Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 01, 2014, 07:18:09 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2012 Elections
| | |-+  2012 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls (Moderators: Tender Branson, Sheriff Buford TX Justice)
| | | |-+  TX-PPP: Obama tied with Palin/Perry, all other Republicans ahead
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: TX-PPP: Obama tied with Palin/Perry, all other Republicans ahead  (Read 3276 times)
Invisible Obama
DrScholl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3535
United States



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: January 22, 2011, 04:49:59 pm »
Ignore

Palin is a non-starter. Being tied in Texas at this stage is not. 2012 is not going to be good for Republicans if she's the nominee (and she will be).
Logged
America™
All For America
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 93
United States


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: January 22, 2011, 04:57:07 pm »
Ignore

Texas is clearly a Democratic state in 2012. [/pbrower2a]

Oh, right.
What are you trying to say?

i think that the democrats should at least attempt in winning Texas. First, it is an electoral goldmine. Second, the state has a democratic history. I believe that since the formation of the two party system in 1856, the state has voted Democratic 24 times, Republican 12 times, and Third Party once (1860).

Obama can campaign here as many times as he want, it still isn't going to swing the state his way.

If Obama makes an effort to win Texas, either
A) Texas is for Obama what Pennsylvania was for Mccain
or
B) Obama has so much campaign money that he has nowhere else to spend it.
or
C) Sarah Palin is running

This. Choice A is the most possible scenario. Palin as the nominee would be the GOP waving the white flag until 2016.
Logged
IDS Judicial Overlord PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22485
United States


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: January 22, 2011, 07:31:45 pm »
Ignore

Obama can campaign here as many times as he want, it still isn't going to swing the state his way.

What does Obama have that Jimmy Carter, Lyndon  Johnson, Jack Kennedy, Harry Truman, FDR, John Davis, James Cox, Woodrow Wilson, William Jennings Bryant, Alton Parker, Grover Cleveland, Winfield Hancock, Samuel Tilden, Horace Greeley and James Buchanan didn't?


A hard right-wing electorate that has dominated Texas politics for years?

     Indeed, Texas has swung dramatically from its Democratic days. If we are to assume that Obama would be competitive there today due to the state's history of voting for Democrats, then by the same logic Vermont must also be competitive for the Republicans.
Logged

freepcrusher
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2296
United States


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: January 22, 2011, 10:14:19 pm »
Ignore

Indeed, Texas has swung dramatically from its Democratic days. If we are to assume that Obama would be competitive there today due to the state's history of voting for Democrats, then by the same logic Vermont must also be competitive for the Republicans.
[/quote]

The reason why Vermont doesn't vote republican anymore is because the national party has written them off. If the party made it an effort to reason with them, Vermont could vote republican.

Remember that old man Bush, Reagan, Ford, Nixon, Eisenhower, Dewey, Wilkie, Landon, Hoover, Coolidge, Harding, Hughes, Taft, T. Roosevelt, McKinley, Harrison, Blaine, Garfield, Hayes, Grant, Lincoln and Fremont all won Vermont.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10140
United States


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: January 22, 2011, 11:34:47 pm »
Ignore

Texas is clearly a Democratic state in 2012. [/pbrower2a]

Oh, right.

I never said so. I said that it might be significantly closer in 2012, and it might show that Sarah Palin has no real chance to be President.  The PPP poll also shows that Rick Perry has no meaningful support for any Presidential campaign in his own state, whihc is an added bonus of the poll shown.

Face it -- Texas is a difficult state to poll.  It is arguably the most diverse state in a combination of religion, ethnicity, and economic activity. It has several giant cities and perhaps the largest rural population of any state. It can't be considered a region in itself despite its size; indeed it straddles clear regions of America. It is clearly Southwestern (El Paso seems to fit more into Arizona than into any other part of Texas) in parts; East Texas is decidedly Southern (I used to live in Greater Dallas and heard the saying "Shreveport is the capital of East Texas); about everything to the north and west of Fort Worth seems to be Midwestern (the state college in Wichita Falls calls itself "Midwestern State University"); areas  along and to the south of I-10 (including San Antonio and to some extent Houston) seem like a transition zone into another country. Now try to figure where Dallas, Fort Worth, Austin, and Houston fit in.

The state is tough to poll. It's possible to poll California, Florida, or New York with smaller sample sizes and smaller margins of error. I really don't trust any poll of Texas for accuracy, and that's not a question of bias. Get too many people from Dallas and too few from San Antonio or vice-versa, and things get distorted.

   
Texas may be no microcosm of America, but it will deliver 38 electoral votes to almost any Republican nominee for President. That is, anyone but Sarah Palin, who seems unable to hold her own against a liberal d@mnyankee politician with more than average melanin content. That may be more relevant than anything else about Texas.

Texas is clearly a Democratic state in 2012. [/pbrower2a]

Oh, right.
What are you trying to say?

i think that the democrats should at least attempt in winning Texas. First, it is an electoral goldmine. Second, the state has a democratic history. I believe that since the formation of the two party system in 1856, the state has voted Democratic 24 times, Republican 12 times, and Third Party once (1860).

Obama can campaign here as many times as he want, it still isn't going to swing the state his way.

If Obama makes an effort to win Texas, either
A) Texas is for Obama what Pennsylvania was for Mccain
or
B) Obama has so much campaign money that he has nowhere else to spend it.
or
C) Sarah Palin is running

Another possibility: with the nationwide election in the bag, President Obama might seek to help some Democrat replace Kay Bailey Hutchinson in the Senate.   
Logged



Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9466
Czech Republic


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: January 23, 2011, 02:30:51 am »
Ignore

Texas is clearly a Democratic state in 2012. [/pbrower2a]

Oh, right.

I never said so. I said that it might be significantly closer in 2012, and it might show that Sarah Palin has no real chance to be President.  The PPP poll also shows that Rick Perry has no meaningful support for any Presidential campaign in his own state, whihc is an added bonus of the poll shown.

Again, I was clearly mistaken, I stand corrected now.
Logged

Clearly the solution is to privatize presidential elections.

So, in less than four years, get excited for the 2016 MetLife Financial U Pick The Prez Extravaganza. If you tweet a picture of your completed ballot with the hashtag #ivoted, you could win a trip for two to the inauguration or an iTunes gift card.
Mjh
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 256


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: January 23, 2011, 09:40:04 am »
Ignore

Remember that old man Bush, Reagan, Ford, Nixon, Eisenhower, Dewey, Wilkie, Landon, Hoover, Coolidge, Harding, Hughes, Taft, T. Roosevelt, McKinley, Harrison, Blaine, Garfield, Hayes, Grant, Lincoln and Fremont all won Vermont.


What you are forgetting is that the political preferences of the population in a state can change over time. The electorate of Texas in 2011 is not the same as the electorate in 1976. The same can be said about Vermont and every other state.
Vermont and Maine wont swing towards the GOP in 2012 just because Mike Huckabee spends alot of time there, and reminds the voters that the people who lived there in 1936 voted for Alf Landon.
Logged
Mehmentum
Icefire9
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1456
United States


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: January 23, 2011, 12:05:40 pm »
Ignore

Remember that old man Bush, Reagan, Ford, Nixon, Eisenhower, Dewey, Wilkie, Landon, Hoover, Coolidge, Harding, Hughes, Taft, T. Roosevelt, McKinley, Harrison, Blaine, Garfield, Hayes, Grant, Lincoln and Fremont all won Vermont.


What you are forgetting is that the political preferences of the population in a state can change over time. The electorate of Texas in 2011 is not the same as the electorate in 1976. The same can be said about Vermont and every other state.
Vermont and Maine wont swing towards the GOP in 2012 just because Mike Huckabee spends alot of time there, and reminds the voters that the people who lived there in 1936 voted for Alf Landon.

I would like to add that both the Democratic and Republican parties have changed since then as well.
Logged

Reading the 3012 boards dulls one's sense of irony.

Seriously. How many times can we read about the Obamachine 3000 pulling ahead of the Reagantronix QLZ in the race for Mars Mutant Colony's 48 electoral votes? Sheesh!
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13457


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: January 23, 2011, 12:21:28 pm »
Ignore

The Democratic party in Texas (and basically the entire south) used to be right-wing. That might explain a few things.
Logged
Sibboleth
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 56680
Saint Helena


View Profile WWW
« Reply #34 on: January 23, 2011, 01:12:53 pm »
Ignore

The Democratic party in Texas (and basically the entire south) used to be right-wing. That might explain a few things.

It always had a wing that certainly wasn't though (actually more than one).
Logged

"I have become entangled in my own data, and my conclusion stands in direct contradiction to the initial idea from which I started. Proceeding from unlimited freedom, I end with unlimited despotism. I will add, however, that there can be no solution of the social formula except mine."
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13457


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: January 23, 2011, 01:37:24 pm »
Ignore

The Democratic party in Texas (and basically the entire south) used to be right-wing. That might explain a few things.

It always had a wing that certainly wasn't though (actually more than one).

To be expected when a party is that big.
Logged
IDS Judicial Overlord PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22485
United States


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: January 24, 2011, 01:16:38 pm »
Ignore

Quote
Indeed, Texas has swung dramatically from its Democratic days. If we are to assume that Obama would be competitive there today due to the state's history of voting for Democrats, then by the same logic Vermont must also be competitive for the Republicans.

The reason why Vermont doesn't vote republican anymore is because the national party has written them off. If the party made it an effort to reason with them, Vermont could vote republican.

Remember that old man Bush, Reagan, Ford, Nixon, Eisenhower, Dewey, Wilkie, Landon, Hoover, Coolidge, Harding, Hughes, Taft, T. Roosevelt, McKinley, Harrison, Blaine, Garfield, Hayes, Grant, Lincoln and Fremont all won Vermont.

     They wrote off Vermont because they can't win it on the Presidential level anymore. The kind of Republican that could win Vermont would have no shot at the nomination today. The very existence of electoral trends more or less refutes the notion that Republicans could win a state today just because they won it regularly 50 years ago.
Logged

R2D2
20RP12
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22517
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.09

View Profile
« Reply #37 on: January 25, 2011, 05:34:08 pm »
Ignore

Texas is a lock for Republicans in 2012, so this poll is microscopic compared to the other polls.
Logged


i like girls but there is NOTHING better then a sexi hott dude
albaleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2214
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.77, S: -4.52

View Profile
« Reply #38 on: January 25, 2011, 06:24:48 pm »
Ignore

Texas is a lock for Republicans in 2012, so this poll is microscopic compared to the other polls.

How is it a lock? Huckabee is the only Republican who is over 50%. Yes, it will most likely go Republican, but it certainly isn't a lock.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10140
United States


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: January 26, 2011, 05:46:58 pm »
Ignore

It appears now that President Obama has about as much chance of winning Texas as he has of losing Pennsylvania. Either way, that's not much.

So how can he win Texas? About everything has to go right.

1. Not many states are in the tier that he must win before winning Texas. After North Carolina that tier includes Missouri, perhaps Indiana, Arizona, and Georgia... maybe the Dakotas and South Carolina. President Obama would need at least 55% of the popular vote with his gains largely in states that he lost in 2008; maybe he has maxed out in some of the states that he won by monster margins.   


2. He has to have good reasons to do campaigning in Texas -- such as making a difference in the Senate race. Texas will have an open seat, and if the Democrats have a strong candidate for the US Senate, then guess who makes some appearances? Where he campaigns, he wins. But that means that the Democrats need a strong candidate. 

3. That of course implies that the Democrats don't have an easier chance to win a Senate seat, whether some incumbent like Corker, Wicker, Brown, (MA) or Kyl (should the opportunity arise) or someone who wins by tea-bagging an incumbent Republican who "isn't conservative enough" and aren't struggling to hold onto the Senate with someone like Brown (OH), Nelson (either one), McCaskill, Stabenow, Tester, or Warner.   

4. He would have to perform well in the suburbs of Dallas and Houston. Obama did badly in those suburbs, much in contrast to suburbs of cities like Detroit and Philadelphia.  Sure, he would have to campaign in places like Arlington, Denton, and Mesquite -- but he would show that he cares about Texas.

4. The war in Afghanistan would have to come to a graceful end. Texas has a large military presence. That is less significant in Texas than in Georgia, an easier target. Such would probably push his approval into the high 50s with a similar vote total. That is good for about an Eisenhower-scale landslide.

5. The Governor could not be on the ballot as a VP candidate. Well, that is unlikely. If the Republicans have enough doubt about carrying Texas  that they would have to nominate Perry for VP, then they are in deep trouble and have all but conceded the Presidency. Texans could conceivably vote for him as VP so that they could get rid of him as Governor.

Much must go right for President Obama to win Texas.     

 
Logged



Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49
Volatilesaff
MATCHU[D]
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6341
United States


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: January 26, 2011, 07:10:38 pm »
Ignore



4. He would have to perform well in the suburbs of Dallas and Houston. Obama did badly in those suburbs, much in contrast to suburbs of cities like Detroit and Philadelphia.  Sure, he would have to campaign in places like Arlington, Denton, and Mesquite -- but he would show that he cares about Texas.

 

That would be entertaining to see.
Logged

Warren '16!
freepcrusher
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2296
United States


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: January 26, 2011, 07:15:32 pm »
Ignore



4. He would have to perform well in the suburbs of Dallas and Houston. Obama did badly in those suburbs, much in contrast to suburbs of cities like Detroit and Philadelphia.  Sure, he would have to campaign in places like Arlington, Denton, and Mesquite -- but he would show that he cares about Texas.

All those places he mentioned Obama did OK in. Denton and Mesquite actually went for Obama something like 51-49 and Arlington is pretty swing territory with the exception of the wealthy areas like Pantego or Dalworthington Gardens. The strong republican suburbs you're talking about would be places like Coppell or Spring Branch.


Logged
Volatilesaff
MATCHU[D]
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6341
United States


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: January 26, 2011, 07:36:30 pm »
Ignore

He lost Denton County and Fort Worth, and Collin County as well.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 07:38:19 pm by MK ULTRA »Logged

Warren '16!
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10140
United States


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: January 26, 2011, 09:51:18 pm »
Ignore

Add Plano, Richardson, Lewisville, and Carrollton.
Logged



Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49
Volatilesaff
MATCHU[D]
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6341
United States


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: January 27, 2011, 01:07:22 am »
Ignore

Add Plano, Richardson, Lewisville, and Carrollton.

To what? Places he should campaign? Seems a bit gratuitous to me. 
Logged

Warren '16!
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: January 27, 2011, 10:32:13 am »
Ignore

This basically confirms my theory.

I don't see why this poll isn't reasonable. If Obama trails Romney by 7 and Gingrich by just 5, I could definitely see Palin being tied.
Palin's still doing no worse than Perry after all the nonstop olympic sharkjumping she's engaged in... I know Perry's always been pretty damn weak incumbent for someone who's been in office this long and never even had a seriously close election, but... there's definitely still room between her current polling and rock bottom.



I'm not sure of the location of the city boundaries of Denton and Fort Worth, but they would have to be dramatically elsewhere from where you'd logically put them for Obama to have lost Fort Worth or polled just 51% in Denton town.
The rest of the Denton County is exurbia (suburbia to the far southeast) and largely dreadful for Democrats, of course.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
Badger
badger
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10804
United States


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: January 28, 2011, 08:17:47 pm »
Ignore

This basically confirms my theory.

I don't see why this poll isn't reasonable. If Obama trails Romney by 7 and Gingrich by just 5, I could definitely see Palin being tied.
Palin's still doing no worse than Perry after all the nonstop olympic sharkjumping she's engaged in... I know Perry's always been pretty damn weak incumbent for someone who's been in office this long and never even had a seriously close election, but... there's definitely still room between her current polling and rock bottom.



I'm not sure of the location of the city boundaries of Denton and Fort Worth, but they would have to be dramatically elsewhere from where you'd logically put them for Obama to have lost Fort Worth or polled just 51% in Denton town.
The rest of the Denton County is exurbia (suburbia to the far southeast) and largely dreadful for Democrats, of course.

Obama only won Ft. Worth city with about 53% IIRC. No surprise he lost the county (by almost exactly the same margin as statewide interestingly--bellweather county?) considering the political makeup of Texas suburbs.
Logged

Your self-serving slacktivism is propelling America to new heights.
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines