Any chance Hillary breaks 400 EV's?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 10:54:44 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
  Any chance Hillary breaks 400 EV's?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Any chance Hillary breaks 400 EV's?  (Read 1542 times)
TDantuono
Rookie
**
Posts: 93
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 25, 2016, 05:25:06 PM »

How likely do you guys think it is that Khaleesi will break 400 EV's? As the first woman President, and a woman who has worked literally her entire life to get here, it would be such a great thing to see her have the greatest Democratic victory in 40 years. And it would serve as an unquestionable repudiation of Trump and all he represents.
Logged
Horus
Sheliak5
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,552
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2016, 05:25:42 PM »

Not a chance. With today's Obamacare news I doubt she'll even win.
Logged
Southern Delegate matthew27
matthew27
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,668
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.03, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2016, 05:26:35 PM »

No...
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 25, 2016, 05:27:08 PM »

Not a chance. With today's Obamacare news I doubt she'll even win.

lol
Logged
Lachi
lok1999
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,347
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -1.06, S: -3.02

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2016, 05:27:54 PM »

Close, but no.
Logged
Devout Centrist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,099
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2016, 05:27:59 PM »

10-20% chance.
Logged
Dr. Arch
Arch
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,452
Puerto Rico


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 25, 2016, 05:28:57 PM »

Not a chance. With today's Obamacare news I doubt she'll even win.

lol
Logged
TarHeelDem
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,448
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 25, 2016, 05:29:30 PM »

Almost as likely as not.
Logged
TDantuono
Rookie
**
Posts: 93
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 25, 2016, 05:30:31 PM »

I hope she at least outdoes Obama's 2008 result, even if only by a few points. Trump doesn't deserve to do better than McCain or Romney.
Logged
Thomas D
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,042
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.84, S: -6.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 25, 2016, 05:31:41 PM »

I only have her at 340.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 25, 2016, 05:32:19 PM »

Pretty much "What's the chance she flips Texas?"  Right now 538 is showing that anywhere from 10-20% in the three models; so we'll go Moderate Hero and say 15%.

The path to 400 is through Texas.
Logged
bedstuy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,526


Political Matrix
E: -1.16, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 25, 2016, 05:32:52 PM »

I've got her at 375 at the moment.

Add Indiana and Missouri = 396.

400 would be South Carolina or Texas probably, or maybe Montana and SoDak.

Unlikely, but certainly possible.
Logged
GeorgiaModerate
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 25, 2016, 05:34:02 PM »

Right now it seems unlikely but not out of reach.  My current estimate is either 359 (Obama 2012 + NC, AZ, NE-02) or 375 (add GA).  I waffle between them on a daily basis. Smiley 

If there's another major revelation against Trump, then the odds would go up.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,613
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 25, 2016, 05:43:49 PM »

Not a chance. With today's Obamacare news I doubt she'll even win.

Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 25, 2016, 05:48:26 PM »

Yup. To get to 400, she must flip Texas, and if she does do that, it's pretty much guaranteed that she'll reach 400.
Logged
Mehmentum
Icefire9
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,594
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 25, 2016, 05:52:42 PM »


This is 397 EVs.  She needs Texas + just a little bit more.  Georgia is the obvious choice, but literally any additional state would put her over the top.
Logged
TDantuono
Rookie
**
Posts: 93
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 25, 2016, 05:56:18 PM »

Make it so.
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 #17 on: October 25, 2016, 05:58:04 PM »

Not a chance. With today's Obamacare news I doubt she'll even win.

If you're serious, find a compassionate doctor to help remove the pearls choking you.
Logged
Rules for me, but not for thee
Dabeav
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,785
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.19, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: October 25, 2016, 05:59:22 PM »

Not a chance. With today's Obamacare news I doubt she'll even win.

I wish that was true, but libs love their failure that is Obamacare.  It's not even going to help the marginally poor now, just the destitute and millions paying the price for thousands doesn't even pass the Vulcan idiom of "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one." 
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 #19 on: October 25, 2016, 06:05:38 PM »

Not a chance. With today's Obamacare news I doubt she'll even win.

I wish that was true, but libs love their failure that is Obamacare.  It's not even going to help the marginally poor now, just the destitute and millions paying the price for thousands doesn't even pass the Vulcan idiom of "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one." 

No, it wasn't a failure. The failure was keeping the private insurance industry as the dominant player in the market. Having said that, the alternative was unsustainable. If anything, this news will only drive support for a single-payer, even if only at the state level, as it permits the government to have more power of the price signals, which is how the universal systems (as-someone-who-lives-with-one-don't-even-try-to-spout-inaccurate-bs-about-them) have lower overheads and can limit cost-growth.

This isn't rocket-science... kind of interesting that Hillary's healthcare plan would have avoided this. Ah well.
Logged
Rules for me, but not for thee
Dabeav
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,785
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.19, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: October 25, 2016, 06:14:28 PM »

Not a chance. With today's Obamacare news I doubt she'll even win.

I wish that was true, but libs love their failure that is Obamacare.  It's not even going to help the marginally poor now, just the destitute and millions paying the price for thousands doesn't even pass the Vulcan idiom of "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one." 

No, it wasn't a failure. The failure was keeping the private insurance industry as the dominant player in the market. Having said that, the alternative was unsustainable. If anything, this news will only drive support for a single-payer, even if only at the state level, as it permits the government to have more power of the price signals, which is how the universal systems (as-someone-who-lives-with-one-don't-even-try-to-spout-inaccurate-bs-about-them) have lower overheads and can limit cost-growth.

This isn't rocket-science... kind of interesting that Hillary's healthcare plan would have avoided this. Ah well.

I'd like a real free market alternative. No huge conglomorates pushing their weight around, cheap doctors visits, etc.  But that's a lot harder to tear down the garbage that's in place now vs going full single-payer.

Obamacare is a failure because it socialized the costs but not the benefits. Only a select few get benefit, it's like a huge insurance ponzi scheme.  Either provide basic healthcare for all that pay in or scrap the whole system!
Logged
Devout Centrist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,099
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: October 25, 2016, 06:17:33 PM »

Not a chance. With today's Obamacare news I doubt she'll even win.

I wish that was true, but libs love their failure that is Obamacare.  It's not even going to help the marginally poor now, just the destitute and millions paying the price for thousands doesn't even pass the Vulcan idiom of "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one." 

No, it wasn't a failure. The failure was keeping the private insurance industry as the dominant player in the market. Having said that, the alternative was unsustainable. If anything, this news will only drive support for a single-payer, even if only at the state level, as it permits the government to have more power of the price signals, which is how the universal systems (as-someone-who-lives-with-one-don't-even-try-to-spout-inaccurate-bs-about-them) have lower overheads and can limit cost-growth.

This isn't rocket-science... kind of interesting that Hillary's healthcare plan would have avoided this. Ah well.
Obamacare is a failure because it socialized the costs but not the benefits. Only a select few get benefit, it's like a huge insurance ponzi scheme.  Either provide basic healthcare for all that pay in or scrap the whole system!
You basically just argued for either a single payer system or something very similar to what the Japanese or Dutch have.

That is to say, not uber free market.
Logged
elcorazon
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,402


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: October 25, 2016, 06:19:28 PM »

about this.
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 #23 on: October 25, 2016, 06:21:29 PM »
« Edited: October 25, 2016, 06:24:28 PM by Fmr President & Senator Polnut »

Not a chance. With today's Obamacare news I doubt she'll even win.

I wish that was true, but libs love their failure that is Obamacare.  It's not even going to help the marginally poor now, just the destitute and millions paying the price for thousands doesn't even pass the Vulcan idiom of "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one." 

No, it wasn't a failure. The failure was keeping the private insurance industry as the dominant player in the market. Having said that, the alternative was unsustainable. If anything, this news will only drive support for a single-payer, even if only at the state level, as it permits the government to have more power of the price signals, which is how the universal systems (as-someone-who-lives-with-one-don't-even-try-to-spout-inaccurate-bs-about-them) have lower overheads and can limit cost-growth.

This isn't rocket-science... kind of interesting that Hillary's healthcare plan would have avoided this. Ah well.

I'd like a real free market alternative. No huge conglomorates pushing their weight around, cheap doctors visits, etc.  But that's a lot harder to tear down the garbage that's in place now vs going full single-payer.

Obamacare is a failure because it socialized the costs but not the benefits. Only a select few get benefit, it's like a huge insurance ponzi scheme.  Either provide basic healthcare for all that pay in or scrap the whole system!

The conglomerates are a consequence of the free-market approach. Healthcare is a basic need, therefore, given that, people will pay what the market dictates, in the healthcare free-market there is NO actual real concept of competition to drive costs down.

Actually, no the costs are the issue. Increasing access is still the primary benefit of the universal system, it's the key to increasing health outcomes. You don't see the benefits immediately, because it's the nature of those types of healthcare systems, the idea that more of the population will have access to the system, is a long-term benefit. The best idea would be state-level government single-payer options that would get a lot of attention and actually be the best way to force the playing field into level and force genuine "competition" but in this context, competition means establishing a new baseline and forcing the expectations of the market down. I'm someone who believes in the free-market and the benefit of competition, but not when it comes to essential services.
Logged
BuckeyeNut
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,458


Political Matrix
E: -8.65, S: -7.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: October 25, 2016, 06:22:21 PM »


This is 397 EVs.  She needs Texas + just a little bit more.  Georgia is the obvious choice, but literally any additional state would put her over the top.
If she's winning Texas, she's maybe also winning NE-01 in addition to NE-02. Toss in Georgia, and that's it.
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 0.062 seconds with 13 queries.