, 01:54:17 AM by Αλληλεγγύη »

2010



Democrats: 10 (=)
Republicans: 23 (=)
Write-In: 1 (=)

Republicans gain only 5 seats instead of 6, but that's only because they had overachieved in 2004 compared to RL results. This is still very much a landslide. In RG, John Cornyn unseats a longtime (and presumably Blue Dog-type) Dem incumbent amid very low Hispanic turnout. Presumably a similar thing happens in California with the last remnants of old-style Democratic populism. Loretta Sanchez face a serious challenge but hangs on, while Patty Murray resists much more easily than IRL. The NV race sees no change. Mark Kirk easily manages to fill the Republican open seat in IL. Rob Portman cruises in Ohio, but Sherrod Brown resists the wave in solidly Democratic ER. There's also obviously no pickup opportunity for the GOP in New York, but Johnson and Coats' wins in WI and IN are even wider than IRL as a result of the border shifts. Finally, in Pennsylvania, Joe Sestak successfully primaries Republican-turned-Democrat Arlen Specter and proceeds to win a close race against Pat Toomey (sorry, Phil Tongue).


The 112th Senate (2011-2013)



Democrats: 52 (+1)
Republicans: 49 (+2)
Independents: 1 (-1) - Joe Lieberman, caucusing with Democrats

Note that Massachusetts is now purple because Brown still won the 2010 special election. This evens out with Specter's party switch and subsequent replacement with Sestak. Democrats still manage to keep control of the Senate, albeit only by only 4 seats instead of 6. The legislature would go largely as IRL.
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,763
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #418 on: August 02, 2015, 08:11:20 PM »

2010



Democrats: 10 (=)
Republicans: 23 (=)
Write-In: 1 (=)

Republicans gain only 5 seats instead of 6, but that's only because they had overachieved in 2004 compared to RL results. This is still very much a landslide. In RG, John Cornyn unseats a longtime (and presumably Blue Dog-type) Dem incumbent amid very low Hispanic turnout. Presumably a similar thing happens in California with the last remnants of old-style Democratic populism. Loretta Sanchez face a serious challenge but hangs on, while Patty Murray resists much more easily than IRL. The NV race sees no change. Mark Kirk easily manages to fill the Republican open seat in IL. Rob Portman cruises in Ohio, but Sherrod Brown resists the wave in solidly Democratic ER. There's also obviously no pickup opportunity for the GOP in New York, but Johnson and Ellsworth's wins in WI and IN are even wider than IRL as a result of the border shifts. Finally, in Pennsylvania, Joe Sestak successfully primaries Republican-turned-Democrat Arlen Specter and proceeds to win a close race against Pat Toomey (sorry, Phil Tongue).


The 112th Senate (2011-2013)



Democrats: 52 (+1)
Republicans: 49 (+2)
Independents: 1 (-1) - Joe Lieberman, caucusing with Democrats

Note that Massachusetts is now purple because Brown still won the 2010 special election. This evens out with Specter's party switch and subsequent replacement with Sestak. Democrats still manage to keep control of the Senate, albeit only by only 4 seats instead of 6. The legislature would go largely as IRL.

Coats landslide Ellsworth IRL. Taking off the Democrat district would only make that landslide worse ITTL
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #419 on: August 03, 2015, 01:53:35 AM »

Yeah, that's what I meant. I just messed up the names. Tongue
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #420 on: August 05, 2015, 06:00:11 AM »

2012



Democrats: 22 (-1)
Republicans: 11 (+3)
Independent: 1 (-1)

Lots of seats changing hands, but in the end Democratic and Republican gains cancel out each other and produce no real change in the overall balance of power. There's no trouble for Democratic incumbents in NY (Rangel), PA (Schwartz), MI (Stabenow) and WA (Wyden). Same for Santorum in AY, who becomes a four-termer (congrats, Phil! Wink) and for other Republicans in TX, JF, NV and CA. Jon Tester manages to keep Lincoln in the Democratic fold following Max Baucus' retirement, by narrowly edging out the uncharismatic Rick Berg. On the other hand, Democrats are unable to hold on their upset gain in Ohio, allowing Mike DeWine to reclaim his old seat. Despite Indiana being even more Republican than IRL, Donnelly still manages to edge out Mourdock by about 2 points. In Rio Grande, the retirement of the Republican incumbent (first elected in 1994) allows rising star San Antonio mayor (and Dem convention keynote speaker) Julian Castro to cruise to victory. However, these Democratic gains are negated by incumbent two-term Governor Charlie Crist's victory in SF. Crist, after dropping out of the GOP primary and running as an independent, managed to narrowly defeat his Democratic opponent after most Republican votes converged on him. However, as a sitting Senator, he has opted to rejoin the Republican caucus.


The 113th Senate (2013-2015)



Democrats: 53 (-2)
Republicans: 49 (+4)

You already know the deal for this one.

Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #421 on: August 13, 2015, 04:13:45 PM »
« Edited: August 13, 2015, 04:16:09 PM by Αλληλεγγύη »

Sorry it took so long. Hope our resident Republicans will enjoy this entry. Wink


2014



Democrats: 12 (+1)
Republicans: 22 (=)

Republicans gain 9 seats, just as IRL. These Republican gains would be a bit less Western and more Midwestern, as Rounds and Daines would stay out, but instead Illinois and Allegheny would supply two more Republican Senators. I'll follow RPryor and fill these seats with Adam Kinzinger and Keith Rothfus. On the other hand, I kept Adirondack and South Florida in Democratic hands, as I think the incumbents there are strong enough to survive in lean-D States, similarly to how Shaheen survived in NH. Still, it was very close, especially in South Florida. Most Republican incumbents, such as Dewhurst, Collins, Thune and Risch, are easily reelected - as are Democrats Ryan, Madigan and Villaraigosa. In Pacific, Barbara Boxer would probably renounce to seeking another term, leaving room for a crowded Democratic primary. My guess is that Gavin Newsom would be favored if he ran, but he might prefer to save himself for the Governor's office instead. In MA, Ed Markey easily wins a full term as John Kerry's successor.


The 114th Senate (2015-2017)



Democrats: 44 (-2)
Republicans: 58 (+4)

The GOP Senatorial majority would be as wide as the Democrats' was at the beginning of Obama's term, quite a symbolic rebuttal for the President. That still makes them 4 seats away from a filibuster-proof majority, but with the help of a few Blue Dogs (let's see... Manchin, Donnelly, and pick two among Warner, Kaine, Villaraigosa, McCaskill, Nelson and Gilibrand). If it holds together, the GOP might be able to get some major bills passed, although Obama could still end up vetoing them. In addition, they would only need 11 Democrats (or 10, depending on how you interpret the 2/3 clause) in order to sabotage the Iran deal, instead of 13. The battle might be quite close, although it really depends from who the remaining Democratic Senators are.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #422 on: August 14, 2015, 07:10:28 AM »

Any thoughts?

2016 predictions coming next.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #423 on: August 18, 2015, 07:46:27 AM »

2016 Senate Predictions



In their luckiest scenario, Democrats could potentially take as many as 9 seats to the GOP (although some of them will almost certainly fall back into the safe column as the campaign draws near). On a particularly good day, Republicans could keep all their 2010 gains and add Colorado and Nevada. The most likely outcome however should be D+1 or D+2.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #424 on: August 19, 2015, 04:27:20 AM »

Now then, all we have left is Governors' elections. Should I bother with that, or is it time to end this thread? It doesn't seem to be getting much interest anymore.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.118 seconds with 12 queries.