Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 19, 2019, 06:27:44 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 173
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: When will South Carolina become a swing state? on: February 17, 2019, 07:43:21 pm
Not sure that it ever will with the retiree influx to the coast, however it could become winnable in future Dem wave years since those moving in appear to be more elastic than those who grew up there.
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: TX-PPP (D): Trump +3 over Biden, +9 over Harris on: February 16, 2019, 02:48:22 pm
IDK, doesn't this just make the EC/PV hole Dems have to dig themselves out of like 2X deeper. 

Agree that Dems running on the GND would be an own goal in Texas.  Trump could even win Harris with that campaign. 
3  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Are wealthy white suburbanites generally socially liberal or conservative? on: February 16, 2019, 02:42:08 pm
There are several separate trends going on here: 

1.  College grads have more extreme political views in general, whether left or right.  Keep in mind that white college grads are the most socialist part of the Dem coalition in polling and minorities the least, with remaining white non-college Dems falling somewhere in between.

2. Building on #1, I would not underestimate the number of people with even 2-3X the national median income who are voting for the left for economic reasons.  Insecurity about the cost of housing/college/healthcare/childcare extends pretty far up the economic ladder nowadays, particularly in large cities.  Also, the suburbs that have stayed the most steadfastly Republican are the ones where homeownership/having 3+ children/stay-at-home parenting is still possible for people with only modestly above average incomes.  Elizabeth Warren picked up on this trend of creeping economic insecurity in the suburbs impressively early.   

3. There is also an increasing tendency among people with above average incomes/wealth to "vote your industry."  This is the other reason why Montgomery County, TX is 70% R and Marin County, CA is 70% D.  Historically, this was commonplace in the late 19th-early 20th century until New Deal era class politics took over.

4.  An ownership interest and/or leadership position in a business would tend to push someone toward being more culturally open-minded than the average of American society.  There is a strong self-interest in appealing to the widest customer/client base possible.  This is a relatively recent development and applies most clearly to people born after the Civil Rights Act. 
 
5. I would caution everyone against using the white Evangelical vote to explain any of the differences between the Bush 2000/2004 campaign and the Trump 2016 campaign.  Voters who self-ID as Evangelical have been consistently 70-80% R every election since 2004 (would be surprised if this wasn't the case in 2000 as well, but exit polls didn't ask the question back then) and a similar % of the overall vote.  They aren't moving, so they don't explain coalition shifts (post-Bill Clinton era) in any meaningful way.  Also, keep in mind that there's a strong tendency among some Evangelicals to think of themselves as a religious minority group distinct from "Generic American."  From what we can tell, Obama->Trump and non-voter->Trump are disproportionately irreligious groups, suggesting that Trump is if anything making the GOP base less religious.
4  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 2022 Senate election on: February 09, 2019, 03:02:08 pm
Most likely Dem pickup is pretty clearly PA, most likely R pickup pretty clearly NH.  I would expect GA to be an easier Dem pickup than NC by 2022.  Also would not have Kansas as Safe R in a Trump midterm.  In a Dem midterm, Republicans probably flip NH and NV, but very unclear where they go from there.  They basically have the 2018 Dem problem with this senate map, and the possibility of a very strong Dem taking a seat in NC or GA anyway is real. 

I don't think the IA/OH tier of Midwestern states is reachable for Dems in federal elections anymore given that they failed to elect a governor in either state in the 2018 environment.  I am almost ready to say the same about Florida, but let's see what it does in 2020.  If it's a several % Trump win, would confirm the state is gone for Democrats with the retiree influx.


AZ is interesting.  If McSally holds on despite a Trump loss, she is safe, and if she loses despite a Trump reelection, the Dem is going to be safe, but if the Dem narrowly wins while Trump loses reelection or McSally narrowly wins while Trump wins as well, it could pretty easily flip back.  Regardless, one of 2020 or 2022 is likely to be a strong Dem year, so I would be surprised if they don't pick up that seat either time. 

5  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: GA-07: Rep. Rob Woodall will not seek reelection on: February 09, 2019, 02:48:14 pm
Easily the most likely Dem pickup now.  I think this seat flips even in a Trump PV win.
6  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Which state is the most inelastic? on: February 09, 2019, 02:32:41 pm
I’d also argue that Georgia is actually more "inelastic" than Mississippi and Alabama.

I would probably agree with this.

Why?  Less possible to have Republican landslides?
7  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Which state is the most inelastic? on: February 09, 2019, 02:29:08 pm
These states will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here they are very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 2015/1987/2017/1998 is comical. Smiley

Really severe scandals catching up to a longtime statewide officeholder in low turnout off year elections.  If either can beat a non-scandalized opponent in 2019/20, I'll change my view.

To answer the original question, MS.  Most elastic has to be LA given JBE's double digit margin over Vitter, right?
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: SCOTUS, Abortion, and 2020 on: February 09, 2019, 02:23:22 pm
Depends on the decision.  Leaving it to the states probably cancels out at the national level (possibly helping Republicans in EC by making some more NE states competitive and Dems in the Senate by allowing them to compete in the Plains/Mormon states), but helps Democrats considerably at the state level (mainly by allowing state Dem parties in deep red states to become explicitly pro-life).

In the event SCOTUS finds a constitutional right to life and strikes down state laws permitting abortion, that would cause a reaction equivalent to the social conservative response to Roe v. Wade and probably means Democrats win all close presidential elections for several decades.  
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: Is the possibility of Dem 2020, Rep 2024 underrated by Atlas? on: February 02, 2019, 04:09:28 pm
Depends entirely on whether the win was due to a substantial weakening of the economy or to Trump's personal scandals.  If it's the former, incumbency plus the natural cycle of economic recovery should make 2024 a pretty easy win for the Dem unless he/she has an egregious personal scandal.  If it's the latter case (which would likely mean quite a narrow winning margin), the Dem would be unusually vulnerable for an incumbent party seeking a 2nd term, as it would be extremely unlikely to get all the way to 2025 without a recession starting. 

As it stands, I expect the economy to stay good until at least 2021, but when it does eventually weaken, the crash will be severe.  So I think the most underrated scenario right now is Trump wins reelection (by a wider EC margin/better PV than 2016), but he is followed by 12+ years of Dems from 2024 on.
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: How many children will the first woman elected to the US presidency have? on: January 27, 2019, 05:04:28 pm
Nearly 90% of all presidents have been fathers, including all 16 since Warren Harding.

Given Harding's paternity of an illegitimate daughter has been conclusively proven recently, all Presidents since Buchanan fathered an offspring.

So the only Presidents with no proven offspring are Washington (had stepchildren), Madison (had a stepson), Jackson (had three adopted sons, though), Polk and Buchanan.

Yes, you have to go back prior to modern medicine to find presidents who didn't have children, presumably because they/their wives medically couldn't.*

*Except for Buchanan of course
11  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: NC-SEN 2020: Tar Heel Tillis on: January 26, 2019, 09:33:28 pm
State Senator Erica Smith announced she is running. She represents several rural counties in Butterfield's district.

https://www.voteericafornc.com/

I'm assuming a state senator isn't considered a top-tier challenger.

True, but Kay Hagan was also a state senator when she ran.
12  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: More Dominant Party: National Democrats in 1936 or California Democrats now on: January 26, 2019, 06:12:34 pm
California.

I could be wrong, but unless something dramatic happens, Democratic dominance in this state is probably going to last longer than it did nationally after 1936. It took 10 years for the GOP to take back both houses of Congress and 16 to retake the presidency after that point and I could very easily see CA Dems breaking that streak.

Well you could argue 1952 and 1956 was an aberration due to the GOP nominating a popular war hero , because really other than Eisenhower the GOP was defeated in election after election in almost every election possible until 1968.

The GOP run form 1966-2010 at the Gubernatorial Level will probably be broken but still wont be easy for the  Dems to break as well as the Republicans controlled the CA Gubernatorial Office for a period of 31/44 years . Democrats run from 1932-1968 will be even more difficult to break as I could see this happen which could make it difficult


GOP could take back the gubernatorial mansion in 2026 if a Dem President has been in the WH for 6 years up to that point, the Dem Party becomes Anti Big Tech(I could see this happen ) and the CA GOP becomes like the MA GOP (with no primaries this could happen too). Then that Charlie Baker is popular that he is Governor for 8 years then it flips to Dems for 8 more years than another Charlie Baker type is governor for 8 years.


The Democratic Dominance from 1932-1968 will be very difficult for any major state party to replicate




1948 was actually really close in the EC and Democrats didn't control enough state delegations to reelect Truman in the House if there was no majority.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump's most likely path to 270? on: January 26, 2019, 04:23:08 pm
Wisconsin is Trump's only hope.

I wouldn’t discount the possibility of Michigan voting to the right of Wisconsin.

Very plausible.  While less likely, I also think the possibility of Florida voting to the right of at least one of NC and GA is very underrated.
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: First female Republican President? on: January 26, 2019, 03:40:49 pm
Stefanik in 2028.  Trump loses reelection pretty badly with a weakened economy, she goes for NY-GOV in 2022 and scores a narrow win, becoming de facto leader of the Republican Party.
15  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Why Pennsylvania isn't the same as Michigan and Wisconsin on: January 26, 2019, 03:38:01 pm
I agree with pretty much all of this, especially with Michigan being the most likely of the 3 to go the way of Ohio despite having the best Clinton performance.  I wouldn't go so far as to say PA is "trending Democratic" statewide, but Democrats are keeping up the fight remarkably well and do have more voters left to flip in SEPA.  It's basically a Democratic version of NC, where Republicans held on unexpectedly well after getting surprised in 2008 by gaining ground in other parts of the state.   
16  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: In Which States Does It Absolutely Suck To Be Governor And Why? on: January 21, 2019, 07:28:45 pm
Michigan doesn't seem to be in all that bad shape economically it seems to be running a surplus with low unemployment. Population growth has stabilized compared to ten years ago and their pension system is no where compared to Illinois. Along with California which seemed ungovernable a decade ago they both have made strong recoveries but are extremely vulnerable during recessions.

Would not want to be in office in California the next time tech crashes.  It could make managing Illinois from 2009-present look like a piece of cake.
17  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: State Partisan Control, 2005-2019 on: January 20, 2019, 10:15:55 pm
In the next two years I could see Arizona, Minnesota, and Virginia flipping to Dem trifectas.

Texas House and Florida Senate should both be in play for 2020 as well. 

Other than that I don't see much changing (Not sure about North Carolina's legislative chambers...?). 
Ducey is the governor, so it can't flip to a Democratic trifecta.

IMO the Dems have a good shot in 2020 at flipping the AK House, AZ House+Senate, FL Senate (crucial for redistricting), IA House, MI House, MN Senate, NC House+Senate, PA House+Senate, TX House, and WI Senate, and can conceivably break R supermajorities in the OH House and the KS House.

I mean, if the Democrats couldn't flip the big midwest chambers in 2018 when they are up by 8% nationally, why would they make some big gains in 2020 when the margin will be closer?

I mean, heres a basic rundown of the chambers:

 Alaska - this ones weird, and politics seems to be less based on Party ID and instead more parochial interests and cross-party pacts to form governing majorities. So I doubt a majority will be formed against the governor, but I admit I know little of AK poltiics.

Arizona - Definitely a dem target in 2020, the state house is probably more tempting then the state sentate.

FL Sen - I mean...how? Dems needed another pickup in 2018 to probably put the chamber in play, just looking at the map. 9 and 39 are the obvious targets, but then Dems need one more to tie (without a breaker), two to take. The route either goes through the pubbish SW with 21/23 or the increasingly Trumpish Treasure coast with 25. Considering how FL consistently bucks national trends, it would require a miracle to flip 3, when the third is going to be a lift.

GA House: More targets, but the ATL suburbs will still be a hard lift, since dems got most of the low hanging fruit in 2018. Chance of flip will be low.

IA house - Definitely a Dem target, but this one feels like a "missed in 2018, can't in 2020." Dems still are defending more trump turf, and pubs could easily go on offense here.

KS - Whats going to make this hard is that the dem targets are mostly moderate R's who would help bust the radical R's control. So, hard to say.

MI House - Really a case of missed in 2018, might not in 2020. Dems even went backwards in the Upper Peninsula. Still available though, but it will require a similar margin to sweep the surburbs for more dem pickups there.

MN Senate - Gimmi.

NC House+Senate - We really have new idea if new maps are happening, if not, Dems can only hope to hold the Pubs below supermajority.

PA: A case of "missed in 2018, so why 2020." Yeah, there are still more suburbs available, but dems still have more seats to lose, like in MI. Dems in the senate for example need 4 for a tied majority and in 2020 there is only one Philly suburb pub, a open seat in Allegheny, and Erie which are easy-ish pickups. But then you need to start guessing at gerryed seats like Lancaster's 13 or Dauphine's 15. Similar to the state house, dems need to punch through more gerryed seats.

They likely need to wait for 2020 redistricting .

TX State House: Easily in the Cards since Beto carried a majority of seats while losing by 48%. Dems could probably get away with 47 or 46% loss to flip, if that 47/46% is distributed efficiently. If you can flip a chamber while losing then that is a prime target.

WI Senate: Dems had good targets in 2018, but failed. They even lost a special election seat. Once again dems need to wait for the fair redistricting.

VA: Gimmi


Yes, basically everything in the Rust Belt other than MN Senate is going to be too much of a lift on the current maps unless the Dem nominee for president is winning by double digits.  It sounds like the same situation in FL Senate with the distribution of seats up in the 2020 cycle. 
18  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Future of the California GOP in Gubernatorial Elections on: January 20, 2019, 05:56:09 pm
Build a time machine, travel back to 1993-94ish, and advise Pete Wilson to tone it down with immigration in his campaign.

While California's drift to a D state was inevitable, the CAGOP could have at least staved off the decline and made CA like a Massachusetts, Maryland, or Vermont type state in which GOP governors could still get elected while D's get elected to the White House and the Senate.

They will eventually get a Charlie Baker type through, particularly once the Dem legislature is seen as safely veto-proof.  Newsom seems likely to really push the limits even in a liberal state, so whichever of 2022/26 is a Dem president midterm could be the opening.
19  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: State Partisan Control, 2005-2019 on: January 20, 2019, 05:53:47 pm
In the next two years I could see Arizona, Minnesota, and Virginia flipping to Dem trifectas.

Texas House and Florida Senate should both be in play for 2020 as well. 

Other than that I don't see much changing (Not sure about North Carolina's legislative chambers...?). 
Ducey is the governor, so it can't flip to a Democratic trifecta.

IMO the Dems have a good shot in 2020 at flipping the AK House, AZ House+Senate, FL Senate (crucial for redistricting), IA House, MI House, MN Senate, NC House+Senate, PA House+Senate, TX House, and WI Senate, and can conceivably break R supermajorities in the OH House and the KS House.

There appears to be no LG tiebreaker in Florida, so they should only have to tie it to get a say in redistricting.  That, along with MN Senate, TX House, and 1/3rd of the KS House (plausible to do this now by getting more suburban R party switchers) should be the top priorities.  NC House and GA House are worth a strong effort as well because a say in redistricting in either state would be so valuable, but the odds of actually flipping control are long.  I wouldn't say chambers where there is both an R governor and an independent redistricting commission are worthy of as much effort. 

North Carolina's Sate Supreme Court is gonna make the help things out there as well.

Good point.  Georgia House should be a much higher Dem priority in light of that.  It's a long shot, but if they can't do it now they won't get another chance at either chamber until 2032 (unless Roberts and/or Kavanaugh do something really surprising in the partisan gerrymandering cases).
20  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: In Which States Does It Absolutely Suck To Be Governor And Why? on: January 20, 2019, 05:51:40 pm
I would start with the simple majority veto override states with term limits where the governor also does not get to pick their LG, so AL, AR, TN, and WV.  Then would come KY and IN, which also have simple majority veto override and term limits, but the governor at least gets to pick their LG and KY has some pretty strong executive order powers. 

Next would probably be VA, where the governor does get to veto with a 2/3rds override (including line item veto), but they can't run for reelection, can be stuck with a separately elected opposition party LG, and don't get any formal say in judicial appointments.   

For strongest, FL certainly comes to mind with essentially unilateral judicial appointments, 2/3rds veto override, choosing your own LG, and pretty strong emergency powers invoked almost yearly with the frequency of hurricanes there. 
21  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: State Partisan Control, 2005-2019 on: January 20, 2019, 05:29:17 pm
In the next two years I could see Arizona, Minnesota, and Virginia flipping to Dem trifectas.

Texas House and Florida Senate should both be in play for 2020 as well. 

Other than that I don't see much changing (Not sure about North Carolina's legislative chambers...?). 
Ducey is the governor, so it can't flip to a Democratic trifecta.

IMO the Dems have a good shot in 2020 at flipping the AK House, AZ House+Senate, FL Senate (crucial for redistricting), IA House, MI House, MN Senate, NC House+Senate, PA House+Senate, TX House, and WI Senate, and can conceivably break R supermajorities in the OH House and the KS House.

There appears to be no LG tiebreaker in Florida, so they should only have to tie it to get a say in redistricting.  That, along with MN Senate, TX House, and 1/3rd of the KS House (plausible to do this now by getting more suburban R party switchers) should be the top priorities.  NC House and GA House are worth a strong effort as well because a say in redistricting in either state would be so valuable, but the odds of actually flipping control are long.  I wouldn't say chambers where there is both an R governor and an independent redistricting commission are worthy of as much effort. 
22  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: State Partisan Control, 2005-2019 on: January 20, 2019, 04:05:47 pm
It is truly amazing how long downballot Dems held out in the more rural Southern states.  And you can't say they were uniformly conservative either.  I wonder if we will see anything equivalent in the future?  For a while, I thought it would be Republican legislative control in Virginia, but it now seems highly likely their time in the majority is up this fall.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Betomania Megathread: A Beto Walks into a Bar... in Ulysses KS on: January 20, 2019, 03:49:02 pm
I don't get this to be honest.  If he wants to build a political career, he should run for the other Texas Senate seat next year.
24  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Could a White VRA district ever have to be drawn? on: January 20, 2019, 03:39:17 pm
If it happens, I would think the test case would come out of inland California in the 2031 or maybe even the 2021 round of redistricting, not some hypothetical mid 21st century Mississippi.  However, SCOTUS appears to be inches away from ruling that the VRA doesn't apply to redistricting as it is, and one more Republican appointee would almost assure that.

Except whites in California are very Dem-leaning, unless you're suggesting either they will become majority Republican or California becomes majority Republican.

Locally, in the eastern CA districts they are quite Republican.
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: Has Kansas actually moved left, or was it just Brownback blowback? on: January 19, 2019, 01:00:42 pm
It's actually moving left.  Wouldn't be surprised at all if the Dem nominee wins it in 2028 or so.

Frankly, Dems will need to compete in KS ASAP for the sake of the Senate.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 173


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines