Bush +15 in South Carolina (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 07:57:13 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Polls
  Bush +15 in South Carolina (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Bush +15 in South Carolina  (Read 29796 times)
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« on: July 03, 2004, 04:19:15 AM »

I don't trust Partisan firms, period. Too many times watching Yes Minister...

Although Bush's lead is about the same as 2000 (presuming the poll is trustworthy), his actual numbers appear to be down from 2000.
There doesn't appear to be a % undecided in the poll however.

My *guess* for SC (at the moment and presuming that Edwards isn't Kerry's VP pick. If he is the Dems gain in rural SC) is about 52% for Bush and 45% for Kerry.
Although Bush will still carry SC, his margin will go down. But not enough for him to lose it (indeed it may be a good thing for Bush if his margins drop in some states that he wins anyway).
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #1 on: July 03, 2004, 10:33:30 AM »


My *guess* for SC (at the moment and presuming that Edwards isn't Kerry's VP pick. If he is the Dems gain in rural SC) is about 52% for Bush and 45% for Kerry.

Two polls have been done: Bush up 10 and Bush up 15.  I say it is about Bush up 12.
If Edwards is the VP choice, Bush wins it by 8 or 9 points.

You are waaay underestimating Bush in the south.  The cultural gap between Kerry and the average southern Dem is big...

Actually how much Bush is up by doesn't really matter as much as how much each candidate is polling. I'm assuming that most undecideds will break for Kerry (which is where 45% comes from). The 52% figure for Bush *is* arbitary... 50-55% seems about right, 52% is sort of in the middle.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #2 on: July 03, 2004, 10:44:05 AM »

What ratio do you assume undecideds will breaks towards Kerry?

Generally about 2/3rds I'm thinking (but then again MoE comes along and messes things up). But in a poll with a small amount of undecideds this'll be a higher %

Maths never was my strong point though...
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #3 on: July 03, 2004, 10:50:23 AM »

You greatly overestimate Kerry in the south...you are a dreamer

Possible Smiley
I *am* assuming that racial voting won't be as bad this year.

Although 45% for Kerry in SC is hardly outlandish. 42-46% looks about right.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #4 on: July 03, 2004, 01:29:59 PM »

You greatly overestimate Kerry in the south...you are a dreamer

Possible Smiley
I *am* assuming that racial voting won't be as bad this year.

Although 45% for Kerry in SC is hardly outlandish. 42-46% looks about right.

Does "racial voting" apply to DC or any other major metropolitan area? Or is it just the bad old white people doing it?

It's bad whenever it happens. People voting based on the colour of their skin is just wrong.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #5 on: July 03, 2004, 01:34:03 PM »

No, actually Al is assuming "racial voting" DOES continue. For Kerry is get near 45%, he will need near-universal support from black voters... over 90%.

Whites, on the other hand, are not nearly so driven by race...

Actually he will win over 90% of the Black vote at whatever % he gets in SC.
45% would mean he would win more white voters than Gore did.
---
Even if there was no racial voting, Black people would still be strongly Democrat (due to their economic status). However it would be about 70% not the insane 90% totals you see so often...
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #6 on: July 03, 2004, 02:07:06 PM »

Kennedy won 51.24% in SC
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #7 on: July 03, 2004, 02:20:32 PM »

lol I meant Alfred Smith in 1928, my B. And it was a much bigger deal then.

Seven states have gone for both Catholic candidates... MA, RI, and the Deep South...

The fact that Al Smith was a Catholic caused him to lose the Upper South in a time when memories of the Civil War were still very much alive.
The only good thing to come out of that election was the nickname "Yella Dawg"...
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #8 on: July 04, 2004, 08:44:26 AM »

No, actually Al is assuming "racial voting" DOES continue. For Kerry is get near 45%, he will need near-universal support from black voters... over 90%.

Whites, on the other hand, are not nearly so driven by race...

Actually he will win over 90% of the Black vote at whatever % he gets in SC.
45% would mean he would win more white voters than Gore did.
---
Even if there was no racial voting, Black people would still be strongly Democrat (due to their economic status). However it would be about 70% not the insane 90% totals you see so often...


Underinformed class-based generealization.  Rasmussen Research conducted a national telephone survey of 822 likely voters on August 23, 2000 (margin of sampling error +/- 3 percentage points; 95% level of confidence).  Aside from finding that 16% of the population, when given the WSPQ, scored libertarian and 2% self-identified as libertarians, the poll also concluded:

African Americans comprise the least number of left liberals (9%) and the highest number of libertarians (21%).

Based on these figures, plenty of African Americans should be voting for moderate Republicans for tax cuts and so forth.  That whole poor people vote one way or another plank is overstated, and in the US it is way less predictable than in America.  Plenty of our so-called 'trailer trash' people are both poor and solid Republicans.

First off a lot of "trailer trash" people who vote GOP do it because of social/wedge issues.
Secondly using a poll as a fact is just silly (and besides there is such a thing as a black middle class. Poor blacks would probably remain monolithically Democrat, but not all black people are poor. Underinformed race-based generalisation on your part methinks)

Income is (IMO) a larger factor in voting patterns than is generally realised BUT what people forget is that it's all relative.
Remember being poor in Mississippi is a world away from being poor in Connecticut.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #9 on: July 04, 2004, 08:45:06 AM »

Yeah, but the 'Upper South' is less religious than the Deep South- and more prosperous. Smith lost the Upper South largely for economic reasons.

If you believe that you'll believe anything
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #10 on: July 04, 2004, 03:02:26 PM »

Keep in mind, I live in the Upper South... you're just a dork that looks at numbers all day for politics in a country you don't even reside in...

Responding to this would put me on your level
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #11 on: July 05, 2004, 06:09:27 AM »

Are you even British, or did you immigrate there from Africa or something?

Is this Enoch Powell's ghost I see before me?
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #12 on: July 05, 2004, 01:13:43 PM »

I'll take that as a yes. At least give me props for perception... then again, most communists in Britain are of foreign descent. Not Livingstone, of course...

I'm white actually
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


« Reply #13 on: July 05, 2004, 01:27:37 PM »

I'll take it not of the Christian variety...

I am a Christian
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.03 seconds with 14 queries.