Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 18, 2020, 03:53:52 am
News: 2020 Presidential Predictions (Primary) are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 User Predictions - Discussion
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 ... 99 Print
Author Topic: 2004 User Predictions - Discussion  (Read 823251 times)
opebo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47,053


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #475 on: January 05, 2004, 12:25:49 pm »

It's importent to remember that while political activists/hacks/elected officials are very polarised, the electorate is not.
Political activists make the mistake of assuming that because they are polarised the wider electorate is.
They also make the mistake of assuming that 2000 was some form of perfect reflection of each states "natural" profile.
Hence irrational beliefs about states won by fairly small margins, or where the defeated candidate still won over 40% of the vote being "unwinnable"
The GOP might win Maryland or Vermont, the Democrats might win Mississippi or Georgia.
There is no reason why either party can't win the aformentioned states.

There is a reason why a Democrat can't win in the South or plains/moutain states - the great majority of people in those states always vote Republican.  The converse could be said of Maryland or Vermont, among many other lefist states.  Just look back at states won by Bush and Dole in 92 and 96, and that's with Perot sapping the votes of the sillier type of Republican voter.  Admittedly, Clinton wasn't very popular, but he's as popular as a Democrat has been in 40 years.
I think the electorate is just as polarized as activists, except for a small sliver in the middle.  I think it is just possible that a very popular Republican, like Reagan, could turn a few strongly Democratic states.  I doubt the alternative is possible, as places like Utah and Mississippi are filled with people who truly despise the Democratic party on ideological grounds.

One other note on Louisiana, Arkansas, and Tennessee - these states are firmly Republican in presidential voting.  Louisiana has narrowly elected Democrats who at least pose as conservative locally, but that doesn't mean much regarding presidential elections, any more than Pataki in NY means Bush can win that state.  

Utter rubbish. No evidence+wildly innacurate facts+falling straight into the trap I warned you all about.

Utter Rubbish?  I don't see any 'evidence' in your post either.  Just a claim.  If you refuse to accept voter's behavior in previous elections as evidence, then I suppose there's no evidence to say one state is more Republican and another more Democratic.  Perhaps Bush will sweep the Northeast while Dean will win a big majority in Texas.

Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,869
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #476 on: January 05, 2004, 12:43:25 pm »

It would help if you actually read what I said.
Bush will not win Massachusetts or Rhode Island and the Democratic nominee will not win Texas.
However I see no reason why a Democrat can't win Mississippi and I see no reason why Bush can't win Maryland.

My main point is:

Most voters split tickets=non-polerised electorate HOWEVER most activists and elected officials are very partizan and very polerised.
Logged
Mort from NewYawk
MortfromNewYawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 399


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #477 on: January 05, 2004, 01:09:20 pm »

Dazzleman's comparison of Nixon's electoral fortunes to Bush's, as a caveat to comparing 2004 to 2000, are well taken.

Let us not forget, however, that McGovern was tranparently liberal and anti-war, while Dean attempts to sway with the breeze. Already we hear his apologists claiming what a moderate governor he was (as if Vermont politics somehow resembles national politics). And we have the sorry spectacle of Dean himself shamelessly pretending to have some religious side, misquoting the Bible in interviews meant to play to Southern audiences.

The point is, might not enough baby-boomer Democrats in the pivotal Democratic states, hungry for the White House, resentful of the 2000 victory, romanced by the youthful fervor of a Dean campaign, and lulled into complacency by successes in Afghanistan and Iraq, turn out for Dean?

Even without Florida, just a turnover in Nevada (the demographic there is rapidly changing) and New Hampshire (Dean's neighboring state) would bring us to an electoral tie.

There are some similarities between the 1968-72 period and the period since 2000.  The political landscape was radically changed by the Sept. 11th attacks, and national security is a much more prominent issue than it was in 2000.  Will the American people entrust their national security to somebody like Howard Dean in 2004?.....

I do think that the political landscape has changed radically against the type of Democrat that Dean is, and if he is the nominee, I would not expect his performance to be comparable with that of Gore.
Logged
opebo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47,053


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #478 on: January 05, 2004, 01:25:11 pm »


Even without Florida, just a turnover in Nevada (the demographic there is rapidly changing) and New Hampshire (Dean's neighboring state) would bring us to an electoral tie.

New Hampshire should go reliably to Bush.  I also think Nevada will do the same, because demographic changes only effects elections if the new migrants vote, which thank goodness they tend not to do.
Logged
Mort from NewYawk
MortfromNewYawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 399


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #479 on: January 05, 2004, 01:40:37 pm »

The "new migrants" in Nevada that I'm thinking of are the middle class from California and Democratic states in the the East and MidWest, who have flooded the Las Vegas Valley in the last four years and would love to vote in a pivotal state in 2004.

And in New Hampshire, you have a growing Vermont-type youth culture gradually replacing the older, libertarian voter. Not to mention the Dean hordes from Burlington coming over to organize and spend the summer in the White Mountains.

I just don't think Republicans should be complacent against Dean.

New Hampshire should go reliably to Bush.  I also think Nevada will do the same, because demographic changes only effects elections if the new migrants vote, which thank goodness they tend not to do.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,584


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #480 on: January 05, 2004, 01:43:06 pm »


Even without Florida, just a turnover in Nevada (the demographic there is rapidly changing) and New Hampshire (Dean's neighboring state) would bring us to an electoral tie.

New Hampshire should go reliably to Bush.  I also think Nevada will do the same, because demographic changes only effects elections if the new migrants vote, which thank goodness they tend not to do.

What's the last part supposed to mean? That they are stupid and vote "wrongly" or what?
Logged
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #481 on: January 05, 2004, 02:11:55 pm »

NH Anti-tax and plus all polls with Dean way ahead of Dem field show him Way behind Bush.

Also they thought Jean Shaheeen would win and she didn't , Sen Sununu the GOP candidate won easily.

Next, Nev went all GOP in 2002 also, Gov in a landslide and GOP picked up new Congressional district.


The "new migrants" in Nevada that I'm thinking of are the middle class from California and Democratic states in the the East and MidWest, who have flooded the Las Vegas Valley in the last four years and would love to vote in a pivotal state in 2004.

And in New Hampshire, you have a growing Vermont-type youth culture gradually replacing the older, libertarian voter. Not to mention the Dean hordes from Burlington coming over to organize and spend the summer in the White Mountains.

I just don't think Republicans should be complacent against Dean.

New Hampshire should go reliably to Bush.  I also think Nevada will do the same, because demographic changes only effects elections if the new migrants vote, which thank goodness they tend not to do.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,601
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #482 on: January 05, 2004, 06:33:26 pm »

It's importent to remember that while political activists/hacks/elected officials are very polarised, the electorate is not.
Political activists make the mistake of assuming that because they are polarised the wider electorate is.
They also make the mistake of assuming that 2000 was some form of perfect reflection of each states "natural" profile.
Hence irrational beliefs about states won by fairly small margins, or where the defeated candidate still won over 40% of the vote being "unwinnable"
The GOP might win Maryland or Vermont, the Democrats might win Mississippi or Georgia.
There is no reason why either party can't win the aformentioned states.

Don't assume that Gore and Clinton's wins in 92, 96, and 00 show the pulse of the American electorate either.  All Gore proved in 2000, is that a Democrat running as a pupulist-centrist (which he is not) can almost win an election and win big in the mid-west and PA.  Dean is not a populist-centrist and he has no intention of running as one.  He is a far-left liberal, who would lose in an utter landslide if it weren't for the northeast and pacific-west being full of far left liberals like him.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,584


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #483 on: January 05, 2004, 06:58:36 pm »

It's importent to remember that while political activists/hacks/elected officials are very polarised, the electorate is not.
Political activists make the mistake of assuming that because they are polarised the wider electorate is.
They also make the mistake of assuming that 2000 was some form of perfect reflection of each states "natural" profile.
Hence irrational beliefs about states won by fairly small margins, or where the defeated candidate still won over 40% of the vote being "unwinnable"
The GOP might win Maryland or Vermont, the Democrats might win Mississippi or Georgia.
There is no reason why either party can't win the aformentioned states.

Don't assume that Gore and Clinton's wins in 92, 96, and 00 show the pulse of the American electorate either.  All Gore proved in 2000, is that a Democrat running as a pupulist-centrist (which he is not) can almost win an election and win big in the mid-west and PA.  Dean is not a populist-centrist and he has no intention of running as one.  He is a far-left liberal, who would lose in an utter landslide if it weren't for the northeast and pacific-west being full of far left liberals like him.

Eh...what is that last part supposed to mean? Bush is a conservative who would lose in a landslide if it wasn't for the annoying fact there are so many conservative voters! In fact, any candidate would lose in a landslide if they didn't have voters who shared their opinion! Smiley
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,601
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #484 on: January 05, 2004, 10:16:52 pm »

It's importent to remember that while political activists/hacks/elected officials are very polarised, the electorate is not.
Political activists make the mistake of assuming that because they are polarised the wider electorate is.
They also make the mistake of assuming that 2000 was some form of perfect reflection of each states "natural" profile.
Hence irrational beliefs about states won by fairly small margins, or where the defeated candidate still won over 40% of the vote being "unwinnable"
The GOP might win Maryland or Vermont, the Democrats might win Mississippi or Georgia.
There is no reason why either party can't win the aformentioned states.

Don't assume that Gore and Clinton's wins in 92, 96, and 00 show the pulse of the American electorate either.  All Gore proved in 2000, is that a Democrat running as a pupulist-centrist (which he is not) can almost win an election and win big in the mid-west and PA.  Dean is not a populist-centrist and he has no intention of running as one.  He is a far-left liberal, who would lose in an utter landslide if it weren't for the northeast and pacific-west being full of far left liberals like him.

Eh...what is that last part supposed to mean? Bush is a conservative who would lose in a landslide if it wasn't for the annoying fact there are so many conservative voters! In fact, any candidate would lose in a landslide if they didn't have voters who shared their opinion! Smiley

What I meant is that there is such a high concentration of far left voters in the NE and Pacific West that those states are sure to go for Dean and will probably be the only states to go to Dean.  Bush's support is msuch more spread out throughout the country.
Logged
00tim
Rookie
*
Posts: 24


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #485 on: January 05, 2004, 10:54:46 pm »

Presuming at this point that Dean is the nominee then Dean will only win 5 or 6 states. NY will certainly go for Dean and CA wouldn't be a surprise either but they did vote in Schwarzenegger but that is probably not enough to change the voting pattern. Dean will probably carry Vermont, Newhampshire and a couple of others that won't mean much. My overall prediction is that if Dean is the nominee this will be a very boring presidential election.
Logged
agcatter
agcat
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,742


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #486 on: January 05, 2004, 11:22:27 pm »

Uh, I wouldn't hold my breath that Bush will carry Maryland or the Dems will carry Georgia or Mississippi.  Opebo has it right when he says there is no evidence that consistent voting trends in these states are not going to hold this time.  There are many more Dems in Maryland and many more presidential Republicans in the deep South.  It is as simple as that.
Logged
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #487 on: January 05, 2004, 11:50:28 pm »


Bill O'Reilly's prediction was 8 states for Dean.

Presuming at this point that Dean is the nominee then Dean will only win 5 or 6 states. NY will certainly go for Dean and CA wouldn't be a surprise either but they did vote in Schwarzenegger but that is probably not enough to change the voting pattern. Dean will probably carry Vermont, Newhampshire and a couple of others that won't mean much. My overall prediction is that if Dean is the nominee this will be a very boring presidential election.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,869
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #488 on: January 06, 2004, 04:50:11 am »

Uh, I wouldn't hold my breath that Bush will carry Maryland or the Dems will carry Georgia or Mississippi.  Opebo has it right when he says there is no evidence that consistent voting trends in these states are not going to hold this time.  There are many more Dems in Maryland and many more presidential Republicans in the deep South.  It is as simple as that.

But there is nothing to say that they can't.
That is the importent word. can't not won't
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,869
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #489 on: January 06, 2004, 04:51:49 am »


Bill O'Reilly's prediction was 8 states for Dean.


I wouldn't trust someone from Faux News to speak my weight...
Logged
Carey
Full Member
***
Posts: 105


Political Matrix
E: -3.38, S: -5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #490 on: January 06, 2004, 09:07:22 am »


Bill O'Reilly's prediction was 8 states for Dean.

Presuming at this point that Dean is the nominee then Dean will only win 5 or 6 states. NY will certainly go for Dean and CA wouldn't be a surprise either but they did vote in Schwarzenegger but that is probably not enough to change the voting pattern. Dean will probably carry Vermont, Newhampshire and a couple of others that won't mean much. My overall prediction is that if Dean is the nominee this will be a very boring presidential election.

Bill O'Reilly is a windbag, I'd take everything he and everybody else on that network says with a grain of salt.
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 25,241


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -8.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #491 on: January 06, 2004, 10:10:43 am »
« Edited: January 06, 2004, 10:11:21 am by afleitch »

I think we can number crunch all we want, but voter turnout will seriously effect the outcome. Regardless of whether or not Dean wins the Democratic nomination, he has energised a large portion of the liberal leaning electorate, who in the past rarely turned out to vote. A sustained youth/minority vote drive should be more successful this time around than in the recent past. One aspect many people over look is how much many Democratic voters WANT BUSH OUT, there is a thirst for gaining back the White House. Yes Howard Dean and authorist Michael Moore (who is a Clark backer) may be behind this, which doesn't make the DNC entirely comfortable, but it can be used effectively. If the turnout increases by even a handful of percent, and most of those votes go to the Demc, on state wide levels this could produce suprising results.
Logged
00tim
Rookie
*
Posts: 24


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #492 on: January 06, 2004, 10:23:20 am »

These people are always there, infact they are the most faithful to vote, it is just that their voice is louder this time around in the primaries. If his strategy works and he gets the nomination he is actually weakning his chances in becoming president.
Logged
Mort from NewYawk
MortfromNewYawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 399


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #493 on: January 06, 2004, 12:01:35 pm »

What are the chances that Democrats in the February and March primaries will realize Dean's potential weakness as a nominee, and pledge enough delegates to other candidates to throw the choice to the convention?
Logged
opebo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47,053


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #494 on: January 06, 2004, 01:19:47 pm »

I think that people overstate the difference between Dean and other potential Democratic nominees, based on subtle differences in their place on the ideological spectrum.  Ultimately it is not Dean's extreme leftism that makes him unelectable, it is his region - Leiberman would fare just as badly, and he's supposedly less left wing.  Interestingly, because the South is so strongly Republican now, I don't think nominating a Southerner would actually carry any southern states - for example I doubt Edwards could even carry North Carolina, just like Gore couldn't carry Tennessee.  The exception would be a very conservative Democrat like Zell Miller or John Breaux, but they're supposedly nearly Republican and could never make it through the primary.  

A southerner or midwesterner could carry swing states in the Midwest, however, like Ohio, Wisconsin, or Iowa.  Gephardt is supposed to be the candidate Karl Rove most fears.  I'd have to say however that Gephart is not a very good midwestern candidate, since I can report he's very unpopular in Missouri outside of St. Louis - I'm not at all sure he'd carry the state against Bush.  I doubt he could be elected governer of Missouri for example - voters outside St. Louis dislike St. Louis pols like the rest of the country dislikes Northeastners.  

 
Logged
Michael Z
Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,288
Political Matrix
E: -5.88, S: -4.72

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #495 on: January 06, 2004, 06:09:57 pm »
« Edited: January 06, 2004, 06:12:12 pm by Michael Zeigermann »

I think that people overstate the difference between Dean and other potential Democratic nominees, based on subtle differences in their place on the ideological spectrum.  Ultimately it is not Dean's extreme leftism that makes him unelectable, it is his region

Please don't brand Dean as an extremist. He might support civil unions and oppose the war in Iraq, but that doesn't mean he's a raving communist. His views on gun control, or his fiscal policies as Govenor, are to the right of the Democratic party.
Logged
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #496 on: January 06, 2004, 09:44:54 pm »

that would be awesome if dems have like a dean with the lead but have to take it to the convention.  Can see it already either dean splits or narrowly gets it and losta  ton of time and money fighting off rivals.


What are the chances that Democrats in the February and March primaries will realize Dean's potential weakness as a nominee, and pledge enough delegates to other candidates to throw the choice to the convention?
Logged
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #497 on: January 06, 2004, 09:47:01 pm »

But he also wants tax increases, wants massive regulations on business,  yes he balanced budget in VT ( half the size of Miami) and he had to raise taxes through the roof there to do it, and he wants to socialize medicine.



I think that people overstate the difference between Dean and other potential Democratic nominees, based on subtle differences in their place on the ideological spectrum.  Ultimately it is not Dean's extreme leftism that makes him unelectable, it is his region

Please don't brand Dean as an extremist. He might support civil unions and oppose the war in Iraq, but that doesn't mean he's a raving communist. His views on gun control, or his fiscal policies as Govenor, are to the right of the Democratic party.
Logged
00tim
Rookie
*
Posts: 24


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #498 on: January 07, 2004, 09:22:37 am »

With the economy going in the up direction it is going to be a tough sell to raise taxes, especially on the middle class.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,869
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #499 on: January 07, 2004, 10:46:34 am »

The most left wing of the mainstream candidates is actually Edwards... he'd make a good Labour cabinet member.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 ... 99 Print 
« previous next »
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