Presidential Ratings and Predictions - Minnesota
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 18, 2024, 04:17:42 PM
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
  Presidential Ratings and Predictions - Minnesota
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Poll
Question: Rate Minnesota and Predict Who Will Win
#1
Safe D
 
#2
Likely D
 
#3
Lean D
 
#4
Toss-Up
 
#5
Lean R
 
#6
Likely R
 
#7
Safe R
 
#8
Clinton
 
#9
Trump
 
#10
Other
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 123

Calculate results by number of options selected
Author Topic: Presidential Ratings and Predictions - Minnesota  (Read 3934 times)
Minnesota Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,055


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: August 23, 2016, 06:26:08 PM »


Obama in 2008 won the state by only 11%, and Hillary won't surpass that performance; stop this nonsense.


Not nonsense IMO. Trump is terrible fit for Minnesota as others have said. He will get killed in the Twin Cities suburbs where Republicans normally split the presidential vote. Trump is the antithesis of Minnesota Nice.   
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,858
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: August 23, 2016, 07:15:58 PM »

In the absence of polls, I cautiously suggest "likely D", Clinton of course winning.

Minnesota swings rather little; it goes about 50% for a weak Democratic nominee and about 58% for a very strong one. Look at how it did with Reagan and with Obama.  A Democratic nominee would have to be just incredibly bad (McGovern in 1972, Mondale without the Favorite Son effect) to lose the state.

It hasn't gone R+ for any Republican since the 1950s... the Democrat would have to win about 60% of the popular vote while winning 58% of the popular vote in Minnesota.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,943
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: August 25, 2016, 10:23:35 PM »


Obama in 2008 won the state by only 11%, and Hillary won't surpass that performance; stop this nonsense.


Trump is going to get crushed with the growing Hmong and Somali populations. Just ask BRTD.

There are an estimated 25k Somalis in Minnesota (of which I'd wager at least half can't vote) and about 66k Hmong (of which more can vote but still less than most people), so really neither is going to be a big factor. Actually most of Minnesota's minority growth is African-Americans and Hispanics.

Still Minnesota is now a 17% non-white state, which means probably about 55% of the white vote is needed for a Republican to win it. Not hard in some states, but hard here...especially for Trump of all people. Like can you see Trump breaking 40% in Edina? And can you imagine a Republican winning Minnesota while performing like that? (Oh btw there was a leaked DCCC poll that showed Trump down by over 20 points in MN-03...now an R+2 seat)
Logged
Pragmatic Conservative
1184AZ
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,735


Political Matrix
E: 3.00, S: -0.41

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: August 25, 2016, 11:19:38 PM »

Safe D
Clinton 54-44-2
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 #29 on: August 25, 2016, 11:41:02 PM »

Clinton by at least 10. Totally Safe D, because I think the GOP here has a hard cap of around 47-47.5% (Pawlenty only reached 46.7% in a mid-term election as an incumbent Governor).
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: September 01, 2016, 07:11:20 PM »

Safe D, Clinton 56-41
Logged
peterthlee
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 568
China


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 07, 2016, 06:41:29 PM »

Safe D-Strong
Clinton 56-42-2
Logged
AGA
Atlas Politician
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,277
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -5.39

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: December 16, 2016, 10:31:22 PM »

This is one of the states that Atlas predicted most inaccurately. I voted Likely D at the time since Minnesota had usually been competitive. People really underestimated the huge Republican swings that occurred in rural areas of the state due to working-class whites.
Logged
rbt48
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,060


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: December 16, 2016, 10:56:50 PM »

For those who have to look it up (like me), Clinton won 46.44 to 44.92%, with a margin of 44,765 votes.
Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,435
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: December 17, 2016, 12:38:33 AM »

This was a classic "epic fail" of Atlasians of all political persuasions....

Although I didn't post in the thread, I confess that I voted "Safe Clinton" thinking she would win here by over 10%, although granted that was back I believe six weeks or so before the election.... buy yeah, despite the warning signs and info from Iowa (which I actually backed Trump winning there even back when) there was a collective failure to assess what that would look like in many parts of rural and small-town Minnesota as well.

In my mind this was even more a surprise than even Wisconsin, which I thought would be closer than many expected on the Forum.
Logged
Arbitrage1980
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 770
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: December 17, 2016, 03:15:47 PM »

This was a classic "epic fail" of Atlasians of all political persuasions....

Although I didn't post in the thread, I confess that I voted "Safe Clinton" thinking she would win here by over 10%, although granted that was back I believe six weeks or so before the election.... buy yeah, despite the warning signs and info from Iowa (which I actually backed Trump winning there even back when) there was a collective failure to assess what that would look like in many parts of rural and small-town Minnesota as well.

In my mind this was even more a surprise than even Wisconsin, which I thought would be closer than many expected on the Forum.

I too was shocked at how close Minnesota was, a state that has not gone GOP since 1972. The closeness in both Minnesota and Maine were big surprises of this election. If Trump had been more disciplined and not said so much incendiary stuff during the campaign, he really could have won some deep blue states.
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 0.045 seconds with 15 queries.