Is the Republican's problem that they're too Southern?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 10:28:37 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Is the Republican's problem that they're too Southern?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
Author Topic: Is the Republican's problem that they're too Southern?  (Read 18348 times)
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,769
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #75 on: January 13, 2015, 01:38:19 PM »

MI, IL, ME, MA, MD, WI should flip with Stabenow, Baldwin, and Warren running.

I mentioned FL as well as OH because Brown will be running for reelection and he is good, unless he is picked for VP. But Brown or whoever replaces Nelson of FL can win without gubernatorial coattails.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,769
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #76 on: January 14, 2015, 03:02:26 AM »
« Edited: January 14, 2015, 03:13:40 AM by OC »

Who cares about the midterm mantra, do you think Stabenow, or Warren or Baldwin won't win. I don't think so, but I also think that we were so close to defeating the incumbants if we get good enough candidates we can steal a couple of these races.

President Hilary isn't Obama, she isn't polarizing and will take a proactive role in getting Democrats elected. Plus, the GOP maxed out the governorships already in those states, anyways.
Logged
MATTROSE94
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,803
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -6.43

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #77 on: January 14, 2015, 12:59:07 PM »

MI, IL, ME, MA, MD, WI should flip with Stabenow, Baldwin, and Warren running.

I mentioned FL as well as OH because Brown will be running for reelection and he is good, unless he is picked for VP. But Brown or whoever replaces Nelson of FL can win without gubernatorial coattails.
Out of all states that you mentioned, I only think that the Democrats could possibly win Illinois and Florida due to the fact that the Republicans are likely to do well in the 2018 midterm elections if Hillary Clinton is President. The Republicans could also make further gains in the 2018 gubernatorial races by picking up Colorado, Connecticut and maybe Alaska if they play their cards right. 
Logged
pikachu
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,179
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #78 on: January 14, 2015, 06:50:19 PM »

with the governors we elect in  MI,  MD, MA, OH will give us the electoral strength to break the GOP in the House, finally.
Um.. who?

Democrats arent winning OH

They probably cant win MA with Baker

Michigan is a stretch

Maryland's Democrat Party is not seriously contesting 2018.

I find your optimism brightening, though.

lol I agree with Ohio and Massachusetts but your dismissal of dem chances in Michigan and Maryland is hilarious.

It's a bit far out to make any reasonable predictions anyway. 4 years ago, I don't think any of us assumed that Corbett would be the only defeated GOP incumbent and Brownback was heavily at risk. If we have a GOP President, I don't see how we don't have at least a 50/50 shot in Michigan and Ohio. (Maryland and Massachusetts are more dependent on how Hogan and Baker's terms go.)

My point is that 2018 would be, generally, a very hard year for dems in Ohio and Massachusetts has a history of liking Republican moderates as Governor while Maryland has no indication of liking Republicans, incumbents especially, and Michigan is very strongly democratic statewide so saying that it's a "stretch" for them to win there is just downplaying their chances.

If it's a strong Dem year (a possibility if there's a GOP President), then they stand a good chance at winning those states. In 2006, Democrats knocked off the not-unpopular Elrich and would've beaten Romney if he ran.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,769
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #79 on: January 15, 2015, 05:59:04 PM »
« Edited: January 15, 2015, 06:06:38 PM by OC »

MI, IL, ME, MA, MD, WI should flip with Stabenow, Baldwin, and Warren running.

I mentioned FL as well as OH because Brown will be running for reelection and he is good, unless he is picked for VP. But Brown or whoever replaces Nelson of FL can win without gubernatorial coattails.
Out of all states that you mentioned, I only think that the Democrats could possibly win Illinois and Florida due to the fact that the Republicans are likely to do well in the 2018 midterm elections if Hillary Clinton is President. The Republicans could also make further gains in the 2018 gubernatorial races by picking up Colorado, Connecticut and maybe Alaska if they play their cards right.  


Again, I don't accept that, we will do well in MI, IL, WI, and MA, and MD and possibly ME because Baldwin, Stabenow, King, Cardin, and Warren will easilly be reelected. Just because it is a midterm, Obama will be out of office.

GOP picks up AK for sure,
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #80 on: January 17, 2015, 12:40:26 AM »

Seems to turn off Northeast and West Coast voters.

What's worse, some regions of the South such as Northern Virginia and South Florida don't even share a southern culture anymore.

The focus has been on gay marriage lately and how it's wrecking the GOP with moderate voters, but maybe the bigger issue is the overall culture Republicans are perceived to have.

Same-sex marriage is dying as a political football. It's as much a political football with Michigan Republicans as it is with Texas Republicans. Republicans will have to move to economic issues and a chest-pumping foreign policy. 

Northern Virginia and South Florida (and to only a slightly-lesser extent much of North Carolina) are increasingly being 'settled' by Yankees who take their political culture with them.  PPP often shows this in some questions that ask about loyalties to sports teams -- and those loyalties are extremely strong. If you were a fan of the Detroit Tigers as a child, you are probably still a fan of the Motor City Kitties.  So if the people around Austin, Texas include lots of Giants, Dodgers, Cubs, Tigers, Indians, Yankees, Red Sox, and Phillies baseball fans, then the local politics are more likely to look like those of Des Moines than those of small towns maybe fifty miles away (where people are more likely to be Rangers or Astros fans).
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #81 on: January 18, 2015, 02:18:03 AM »
« Edited: January 18, 2015, 02:22:54 AM by hopper »

Well getting back to the original topic its like "The South" or at least "Deep South" hasn't moved with the rest of the country socially since 2004. SSM and Immigration Reform the rest of the country is for those 2 things but not  the "Deep South" and that is killing Republicans in Presidential Elections I think with younger voters born after 1986 maybe. I don't think SSM is a big deal to voters who first voted in the 2004 Presidential Election since SSM wasn't a winning issue for the Dems then. First Time Voters who voted in the 2008 Presidential Election graduated HS were born anywhere from 1987-1990.
Logged
MATTROSE94
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,803
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -6.43

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #82 on: January 18, 2015, 01:18:09 PM »

MI, IL, ME, MA, MD, WI should flip with Stabenow, Baldwin, and Warren running.

I mentioned FL as well as OH because Brown will be running for reelection and he is good, unless he is picked for VP. But Brown or whoever replaces Nelson of FL can win without gubernatorial coattails.
Out of all states that you mentioned, I only think that the Democrats could possibly win Illinois and Florida due to the fact that the Republicans are likely to do well in the 2018 midterm elections if Hillary Clinton is President. The Republicans could also make further gains in the 2018 gubernatorial races by picking up Colorado, Connecticut and maybe Alaska if they play their cards right.  


Again, I don't accept that, we will do well in MI, IL, WI, and MA, and MD and possibly ME because Baldwin, Stabenow, King, Cardin, and Warren will easilly be reelected. Just because it is a midterm, Obama will be out of office.

GOP picks up AK for sure,
Usilly, the party that controls the Presidency does poorly in midterm elections. I believe that the only midterm elections in which the party that controlled the Presidency gained seats were 1904, 1934, 1962, 1998 and 2002. Regardless of what Hillary Clinton does, I don't see her bucking the usual midterm election trend in 2018.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,769
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #83 on: January 20, 2015, 10:51:59 PM »

Like I stated before, Tammy Baldwin, Elizabeth Warren and Debbie Stabenow will all be reelected and I do want MI, WI, IL, ME and MD governorship so we can win the redistricting battle in 2020.

But, we disagree on this point.
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,709
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #84 on: January 25, 2015, 05:11:35 PM »

To a certain extent but more so that they are seen as antiquated, too fixated on social issues, and that they repeat the same mistakes on election, i.e., focusing on cutting the wrong things or pushing anti-abortion, guns everywhere, religious stuff, etc. The need to become more populist, the more trusted, moderate economical managers and they can win - see New England GOP or UK Conservatives, for example.

There's nothing populist about Toryism.

If the United States is going to continue to look more and more like Europe (more urban, more secular, wealthier, more cosmopolitan) than populism is not the way for the GOP to go.  We just have to start doing big government technocracy better than the Democrats like we were 10 to 15 years ago. 
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #85 on: January 25, 2015, 10:14:36 PM »

To a certain extent but more so that they are seen as antiquated, too fixated on social issues, and that they repeat the same mistakes on election, i.e., focusing on cutting the wrong things or pushing anti-abortion, guns everywhere, religious stuff, etc. The need to become more populist, the more trusted, moderate economical managers and they can win - see New England GOP or UK Conservatives, for example.
Guns weren't a big topic in 2012 though. True the GOP needs a more moderate economic policy though.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]  
« 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 0.044 seconds with 12 queries.