Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 18, 2019, 11:41:54 pm
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2018 Gubernatorial Election Polls (Moderator: Brittain33)
  IA Des Moines Registar: Hubbell +2 (search mode)
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: IA Des Moines Registar: Hubbell +2  (Read 2672 times)
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30,817
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.65, S: -5.70

P P

« on: September 22, 2018, 06:12:55 pm »

Toss up, as expected. This should surprise nobody considering Reynolds was only up 5 when Hubbell was just a some dude.
Logged
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30,817
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.65, S: -5.70

P P

« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2018, 04:15:53 pm »

If Reynolds, Blum and Young all lose, thatís terrible news for Joni Ernst and Trump's chances in IA in 2020.

Maybe, but Democrats for example got blown out in Tennessee in 94 and Clinton still carried the state comfortably two years later. A lot can happen.

And Democrats lost the Illinois gubernatorial race, Senate race, and 4 House seats in 2010, and it didn't mean a damn thing for 2012.
Logged
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30,817
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.65, S: -5.70

P P

« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2018, 04:36:28 pm »

If Reynolds, Blum and Young all lose, thatís terrible news for Joni Ernst and Trump's chances in IA in 2020.

Maybe, but Democrats for example got blown out in Tennessee in 94 and Clinton still carried the state comfortably two years later. A lot can happen.

And Democrats lost the Illinois gubernatorial race, Senate race, and 4 House seats in 2010, and it didn't mean a damn thing for 2012.
At the very least, we can all agree that such a result should make Joni Ernst nervous.

Yes, in the sense that it means Iowa isn't the new Wyoming that is unwinnable for Dems even in waves, but very few if any people have been arguing that. It's just a strawman. Just because Dems can win Iowa in a wave like 2018 is shaping up to be doesn't mean it isn't trending heavily R and that Republicans are more likely than not to win it in a more neutral environment. Illinois didn't become a red state or a swing state just because Republicans dominated there in a wave.
Logged
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30,817
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.65, S: -5.70

P P

« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2018, 04:39:29 pm »

Bloomberg said he would run third party if Sanders win nomination. Dems are gonna nominate BIDEN, Booker or Gillibrand
If anything, a run by Bloomberg as a 3rd option should pull away more moderate voters who held their nose last year for Trump, not the voters from the Democrats.

Sort of like a 1992 situation.

Bloomberg would appeal to approximately 5 Trump voters. If anything he'd be an outlet for Romney-Clinton voters who the Democrats very well may end up needing.
Logged
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30,817
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.65, S: -5.70

P P

« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2018, 05:09:53 pm »
« Edited: September 23, 2018, 05:30:27 pm by IceSpear »

^I didn't say that Romney-Clinton voters existed in large quantities. I said that Dems could very well need them in a close election. Trump only got 46% of the vote, which is rather pathetic for a major party candidate. It was the same percentage McCain got as he was being curbstomped and actually less than Romney got when he lost handily. And considering Trump currently has a ~90% approval rating among Republicans and and the ~10% who disapprove mostly already voted for Clinton or third party in 2016 anyway, I see zero reason to believe that Bloomberg would draw more from Trump than from the Democrats. Also, let's just apply some common sense here too. The guy is about as good a "cultural fit" for Trump voters as a black triggered transgender college leftist kneeling at an NFL game. A coastal elitist NYC billionaire who is now a Democrat that rails against large sodas and guns and is in favor of unironic globalism, unironic neoliberalism, multiculturalism, free trade, and open borders? Give me a break!
Logged
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30,817
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.65, S: -5.70

P P

« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2018, 08:07:05 pm »
« Edited: September 23, 2018, 08:18:55 pm by IceSpear »

This is true, but leaves out important key information. 2016 had a lot of votes siphoned to 3rd party candidates. The Libertarian and Green Parties got record amounts in votes. By pointing out how badly Trump did misses how great 3rd parties did, and also misses that these 3rd party voters would likely revert to Trump, unless a Bloomberg were on the ballot, considering the GCB was R+1.

Jill Stein voters would revert to Trump if Bloomberg wasn't on the ballot? That's quite an interesting theory you have there. It makes about as much sense as Bloomberg drawing more from Trump than from Sanders, lol. And there's zero evidence to suggest third parties in general would've broken to him if forced to choose. Considering most of these people were Obama voters or first time voters and skewed young, I'm highly skeptical of that claim. Sure, there was a small amount of Obama-Trump voters, but there were far more Obama-Clinton voters (obviously, considering she won the popular vote by 2 points.) What evidence is there to suggest that all these third party voters would've joined the small Obama-Trump group rather than the massive Obama-Clinton group if forced to choose? And the generic ballot doesn't mean anything. Democrats only won it by 1 even while Obama won by 4 in 2012. It just means voters were splitting their tickets.

Quote
2. I dont know what your obsession with beating down on rural voters is. Many of these guys have had the biggest swing towards Democrats. Its been the suburbs, the ones who voted for him by plugging their nose, and swung a bit Clinton, that have been the biggest obstacle. The fact that we are competitive in MT, and not in the GA suburbs show this.

Wow. This might be the most intellectually disingenuous "point" I've ever seen made on Atlas, and that's saying something. You literally cherrypicked a single example, ignored all elections that occured before and after it as well as tons of recent polling, then made a trend out of it. I'm very impressed, in all honesty. Luckily I already made a rebuttal to this stale year and a half old argument.

KS-04: Thompson kept it relatively close because he cleaned up in Wichita and the suburbs, even winning Sedgwick County. He got crushed in the rural areas.
MT-AL: Quist mostly ran up the score in what passes for urban/suburban areas in Montana like Missoula, Bozeman (Gallatin County), Helena (Lewis and Clark County), and Butte (Silver Bow County.) He still got curbstomped in the rural areas.
VA-Gov: Northam did even better than Clinton in NoVa which hardly anyone expected, while also making massive improvements in the Virginia Beach and Richmond suburbs. He did far worse than even McAuliffe in the rural areas.
AL-Sen: Moore actually did better in the rural areas than he did in 2012. He lost because he got burbstomped in the Birmingham/Mobile/Huntsville cities and their suburbs, along with the Black Belt. Look at the swing in Jefferson, Shelby, and Madison Counties.
PA-18: Lamb won because of the Pittsburbstomping in Allegheny County, he was still soundly rejected in Washington/Greene/Westmoreland Counties.
AZ-08: Dems got a massive swing in a heavily Republican district that consists entirely of Phoenix suburbs.
OH-12: Same story as PA-18 basically, with a slightly different ending. O'Connor dominated in suburban Columbus (Franklin County) and put in an amazing performance for a Democrat in suburban Delaware County. It wasn't quite enough to make up for the thumping he got in the rural areas of the district.

Really the only counter example and the reason the whole "suburbs are fools gold" narrative got started is because of GA-06, which is a pretty obvious outlier at this point.

On top of that, since that post we've gotten multiple polls showing Comstock, Rothfus, Paulsen, Coffman, Harkey, and Yoder getting curbstomped, and I doubt they're the only ones. And their districts are almost entirely suburban. It's time to give up on this narrative about the "stubborn suburbs."
Logged
Pages: [1] 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