Clinton vs Cruz
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 07:58:35 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 vs Cruz
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Clinton vs Cruz  (Read 3884 times)
Devils30
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,967
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.06, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 16, 2015, 12:28:17 PM »



I think states like NH would be completely out of the picture for Cruz. He would get destroyed in northern suburbs and even possibly lose states like Montana without a huge evangelical population. Georgia would be close but it is inelastic and helps GOP for now.
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2015, 12:31:54 PM »

Cruz would not lose Montana, and I think even Arizona and Missouri are a stretch.
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2015, 12:59:01 PM »



I think states like NH would be completely out of the picture for Cruz. He would get destroyed in northern suburbs and even possibly lose states like Montana without a huge evangelical population. Georgia would be close but it is inelastic and helps GOP for now.


Wrong. Cruz carries MT, AZ MO and IN and probably NC. I dont see him doing worse than Romney
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2015, 01:02:38 PM »

Cruz would not lose Montana, and I think even Arizona and Missouri are a stretch.

A lot of conventional wisdom is that moderates win more votes than candidates on the extremes. But there is no evidence for that. 1964 and 1972 are the elections that pundits like to point to but they were 52 and 44 years ago when over 20% of the electorate was up for grabs. Today it is 5-10% at best.

A 1964 or 1972 rout woudnt happen today. Karl Rove said even George McGovern in 2008 would have had a good chance of winning.
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 16, 2015, 01:05:26 PM »

Same as 2012, slightly bigger Democratic margin of victory in the popular vote.

Nope...wont happen. There is no example of a party going for its third straight electoral victory where they get MORE popular votes. Even FDR in 1940 got fewer votes than in 1936.

2016 will be closer than 2012 REGARDLESS of the candidates. I think based on unemployment that 2016 is a close DEM win. About 1-2 points less than 2012.


Most people dont know who Ted Cruz is. The problem with Atlas is you think people pay attention to candidates like you do, they dont.
Logged
JonathanSwift
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,122
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 16, 2015, 01:09:08 PM »


287-251
Logged
Devils30
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,967
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.06, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 16, 2015, 01:10:42 PM »

I think the Rs here are discounting the idea of Cruz becoming toxic like Akin, Mourdock at the national level. When Clinton points out his strategy to get his away is to whine and shut down the government, he will have little response that resonates. GOP can still lose ground with educated whites, hence why NC would flip.
Logged
Illiniwek
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,866
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: November 16, 2015, 01:13:02 PM »


That's a funny joke.
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 #8 on: November 16, 2015, 01:32:52 PM »

Assume that Republicans can't do worse than 2012 at your peril; Cruz could easily prove that idea wrong. I think he'd do slightly worse than Romney, losing the Obama states and NC, while losing the popular vote by 5-6%.
Logged
The Other Castro
Castro2020
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,230
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: November 16, 2015, 01:46:48 PM »

Unless there's some major Republican trend going on in Iowa, I highly doubt Clinton would do worse than Obama 2012. She'd most likely win North Carolina, and probably have a decent shot at Missouri and Arizona. We're probably too polarized at the moment for her to win states like Montana, Indiana, or Georgia though.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: November 16, 2015, 01:57:35 PM »

Polarization is definitely a thing but it breaks down when people don't turn out, and I think a lot of Republicans wouldn't vote if Cruz is the nominee.
Logged
dudeabides
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,375
Tuvalu
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: November 16, 2015, 01:58:14 PM »

Polarization is definitely a thing but it breaks down when people don't turn out, and I think a lot of Republicans wouldn't vote if Cruz is the nominee.

OMG! I agree with Lief!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Logged
yankeesfan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,148
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: November 16, 2015, 02:00:56 PM »

Polarization is definitely a thing but it breaks down when people don't turn out, and I think a lot of Republicans wouldn't vote if Cruz is the nominee.

I think a Clinton vs. Cruz election would have the highest voter turnout in recent history.
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: November 16, 2015, 02:47:24 PM »

Polarization is definitely a thing but it breaks down when people don't turn out, and I think a lot of Republicans wouldn't vote if Cruz is the nominee.

I think that's true to a small extent, but I don't think there are that many ACTUAL GOP voters who would bail on Cruz. Obviously some people here and some people on the TV would be hesitant, but Cruz would largely get real GOP voters and probably amp up turnout for others.
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,192
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: November 16, 2015, 02:49:43 PM »

I don't know. The trouble with Cruz as a candidate isn't ideological, but vaguely personal. He looks like a casting call for "Corrupt Politico #5". Notoriously, everybody who works with him thinks he's a giant tool, which could hurt and help him in the general. That said, he is a very intelligent candidate, perhaps one of the smartest in the field. I think Hils would be favoured, but it wouldn't be a blowout like it would be against weaker candidates like Jeb.
Logged
Free Bird
TheHawk
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,918
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.84, S: -5.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: November 16, 2015, 03:22:48 PM »

Once more, are these predictions what COULD happen, or what you WANT to happen?
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: November 16, 2015, 04:02:18 PM »

Polarization is definitely a thing but it breaks down when people don't turn out, and I think a lot of Republicans wouldn't vote if Cruz is the nominee.

OMG! I agree with Lief!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Most honest, hardworking Americans do, old friend.
Logged
ScottieF
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 349


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: November 16, 2015, 04:09:42 PM »

Hillary wins with Obama '08 map minus Indiana, popular vote by ~8%. Arizona, maybe Missouri and Georgia are all in play.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: November 16, 2015, 04:43:27 PM »


323: Fmr. Sen. Hillary Clinton(D-NY)/Sen. Cory Booker(D-NJ) - 51.7%
215: Sen. Rafael "Ted" Cruz(R-TX)/Sen. Joni Ernst(R-IA) - 46.2%
Logged
Devils30
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,967
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.06, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: November 16, 2015, 06:41:32 PM »

Cruz won't win Florida, he's not a south Florida Cuban and that's a big deal. And there are not these missing white voters that will all be showing up just to vote for Cruz. The GOP base showed up in 2012 and still lost.
Logged
Mehmentum
Icefire9
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,594
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: November 16, 2015, 06:52:40 PM »

Same as 2012, slightly bigger Democratic margin of victory in the popular vote.

Nope...wont happen. There is no example of a party going for its third straight electoral victory where they get MORE popular votes. Even FDR in 1940 got fewer votes than in 1936.

Remember before the 2012 election, how people were saying it'd been a century since the last time a president had been re-elected with fewer EVs than their first election?
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: November 16, 2015, 06:58:25 PM »

yeah, presidential records are designed to be broken
Logged
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,139
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: November 16, 2015, 07:03:59 PM »

Same as 2012, slightly bigger Democratic margin of victory in the popular vote.

Nope...wont happen. There is no example of a party going for its third straight electoral victory where they get MORE popular votes. Even FDR in 1940 got fewer votes than in 1936.

Remember before the 2012 election, how people were saying it'd been a century since the last time a president had been re-elected with fewer EVs than their first election?

Remember how no Democrat had won without Tennessee before 2008, and how no Republican had won without California until 2000? Remember how the Weekly World News Alien always endorsed the winner until 2012? Dozens of these are broken every election cycle, so they're pretty much meaningless.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: November 16, 2015, 07:13:21 PM »

yeah presidential candidates never win re-election to their second term by a smaller margin either... until literally last election Roll Eyes
Logged
JonathanSwift
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,122
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: November 16, 2015, 07:13:56 PM »
« Edited: November 16, 2015, 07:19:22 PM by عبدالله الحظرد »

Same as 2012, slightly bigger Democratic margin of victory in the popular vote.

Nope...wont happen. There is no example of a party going for its third straight electoral victory where they get MORE popular votes. Even FDR in 1940 got fewer votes than in 1936.

Remember before the 2012 election, how people were saying it'd been a century since the last time a president had been re-elected with fewer EVs than their first election?

Remember how no Democrat had won without Tennessee before 2008, and how no Republican had won without California until 2000? Remember how the Weekly World News Alien always endorsed the winner until 2012? Dozens of these are broken every election cycle, so they're pretty much meaningless.

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1960

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1880
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 0.057 seconds with 12 queries.