Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 08, 2016, 10:54:55 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: Mr. Morden)
| | |-+  The direction of the Republican Party if McCain loses
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print
Author Topic: The direction of the Republican Party if McCain loses  (Read 15261 times)
Spicy Purrito
Angry_Weasel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15343
United States


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: February 24, 2009, 05:25:25 pm »
Ignore

....like the Democrats in 1984 and 1988. Basically, the GOP still thinks this will blow over.
Logged

RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9353
Czech Republic


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: February 24, 2009, 07:36:16 pm »
Ignore

I think in 2012 we'll either let the losses get to us and nominate some loonie or we'll nominate someone like Romney that can actually compete and stay on message.  That message being the actual Republican message, not the junk we've been spewing the last decade.

What "actual Republican message" and "junk we've been spewing the last decade" are you talking about??
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.
Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10125
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

View Profile
« Reply #52 on: February 24, 2009, 08:49:31 pm »
Ignore

The GOP only hope is Jon Huntsman, sorry but it is. Huntsman would be a new face and he isn't a right wing nutjob.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14119
United States


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: February 25, 2009, 05:32:28 pm »
Ignore

The GOP leadership must go rational to ever have a chance in winning any of the states that never voted for a GOP nominee for President since 1992:



244 electoral votes

those that either voted for the Republican nominee only once since 1992, or voted for Obama by a double-digit margin in 2008:




because these states are never going to vote for school prayer, creationism, or an abortion ban. Before 2010 reapportionment those combined for 269 electoral votes.

But those aren't enough to win outright after 2010 reapportionment of Congressional seats.  Obama has a good chance to pick up other any state shaded in yellow, which includes all of those outside of those shaded red. Those include Arizona and Missouri, both of which Clinton won at least once. Missouri was close, and Obama lost Arizona by a margin probably less than the 10% that a Favorite Son can usually win by:



With all of the states shown in either shade of red, and any one of the states shown in yellow, a Democrat is elected President. Such also happens if the Democrat (probably a Southern moderate populist) wins any one in yellow or green:



that a southern moderate Southern populist like Carter in 1976 or Clinton in 1992 or 1996 has a chance to win as a Democrat (and in which case has a chance to pick up a raft of states in the region, including some in yellow). Obama lost all of those states by double-digit margins and won't win them except in an electoral landslide. Northern liberals will vote for Southern Democratic populists, but Southern white Democrats are unlikely to vote for northern liberal Democrats except in electoral blowouts.  Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida no longer seem particularly Southern.

States in gray? No single one of them decides the election, although many possible combinations decide an election (for example, Montana and the Dakotas; Arkansas and West Virginia; Kentucky and one of the Congressional districts of Nebraska).  I assume that Louisiana is likely to lose a congressional seat. 

In no way does this model depict how likely any candidate is to win or lose any specific state in any previous or future election except as explicitly stated in the text. This model should not be applied to any election beyond 2020 because American political life is likely to change significantly by then, especially should Obama win a landslide election and the Republicans run a weak candidate in 2016. In 2016 nobody knows who the Democratic nominee for President will be, and that nominee could be a Southern populist.





 

« Last Edit: February 27, 2009, 10:36:50 am by pbrower2a »Logged



Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49
Jante's Law Revivalist
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 42191
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #54 on: February 25, 2009, 06:15:38 pm »
Ignore

Very good, but Tennessee and Alabama are solidly republican. And you probably forgot Montata and the Dakotas who are trending more and more democrat.
Logged


"The major political task that we face in the next five months is to make certain that Donald [Drumpf] is defeated and defeated badly."

Bernie Sanders, 06/14/2016
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14119
United States


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: February 27, 2009, 03:49:40 am »
Ignore

Very good, but Tennessee and Alabama are solidly republican. And you probably forgot Montata and the Dakotas who are trending more and more democrat.

Of course. The Dakotas have not voted for the Democratic nominee for President since 1964. Similar logic would have mandated that I neglect the chance that either Virginia or Indiana would go for Obama in 2008.  I consider both North Dakota and South Dakota possible pick-ups for Obama in 2012, and more likely than Tennessee or Alabama. But if I had to account for that I would also have to account for the fact that Wisconsin and Peensylvania all were close to going for Dubya in 2004, and  that would make the model messy:

The GOP leadership must go rational to ever have a chance in winning any of the states that never voted for a GOP nominee for President since 1992

 or missed doing so by 2% in 2004:



213 electoral votes

... At this point it becomes more complicated and less dramatic, and it would conceal the polarization of American political life that has existed since 2000, if not earlier.

Although it is conceivable that such a scenario would have arisen with a GOP incumbent  different from Dubya in 2004, or John McCain challenging a lackluster Gore administration in 2004, such is not what we had. Such a scenario might demonstrate a very different set of political dynamics, one in which the Bush-era GOP might not have existed and one that would not have created the political culture that exists to this day. A President less tied to special interests that comprise appreciably less than the majority of voters of so many states might not have created the political climate in which Obama had an easy victory.

America became polarized in its politics as it had never been since the Civil War. I consider that a clear statement of the ineptitude of Dubya as President and the callowness of those around him as leaders.

As it was, Obama had many reasonable ways in which to win, and few in which to lose, John McCain had to take gambles that he would not have otherwise taken, and a landslide for Obama was possible.

.......

I use the model to show how an elections might go in 2016.   Barring the unthinkable, Obama will run for re-election in 2012, and unless he fouls up badly, he will win by a wide margin. In 2016 he will NOT be running for re-election; someone else will be the Democratic nominee for President. The Democratic candidate may be from any part of the United States,  Democrats from the South tend to be less liberal than those from elsewhere in America, but northern liberals end up voting for a Jimmy Carter (if only once) or Bill Clinton (twice). For reasons not entirely clear, southerners are not so receptive to northern and western liberals, voting for them only in electoral landslides. They rejected Kerry decisively in 2004, Dukakis in 1996, and Humphrey in 1968.

My model suggests that a Southern Democrat is more likely to win Tennessee than Indiana in 2016, and that a northern or western liberal Democrat is more likely to win Indiana than win Tennessee in 2016.  I don't see the Republican Party having a strong candidate as the Presidential nominee in 2016.  Beyond that? I have no idea what sorts of political personalities will be out there, or even whether the Republican Party will have enough relevance to discuss.   
Logged



Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49
Frodo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15712
United States


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: December 18, 2010, 06:36:07 pm »
Ignore

Now we know.    Tongue

All I'm waiting for now is to have Sarah Palin win the GOP 2012 presidential nomination and pick a fellow tea-partier as her running-mate (Jim DeMint?) to seal the deal. 
Logged

Cathcon
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18197
United States


View Profile
« Reply #57 on: December 19, 2010, 10:27:34 am »
Ignore

The GOP isn't anywhere near populist or protectionist. Complaining about 13-30 million illegal Americans (and don't reply saying the number is wrong because thats not the point) like the right has is not protectionist or populist economically. The only populist/protectionist sentiment exists within the democratic party (and really only half of the party supports this). I have never heard once a republican (that I know of) talk badly about free trade.

Pat Buchanan.
Logged

Hate Thy Neighbor as Thyself: A Catholic's Guide to Misanthropy
President Mitt
Giovanni
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3495
Samoa


View Profile
« Reply #58 on: December 19, 2010, 10:30:38 am »
Ignore

You just responded to a post made 2 years ago, by a poster who no longer posts here.
Logged

[This space is available for purchase]
Reaganfan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12887
United States


View Profile
« Reply #59 on: December 21, 2010, 03:07:15 am »
Ignore

Anything can happen.

Scenario 1: McCain loses massively, President Obama is an extremely popular President and the 2010 midterms are similar to the 1998 midterms and aren't too significant. The Republicans nominate a solid conservative and they lose to Obama in a 1996-type election.

Scenario 2: McCain loses narrowly, President Obama begins to sag under continued public disapproval of all types of Government, and has an approval rating of 40%. 2010 is a disaster for the miffed Democrats and the revitalized Republicans make gains. A conservative Republican, possibly the 2008 VP candidate, defeats President Obama in 2012.

Hmmm....
Logged

Niemeyerite
JulioMadrid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6657
Spain


View Profile
« Reply #60 on: December 21, 2010, 10:15:18 am »
Ignore

Anything can happen.

Scenario 1: McCain loses massively, President Obama is an extremely popular President and the 2010 midterms are similar to the 1998 midterms and aren't too significant. The Republicans nominate a solid conservative and they lose to Obama in a 1996-type election.

Scenario 2: McCain loses narrowly, President Obama begins to sag under continued public disapproval of all types of Government, and has an approval rating of 40%. 2010 is a disaster for the miffed Democrats and the revitalized Republicans make gains. A conservative Republican, possibly the 2008 VP candidate, defeats President Obama in 2012.

Hmmm....

McCain didn't loose narrowly.
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
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9353
Czech Republic


View Profile
« Reply #61 on: December 21, 2010, 01:42:31 pm »
Ignore

Anything can happen.

Scenario 1: McCain loses massively, President Obama is an extremely popular President and the 2010 midterms are similar to the 1998 midterms and aren't too significant. The Republicans nominate a solid conservative and they lose to Obama in a 1996-type election.

Scenario 2: McCain loses narrowly, President Obama begins to sag under continued public disapproval of all types of Government, and has an approval rating of 40%. 2010 is a disaster for the miffed Democrats and the revitalized Republicans make gains. A conservative Republican, possibly the 2008 VP candidate, defeats President Obama in 2012.

Hmmm....

McCain didn't loose narrowly.

He didn't lose massively, either.
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.
tpfkaw
wormyguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9164
Liechtenstein


View Profile
« Reply #62 on: May 22, 2011, 10:48:51 pm »
Ignore

Scenario 2: McCain loses narrowly, President Obama begins to sag under continued public disapproval of all types of Government, and has an approval rating of 40%. 2010 is a disaster for the miffed Democrats and the revitalized Republicans make gains. A conservative Republican, possibly the 2008 VP candidate, defeats President Obama in 2012.

Wow.  Got any hot stock tips, Naso?

And it appears, liberals, that someone's just around the corner...

Logged
Jackson
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 611
United States


View Profile
« Reply #63 on: June 05, 2011, 04:23:14 am »
Ignore

Open Fascism.
Logged

#IAintAfraidOfNoGoats
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6500
United States


View Profile
« Reply #64 on: June 07, 2011, 08:27:41 am »
Ignore

Open Fascism.

No. We're going back to closer to libertarianism. The Dems will go lefto facism.
Logged

President
Ted Cruz

House/Senate Races
Marlin Stutzman (Indiana GOP Senate Primary)
Jim Banks (GOP/IN-3)
Trey Hollingsworth (GOP/IN-9)
Tom Massie (GOP/KY-4)
David Brat (GOP/VA-7)
Tim Tebow (GOP/FL-4) (if he chooses to run)
Dan Bongino (GOP/FL-19)
Paul Kemp
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6259
United States
View Profile
« Reply #65 on: June 07, 2011, 10:04:29 am »
Ignore

Anything can happen.

Scenario 1: McCain loses massively, President Obama is an extremely popular President and the 2010 midterms are similar to the 1998 midterms and aren't too significant. The Republicans nominate a solid conservative and they lose to Obama in a 1996-type election.

Scenario 2: McCain loses narrowly, President Obama begins to sag under continued public disapproval of all types of Government, and has an approval rating of 40%. 2010 is a disaster for the miffed Democrats and the revitalized Republicans make gains. A conservative Republican, possibly the 2008 VP candidate, defeats President Obama in 2012.

Hmmm....

Anyone with a history book could have seen 2010 coming a mile away.
Logged

Reaganfan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12887
United States


View Profile
« Reply #66 on: June 08, 2011, 10:42:49 am »
Ignore

Then again if my predictions held true, George Bush would have been elected by 300+ electoral votes in 2000, defeated Howard Dean in 2004 by a landslide, and George Allen would be running for re-election today.
Logged

Jackson
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 611
United States


View Profile
« Reply #67 on: June 08, 2011, 04:37:08 pm »
Ignore

Open Fascism.

No. We're going back to closer to libertarianism. The Dems will go lefto facism.
Yes, clearly every move taken by the Republicans during the last decade has signaled a shift to Libertarianism! That explains everything!
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 05:23:56 pm by Jackson »Logged

Ideological Leader of Atlas Forum
ChairmanSanchez
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24403
United States


View Profile
« Reply #68 on: June 08, 2011, 06:18:57 pm »
Ignore

Open Fascism.

No. We're going back to closer to libertarianism. The Dems will go lefto facism.
I want to see a combo of Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan mixed together.
Logged

A Hybrid of Pat Buchanan and Bob Dylan.
Cathcon
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18197
United States


View Profile
« Reply #69 on: June 08, 2011, 07:50:31 pm »
Ignore

Open Fascism.

No. We're going back to closer to libertarianism. The Dems will go lefto facism.
Yes, clearly every move taken by the Republicans during the last decade has signaled a shift to Libertarianism! That explains everything!

You're right. The Democrats are well positioned as the party of true libertarianism. They have been consistent advocates of opening up the market, unbridaled competition, dis-mantling the welfare state, and in general just getting government out of people's lives.
Logged

Hate Thy Neighbor as Thyself: A Catholic's Guide to Misanthropy
Ideological Leader of Atlas Forum
ChairmanSanchez
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24403
United States


View Profile
« Reply #70 on: June 08, 2011, 10:45:19 pm »
Ignore

Open Fascism.

No. We're going back to closer to libertarianism. The Dems will go lefto facism.
Yes, clearly every move taken by the Republicans during the last decade has signaled a shift to Libertarianism! That explains everything!

You're right. The Democrats are well positioned as the party of true libertarianism. They have been consistent advocates of opening up the market, unbridaled competition, dis-mantling the welfare state, and in general just getting government out of people's lives.
Not too mention the non interventionist policies, such as staying out of Libya.
Logged

A Hybrid of Pat Buchanan and Bob Dylan.
shua
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15672
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 2.06, S: -4.52

View Profile WWW
« Reply #71 on: June 11, 2011, 08:14:00 am »
Ignore

Open Fascism.

No. We're going back to closer to libertarianism. The Dems will go lefto facism.
Yes, clearly every move taken by the Republicans during the last decade has signaled a shift to Libertarianism! That explains everything!
note the thread title we're not talking about the last decade we're talking since 2008.
Logged
Spicy Purrito
Angry_Weasel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15343
United States


View Profile
« Reply #72 on: June 11, 2011, 11:32:10 am »
Ignore

After the loss to McCain? Its hard to say. Apparently Moderates did just as well Reactionaires in 2010...but even Kirk and Brown can be seen voting with the reactionaries on reactionairy legislation. It appears that the Republican Party hasn't changed much but how its held together. In good times, it was your emotionless puppetmasters who courted the last few tens of thousands of votes by claiming that we'll spend money to wein you off of the other guy's programs (ownership society). Now, in bad times, its basically crazy puppetmasters who claim that the other guys want to use these bad times to make you their bitches.  The policies of W remain, but the message is a lot more...uh...bipolar.
Logged

Jackson
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 611
United States


View Profile
« Reply #73 on: June 12, 2011, 02:56:16 am »
Ignore

Open Fascism.

No. We're going back to closer to libertarianism. The Dems will go lefto facism.
Yes, clearly every move taken by the Republicans during the last decade has signaled a shift to Libertarianism! That explains everything!
note the thread title we're not talking about the last decade we're talking since 2008.
Are you unable to detect sarcasm?
Logged

shua
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15672
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 2.06, S: -4.52

View Profile WWW
« Reply #74 on: June 13, 2011, 02:15:03 pm »
Ignore

Open Fascism.

No. We're going back to closer to libertarianism. The Dems will go lefto facism.
Yes, clearly every move taken by the Republicans during the last decade has signaled a shift to Libertarianism! That explains everything!
note the thread title we're not talking about the last decade we're talking since 2008.
Are you unable to detect sarcasm?
I saw that you were being sarcastic about the shift to libertarianism, but I didn't realize you were trying to be sarcastic about the timeframe in order that the sarcasm of the latter works against the persuasiveness of the sarcasm of the former.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines