Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 19, 2014, 02:20:15 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Election What-ifs? (Moderators: Bacon King, Dallasfan65)
| | |-+  "2006 Timeline and on......" Discussion Thread
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: "2006 Timeline and on......" Discussion Thread  (Read 2130 times)
GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7411
United States


View Profile
« on: June 28, 2009, 12:11:39 pm »
Ignore

Lets talk about the election night 2008 so far. With all of the states reporting at the presidential level, we do not have a winner. Clinton is not far away from 270 but he is still not there yet and Bush is far behind.

Here is an update of the three maps so far.

Beginning with the all important presidential map...



Bush: 204
Clinton: 255
Not Called: 79
270 to win


Now to the senatorial desk...




And to the gubernatorial map...





So there are the maps. There are some states that are too close to call on the presidential level...Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio, Colorado, Hawaii, Washington, and Oregon. Where do we think that these states will go? Will Bill Clinton win the election or will Bush win? On the senate map, there are many races still too close to call including Elizabeth Dole vs. Kay Hagan in north Carolina. Where will states like that go? What do you make of the gubernatorial elections so far? Has anything surprised you so far on any of the election levels? Discuss.

Logged

tmthforu94
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18577
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.74, S: -2.09


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2009, 01:52:15 pm »
Ignore

In this close of an election, Bush would have won Kentucky and Arizona.
I can't find anything else majorly wrong with it, though.
Logged


Upset: Hogan wins in Maryland
Bold Prediction: Deal wins outright, avoiding a runoff
GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7411
United States


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 28, 2009, 02:13:21 pm »
Ignore

In this close of an election, Bush would have won Kentucky and Arizona.
I can't find anything else majorly wrong with it, though.
Arizona went because of such a large latino turnout for Clinton. Kentucky was very close. But, Clinton performed well there in 1992 and 1996.

What do you make of Hawaii?
« Last Edit: June 28, 2009, 02:23:52 pm by GPORTER »Logged

tmthforu94
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18577
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.74, S: -2.09


View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: June 28, 2009, 03:56:22 pm »
Ignore

In this close of an election, Bush would have won Kentucky and Arizona.
I can't find anything else majorly wrong with it, though.
Arizona went because of such a large latino turnout for Clinton. Kentucky was very close. But, Clinton performed well there in 1992 and 1996.

What do you make of Hawaii?
Nothing.
The only reason Obama won it by so much because he was "born there". It would have been a toss-up otherwise.
Logged


Upset: Hogan wins in Maryland
Bold Prediction: Deal wins outright, avoiding a runoff
GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7411
United States


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: June 28, 2009, 05:23:08 pm »
Ignore

A question for Bayh '10 and other posters and readers in this thread...who do you think is going to win?
Logged

tmthforu94
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18577
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.74, S: -2.09


View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 28, 2009, 06:04:22 pm »
Ignore

Clinton wins. Because in your final polling map, you had Hawaii as deep red. That would give Clinton the 270 votes needed to win.
Logged


Upset: Hogan wins in Maryland
Bold Prediction: Deal wins outright, avoiding a runoff
JerryBrown2010
KyleGordon2016
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 743
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.68, S: -9.30

P P P
View Profile
« Reply #6 on: June 28, 2009, 06:20:42 pm »
Ignore

Clinton!
Logged
pogo stick
JewishConservative
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3523
United States


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: June 28, 2009, 08:16:43 pm »
Ignore

Clinton
Logged

Economic score: -6.80
Social score: -0.97
I'm a crazy Liberal  Troll. LAWL

ndvc ,b., b


CRAZY GAY TROLL LIBRAL FROM ALABAMAS
Alabama is dum redecks!


Gays and minorites are sexeh
Grad Students are the Worst
Alcon
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29691
United States


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: June 28, 2009, 11:20:32 pm »
Ignore

The only reason Obama won it by so much because he was "born there". It would have been a toss-up otherwise.

Strong Democratic year

Swing back from massive pro-incumbent bias

High number of mixed race persons

= toss-up?!

Not like being born in Colorado did John Kerry any good there.  Sure, having native roots boosted Obama's incredible popularity in Hawai'i.  But it was the difference between megalandslide and supermegalandslide.

But Hawaii would have swung McCain?  (It'd have to, to be a toss-up)
« Last Edit: June 28, 2009, 11:29:45 pm by Alcon »Logged

n/c
GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7411
United States


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2009, 05:27:28 pm »
Ignore

And here is the final gubernatorial map for the 2008 election...

Logged

GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7411
United States


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: June 29, 2009, 07:36:00 pm »
Ignore

A major upset has just been projected on the presidential level. It has been projected that Hawaii has gone to George W Bush.



Bush: 251
Clinton: 267
Not Called: 20
270 to win
Logged

Lief
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 34868


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: June 29, 2009, 07:39:51 pm »
Ignore

In the 2008 exit polls, 58% of Oregon voters "Strongly Disapproved" of Bush's job performance (with 72% disapproving over all). The numbers were similar in Hawaii, with 76% disapproving over all.

Please explain how George W. Bush won these states against Bill Clinton.
Logged

GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7411
United States


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: June 29, 2009, 07:47:39 pm »
Ignore

In the 2008 exit polls, 58% of Oregon voters "Strongly Disapproved" of Bush's job performance (with 72% disapproving over all). The numbers were similar in Hawaii, with 76% disapproving over all.

Please explain how George W. Bush won these states against Bill Clinton.
Read the entire timeline. This is different. President Bush did some things differently late in his second term.

Obama's birth state was Hawaii. This gave him a landslide victory. With the democratic tickets in this scenario, there is no one with any connection to Hawaii. Nader just about gave Oregon to Clinton. Clinton is unpopular in Oregon and Washington. Look at Hillary Clinton's numbers there if she had been the nominee.
Logged

GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7411
United States


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: June 29, 2009, 07:59:10 pm »
Ignore

And another state has been called in this election. Could we be ready to make a major projection for the presidency? The answer is no or  atleast not yet.



Bush: 261
Clinton: 267
Not Called: 10
270 to win

Wisconsin goes to Bush
Logged

Lief
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 34868


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: June 29, 2009, 08:08:42 pm »
Ignore

In the 2008 exit polls, 58% of Oregon voters "Strongly Disapproved" of Bush's job performance (with 72% disapproving over all). The numbers were similar in Hawaii, with 76% disapproving over all.

Please explain how George W. Bush won these states against Bill Clinton.
Read the entire timeline. This is different. President Bush did some things differently late in his second term.

Obama's birth state was Hawaii. This gave him a landslide victory. With the democratic tickets in this scenario, there is no one with any connection to Hawaii. Nader just about gave Oregon to Clinton. Clinton is unpopular in Oregon and Washington. Look at Hillary Clinton's numbers there if she had been the nominee.

I did read the timeline, and I didn't really see anything he did differently, at least not differently enough to narrowly win/lose re-election, especially against an incredibly popular President who left the country better off than Bush did. And Clinton won Hawaii in a landslide when he ran for re-election (and by 12 points when he ran the first time). Even Kerry won Hawaii easily. And Bush was very unpopular in the Pacific Northwest. If Oregon didn't vote for him 2004, when he had 50-50 approvals (actually swinging Democratic rather strongly), why would it vote for him in 2008?
Logged

GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7411
United States


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: June 29, 2009, 08:23:31 pm »
Ignore

In the 2008 exit polls, 58% of Oregon voters "Strongly Disapproved" of Bush's job performance (with 72% disapproving over all). The numbers were similar in Hawaii, with 76% disapproving over all.

Please explain how George W. Bush won these states against Bill Clinton.
Read the entire timeline. This is different. President Bush did some things differently late in his second term.

Obama's birth state was Hawaii. This gave him a landslide victory. With the democratic tickets in this scenario, there is no one with any connection to Hawaii. Nader just about gave Oregon to Clinton. Clinton is unpopular in Oregon and Washington. Look at Hillary Clinton's numbers there if she had been the nominee.

I did read the timeline, and I didn't really see anything he did differently, at least not differently enough to narrowly win/lose re-election, especially against an incredibly popular President who left the country better off than Bush did. And Clinton won Hawaii in a landslide when he ran for re-election (and by 12 points when he ran the first time). Even Kerry won Hawaii easily. And Bush was very unpopular in the Pacific Northwest. If Oregon didn't vote for him 2004, when he had 50-50 approvals (actually swinging Democratic rather strongly), why would it vote for him in 2008?
What do you think that the final outcome of the presidential election is going to be?
Logged

tmthforu94
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18577
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.74, S: -2.09


View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: June 29, 2009, 08:24:26 pm »
Ignore

In the 2008 exit polls, 58% of Oregon voters "Strongly Disapproved" of Bush's job performance (with 72% disapproving over all). The numbers were similar in Hawaii, with 76% disapproving over all.

Please explain how George W. Bush won these states against Bill Clinton.
Read the entire timeline. This is different. President Bush did some things differently late in his second term.

Obama's birth state was Hawaii. This gave him a landslide victory. With the democratic tickets in this scenario, there is no one with any connection to Hawaii. Nader just about gave Oregon to Clinton. Clinton is unpopular in Oregon and Washington. Look at Hillary Clinton's numbers there if she had been the nominee.

I did read the timeline, and I didn't really see anything he did differently, at least not differently enough to narrowly win/lose re-election, especially against an incredibly popular President who left the country better off than Bush did. And Clinton won Hawaii in a landslide when he ran for re-election (and by 12 points when he ran the first time). Even Kerry won Hawaii easily. And Bush was very unpopular in the Pacific Northwest. If Oregon didn't vote for him 2004, when he had 50-50 approvals (actually swinging Democratic rather strongly), why would it vote for him in 2008?
What do you think that the final outcome of the presidential election is going to be?
Florida 2000 all over, except Clinton ends up winning. (Although the map would look better if Bush lost Oregon, and won Minnesota.
Logged


Upset: Hogan wins in Maryland
Bold Prediction: Deal wins outright, avoiding a runoff
GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7411
United States


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: June 29, 2009, 09:21:36 pm »
Ignore

The final senate map for 2008 is now being projected...


« Last Edit: June 29, 2009, 10:52:47 pm by GPORTER »Logged

GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7411
United States


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: June 29, 2009, 11:02:02 pm »
Ignore

BREAKING NEWS FLASH:

George W Bush has been reelected to a third term as President. After two recounts, Bush has taken the lead in the state of Minnesota. The Clinton campaign attempted for another recount. But, the Bush campaign sued the Clinton campaign so much that the Clinton campaign did not have the money necessary to pay for a third recount. Therefore, the results from the second recount were accepted and President Bush was projected to have carried Minnesota and the presidency.

Logged

GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7411
United States


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: June 29, 2009, 11:12:16 pm »
Ignore

Here are the final maps for the 2008 election.

President:




Senate:


Gubernatorial:



House of Representatives:
Republican: 268
Democrat: 167


Balance of Power in Washington:
President Bush and Vice President Cheney are reelected to another four years
Republicans hold control of the house, but democrats gain control of the senate
Democrats win six out of 11 gubernatorial elections
« Last Edit: July 01, 2009, 04:05:53 pm by GPORTER »Logged

Hashemite
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31603
Colombia


Political Matrix
E: -1.29, S: -7.30


View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: June 30, 2009, 08:22:45 am »
Ignore

rofl
Logged


tonyreyes89
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 75
United States


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: June 30, 2009, 10:53:06 am »
Ignore

rofl


HAHA
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8798
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: June 30, 2009, 11:23:02 am »
Ignore

George W Bush has been reelected to a third term as President.

Oh, can you imagine? Lol. I think i'd move to another planet.
Logged

Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines