Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 08, 2019, 11:55:11 am
News: 2020 Presidential Predictions (Primary) are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderators: Tegridy Farms, Apocrypha)
  Post random maps here (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: Post random maps here  (Read 846237 times)
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« on: August 08, 2009, 01:45:59 am »

Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #1 on: August 08, 2009, 05:07:31 pm »


Read between the lines, wink wink.
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #2 on: August 10, 2009, 05:01:21 pm »

Since we are in the fantasy maps :



Here is what are become USA in 2016. After Obama's assassination by a member of KuKluxClan, they totally explode :
- North American Republic : founded just after Obama's assassination, it's the most progressive country of the former USA, both on social and economic issues.
- American Democratic Alliance : after NAR's secession, USA start turning into a one-party republican domination. This causes the secession of the Southeastern part of the country also secedes. This is a quite conservative state on economic issues but very liberal on social ones. Surprisingly, Texas in majority decides to join, though the northern part of the State highly protests
- Then, to complete the scenario, the most conservative states chose to get rid of the few moderate states still in the US and create the Christian Nation for Patriotism and Moral Values, a joke state that goes from the Deep South until Utah.

Bring on the ADA!
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #3 on: August 12, 2009, 11:27:10 pm »

Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2010, 02:00:53 pm »


Repubs barely hold onto Montana, barely hold onto Indiana barely Missouri, LOSE North Carolina, but pick up New Hampshire, ME-AL, ME-02, and ME-01, which includes Portland?

Yea, that is Romney appealing to moderates

Roll Eyes

You've got a lot to learn here, my friend. Welcome to the forum.

Atleast explain how he still loses North Carolina and barely holds Indiana?

Gosh, this is so simple

Black turnout in NC. Indiana? BNot much blacks
What about Georgia and Missouri? Or did Romney appeal to more moderates there? Roll Eyes

Or how about f***in Minnesota? How the hell does a Republican candidate these days lose Ohio, lose Virginia, lose North Carolina but pick up Minnesota? Please enlighten us.
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #5 on: February 12, 2010, 03:26:58 am »
« Edited: February 12, 2010, 03:51:34 am by Inhofe in 2012 »

By the way, Inhofe in 2012. You know what? AT least I support a candidate who can win, not some crazy dude like you. Inhofe is nothing in compare to Romney.

That name is a joke you fuckin idiot. Get a sense of humour instead of being a hurt little bitch while discussing electoral politics you jackass!
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #6 on: February 19, 2010, 07:50:50 am »


Fixed Grin
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #7 on: March 22, 2010, 05:15:41 pm »


Er...a libertarian-esque Republican candidate, and a moderate Democrat?

Half right. The Democrat ticket I had in mind was Dave Freudenthal/Russ Feingold.

I would've guessed a libertarian-esque Democrat ticket and a moderate Republican ticket myself.
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #8 on: March 29, 2010, 06:34:13 pm »



This one is probably easy to predict, but I felt like posting it so meh......
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #9 on: April 10, 2010, 09:54:01 am »



The similarities are striking.
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #10 on: April 10, 2010, 10:00:06 am »



Interesting how none of the states voted for losers in both 1932 and 1980........
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #11 on: April 10, 2010, 10:42:27 am »
« Edited: April 13, 2010, 02:30:56 pm by Mechatroll »

Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #12 on: April 13, 2010, 09:35:34 am »


That's part of it......
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #13 on: April 13, 2010, 10:47:17 am »


Um...Well Nixon carried all the yellow states in 1968, and he carried all of the blue states too (except Connecticut). Humphrey carried all of the red states, while Wallace carried all the green states and the dark red states. Is this it? Wink

I screwed up on Connecticut Sad
But otherwise that's correct.
The states in red are states that both Truman and Humphrey won (thus red for Democratic).
The states in blue (except Connecticut Grin) are states that both Dewey '48 and Nixon won (thus blue for Republican)
The states in yellow are states that Truman and Nixon won.
The states in orange are states that Dewey '48 and Humphrey won (and the color Connecticut should be)
The states in green are states that both Thurmond and Wallace won.
The states in dark red are states that Truman won in '48 and Wallace won in '68
South Carolina went for Thurmond in '48 and then went to Nixon in '68 (by a small margin)
The blank states are states that weren't states in 1948
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #14 on: April 13, 2010, 02:44:09 pm »

Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #15 on: April 13, 2010, 05:07:25 pm »


Bush carried all the green and blue states in 2000. Charles Evans Hughes carried all the yellow and blue states in 1916. Wilson carried all the green and red states in 1916. Gray states weren't states in 1916.

Does it make you go ape how much the electorate has changed?
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #16 on: April 17, 2010, 08:55:55 pm »


How gay each state is?
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #17 on: April 18, 2010, 05:30:05 pm »


Oddly enough this might be true.
You won't believe how lax the alcohol laws are in a lot of places in Texas.  Hell, I even think in some places it's legal for minors to consume alcohol as long as there is an adult around.
Not to mention the social permissiveness that exists in Texas cities like Houston and Austin.
Oklahoma and Kansas though.....really?
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #18 on: April 19, 2010, 10:27:42 am »


Oddly enough this might be true.
You won't believe how lax the alcohol laws are in a lot of places in Texas.  Hell, I even think in some places it's legal for minors to consume alcohol as long as there is an adult around.
Not to mention the social permissiveness that exists in Texas cities like Houston and Austin.
Oklahoma and Kansas though.....really?

Wait... wait... You mean that DARK States are the more free and LIGHT States the more fascist ?
What the hell ? Huh

It must be those goddamn state governments, regulating our lives.......
It must be some really key things these people were looking at because if you notice hippie haven Colorado is also dark green.
Now notice it says Personal and Economic Freedoms, so that might explain kind of why the "blue states" are sky green.  Plus, I hear things like gun laws suck mightily in places like Maryland and New York.
However, I think these people really need to visit Oklahoma.......I mean really.  Most states level of social authoritarianism is overblown (like Texas), but I can say without bias that Oklahoma truly does blow.
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #19 on: April 29, 2010, 01:23:27 am »
« Edited: April 29, 2010, 12:51:26 pm by Mark Sexgod Warner »

Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #20 on: May 13, 2010, 12:14:18 am »

Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #21 on: May 13, 2010, 11:09:38 pm »
« Edited: May 13, 2010, 11:12:23 pm by David Lee Roth »

Wrongo.
It's a map of the strongest popular vote performance per state in each election since 1840 with the colors representing the party that achieved the shaded percentage vote.
I made a similar map that included all elections since 1824, but Jackson and Adams were such outliers in some states that I had to make another more narrow map.
Someday I might make one of all elections since 1900, which should be interesting.
What I found interesting is that minus Jackson's performance in 1832 in the Deep South, the best candidate in the Deep South was Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the infamous baby's daddy of modern day American "liberalism".
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #22 on: May 13, 2010, 11:10:52 pm »
« Edited: May 13, 2010, 11:27:13 pm by David Lee Roth »


This is the original map I made of the strongest popular vote performances per state since 1824.
Blue=Adams Republicans
Red=Jackson Democrats
Someday when I have enough time and not so much stuff to do I'll make a modified map of this that lists the years in which the highest vote percentages were achieved by state.
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #23 on: May 14, 2010, 07:19:52 am »

What I found interesting is that minus Jackson's performance in 1832 in the Deep South, the best candidate in the Deep South was Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the infamous baby's daddy of modern day American "liberalism".

Oh, please... Roll Eyes I think you know how intellectually dishonest this attack is.

Okay I'll admit that alot of those votes were probably just in reaction to a Great Depression, poor whites and blacks were discriminated against at the voting booth, and that it was in 1932.....the first year that FDR ran for office that quite a few of these states voted for him by said margins.
But even without a Great Depression.................do you really think any of those states would've voted for FDR by any amount less than they voted for (at the very least) Al Smith?
Logged
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13,810
Jamaica
« Reply #24 on: May 14, 2010, 10:02:38 am »
« Edited: May 14, 2010, 02:08:42 pm by David Lee Roth »

What I found interesting is that minus Jackson's performance in 1832 in the Deep South, the best candidate in the Deep South was Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the infamous baby's daddy of modern day American "liberalism".

Oh, please... Roll Eyes I think you know how intellectually dishonest this attack is.

Okay I'll admit that alot of those votes were probably just in reaction to a Great Depression, poor whites and blacks were discriminated against at the voting booth, and that it was in 1932.....the first year that FDR ran for office that quite a few of these states voted for him by said margins.
But even without a Great Depression.................do you really think any of those states would've voted for FDR by any amount less than they voted for (at the very least) Al Smith?

Smith was a Catholic. For any other democrat, I have no reason to think they would poll worse than FDR in the climate of Great Depression.

Granted, I'm not implying that FDR was any more evil than say someone like William H. Murray (anyone who has read my Great Depression timeline knows this, hell FDR is like the friggin hero in that TL), just that how people focused on what "liberal" or "conservative" was back then.  I also used it to demonstrate quite easily how sensitive "liberals" and "progressives" are to any mention of how well FDR did with Southerners (admit, your response was so predictable).  SUre he didn't campaign on hanging negroes or federalizing segregation, but he sure as hell didn't ignore Southern wants in his campaigns.  That's because in reality FDR wasn't the gallant advancer of liberal causes as he's portrayed in history books but rather as a consensus builder.  In addition to winning the South and record numbers he also won the American West in record numbers in places like New Mexico in 1932 (I believe he might be the ONLY candidate to ever win over 60% of the popular vote in New Mexico in 1932 and 1936), Arizona 1936, and California in 1936 (with 66.95% of the popular vote).
I'm not arguing that FDR was really a southern bred William H. Murray Democrat, but he wouldn'tve come second only to Andrew Jackson in popular vote terms if he didn't agree to leave the Southern states to their own devices in regards to Civil Rights during the 1930's.  Would it be so far fetched for me to suggest that by taking a moderate stance in regards to Southern policies FDR might've done better than most other Democrats because some anti-segregation whites in the Deep South might've voted (alongside segregationists) for FDR instead of the Republican?  With the exception of the Japanese internment camps he was miles ahead of his predecessor on nearly every social policy.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC