Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 17, 2014, 05:30:48 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: Bacon King)
| | |-+  Future Electoral Votes
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Future Electoral Votes  (Read 1445 times)
moderate_devil_dog
Newbie
*
Posts: 16


View Profile
« on: March 30, 2005, 08:07:09 am »
Ignore

Which states might gain or lose electoral votes come the 2008 election?
Logged
phk
phknrocket1k
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12976


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

View Profile
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2005, 12:47:06 pm »
Ignore

LOL
Logged

Gabu
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28563
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -4.32, S: -6.52

View Profile
« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2005, 01:47:17 pm »
Ignore

Which states might gain or lose electoral votes come the 2008 election?

Uh, none, because the next census won't be taken until 2010.
Logged



"To me, 'underground' sounds like subway trains.  That's the only sound I associate with 'underground'." - Everett
jacob_101
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 648


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2005, 02:24:21 pm »
Ignore

Let's not laugh at someone just because they don't know something.  Instead let's educate our fellow atlasian.

Electoral vote distribution only changes once every 10 years after the national census.  The next one is in 2010 and won't effect elections until 2012.
Logged
Akno21
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9138
View Profile
« Reply #4 on: March 30, 2005, 02:47:30 pm »
Ignore

Assuming you mean 2012, I'd say Texas, Florida, Arizona, Colorado, maybe Utah, Nevada, California are likely to gain, while New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, and maybe other midwest states are likely to lose. Basically, the Southeast and Southwest are growing, the Northeast and Midwest are losing.
Logged

True Democrat
true democrat
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7485
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.10, S: -2.87

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: March 30, 2005, 04:41:02 pm »
Ignore

Maybe this, I'm not sure if it adds up to 435.



Maine and Nebraska should be 4 and 5, respectively.
Logged

Michael Bloomberg for President.



Lol Winfield.  This quote is from a thread entitled "what do the following proceed to do if they are not nominated?"
Romney - President of Harvard
Joe Republic
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29560
United States


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: March 30, 2005, 06:23:18 pm »
Ignore

This article gives some estimates for electoral college reapportionment if it were to happen today.  Or at least in 2004 when it was written Wink.
Logged
Dave from Michigan
9iron768
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3293
United States


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: March 30, 2005, 07:36:56 pm »
Ignore

hopefully michigan will not lose any seats
Logged
Erc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4685
Slovenia


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2005, 12:24:16 am »
Ignore

NY will continue to lose seats.

Yay.
Logged
muon2
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8080


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2005, 10:26:55 am »
Ignore

We had a thread on this in December after the most recent Census estimates were released. Here are my projections:

The US Census Bureau released (link) its estimates for the populations of the states for July 1, 2004. This data can be used to project the apportionment for 2010.

For each state I have calculated an annual rate of growth based on the 4 1/4 years between the decennial cencus on April 1, 2000 and this new estimate. I assume growth rates based on an annual percentage increase which is uniform over the period. This is the same as a financial institution would use to calculate the growth rate of an investment.

The annual growth rate is then applied for 10 years with annual compounding to the decennial census counts. This results in a projected population for each state on April 1, 2010. With this projection, the average CD would have 712.6 K people.

The apportionment of representatives is calculated in the correct manner. Each state starts with 1 seat. The priority vaule used to assign each subsequent seat is taken as geometric mean of the average population per seat and the average population per seat if an additional seat were assigned. Seats are assigned until 435 seats are apportioned.

The last few seats assigned (and next few not assigned) are:

#431 TX 35
#432 PA 18
#433 MN 8
#434 AL 7
#435 MI 15

#436 CA 55
#437 NY 28
#438 IL 19
#439 FL 28
#440 LA 7

The result of this apportionment would be the following changes:

AZ +1
CA +1
FL +2
GA +1
IL -1
IA -1
LA -1
MA -1
MO -1
NV +1
NY -2
OH -2
PA -1
TX +3
UT +1

Logged


Lunar Eclipse of April 15, 2014 with the star Spica.
jacob_101
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 648


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: March 31, 2005, 02:41:33 pm »
Ignore

hopefully michigan will not lose any seats

Why is that?  Do you expect it to go Republican anytime soon?

BTW the 9 Iron is my favorite club...
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines