Post Random Maps Here 2.0.

[catographer]

part ii

4.

5.

Senate composition.
1. 1938
2. 1958
3. 1978
4. 1998
5. 2018

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

part ii

[snip]

Senate composition.
1. 1938
2. 1958
3. 1978
4. 1998
5. 2018

He just said it was 1918-1943-1968-1993-2018.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

2018 House Elections:



D+64

I think you are being way too generous to the democrats here. I think that the Democrats will substantially slim the GOP majority, but I don't think a house takeover is possible with the districts drawn the way they are.

Regardless, that map was intended to be a near-best case scenario map, and I thing the most likely outcome currently is something like D+35.

[Metalhead123]

2018 House Elections:



D+64

I think you are being way too generous to the democrats here. I think that the Democrats will substantially slim the GOP majority, but I don't think a house takeover is possible with the districts drawn the way they are.

Regardless, that map was intended to be a near-best case scenario map, and I thing the most likely outcome currently is something like D+35.

ah ok.

I might as well post my predictions then


D+24

While making this prediction map, I realized that what I was saying about there being a slight GOP majority rang true for me. According to my predictions, the GOP will have a 1 seat majority.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

2018 House Elections:



D+64

I think you are being way too generous to the democrats here. I think that the Democrats will substantially slim the GOP majority, but I don't think a house takeover is possible with the districts drawn the way they are.

Regardless, that map was intended to be a near-best case scenario map, and I thing the most likely outcome currently is something like D+35.

ah ok.

I might as well post my predictions then


D+24

While making this prediction map, I realized that what I was saying about there being a slight GOP majority rang true for me. According to my predictions, the GOP will have a 1 seat majority.

Actually, D+24 gives Democrats a 1 seat majority.

[Metalhead123]

2018 House Elections:



D+64

I think you are being way too generous to the democrats here. I think that the Democrats will substantially slim the GOP majority, but I don't think a house takeover is possible with the districts drawn the way they are.

Regardless, that map was intended to be a near-best case scenario map, and I thing the most likely outcome currently is something like D+35.

ah ok.

I might as well post my predictions then


D+24

While making this prediction map, I realized that what I was saying about there being a slight GOP majority rang true for me. According to my predictions, the GOP will have a 1 seat majority.

Actually, D+24 gives Democrats a 1 seat majority.

I may have fudged up the numbers, but it's close regardless

[catographer]

I might as well post my predictions then


D+24

While making this prediction map, I realized that what I was saying about there being a slight GOP majority rang true for me. According to my predictions, the GOP will have a 1 seat majority.

do you have a larger version of your prediction map of CDs?

[Metalhead123]

I might as well post my predictions then


D+24

While making this prediction map, I realized that what I was saying about there being a slight GOP majority rang true for me. According to my predictions, the GOP will have a 1 seat majority.

do you have a larger version of your prediction map of CDs?

sure

Just click on the image and you'll get the larger image.

[catographer]

Did you draw that? Where'd u get that? I've been trying to create a large district map that like for a while but it was gonna take forever!

[Metalhead123]

Did you draw that? Where'd u get that? I've been trying to create a large district map that like for a while but it was gonna take forever!

I didn't draw it lol. I found it on either this website or alternatehistory.com

[Huey Long is a Republican]

I have 4 prediction Maps with the Candidates named:

2000:

Don Sundquist (R-TN)/Newt Gingrich (R-GA):
280/47.41%
Jerry Brown (D-CA)/John Kerry (D-MA): 258/48.44%

Election too close to call for several days because of Wisconsin being within 250 votes. It was originally a Electoral tie because WI went to Brown but on November 16th, it was decided that WI would go to Sundquist with just a 70 vote lead.



2004:

Sundquist/Gingrich: 370/56.7%
Kerry/Edwards: 168/43.3%

Closest state was Ohio but Sundquist had already won at that point. He would win Ohio on November 10th along with WI, MI, and PA by 2500, 4000, 5000, and 7000 votes respectfully.



2008:

Gingrich/John Hoeven (R-ND): 299/53.2%
Clinton/Strickland: 239/46.8%

Ohio and Florida determined winner and Gingrich would win both by 6300 and 540 votes respectfully.

2008:

Obama/Gore: 443/57.5%
Gingrich/Hoeven: 95/42.5%

Closest state was Florida. Obama would win it with 7% lead. Gingrich was behind by 12 points on Election day

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

I have 4 prediction Maps with the Candidates named:

2000:

Don Sundquist (R-TN)/Newt Gingrich (R-GA):
280/47.41%
Jerry Brown (D-CA)/John Kerry (D-MA): 258/48.44%

Election too close to call for several days because of Wisconsin being within 250 votes. It was originally a Electoral tie because WI went to Brown but on November 16th, it was decided that WI would go to Sundquist with just a 70 vote lead.



2004:

Sundquist/Gingrich: 370/56.7%
Kerry/Edwards: 168/43.3%

Closest state was Ohio but Sundquist had already won at that point. He would win Ohio on November 10th along with WI, MI, and PA by 2500, 4000, 5000, and 7000 votes respectfully.



2008:

Gingrich/John Hoeven (R-ND): 299/53.2%
Clinton/Strickland: 239/46.8%

Ohio and Florida determined winner and Gingrich would win both by 6300 and 540 votes respectfully.

2008:

Obama/Gore: 443/67.5%
Gingrich/Hoeven: 95/32.5%

Closest state was Florida. Obama would win it with 7% lead. Gingrich was behind by 12 points on Election day

One minor complaint: if Obama got 67.5% of the national PV he would obviously win every state.

[Huey Long is a Republican]

I have 4 prediction Maps with the Candidates named:

2000:

Don Sundquist (R-TN)/Newt Gingrich (R-GA):
280/47.41%
Jerry Brown (D-CA)/John Kerry (D-MA): 258/48.44%

Election too close to call for several days because of Wisconsin being within 250 votes. It was originally a Electoral tie because WI went to Brown but on November 16th, it was decided that WI would go to Sundquist with just a 70 vote lead.



2004:

Sundquist/Gingrich: 370/56.7%
Kerry/Edwards: 168/43.3%

Closest state was Ohio but Sundquist had already won at that point. He would win Ohio on November 10th along with WI, MI, and PA by 2500, 4000, 5000, and 7000 votes respectfully.



2008:

Gingrich/John Hoeven (R-ND): 299/53.2%
Clinton/Strickland: 239/46.8%

Ohio and Florida determined winner and Gingrich would win both by 6300 and 540 votes respectfully.

2008:

Obama/Gore: 443/67.5%
Gingrich/Hoeven: 95/32.5%

Closest state was Florida. Obama would win it with 7% lead. Gingrich was behind by 12 points on Election day

One minor complaint: if Obama got 67.5% of the national PV he would obviously win every state.

Fixed

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

2000:

Don Sundquist (R-TN)/Newt Gingrich (R-GA):
280/47.41%
Jerry Brown (D-CA)/John Kerry (D-MA): 258/48.44%

Election too close to call for several days because of Wisconsin being within 250 votes. It was originally a Electoral tie because WI went to Brown but on November 16th, it was decided that WI would go to Sundquist with just a 70 vote lead.

Who was the third candidate in Wisconsin, and why did their campaign not register similar support (at least 20%, given that Sundquist carried it with >40% of the vote) in other states?

[Huey Long is a Republican]

2000:

Don Sundquist (R-TN)/Newt Gingrich (R-GA):
280/47.41%
Jerry Brown (D-CA)/John Kerry (D-MA): 258/48.44%

Election too close to call for several days because of Wisconsin being within 250 votes. It was originally a Electoral tie because WI went to Brown but on November 16th, it was decided that WI would go to Sundquist with just a 70 vote lead.

Who was the third candidate in Wisconsin, and why did their campaign not register similar support (at least 20%, given that Sundquist carried it with >40% of the vote) in other states?

Nader still runs like in OTL, so it was him that took the remaining 4.15% of the NPV. Idk what you mean by Wisconsin though

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

2000:

Don Sundquist (R-TN)/Newt Gingrich (R-GA):
280/47.41%
Jerry Brown (D-CA)/John Kerry (D-MA): 258/48.44%

Election too close to call for several days because of Wisconsin being within 250 votes. It was originally a Electoral tie because WI went to Brown but on November 16th, it was decided that WI would go to Sundquist with just a 70 vote lead.

Who was the third candidate in Wisconsin, and why did their campaign not register similar support (at least 20%, given that Sundquist carried it with >40% of the vote) in other states?

Nader still runs like in OTL, so it was him that took the remaining 4.15% of the NPV. Idk what you mean by Wisconsin though

You have it shaded as >30% which made him think there was a third candidate keeping Sundquist below 40%.

[Huey Long is a Republican]

2000:

Don Sundquist (R-TN)/Newt Gingrich (R-GA):
280/47.41%
Jerry Brown (D-CA)/John Kerry (D-MA): 258/48.44%

Election too close to call for several days because of Wisconsin being within 250 votes. It was originally a Electoral tie because WI went to Brown but on November 16th, it was decided that WI would go to Sundquist with just a 70 vote lead.

Who was the third candidate in Wisconsin, and why did their campaign not register similar support (at least 20%, given that Sundquist carried it with >40% of the vote) in other states?

Nader still runs like in OTL, so it was him that took the remaining 4.15% of the NPV. Idk what you mean by Wisconsin though

You have it shaded as >30% which made him think there was a third candidate keeping Sundquist below 40%.

Ah Well, Nader was able to carry just enough members of the working Class to place the Victory percentage in 39% as he (Nader) took 23% and Brown's 38%, making WI extremely close

[Oldiesfreak1854]

1980

Rep. John Anderson (R-IL)/Fmr. Gov. Ronald Reagan (R-CA): 463 EVs (55% PV)
Pres. Jimmy Carter (D-GA)/Vice Pres. Walter Mondale (D-MN): 75 EVs (42% PV)

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

Is this just 2016 but reversed?

No. It’s 2016 but with the right wrong colors

[The Govanah Jake]

1980

Rep. John Anderson (R-IL)/Fmr. Gov. Ronald Reagan (R-CA): 463 EVs (55% PV)
Pres. Jimmy Carter (D-GA)/Vice Pres. Walter Mondale (D-MN): 75 EVs (42% PV)

How it should of been.

[King Lear]

Here are three outcomes of the 2020 presidential election with three different Democratic Nominees, the first one is with Bernie Sanders.

2020 Presidential Election

2020 Presidential Election Results:
Bernie Sanders: 278 Electoral Votes (50% of PV)
Donald Trump: 260 Electoral Votes (49% of PV)
As you can see I believe Sanders can narrowly beat Trump by flipping the three Rust belt states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin with higher Nonwhite and youth turnout, along with increased support in Rural WWC areas. Trump will make gains in Wealthy, White, suburbs, throughout the sun belt and will thus improve his margins in Florida, Georgia, Texas, North Carolina, and Arizona, along with coming closer in Virginia, Colorado, and Nevada, and losing California by 20 points instead of 30. This will have the effect of making him improve in the popular vote (losing it by one instead of two points), while losing the electoral college. The next map is with Cory Booker.

2020 Presidential Election

2020 Presidential Election Results:
Donald Trump: 290 Electoral Votes (48% of PV)
Cory Booker: 248 Electoral Votes (51% of PV)
As you can see, Booker would flip Michigan and hold all the Hillary States due to high turnout from Nonwhites and young voters, However due to his Race he'd fail to make up any ground in Rural WWC areas would doom him in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, while Trump would still narrowly win Florida due to his unwavering support from the high-turnout elderly White population their. Finally, Booker would lose the electoral college with an even bigger popular vote victory then Hillary (three points instead of two) due to him maintaining the support of many Educated White suburbanites along with higher Nonwhite and youth turnout (due to these factors he'd carry California by around a 30 point margin). The last map I'd for Warren.

2020 Presidential Election

2020 Presidential Election Results:
Donald Trump: 328 Electoral Votes (50% of PV)
Elizabeth Warren: 210 Electoral Votes (48% of PV)
As much as I hate to say this, it's pretty obvious Elizabeth Warren is the weakest of these three potential Nominees, because though she would excite the Democratic base of Nonwhites and Young people, her Gender would turn of even more WWCs, which would cause her to lose Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin by even larger margins and cause her to lose Minnesota, New Hampshire, Maine, and Nevada. Meanwhile, her Left-wing economic views would turn of Wealth White Suburbanites, which would cause her to barely win Virginia and Colorado (Nonwhites and Young people would save her in those two states), win California by 20 points instead of 30, and lose Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona, and Florida by larger margins then Hillary. Overall these National shifts would cause Trump to win the popular vote by two points, along with winning 328 Electoral votes from 34 states.

[MATTROSE94]

Here are three outcomes of the 2020 presidential election with three different Democratic Nominees, the first one is with Bernie Sanders.

2020 Presidential Election

2020 Presidential Election Results:
Bernie Sanders: 278 Electoral Votes (50% of PV)
Donald Trump: 260 Electoral Votes (49% of PV)
As you can see I believe Sanders can narrowly beat Trump by flipping the three Rust belt states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin with higher Nonwhite and youth turnout, along with increased support in Rural WWC areas. Trump will make gains in Wealthy, White, suburbs, throughout the sun belt and will thus improve his margins in Florida, Georgia, Texas, North Carolina, and Arizona, along with coming closer in Virginia, Colorado, and Nevada, and losing California by 20 points instead of 30. This will have the effect of making him improve in the popular vote (losing it by one instead of two points), while losing the electoral college. The next map is with Cory Booker.

2020 Presidential Election

2020 Presidential Election Results:
Donald Trump: 290 Electoral Votes (48% of PV)
Cory Booker: 248 Electoral Votes (51% of PV)
As you can see, Booker would flip Michigan and hold all the Hillary States due to high turnout from Nonwhites and young voters, However due to his Race he'd fail to make up any ground in Rural WWC areas would doom him in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, while Trump would still narrowly win Florida due to his unwavering support from the high-turnout elderly White population their. Finally, Booker would lose the electoral college with an even bigger popular vote victory then Hillary (three points instead of two) due to him maintaining the support of many Educated White suburbanites along with higher Nonwhite and youth turnout (due to these factors he'd carry California by around a 30 point margin). The last map I'd for Warren.

2020 Presidential Election

2020 Presidential Election Results:
Donald Trump: 328 Electoral Votes (50% of PV)
Elizabeth Warren: 210 Electoral Votes (48% of PV)
As much as I hate to say this, it's pretty obvious Elizabeth Warren is the weakest of these three potential Nominees, because though she would excite the Democratic base of Nonwhites and Young people, her Gender would turn of even more WWCs, which would cause her to lose Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin by even larger margins and cause her to lose Minnesota, New Hampshire, Maine, and Nevada. Meanwhile, her Left-wing economic views would turn of Wealth White Suburbanites, which would cause her to barely win Virginia and Colorado (Nonwhites and Young people would save her in those two states), win California by 20 points instead of 30, and lose Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona, and Florida by larger margins then Hillary. Overall these National shifts would cause Trump to win the popular vote by two points, along with winning 328 Electoral votes from 34 states.

I agree with you regarding Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren (though I feel that they would have an edge in Arizona), ni also feel that Cory Booker would have a good chance to pick up Arizona, North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, and Pennsylvania. Still, my gut feeling is that a Kamala Harris/John Bel Edwards ticket would be the best choice for the Democrats in 2020. I think that such a ticket would hold all of he Clinton 2016 states and also pick up Arizona, Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, Texas, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and maybe even Louisiana and win the popular vote by about 5%.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

1980

Rep. John Anderson (R-IL)/Fmr. Gov. Ronald Reagan (R-CA): 463 EVs (55% PV)
Pres. Jimmy Carter (D-GA)/Vice Pres. Walter Mondale (D-MN): 75 EVs (42% PV)

I'd probably give Anderson Minnesota too. maybe give Tennessee and/or North Carolina to Carter.

[Huey Long is a Republican]

1885:

72 Electoral Votes to win

Breckenridge/Bragg: 94/51.2%
Huntington/Jamison: 29/37.5%
Forrest/Wigfall: 19/11.3%

Constitutional Party
True Equality Party
Reactionist Party

Issues: Anglo-American War of 1883; Mexican Civil War; Slavery.

Fictional people: Samuel J. Huntington: born in Knoxville, TN on January 17th, 1834, Samuel J. Huntington was a Major General for the Confederate Army in the Pueblo Rebellion of 1867-1869 and the first Mexican Intervention in 1884. Despite having served as Governor of Tennessee from 1873-1881, he barely lost the state to John C. Breckenridge, though he still remains Popular throughout the state.

Alfred Jamison: born on September 15th, 1850, this young man would serve as Governor of Kentucky from 1881-1889 and was a major reason why the True Equality Party carried the state with 60% of the vote in the 1885 Election. He also served in the Pueblo Rebellion and first Mexican Intervention and would even be a future Confederate President

[Suburbia]

2024-The Hawley era begins

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO)/Rep. Chris DiPiazza (R-NJ)-361 EV/53.2%
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA)/Gov. Jon Ossoff (D-GA)-177 EV/47.5%
Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, elected in 2021 after the retirement of Roy Blunt to become White House Chief of Staff for President Donald Trump, runs for president in 2024 after sterling conservative credentials and several legislative achievements including The Hawley Act (sweeping education reform).
Hawley wins the 2024 GOP nomination and picks rising Republican star Rep. Chris DiPiazza of New Jersey as his vice presidential running mate. Hawley/DiPiazza wins with 361 electoral votes, becoming one of the youngest presidential/vice-presidential pairs since Clinton and Gore in 1992. Hawley wins with 53% of the vote, compared with Democratic opponent Sen. Kamala Harris' 47% of the popular vote. Harris wins the 2024 Democratic nomination in a bitter ethnic battle, and the remnants of the nomination casts over to the general election. This is the Republicans' third consecutive electoral victory, first time since 1980/1984/1988 with Reagan-Bush.

https://savejersey.com/2018/01/di-piazza-paramus-council/