What does your map look like?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 11:50:21 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  What does your map look like?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: What does your map look like?  (Read 15301 times)
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: August 01, 2009, 05:50:31 PM »

Monthly post:

If Obama does really good, this:



Montana is not going Democratic in 2012.

I think there is a small voting bloc, who really, really hates authority, basically hating the establishment, whatever the establishment is. But since youve probably already tossed out my idea, lets provide some facts:

1980: Dems in Control, Montana trends Rep.
1984: Reps in Control, Montana trends Dem.
1988: Reps still in Control, Montana trends Dem.
1992: Reps STILL in Control, Montana trends Dem.
1996: Dems in Control, Montana trends Rep.
2000: Dems in Control, Montana trends Rep.
2004: Reps in Control, Montana trends Dem.
2008: Reps in Control, Montana trends Dem.
2012: Dems in Control, Montana will trend Rep.

Barring some unforseen change, Montana will trend Republican, and keep switching.

Even if it trends Republican, that doesn't mean that it will vote Republican. If Obama is successful, the country as a whole will likely swing to the Democrats. Montana could easily swing Democratic without trending Democratic and, as long as the national swing is high enough, it would vote Democratic. Example: Both Ohio and Florida trended Republican in 2008, yet they both switched from Republican to Democratic.

If realicidealist says so it must be true.
Logged
Vepres
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,032
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: August 01, 2009, 06:14:06 PM »



It's so far out, that I went with my gut on many.

Michigan is lean-Dem because of the apparent success of the auto bailouts. Connecticut and New Jersey are toss-ups because they seem to be leaning Republican in the 2009 gubernatorial race.
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,713


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: August 01, 2009, 06:25:39 PM »

Monthly post:

If Obama does really good, this:



Montana is not going Democratic in 2012.

I think there is a small voting bloc, who really, really hates authority, basically hating the establishment, whatever the establishment is. But since youve probably already tossed out my idea, lets provide some facts:

1980: Dems in Control, Montana trends Rep.
1984: Reps in Control, Montana trends Dem.
1988: Reps still in Control, Montana trends Dem.
1992: Reps STILL in Control, Montana trends Dem.
1996: Dems in Control, Montana trends Rep.
2000: Dems in Control, Montana trends Rep.
2004: Reps in Control, Montana trends Dem.
2008: Reps in Control, Montana trends Dem.
2012: Dems in Control, Montana will trend Rep.

Barring some unforseen change, Montana will trend Republican, and keep switching.

Even if it trends Republican, that doesn't mean that it will vote Republican. If Obama is successful, the country as a whole will likely swing to the Democrats. Montana could easily swing Democratic without trending Democratic and, as long as the national swing is high enough, it would vote Democratic. Example: Both Ohio and Florida trended Republican in 2008, yet they both switched from Republican to Democratic.

If realicidealist says so it must be true.

I was merely playing devil's advocate. Tongue
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: August 01, 2009, 06:35:35 PM »



It's so far out, that I went with my gut on many.

Michigan is lean-Dem because of the apparent success of the auto bailouts. Connecticut and New Jersey are toss-ups because they seem to be leaning Republican in the 2009 gubernatorial race.

look, if Oregon, Maine, and Minnesota are toss-ups, Michigan is safe Dem and Inidna and North Carolina are counted tossups. This is an extremely Republican-biased map for any election year.
Logged
War on Want
Evilmexicandictator
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,643
Uzbekistan


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -8.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: August 01, 2009, 06:36:30 PM »

Monthly post:

If Obama does really good, this:



Montana is not going Democratic in 2012.

I think there is a small voting bloc, who really, really hates authority, basically hating the establishment, whatever the establishment is. But since youve probably already tossed out my idea, lets provide some facts:

1980: Dems in Control, Montana trends Rep.
1984: Reps in Control, Montana trends Dem.
1988: Reps still in Control, Montana trends Dem.
1992: Reps STILL in Control, Montana trends Dem.
1996: Dems in Control, Montana trends Rep.
2000: Dems in Control, Montana trends Rep.
2004: Reps in Control, Montana trends Dem.
2008: Reps in Control, Montana trends Dem.
2012: Dems in Control, Montana will trend Rep.

Barring some unforseen change, Montana will trend Republican, and keep switching.
Do you know anything about Montana and why it has been trending towards the Democrats lately?
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: August 03, 2009, 05:18:59 PM »

Here's one trend to watch:

The youngest voters from 2004-2008

State       2004 Margin      2008 Margin            Swing

The Mid-Atlantic

PA            60-39 Kerry       66-34 Obama          D + 6
DE           54-45 Kerry        71-25 Obama         D + 17
NY           72-25 Kerry         76-21 Obama        D + 4
NJ            64-35 Kerry        67-32 Obama         D + 3
MD           62-35 Kerry       70-26 Obama          D + 8
DC           90-8 Kerry       95-5 Obama              D + 5

New England

CT            70-29 Kerry       79-18 Obama      D + 9
ME            50-48 Bush       67-30 Obama      D + 19
NH            57-43 Kerry       61-37 Obama      D + 4
VT            71-27 Kerry       81-18 Obama      D + 10
MA           72-26 Kerry       78-20 Obama      D + 6
RI             68-30 Kerry       68-25 Obama      D + 0

The Midwest

OH           56-42 Kerry       61-38 Obama              D + 5
IN            52-47 Bush        63-35 Obama              D + 16
MO           51-48 Kerry        59-39 Obama             D + 8
IA              53-46 Kerry        63-34 Obama            D + 10
MI             55-43 Kerry         68-29 Obama            D + 13
MN           57-41 Kerry         66-32 Obama            D + 9
WI            57-41 Kerry         64-35 Obama            D + 7
IL             64-35 Kerry        71-27 Obama    D + 7

The Coastal South

VA             54-46 Kerry       63-34 Obama              D + 9
NC             56-43 Kerry       74-26 Obama              D + 18
SC             51-48 Bush        57-42 Obama             D + 9
GA             52-47 Bush        51-48 McCain             D + 1
FL              58-41 Kerry        61-37 Obama             D + 3

The Deep and Inland South

AL            57-41 Bush         51-49 Obama           D + 10
MS           63-37 Kerry         56-43 Obama           R + 6
TN            53-46 Bush         59-40 Obama           D + 13
KY           54-45 Bush          51-48 Obama           D + 6
WV          52-48 Bush         50-50 Tie      D + 2
AR           51-47 Bush         49-49 Tie      D + 2
LA            53-45 Bush         49-48 McCain   D + 4 (but won 18-24 by 53-45)
TX            59-41 Bush         54-45 Obama   D + 13

The Plains States

KS           55-44 Bush          51-47 Obama   D + 7
ND           68-32 Bush         51-47 Obama   D + 19
SD           55-43 Bush         50-48 Obama   D + 7
NE           60-38 Bush         54-43 Obama   D + 16
OK           62-38 Bush         60-40 McCain   D + 2

The Rockies and the Southwest

AZ            50-48 Bush        52-48 Obama            D + 4
NV            56-42 Kerry        70-29 Obama           D + 14
NM           50-49 Bush         77-21 Obama           D + 27
CO           51-47 Kerry         No result                  N/A
UT            77-18 Bush         62-33 McCain           D + 15
WY          72-25 Bush         63-35 McCain            D + 10
MT            52-43 Bush        61-37 Obama            D + 18
ID            65-35 Bush        56-42 McCain              D + 7

The West

CA           58-39 Kerry         76-23 Obama            D + 18 (80% of 18-24 for Obama)
OR           62-37 Kerry          No result                 N/A
WA          50-47 Kerry          No result                 N/A
AK            59-37 Bush         61-37 Bush               R + 2
HI             61-39 Kerry         82-18 Obama            D + 21



Figure that this bloc of voters will get larger in 2012 (it will be under 35 instead of under 30) and that it will be no less liberal-leaning by then. I notice that the youngest voters vote much more Democratic than older voters in practically every state.

The significance? Younger voters will supplant older voters in the electorate as older ones die or go senile and no longer vote. If you figure that the voters in a state like Virginia (which voted about 53-46 for Obama) had young voters going 63-34 for Obama.  So the youngest 16 years of voters in Virginia voted 63-34 for Obama, then the rest of the electorate voted  about 50-50 for Obama.

The math:

(1/4)x(63%) + (3/4) N = 53%

N =49.7%.

Next time with nothing more than the appearance of new young voters and the disappearance of older voters to death or senility, (round up 49.7% to 50%)

(20/64) x 63% + (44/64) x 50% = 54.1%

With no other change than new voters supplanting older voters, such suggests that Obama will win Virginia about 54-44-2.   That's roughly a 1.5% change in favor of Obama without doing much.

With someone else's guess on how Congressional seats will be re-apportioned and that the Favorite Son effect will disappear from Arizona (unless Senator John Kyl runs, which I think unlikely). This assumes that Obama will face an opponent as strong as John McCain was in 2008 (which itself is a huge assumption) :







Overpowering Obama win (20%+)
Strong Obama win (10-20%)
Modest Obama win (5-10%)
Weak Obama win (under 5%)
Weak GOP win (under 5%)
Modest GOP win (5-10%)
Strong GOP win (10%-20%)
Overpowering GOP win (20%+)
Nebraska: splits its electoral votes



(Nebraska splits its electoral votes, and the map fails to show it):

NE-01 is "Modest GOP"
NE-02 is "Weak Obama"
NE-03 is "Overwhelming GOP"
the state at large is "Strong GOP"


Obama wins of 2008 are solidified everywhere, and many viewers will be turning channels as the suspense fails to develop. 

Young voters in Georgia are not particularly liberal -- probably many of them are military, and the military tends to attract conservative-leaning young adults. Georgia, close as it was for Obama in 2008, will not go for him.  Older voters in the Dakotas aren't as conservative as those in Kansas, but younger voters in the Dakotas are too close to 50-50 to swing either state. Maybe farm-and-ranch life is good for ensuring that kids really are chips off the old block, so to speak, even in politics. 


 
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: August 03, 2009, 06:01:54 PM »

You might as well make the entire map red since you're a Democrat hack. Seriously, you can't really predict what the election is going to be like in 2012.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: August 03, 2009, 09:42:55 PM »

You might as well make the entire map red since you're a Democrat hack. Seriously, you can't really predict what the election is going to be like in 2012.

You misuse the word "hack".

I state my assumptions and I used statistics and mathematics. I may have used an over-simplified example with Virginia, but only to make the mathematics simple (although I found it a great opportunity). What I showed is a jumping-off point for further discussion. In the example that I gave, I showed Obama picking up Missouri (which was close and wouldn't take much to flip toward Obama in 2012), Montana (likewise), and Arizona (the Favorite Son effect is real; it was enough to allow George McGovern to come close to winning South Dakota in 1972 while losing neighboring North Dakota and Nebraska by gigantic margins). Missouri, Montana, and Arizona are the only states that I showed Obama picking up. The statistics also suggested that Obama would get bigger margins in such states as Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio, and Florida. I could say nothing about Colorado because no relevant data is available for Colorado.

You cannot deny that the young voters voted more strongly Democratic in 2008 than older voters practically everywhere that Obama won or in which he was close in 2008. The true "hack" would deny the effect or expect to see it vanish without obvious cause.

If I saw the reverse... let us say that North Carolina, which Obama won by a narrow margin, went for McCain by a margin of 58-41  among voters 18-30,  then the model would have forced me to conclude that Obama would likely lose North Carolina in 2012.

My model suggests, contrary to the models that others with Democratic tendencies have, that Obama is unlikely to win Georgia or the Dakotas in 2012 -- and why. If young voters are voting like their elders in the same state, then no youth trend in voting exists that can change anything by itself in that state.  I have explained why Georgia would have so many young conservatives: Georgia has large military bases and lots of soldiers and airmen, that the military tends to attract ideological conservatives, and that many of them register to vote in Georgia.

This model is a starting point for discussion. One can argue that young voters will come to their senses, that they will realize that shareholders and executives are more reliable friends than government or unions, that taxes on rich people that they don't know or care about  do even more harm to young adults than do taxes on themselves, that George W. Bush really was a great President... it's also still possible that vaudeville will make a comeback.

It might be distressing that I show that the state that likely forms the line between the re-election of Barack Obama and a GOP victory -- Virginia -- looks as if it could go to Obama by a small double-digit margin, and that the play-by-play of the 2012 election will have lost all suspense once the networks call Virginia for Obama early in the evening long before polls close on the West Coast. Such happens. Deal with it. Obama looks as if he will win 279 electoral votes by double-digit margins, Virginia, Iowa, and New Hampshire joining those ranks in 2012, and that's before any states that he will likely win by smaller margins.

Remember: it is a starting point. One of the assumptions that I gave was that the GOP nominee would be as strong and effective a campaigner as John McCain and would be similarly appealing to the voters of 2008. We will have a new set of voters -- one with comparatively-young voters voting for the first time and many voters, mostly old, no longer able to vote because (to make it a bit graphic) governments don't ordinarily bring voting booths to the cemeteries.

Demographics matter. Voting patterns with age matter. Political culture matters. Nothing yet indicates that young voters will be more conservative in their social and economic attitudes in 2012. For the Republicans to do better in 2012 they will be obliged to win over people over 35 who went for Obama in 2008; they can forget young adults.


Logged
5280
MagneticFree
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: August 03, 2009, 10:31:20 PM »

I'm 25 and don't consider myself to be part of the youth, even though my age is.  Who knows whether the new youth will still like the government to be part of their lives.
Logged
Vepres
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,032
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: August 03, 2009, 10:37:50 PM »

I'm 25 and don't consider myself to be part of the youth, even though my age is.  Who knows whether the new youth will still like the government to be part of their lives.

As I say, the current 14-18 year olds will only know a Democratically controlled government, at least that they know a lot about. They'll remember the Democratic bailouts, the stimulus, any failure on healthcare or cap-and-trade will hurt Obama significantly with them. Not to mention Pelosi, Waxman, Dodd, Blagojavich (Spelling?), Spitzer, and others yet to come I'm sure.
Logged
Devilman88
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,498


Political Matrix
E: 5.94, S: 2.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: August 03, 2009, 10:54:17 PM »

I'm 25 and don't consider myself to be part of the youth, even though my age is.  Who knows whether the new youth will still like the government to be part of their lives.

As I say, the current 14-18 year olds will only know a Democratically controlled government, at least that they know a lot about. They'll remember the Democratic bailouts, the stimulus, any failure on healthcare or cap-and-trade will hurt Obama significantly with them. Not to mention Pelosi, Waxman, Dodd, Blagojavich (Spelling?), Spitzer, and others yet to come I'm sure.

I agree, the only reason why Obama did very well with the youth vote is because Bush was so unpopular and most 18-25 years olds only can remember the Bush years.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.067 seconds with 13 queries.