Atlas Forum

Election Archive => 2008 Elections => Topic started by: WalterMitty on March 25, 2008, 11:23:32 pm



Title: virginia.
Post by: WalterMitty on March 25, 2008, 11:23:32 pm
why are the obama supporters so confident about virginia?

is it because of the big primary win there?

is it because of tim kaine?

is it because obama is so gosh darn inspiring?

i fail to see any way any democrat is going to carry va in 08.  i just dont see it, fellows.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Lief 🐋 on March 25, 2008, 11:28:11 pm
Trending-Democratic rapidly, big primary win, he does well in polls there, he appeals well to the rapidly growing NoVA voters, and there's a considerable black population in the state.

It's definitely one of the states that he'll have a good shot at taking.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Sam Spade on March 25, 2008, 11:29:07 pm
Ironically, the problem Obama will have in VA is the same area of the state that torpedoed Allen in 2006.  Life is kind of odd.

Anyway, I would predict that VA will probably be somewhere in-between +3-+5 of the national margin in 2008, depending on the candidate.  So yes, a VP from here could swing the state, maybe.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Torie on March 25, 2008, 11:33:21 pm
Ironically, the problem Obama will have in VA is the same area of the state that torpedoed Allen in 2006.  Life is kind of odd.

Anyway, I would predict that VA will probably be somewhere in-between +3-+5 of the national margin in 2008, depending on the candidate.  So yes, a VP from here could swing the state, maybe.

With McCain running, Virginia will be a least a bit more GOP than the nation, against either Dem. Thus I don't consider it a critical swing state.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: ChrisFromNJ on March 25, 2008, 11:36:09 pm
Ironically, the problem Obama will have in VA is the same area of the state that torpedoed Allen in 2006.  Life is kind of odd.

Anyway, I would predict that VA will probably be somewhere in-between +3-+5 of the national margin in 2008, depending on the candidate.  So yes, a VP from here could swing the state, maybe.

With McCain running, Virginia will be a least a bit more GOP than the nation, against either Dem. Thus I don't consider it a critical swing state.

Based on what? McCain struggled in a (pretty much) uncontested Virginia primary. This is probably one of his weakest leaning Republican states electorally.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Sam Spade on March 25, 2008, 11:36:20 pm
Ironically, the problem Obama will have in VA is the same area of the state that torpedoed Allen in 2006.  Life is kind of odd.

Anyway, I would predict that VA will probably be somewhere in-between +3-+5 of the national margin in 2008, depending on the candidate.  So yes, a VP from here could swing the state, maybe.

With McCain running, Virginia will be a least a bit more GOP than the nation, against either Dem. Thus I don't consider it a critical swing state.

Ya, I meant +3 to +5 GOP.  Forgot to include that.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: WalterMitty on March 25, 2008, 11:36:42 pm
waltermitty official prediction:

take note all of you little obama supporters who think white southerners who vote clinton in the primary are 'racist'

buchanan county va, where clinton won 90% of the vote, will go for obama if he is in fact the democrat nominee.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Smash255 on March 25, 2008, 11:42:27 pm
The state is trending Democratic, it was 5.7% more GOP than the national average in 2004, following that same trend it puts it @ 3% more GOP than the national average.  If anything the trend in Virginia towards the Democrats has picked up even more steam since 2004, so the 04-08 trend against the national average would likely be even heavier than the 00-04 trend.  Top that off with higher black turnout as well with Obama having more appeal than the typical Democrat would in leftward FLYING Northern Virginia.  In VA I would say Hillary could be within 3 points of the national average and possibly 2, Obama looks like he can very well be even with the national average.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: bullmoose88 on March 25, 2008, 11:44:29 pm
The state is trending Democratic, it was 5.7% more GOP than the national average in 2004, following that same trend it puts it @ 3% more GOP than the national average.  If anything the trend in Virginia towards the Democrats has picked up even more steam since 2004, so the 04-08 trend against the national average would likely be even heavier than the 00-04 trend.  Top that off with higher black turnout as well with Obama having more appeal than the typical Democrat would in leftward FLYING Northern Virginia.  In VA I would say Hillary could be within 3 points of the national average and possibly 2, Obama looks like he can very well be even with the national average.


My math and econometrics professors always warned against taking trends from the last data point or two and extrapolating forward.

It would be more conservative and wiser to say take the trend back from say 88 or 92 and seeing where that put VA.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: ChrisFromNJ on March 25, 2008, 11:45:27 pm
waltermitty official prediction:

take note all of you little obama supporters who think white southerners who vote clinton in the primary are 'racist'

buchanan county va, where clinton won 90% of the vote, will go for obama if he is in fact the democrat nominee.

I'm just curious, are you initially trying to bait Obama supporters? I am new here, but I've been a lurker for a few months, and I have noticed this is a consistent pattern with you. Would you quit it with the snide tone and the indignation towards Obama supporters? Nobody has brought up racism in this thread. Let's have a peaceful discussion.

Now.... back on topic. I do think Obama's huge primary win in a heavily contested primary, breaking even in the white vote against a formidable challenger... those are all good signs that he plays very well in Virginia, moreso than HRC. Will I say that it is a guarentee that Obama will win the state not? Of course not. It will lean Republican. But I do think Obama will put it in play, unlike Hillary Clinton. And putting it in play will make the GOP spend precious resources defending their own turf. They cannot afford to lose Virginia.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: WalterMitty on March 25, 2008, 11:46:55 pm
yes nova has been trending (i hate that term) democrat.

but keep in mind who is the republican nominee.  not george w.bush.  john mccain.  it seems to me he is very acceptable to many suburbanites.

he wont win nova, but i think he can slow the bleeding.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: bullmoose88 on March 25, 2008, 11:50:26 pm
yes nova has been trending (i hate that term) democrat.

but keep in mind who is the republican nominee.  not george w.bush.  john mccain.  it seems to me he is very acceptable to many suburbanites.

he wont win nova, but i think he can slow the bleeding.

True, and can Obama stop the bleeding in ever Republican growing Southside?


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Democratic Hawk on March 25, 2008, 11:50:55 pm
waltermitty official prediction:

take note all of you little obama supporters who think white southerners who vote clinton in the primary are 'racist'

buchanan county va, where clinton won 90% of the vote, will go for obama if he is in fact the democrat nominee.

I should hope that any county that is heavily Democratic at the presidential level, which strongly favored Clinton in the primary would vote for Obama in the general - and vice versa

Dave


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: ottermax on March 25, 2008, 11:52:56 pm
yes nova has been trending (i hate that term) democrat.

but keep in mind who is the republican nominee.  not george w.bush.  john mccain.  it seems to me he is very acceptable to many suburbanites.

he wont win nova, but i think he can slow the bleeding.

Why yes, McCain does not scare suburbanites, but Clinton sure does. I live in the stereotypical suburb, and everyone here hates Clinton. Obama will at least stand a chance against McCain in the suburbs, which happen to be home to many many voters.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: WalterMitty on March 25, 2008, 11:57:23 pm
yes nova has been trending (i hate that term) democrat.

but keep in mind who is the republican nominee.  not george w.bush.  john mccain.  it seems to me he is very acceptable to many suburbanites.

he wont win nova, but i think he can slow the bleeding.

True, and can Obama stop the bleeding in ever Republican growing Southside?

depends on what you  mean by southside?

i expect any democrat to do well in the cities of martinsville, south boston and danville.

the rural (white areas) of southside, mccain should do very well.  east of say halifax county, id definitely expect obama to perform better than clinton.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: auburntiger on March 25, 2008, 11:59:01 pm
Also keep in mind that Kaine, Warner, and Webb are moderate Dems, while Obama and Clinton are liberal democrats. Obama's ceiling in VA will be 48% of the vote.

Virginia has yet to be contested on the national level as a true battleground. This is the first time in years VA's even been considered a swing state. It will take more than one election cycle to solidify that trend to the left enough to go Democrat, especially against McCain. For example, take New Jersey and New Hampshire...solid GOP in 1988, swing states that leaned to the right of the national average in 1992, but the national margin was great enough to swing them barely Dem, 1996 both were left of the national average. In 2000, NJ was solid Dem wheras NH swung back right in 2000, before making its assumed journey into solid democrat territory to stay.

However, if Warner had gotten the nomination this year, Virginia would have seen a seismic shift to the Dems, maybe a 15% shift or greater in terms of the national average


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Lief 🐋 on March 26, 2008, 12:01:25 am
Also keep in mind that Kaine, Warner, and Webb are moderate Dems, while Obama and Clinton are liberal democrats. Obama's ceiling in VA will be 48% of the vote.

Virginia has yet to be contested on the national level as a true battleground. This is the first time in years VA's even been considered a swing state. It will take more than one election cycle to solidify that trend to the left enough to go Democrat, especially against McCain. For example, take New Jersey and New Hampshire...solid GOP in 1988, swing states that leaned to the right of the national average in 1992, but the national margin was great enough to swing them barely Dem, 1996 both were left of the national average. In 2000, NJ was solid Dem wheras NH swung back right in 2000, before making its assumed journey into solid democrat territory to stay.

However, if Warner had gotten the nomination this year, Virginia would have seen a seismic shift to the Dems, maybe a 15% shift or greater in terms of the national average
Webb isn't a moderate Democrat...

Also, I fail to understand why McCain has some huge appeal to Virginians that George W. Bush lacked.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Torie on March 26, 2008, 12:02:22 am
Leif, Bush won Virginia by 8% in 2004.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: bullmoose88 on March 26, 2008, 12:02:36 am
Also keep in mind that Kaine, Warner, and Webb are moderate Dems, while Obama and Clinton are liberal democrats. Obama's ceiling in VA will be 48% of the vote.

Virginia has yet to be contested on the national level as a true battleground. This is the first time in years VA's even been considered a swing state. It will take more than one election cycle to solidify that trend to the left enough to go Democrat, especially against McCain. For example, take New Jersey and New Hampshire...solid GOP in 1988, swing states that leaned to the right of the national average in 1992, but the national margin was great enough to swing them barely Dem, 1996 both were left of the national average. In 2000, NJ was solid Dem wheras NH swung back right in 2000, before making its assumed journey into solid democrat territory to stay.

However, if Warner had gotten the nomination this year, Virginia would have seen a seismic shift to the Dems, maybe a 15% shift or greater in terms of the national average
Webb isn't a moderate Democrat...

Also, I fail to understand why McCain has some huge appeal to Virginians that George W. Bush lacked.

It may not so much be huge appeal rather than that mccain won't face the same sort of animosity Bush faced in nova04


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on March 26, 2008, 12:03:30 am
Also keep in mind that Kaine, Warner, and Webb are moderate Dems, while Obama and Clinton are liberal democrats. Obama's ceiling in VA will be 48% of the vote.

Virginia has yet to be contested on the national level as a true battleground. This is the first time in years VA's even been considered a swing state. It will take more than one election cycle to solidify that trend to the left enough to go Democrat, especially against McCain. For example, take New Jersey and New Hampshire...solid GOP in 1988, swing states that leaned to the right of the national average in 1992, but the national margin was great enough to swing them barely Dem, 1996 both were left of the national average. In 2000, NJ was solid Dem wheras NH swung back right in 2000, before making its assumed journey into solid democrat territory to stay.

However, if Warner had gotten the nomination this year, Virginia would have seen a seismic shift to the Dems, maybe a 15% shift or greater in terms of the national average
Webb isn't a moderate Democrat...

Also, I fail to understand why McCain has some huge appeal to Virginians that George W. Bush lacked.

He's more moderate than Obama, that's for sure. He also would've been slaughtered in the senate race if it weren't for Allen's big mouth.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Torie on March 26, 2008, 12:09:30 am
There is a growing distaste for good old boys in Virginia, who appeal to the hinterlands, without many voters.  If a pubbie seems to be retro in that way, it's curtains. Ya, they can do great in some of those counties out there around Roanoke and so on, in the "Fighting Ninth," but overall it doesn't pencil. Virginia is more and more coming to look like Florida.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: ChrisFromNJ on March 26, 2008, 12:11:18 am


Also, I fail to understand why McCain has some huge appeal to Virginians that George W. Bush lacked.

I'm scratching my head at that too. Anybody care to explain?


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Torie on March 26, 2008, 12:15:18 am


Also, I fail to understand why McCain has some huge appeal to Virginians that George W. Bush lacked.

I'm scratching my head at that too. Anybody care to explain?

Dubya ran about 5% better than the nation in Virginia in 2004, and McCain will match it. Heck if Bush ran again, he might run 5% better in Virginia than the nation, getting 45% there, while 40% in the nation.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: auburntiger on March 26, 2008, 12:23:13 am
Regardless of who's running, does anyone want to discuss VA itself...like i discussed in my previous post? it's a beautiful state! :)


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Torie on March 26, 2008, 12:37:16 am
Regardless of who's running, does anyone want to discuss VA itself...like i discussed in my previous post?

Ya, I noticed that there was almost no agriculture in my view when I drove from DC to Williamsburg, and the landscape seemed very monochromatic, with the same lot of about three species of trees, all about 25 feet in height.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: bullmoose88 on March 26, 2008, 12:39:22 am
Regardless of who's running, does anyone want to discuss VA itself...like i discussed in my previous post?
Its for lovers.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: WalterMitty on March 26, 2008, 12:41:18 am
va is the state of my birth.  great state.  it is certainly worthy of discussion.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: bullmoose88 on March 26, 2008, 12:44:08 am
va is the state of my birth.  great state.  it is certainly worthy of discussion.


commonwealth damnit...commonwealth.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Keystone Phil on March 26, 2008, 12:44:41 am
va is the state of my birth.  great state.  it is certainly worthy of discussion.


commonwealth damnit...commonwealth.

My second favorite commonwealth.  :)


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: bullmoose88 on March 26, 2008, 12:45:35 am
va is the state of my birth.  great state.  it is certainly worthy of discussion.


commonwealth damnit...commonwealth.

My second favorite commonwealth.  :)

homer


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Keystone Phil on March 26, 2008, 12:46:01 am
va is the state of my birth.  great state.  it is certainly worthy of discussion.


commonwealth damnit...commonwealth.

My second favorite commonwealth.  :)

homer

Huh?


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: WalterMitty on March 26, 2008, 12:51:44 am
pa is my second favorite commonwealth.   maybe third behind the ma.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: ?????????? on March 26, 2008, 12:55:52 am
Campaign away in Virginia liberals! You'll do great there, just like you did in '04!


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: villainsaff on March 26, 2008, 09:52:11 am
I havnt been here long, but I can tell the enthusiasm here for Obama is huge. That doesnt mean that hes going to win though, I just have a good feeling about my state in the fall.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred on March 26, 2008, 10:03:26 am
The only possible way Virginia would have gone Dem is if Mark Warner were the Democratic nominee, or if Dems ran a crypto-confederate like Jim Webb.

McCain will win VA by close to double-digits, especially up againt Obama or Hillary.  And he wouldn't even have to try, either.

I agree, NOVA will go to Obama by huge margins.   All the Democrats I know here are diehard Obama supporters, but unfortuntaley the Arlington-Alexandria liberal vote won't be enough to overcome the rest of the state, which is solidly red.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Smash255 on March 26, 2008, 10:18:11 am
The state is trending Democratic, it was 5.7% more GOP than the national average in 2004, following that same trend it puts it @ 3% more GOP than the national average.  If anything the trend in Virginia towards the Democrats has picked up even more steam since 2004, so the 04-08 trend against the national average would likely be even heavier than the 00-04 trend.  Top that off with higher black turnout as well with Obama having more appeal than the typical Democrat would in leftward FLYING Northern Virginia.  In VA I would say Hillary could be within 3 points of the national average and possibly 2, Obama looks like he can very well be even with the national average.




My math and econometrics professors always warned against taking trends from the last data point or two and extrapolating forward.

It would be more conservative and wiser to say take the trend back from say 88 or 92 and seeing where that put VA.


 In 96 it was 10.46% more GOP than nationally, 8.54% in 2000 & 5.74% in 04.  So the trend of 2-3 points nationally has been going on since 96.  Just looking at what is going on in Virginia, and Northern VA in particular it looks like the Dem trend has even gained more steam.  A trend doen't mean the trend will continue, but their is no evidence that the trend in VA is reversing itself, slowing down, and if anything it seems like the trend is picking up steam.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on March 26, 2008, 10:21:54 am
I havnt been here long, but I can tell the enthusiasm here for Obama is huge. That doesnt mean that hes going to win though, I just have a good feeling about my state in the fall.

The entusiasm for Obama when he visted Charleston was huge when Kerry endorsed him. The enthusiasm here at UNC-Chapel Hill is huge for him. That doesn't mean he'll win the Carolinas now, does it?


I think VA is a stage that is distracting the Dems so much that McCain will be able to pick off Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and maybe Wisconsin without the Dems noticing.

Go ahead and dump tons of money there. There are too many veterans there to lose the state for McCain.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Smash255 on March 26, 2008, 10:23:15 am
yes nova has been trending (i hate that term) democrat.

but keep in mind who is the republican nominee.  not george w.bush.  john mccain.  it seems to me he is very acceptable to many suburbanites.

he wont win nova, but i think he can slow the bleeding.

the McCain of 2000 would have been better prepared to stop the bleeding than the McCain of 2008.  That maverick appeal he had is gone, may have it still in some moderate suburban areas, but not NOVA. The area is just morphing into full blown Democratic at this point.  Not to mention Obama is an excellent candidate in Northern VA for a General.  


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Smash255 on March 26, 2008, 10:25:47 am
I havnt been here long, but I can tell the enthusiasm here for Obama is huge. That doesnt mean that hes going to win though, I just have a good feeling about my state in the fall.

The entusiasm for Obama when he visted Charleston was huge when Kerry endorsed him. The enthusiasm here at UNC-Chapel Hill is huge for him. That doesn't mean he'll win the Carolinas now, does it?


I think VA is a stage that is distracting the Dems so much that McCain will be able to pick off Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and maybe Wisconsin without the Dems noticing.

Go ahead and dump tons of money there. There are too many veterans there to lose the state for McCain.

Obama has a better chance of winning VA, than McCain does of winning PA, WI, NH, or MI


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: villainsaff on March 26, 2008, 10:27:07 am
I havnt been here long, but I can tell the enthusiasm here for Obama is huge. That doesnt mean that hes going to win though, I just have a good feeling about my state in the fall.

The entusiasm for Obama when he visted Charleston was huge when Kerry endorsed him. The enthusiasm here at UNC-Chapel Hill is huge for him. That doesn't mean he'll win the Carolinas now, does it?


I think VA is a stage that is distracting the Dems so much that McCain will be able to pick off Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and maybe Wisconsin without the Dems noticing.

Go ahead and dump tons of money there. There are too many veterans there to lose the state for McCain.

Notice how I even said in my post that I didnt expect Obama to win just based on the enthusiasm in my state. If you would have actually read my post entirely you would have noticed, and not randomly attack me like a moron. And for the record, I dont expect Obama to win the Carolinas.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred on March 26, 2008, 10:28:30 am

Obama has a better chance of winning VA, than McCain does of winning PA, WI, NH, or MI



ROTFLMAO!

Uh.... no. 

You fail.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Smash255 on March 26, 2008, 10:34:15 am

Obama has a better chance of winning VA, than McCain does of winning PA, WI, NH, or MI



ROTFLMAO!

Uh.... no. 

You fail.

For starters I thinK Obama is going to win nationally by 2-3%, but if you look at a  50/50 type of election

VA is 1-2% more GOP than nationally
PA & Wi are about 3-4% more Dem than nationally
MI & NH are at least 5% more Dem than nationally


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: bullmoose88 on March 26, 2008, 11:20:44 am

Obama has a better chance of winning VA, than McCain does of winning PA, WI, NH, or MI



ROTFLMAO!

Uh.... no. 

You fail.

For starters I thinK Obama is going to win nationally by 2-3%, but if you look at a  50/50 type of election

VA is 1-2% more GOP than nationally
PA & Wi are about 3-4% more Dem than nationally
MI & NH are at least 5% more Dem than nationally

But Obama isn't white, and you forget that PA is Philly plus Alabama and Pittsburgh...I dont know if Obama can hold the same coalition as say Hillary/Kerry/Gore/Willy


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Smash255 on March 26, 2008, 11:24:52 am

Obama has a better chance of winning VA, than McCain does of winning PA, WI, NH, or MI



ROTFLMAO!

Uh.... no. 

You fail.

For starters I thinK Obama is going to win nationally by 2-3%, but if you look at a  50/50 type of election

VA is 1-2% more GOP than nationally
PA & Wi are about 3-4% more Dem than nationally
MI & NH are at least 5% more Dem than nationally

But Obama isn't white, and you forget that PA is Philly plus Alabama and Pittsburgh...I dont know if Obama can hold the same coalition as say Hillary/Kerry/Gore/Willy


When it comes down to it I don't think Obama will really be hurt by his race.  For the most part most of those who would never vote for a black man are already voting GOP.  Those who are Democrats, working class white Democrats especially may prefer a white person and would go for Hillary in the Primary, would want Hillary over Obama in part because of race, but would take Obama over McCain because of economics.  I did take the race issue somewhat into consideration, took about 1-2 points compared to the national average off of PA (it was 5% more Dem in 04) but I also think Obama does better in Bucks and Chester than Kerry did.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: jesmo on March 26, 2008, 11:26:10 am

Obama has a better chance of winning VA, than McCain does of winning PA, WI, NH, or MI



ROTFLMAO!

Uh.... no. 

You fail.

For starters I thinK Obama is going to win nationally by 2-3%, but if you look at a  50/50 type of election

VA is 1-2% more GOP than nationally
PA & Wi are about 3-4% more Dem than nationally
MI & NH are at least 5% more Dem than nationally

You can't expect everything to swing perfectly from 2004 forever and ever. However, considering who you are, I won't take you seriously.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: villainsaff on March 26, 2008, 11:32:49 am

Obama has a better chance of winning VA, than McCain does of winning PA, WI, NH, or MI



ROTFLMAO!

Uh.... no. 

You fail.

For starters I thinK Obama is going to win nationally by 2-3%, but if you look at a  50/50 type of election

VA is 1-2% more GOP than nationally
PA & Wi are about 3-4% more Dem than nationally
MI & NH are at least 5% more Dem than nationally

You can't expect everything to swing perfectly from 2004 forever and ever. However, considering who you are, I won't take you seriously.

lol looks whos talking.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Smash255 on March 26, 2008, 01:56:51 pm

Obama has a better chance of winning VA, than McCain does of winning PA, WI, NH, or MI



ROTFLMAO!

Uh.... no. 

You fail.

For starters I thinK Obama is going to win nationally by 2-3%, but if you look at a  50/50 type of election

VA is 1-2% more GOP than nationally
PA & Wi are about 3-4% more Dem than nationally
MI & NH are at least 5% more Dem than nationally

You can't expect everything to swing perfectly from 2004 forever and ever. However, considering who you are, I won't take you seriously.

Ahh yes coming from the person who tried to make a half serious predictioon about Oklahoma.  Now, who knows when you are being serious or just down right being an idiotic troll...

Now I never suggested everything is going to be like it was in 04, or trend the same way (for example I had PA back tracking a bit).  However, do you have any evidence to contradict what i stated about where those states will fall compared to the national average from  04.  Do you have any reasoning on  that?  Or you just bbeinga little sarcastic runt who is uncapable of having a serious discussion?


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Northam for Governor '17 on March 26, 2008, 02:09:42 pm
Obama will probably lose, but there is an outside chance he could win.  In all probability, though, Obama will lose 52-47.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Adlai Stevenson on March 26, 2008, 02:15:54 pm
I believe in the power of Obama, but I still think McCain will probably win:

VIRGINIA PRESIDENTIAL RACE -
51% (R) McCain
48% (D) Obama


VIRGINIA SENATE RACE -
56% (D) Warner
41% (R) Gilmore


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Lief 🐋 on March 26, 2008, 04:43:36 pm
I havnt been here long, but I can tell the enthusiasm here for Obama is huge. That doesnt mean that hes going to win though, I just have a good feeling about my state in the fall.

Go ahead and dump tons of money there. There are too many veterans there to lose the state for McCain.
McCain has no more support among veterans than any other Republican.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Robespierre's Jaw on March 26, 2008, 04:49:32 pm
Virginia will be closer in 2008 than in the last two presidential elections, however it will still result in victory for Senator McCain come election day. My predictions for the Presidential race in Virginia would be this:

McCain (R): 52%
Obama (D): 47%
Others: (O): 1%


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: agcatter on March 26, 2008, 04:52:38 pm
about right


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: bullmoose88 on March 26, 2008, 05:38:03 pm
The state is trending Democratic, it was 5.7% more GOP than the national average in 2004, following that same trend it puts it @ 3% more GOP than the national average.  If anything the trend in Virginia towards the Democrats has picked up even more steam since 2004, so the 04-08 trend against the national average would likely be even heavier than the 00-04 trend.  Top that off with higher black turnout as well with Obama having more appeal than the typical Democrat would in leftward FLYING Northern Virginia.  In VA I would say Hillary could be within 3 points of the national average and possibly 2, Obama looks like he can very well be even with the national average.




My math and econometrics professors always warned against taking trends from the last data point or two and extrapolating forward.

It would be more conservative and wiser to say take the trend back from say 88 or 92 and seeing where that put VA.


 In 96 it was 10.46% more GOP than nationally, 8.54% in 2000 & 5.74% in 04.  So the trend of 2-3 points nationally has been going on since 96.  Just looking at what is going on in Virginia, and Northern VA in particular it looks like the Dem trend has even gained more steam.  A trend doen't mean the trend will continue, but their is no evidence that the trend in VA is reversing itself, slowing down, and if anything it seems like the trend is picking up steam.

Second, I don't know if I totally buy into the idea of using how much more an area was (or less) than the national (or state) average.

Say for instance Candidate X in 1988 in State Y had 55% of the vote when he had 52% nationally, but 4 years later had 55% in state Y but 57% nationally...is the state any more or less favorable to his party than it was 4 years before?

What your doing does have some use and is telling, but like every other statistic, it needs to be taken with a grain of salt.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Smash255 on March 26, 2008, 08:10:43 pm
The state is trending Democratic, it was 5.7% more GOP than the national average in 2004, following that same trend it puts it @ 3% more GOP than the national average.  If anything the trend in Virginia towards the Democrats has picked up even more steam since 2004, so the 04-08 trend against the national average would likely be even heavier than the 00-04 trend.  Top that off with higher black turnout as well with Obama having more appeal than the typical Democrat would in leftward FLYING Northern Virginia.  In VA I would say Hillary could be within 3 points of the national average and possibly 2, Obama looks like he can very well be even with the national average.




My math and econometrics professors always warned against taking trends from the last data point or two and extrapolating forward.

It would be more conservative and wiser to say take the trend back from say 88 or 92 and seeing where that put VA.


 In 96 it was 10.46% more GOP than nationally, 8.54% in 2000 & 5.74% in 04.  So the trend of 2-3 points nationally has been going on since 96.  Just looking at what is going on in Virginia, and Northern VA in particular it looks like the Dem trend has even gained more steam.  A trend doen't mean the trend will continue, but their is no evidence that the trend in VA is reversing itself, slowing down, and if anything it seems like the trend is picking up steam.

Second, I don't know if I totally buy into the idea of using how much more an area was (or less) than the national (or state) average.

Say for instance Candidate X in 1988 in State Y had 55% of the vote when he had 52% nationally, but 4 years later had 55% in state Y but 57% nationally...is the state any more or less favorable to his party than it was 4 years before?

What your doing does have some use and is telling, but like every other statistic, it needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

I'm not saying its full proof by any means, nothing is, but its probably the best barometer to show where a state actually stands.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: MODU on March 26, 2008, 08:54:47 pm

Obama definitely has the better chance of winning VA than Killary, but it would take a nation-wide landslide on Obama's side to definitely claim VA.  Killary would have had a better shot at winning the state if she wasn't "Clinton," since she does pander to the moderates much more than any other leftist, since VA is definitely a Blue Dog state.  However, as history shows, the Democrats rarely put forward a Blue Dog candidate, which is why it tends to go GOP, even when the state-level races go to the Democrats.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: MarkWarner08 on March 26, 2008, 10:27:44 pm

Obama definitely has the better chance of winning VA than Killary, but it would take a nation-wide landslide on Obama's side to definitely claim VA.  Killary would have had a better shot at winning the state if she wasn't "Clinton," since she does pander to the moderates much more than any other leftist, since VA is definitely a Blue Dog state.  However, as history shows, the Democrats rarely put forward a Blue Dog candidate, which is why it tends to go GOP, even when the state-level races go to the Democrats.
Which is exactly why Mark Warner would've been the perfect Democratic candidate for VA. If he runs in 2012, he might also be competitive in NC.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: joshc99 on June 23, 2011, 07:35:35 pm
I think it's interesting that virtually every prediction in this thread turned out wrong. Not only did Obama win by 6.3% (only 1.0% worse than nationally), but he actually lost Buchanan County. In fact, he lost quite a few Appalachian counties where Clinton won upwards of 80% of the vote.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: DS0816 on June 25, 2011, 10:05:22 am
I think it's interesting that virtually every prediction in this thread turned out wrong. Not only did Obama win by 6.3% (only 1.0% worse than nationally), but he actually lost Buchanan County. In fact, he lost quite a few Appalachian counties where Clinton won upwards of 80% of the vote.

Virginia was No. 1 in being closest to reflecting President Obama's national margin. A spread of 0.96%. Look at it and Colorado for spreads, since 1996, and no wonder they were Nos. 1 and 2 (with Colo. at 8.95%, 1.69% above his national 7.26%).



Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: pbrower2a on June 09, 2013, 08:04:25 pm
What was so amazing was that Virgina which had not gone for a Democratic nominee since the 1964 so did in 2008, and unlike in 1964, not in a full landslide. Virginia was the one former Confederate state that did not go for Jimmy Carter in 1976. It never went for Bill Clinton, a very strong nominee.

Virginia is now a true border state between the North and South, and it has become increasingly "Northern" since the 1920s. It went for Hoover in 1928 and then went for the Democratic nominee in four consecutive Presidential elections. It then went clearly for Nixon in 1960. It was one of the weaker wins of LBJ. It was fairly close in 1976, but Carter still lost it.

Virginia has become more like a Northern State. It is increasingly urban. It is probably better educated than the average. That Obama won it in 2008 after it going to Dubya by about 8% twice suggests not only a nationwide shift but that the state itself has moved in ways different from some other states. 2012 confirms that a Republican nominee will have to be very effective to win it. It is near the national average.

 


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Oldiesfreak1854 on June 13, 2013, 01:29:15 pm
From what I've noticed in the voting patterns, Virginia is quickly becoming more of a Northeastern state than a Southern state politically, although it's geographically a Southern state.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: barfbag on July 07, 2013, 02:01:57 am
It's more of a toss up, swing, battleground state now. The tentacles of our government in D.C. have reached our first beloved colony. Obama probably did better than Democrats would have done there in the last 2 elections so even if the next couple elections in VA reflect the popular vote, it's hard to say if a generic Democratic candidate would have carried the state or had Obama's numbers there. There has definitely been a trend too which has helped the Democrats in the Old Dominion. By 2020 we'll be able to fully experience Obama's advantages or know that Virginia's outcomes in 2008 and 2012 were a result of trends.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: Rep. Pessimistic Antineutrino on July 07, 2013, 09:54:17 pm
It was not Obama that pulled Virginia over the line. The Democratic wave in 2008 demonstrated the extreme growth of NOVA which consists of young urban professionals, including many government workers. The young, upper-middle class educated demographic is obviously much more Democratic then the rest of the state, and the growth rates here compared to southwest Virginia have been pulling it away from GOP hands at an alarming rate. This obviously results in the state voting more like Maryland than the Carolinas. So unlike Obama's bumps in Louisiana and Mississippi, this state's movement is all trend based.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: PolitiJunkie on September 08, 2013, 01:20:11 pm
Campaign away in Virginia liberals! You'll do great there, just like you did in '04!

Thanks bro!


Obama has a better chance of winning VA, than McCain does of winning PA, WI, NH, or MI

ROTFLMAO!

Uh.... no. 

You fail.


No, you fail.

Obama will probably lose, but there is an outside chance he could win.  In all probability, though, Obama will lose 52-47.

Agreed, man.


Title: Re: virginia.
Post by: ElectionsGuy on September 09, 2013, 05:56:37 pm
You know what this says, that there will be absolute impossibilities pulled off by candidates in the future. Meaning states we know as Pennsylvania, North Carolina, or even New York could change drastically. If this thread says anything, its that some states that we say won't go republican/democrat in the future most definitely could/will.