Clinton 2016 campaign: Georgia is a "Tier Two" state
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 10:21:10 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Clinton 2016 campaign: Georgia is a "Tier Two" state
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Clinton 2016 campaign: Georgia is a "Tier Two" state  (Read 3670 times)
HillOfANight
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,459
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 23, 2015, 10:38:19 PM »
« edited: June 23, 2015, 10:40:54 PM by HillOfANight »

http://www.myajc.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/georgia-on-hillary-clintons-general-election-radar/nmgyn/?ecmp=ajc_social_twitter_2014_washington_sfp#4440b049.3630125.735770

Makes me wonder what the other tier two states are. North Carolina? Arizona? Missouri?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was really hopeful based on the polls for Nunn, but she ended up just over 45%.

So unless Hillary has money to burn or Palin is the nominee or Trump runs third party, Georgia just seems like a money pit.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/hillary-clinton.html

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Abraham Reagan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 7.35, S: 2.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 23, 2015, 10:41:47 PM »

Come on Dems, keep on tryin'... you weren't able to do it in 08 in an extremely favorable climate, but so what. #mehBlueGA
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 23, 2015, 10:51:07 PM »

Yeah, I remember when Democrats wasted all that money in solid Republican states like Virginia and Colorado in 2008.
Logged
HillOfANight
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,459
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 23, 2015, 10:54:54 PM »

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/can-president-obama-win-georgia/2011/04/04/AFDy28iC_blog.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/09/nation/na-election9

Some good insight here. Obama's team in 2008 gave up in September on staff and spending, yet they ended up with 46.9%. Also interesting to note that they had a paid staff of more than 100 at 1 point.
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 23, 2015, 11:07:30 PM »

What's kinda weird is how many media sources were casting Minnesota as a potential swing state in 2012, but no one ever mentioned Georgia once.     In the end Obama won Minnesota by about the same margin as Romney won Georgia.
Logged
Abraham Reagan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 7.35, S: 2.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 23, 2015, 11:08:33 PM »

Yeah, I remember when Democrats wasted all that money in solid Republican states like Virginia and Colorado in 2008.

I don't really think you can compare VA and CO to GA. My evidence for this is looking at the 2004 results. CO was not a solid Republican state in 04, Bush won it 51-47, and while VA did give Bush a larger 53-45 margin, Bush won GA 57-41. I doubt that the 04 to 08 swing in VA will be replicated in GA considering that the environment for the Dems will not be nearly as good in 16.
Logged
WVdemocrat
DimpledChad
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 954
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 23, 2015, 11:45:11 PM »

It's smart to invest in states like Georgia and Arizona and North Carolina, though I don't know why Hillary's campaign considers NC a "long shot." Expanding the map shouldn't be her priority, but she should look into where they could expand to in favorable circumstances.
Logged
VPH
vivaportugalhabs
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,682
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -0.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 23, 2015, 11:49:12 PM »

http://www.myajc.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/georgia-on-hillary-clintons-general-election-radar/nmgyn/?ecmp=ajc_social_twitter_2014_washington_sfp#4440b049.3630125.735770

Makes me wonder what the other tier two states are. North Carolina? Arizona? Missouri?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was really hopeful based on the polls for Nunn, but she ended up just over 45%.

So unless Hillary has money to burn or Palin is the nominee or Trump runs third party, Georgia just seems like a money pit.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/hillary-clinton.html

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

45% with abysmal turnout of key Dem demographics and Dems as a whole. The presidential year is much friendlier.
Logged
Warren 4 Secretary of Everything
Clinton1996
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,203
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: June 23, 2015, 11:55:46 PM »

http://www.myajc.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/georgia-on-hillary-clintons-general-election-radar/nmgyn/?ecmp=ajc_social_twitter_2014_washington_sfp#4440b049.3630125.735770

Makes me wonder what the other tier two states are. North Carolina? Arizona? Missouri?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was really hopeful based on the polls for Nunn, but she ended up just over 45%.

So unless Hillary has money to burn or Palin is the nominee or Trump runs third party, Georgia just seems like a money pit.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/hillary-clinton.html

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

45% with abysmal turnout of key Dem demographics and Dems as a whole. The presidential year is much friendlier.
I actually don't believe that there's much of a difference between Midterm and Presidential electorates here in Georgia. Turnout doesn't drop much.
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: June 24, 2015, 12:06:43 AM »

I actually don't believe that there's much of a difference between Midterm and Presidential electorates here in Georgia. Turnout doesn't drop much.
    2012 Presidential Election Turnout: 3,900,050
-   2014 Senate Election Turnout:       2,567,761          
    1,332,289 voters that didn't turnout.
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,578
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: June 24, 2015, 01:24:45 AM »

With 0% of the vote in, we are ready to project that Jeb Bush is the winner in the state of Georgia....

If Hillary wins Georgia, she will also win all Obama states including CO plus NC. It will not come anywhere close to being important in terms of actually being a state that is crucial to a Hillary victory.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: June 24, 2015, 01:48:00 AM »

With 0% of the vote in, we are ready to project that Jeb Bush is the winner in the state of Georgia....

If Hillary wins Georgia, she will also win all Obama states including CO plus NC. It will not come anywhere close to being important in terms of actually being a state that is crucial to a Hillary victory.

I don't think that's the point. It's that the Clinton campaign considers it a state that COULD come into play realistically. I think that's a pretty reasonable position. No one is saying that GA will be crucial to her winning the election, but it would be indicative of the state of the race nation-wide, if the campaign starts pumping money into GA.
Logged
TomC
TCash101
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,973


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: June 24, 2015, 02:09:35 AM »

Even making a Republicans fight for it and spend resources might help in other places.
Logged
Leinad
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,049
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.03, S: -7.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: June 24, 2015, 02:22:44 AM »

Yeah, I remember when Democrats wasted all that money in solid Republican states like Virginia and Colorado in 2008.

You misspelled "Indiana." Virginia and Colorado are clear purple states, but Indiana, and North Carolina, were the bigger surprises in 2008.



I do agree that North Carolina has a much better chance of going her way. Georgia has been solid Republican for a long time, although it could be close given the fact that there is a fairly large number of Democrats, primarily among black and Hispanic people and urban Atlanta.

Overall, I'd say that if the Democratic nominee wins Georgia, they've won the election. It most likely won't be remotely crucial to a Democrat victory.
Logged
HillOfANight
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,459
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: June 24, 2015, 08:08:38 AM »

Is it unreasonable to think that they could have won in 2008 if they didn't pull out? Loss by 204,636 votes.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/06/25/chris_hayes_the_math_that_could_turn_georgia_blue.html

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Could be an insurance policy against Ohio/Florida turning red?
Logged
ElectionsGuy
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,107
United States


Political Matrix
E: 7.10, S: -7.65

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: June 24, 2015, 08:15:17 AM »

Please Dems, do dump money onto Georgia. Maybe they can get 46% this time!
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,578
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: June 24, 2015, 11:32:25 AM »

Please Dems, do dump money onto Georgia. Maybe they can get 46% this time!
Logged
The Other Castro
Castro2020
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,230
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: June 24, 2015, 11:54:53 AM »


Only if Republicans dump money into Pennsylvania. Maybe they can get 47% this time.
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 #18 on: June 24, 2015, 12:10:59 PM »

Strategy if Walker, Trump or Christie is nominee.  If Jeb is nominee or Rubio, Ga wont matter.
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,303
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: June 24, 2015, 12:40:10 PM »

Georgia won't be important to the electoral math, at least not next year. If there's any doubt about Georgia going Republican, the Republican candidate is toast.
Logged
Mr. Illini
liberty142
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,838
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: June 24, 2015, 02:42:17 PM »

Yeah, I remember when Democrats wasted all that money in solid Republican states like Virginia and Colorado in 2008.

I don't really think you can compare VA and CO to GA. My evidence for this is looking at the 2004 results. CO was not a solid Republican state in 04, Bush won it 51-47, and while VA did give Bush a larger 53-45 margin, Bush won GA 57-41. I doubt that the 04 to 08 swing in VA will be replicated in GA considering that the environment for the Dems will not be nearly as good in 16.

Sometimes a hail mary is more accurately an investment in the future if the rest of the map is favorable
Logged
dudeabides
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,375
Tuvalu
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: June 24, 2015, 04:20:25 PM »

Here is the deal:

So long as Jeb Bush is the GOP nominee, Hillary Clinton's path to 272 becomes a lot harder because he will win Florida, Nevada, and North Carolina. Ohio, Virginia, New Mexico, Colorado, and Iowa would be up for grabs.

With Marco Rubio, it's the same thing.

With Scott Walker, Florida, Nevada, and New Mexico come back into her column. Virginia and Colorado are leaning her way, though up for grabs. North Carolina is 50/50, then Ohio and Iowa lean Walker.

Rand Paul would give her a run for her money in Colorado and New Hampshire, but she might even be able to win a state like Georgia or Missouri.

Without Bush, Walker, or Rubio, Georgia leans Republican, but it's still up for grabs. Same thing with North Carolina, Indiana, Missouri, and Montana.



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 #22 on: June 24, 2015, 05:33:30 PM »

Here is the deal:

So long as Jeb Bush is the GOP nominee, Hillary Clinton's path to 272 becomes a lot harder because he will win Florida, Nevada, and North Carolina. Ohio, Virginia, New Mexico, Colorado, and Iowa would be up for grabs.

With Marco Rubio, it's the same thing.

With Scott Walker, Florida, Nevada, and New Mexico come back into her column. Virginia and Colorado are leaning her way, though up for grabs. North Carolina is 50/50, then Ohio and Iowa lean Walker.

Rand Paul would give her a run for her money in Colorado and New Hampshire, but she might even be able to win a state like Georgia or Missouri.

Without Bush, Walker, or Rubio, Georgia leans Republican, but it's still up for grabs. Same thing with North Carolina, Indiana, Missouri, and Montana.





Uh oh!!!
Dubya, his brother along with Cheney, said that Yacca Mnt should be built in NV. Rubio already supports it.

Jeb says that it shouldnt be forced by govt down throat of NV voters.

NV 4 electors or NH 4 electors would have put Gore the winner. It will be decider in 2016 as well.
Logged
WVdemocrat
DimpledChad
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 954
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: June 24, 2015, 05:42:17 PM »

So long as Jeb Bush is the GOP nominee, Hillary Clinton's path to 272 becomes a lot harder because he will win Florida, Nevada, and North Carolina. Ohio, Virginia, New Mexico, Colorado, and Iowa would be up for grabs.

Florida isn't a lock for Jeb, it's as much Bush country as it is Hillary country. And please tell me your reasoning behind him being a lock to win NV is more elaborate than "muh Hispanic wife" and "muh immigration." Also, news flash: Obama nearly won NC and Hillary's leading in the polls. She, the wife of a very popular former president, would be running against the brother of a very unpopular former president. I'm sure you can come up with reasons why Hillary isn't Bill and Jeb isn't George, but the GP will not see it that way. Hillary will make this a referendum on the Clinton and Bush names, and based on that, she will win.

With Scott Walker, Florida, Nevada, and New Mexico come back into her column. Virginia and Colorado are leaning her way, though up for grabs. North Carolina is 50/50, then Ohio and Iowa lean Walker.

Is that supposed to be an extended home state effect (re: OH and IA)?

I don't understand why Atlas thinks these candidates can only be exclusively competitive. Was Romney only competitive in NH and in the Upper Midwest (he was born in MI, so obviously he'll win there and surrounding states)? No. He didn't nearly win NH or MI or WI. He nearly won Florida. And Virginia, and Ohio. Why? Because when you become a presidential candidate, it no longer matters that you're from Wisconsin or Florida, or that you have a Hispanic wife. The fact that Walker hails from Wisconsin does not mean Florida voters (or voters anywhere else) are going to be less likely to vote for him. Just because Rubio is from Florida, doesn't mean he can't compete in Wisconsin. Just because Jeb has a Hispanic wife, doesn't mean that Colorado, and New Mexico, and Nevada, and Florida are locks for him. We lambaste "Mark Halperin logic" here all the time, so why do we constantly engage in it? Why do we on Atlas engage in arbitrating, months out from Election Day, which states (many of which went for the opposite party in 2012) are a lock for which candidates?
Logged
Donerail
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,345
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: June 24, 2015, 05:46:39 PM »

ITT: generalization of 'Hispanics' as a monolithic group that'll vote the same in Little Havana as in Santa Fe.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« 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 0.056 seconds with 12 queries.