-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2015 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
I'm very confident too. That's why I'm not too worried about our country at the moment. Let's hope the economy of all things continues to hold up and improve.
Black Mamba
Member
Republicans are far more likely to take part of a poll than Democrats.
Old people are more likely to participate in a poll, too.
Minorities and young people are far harder to poll. You have it completely backwards.
BTW, the problem with all these "indicators" in predicting an election is that there's no real data. How many elections after a 2 term President have there been? How many since woman and all minorities could vote? How many since women were in the workforce? After the VRA? How many with that and television? And internet? And let's remove ones with special circumstances like a Presidential scandal, a great recession, etc.
Etc etc etc.
Of course, the economy will always be a driving factor in elections, though people tend to forget the trend-line is often more important that the snapshot state, which is why so many screwed up 2012 (the trend was up even if the economy wasn't good).
There are so many fucking variables that can come into play that trying to fit past elections into future elections is kind of weird.
What we do know is demographics matter. The economy (specifically its trend) matters. Candidates matter. Those are pretty consistent every election. The rest is mostly variable.
At the end of the day I think more people will agree and like Hillary over anyone the GOP runs out there. Partially because of demographics, partially because of platform (and yes even cuz Hillary is a women is a small part too), and partially because of GOP actions the past 8 years. Another variable could come into play to override those factors but it is currently unforeseen. Could a scandal come up? Could the economy shrink? Could there be a massive terrorist attack? Etc? yes. But until something like that happens, I don't see a valid argument why the GOP candidate will beat Hillary.
The economy is probably my #1 bugaboo right now. Not emails, not Hillary's personality, not the Iran deal or any specific policy, etc.
Unemployment numbers come out, and I pay attention. Oil prices fall, and I cheer. Durable good orders, new home construction, same-store sales, commodity prices, cash purchases of real estate, inventory of cars & white goods, etc etc.. I sometimes feel like I'm watching more CNBC than any political programming.
Obama himself soothes some of my fears of 2016. He's the best 4th quarter quarterback in politics there is, and he'll be on the ballot as much as Hillary. I'm sure he'll campaign hard.
That and if Jeb, Rubio, or Kasich doesn't win an early state it looks like we'll nominate a joke candidate of some kind.
That and if Jeb, Rubio, or Kasich doesn't win an early state it looks like we'll nominate a joke candidate of some kind.
Jack Remington
Banned
I also wonder how many women who haven't voted in the last few elections would come out for this one to help elect the first female president.
Manmademan
Member
not enough to beat Obama in 2008. But then again nothing was stopping THAT train.
Can't blame you. The moment it begins to show some bad signs of weakness we'll all be diablosing.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/05/07/the-electoral-college-challenge-facing-the-republicans-in-2016/
2016: Virginia, Virginia, Virginia
One thing I'm curious about is if Trump or Cruz or something equally nutty runs and loses, what will be the accepted wisdom within the Tea Party fringe? So far it's been that they keep nominating fake conservatives like McCain and Romney, but if they run someone they truly believe is one of them and get trounced, where will they go from there? Accusations of electoral fraud?
Tarkus
Member
Umm, not in the American south and Midwest, which was the point of my statement since that's a great portion of the republican vote. Ask my farmer grandpappy to participate in a poll. You'll learn forms of curse words you've never heard before.
Jack Remington
Banned
Well not in a primary. I mean in a general election, I wonder how many extra women voters she might pick up.
I don't think my girlfriend voted in 2008 or 2012, but she says she'd definitely make it to the polls for Hillary.
GOD, that would be so damn fun to see! We really haven't seen the Republicans run a non-establishment guy in how long? At least a generation.
When the Democrats in 1988 lost a third election in a row, there was a moderating force already in place (the DLC), having been formed shortly after the landslide of 1984. They were there, ready to make the argument that the party needed to adjust in order to become competitive.
Right now, there's no real obvious comparable group in place to steer the GOP (unless you count the vague population of leaders, strategists, media personalities, etc referred to as "The Establishment." And even now, we can see what the party's voters think of their influence). I really don't know what we'd see.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I feel the problem is many GOP voters probably really think they're the majority and that they're entitled to the presidency. The media fell in love with Reagan and from then become quite complicit in treating the Republicans as America's default party even though that's clearly not the case. But enough people in the Republican Party believe it and don't think they need to change.
RustyNails
Member
They're like terrorists. They will find someone even more pure.
PhoenixDark
Banned
If Trump were to get the nomination I'd imagine establishment candidates would run for the hills across the country; many republicans would refuse to attend events with Trump for instance. The inevitable Trump loss would thus be blamed on establishment republicans not supporting Trump. However if someone like Walker lost I'd imagine the loss would be chalked up to a more traditional boogeyman: the media, or voter fraud, or Hillary "playing the gender card," etc.
Beautiful chaos right there. Good TV. Sad for the country.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Maybe I put too much into candidate beliefs instead of party identification and the economy, but the idea that Trump would have a 50/50 shot against Hillary just seems absurd to me (talking about that Jack post a few posts back).
The degree to which Hillary would destroy Trump in people of color voting would be historic.
The degree to which Hillary would destroy Trump in people of color voting would be historic.
Jack Remington
Banned
The old school models Bernstein looks at don't seem to incorporate demographic changes.
Found no mention of "loser". Lost some impact as a result.
Fenderputty
Banned
The man gives no fucks.
If true, oh wow.
Yes that's a good point. If Trump does anything but win, it'll look like the Establishment + Fox News had their fingers all over it (ever since the botched attempt to discredit him at the first debate). Or if he runs third party, they might also blame him for hurting the Cruz/Walker or whoever candidate.
Trump is going to get blamed no matter who loses or what happens in the end.
Metaphoreus
This is semantics, and nothing more
That's Partisan Hackery in one chart. Both ways. That's...not...good.
I think we all know who the real hacks are:
The lesson seems to be that Democrats hate Trump more than Republicans hate Obama. And that's saying something.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Does anyone still have that BigSicily chronological chart that claims the Democrats are just as bad about abusing the filibuster as Republicans, while blocking out all the periods where Democrats had a Senate majority?I think we all know who the real hacks are:
The lesson seems to be that Democrats hate Trump more than Republicans hate Obama. And that's saying something.
Metaphoreus
This is semantics, and nothing more
What have I blocked out, Aaron Strife?
Well, I agree that there's no electoral college advantage. Turn it around -- if the GOP won the popular vote, they'd have to do it by winning back demographics they were previously losing. If they did that then the "blue wall" would go red, obviously, because the reason they're going Democratic is that they're more Democratic than the nation was because of their demographics.
I still basically think that the people saying this is a toss-up are being very conservative. As I mentioned before, the problem with poli sci right now is that we really don't have a sufficient dataset to draw really solid conclusions, nor the ability to actually isolate and eliminate variables. There are a lot of notable things happening this year -- things that haven't happened every election year. But every election year there are things happening that haven't happened before, and a lot of them end up not mattering, so I understand wanting to take the null hypothesis until you really see evidence.
Bernstein also is one of the strongest believers in the power of the party establishment, so he doesn't have to consider, say, what if Trump gets the nomination, because he's extremely confident that that can't happen. I am not so confident, because I think there are meaningful forces (superPACs, the coalition unraveling) that are affecting party power this year.
If you asked me to make a prediction, I would say that I expect the GOP to nominate a low-quality candidate (Trump, Carson, Cruz, etc.) and to lose relatively badly based on that. My feeling is that candidate quality matters if parties are unsuccessful at selecting the most electable candidate, and that the GOP will probably fail at that this year. But we'll have to see!
Back when Trump made those comments in support of universal healthcare I """tricked""" plenty of my conservative friends and family into supporting the idea on its merits since the fact that it was supported by a politician labelled conservative meant it was okay to actually entertain the idea, so I'm not surprised.
RustyNails
Member
I found the perfect gif to represent GOP 2016 race (to the bottom)
I found the perfect gif to represent GOP 2016 race (to the bottom)
That gif is amazing.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
The number of Ls Jindal has taken recently are almost uncountable.
It's kind of like Romneycare/Obamacare. That was the conservative solution, then it wasn't when conservatives turned on it.
Officerrob
Banned
No idea how/why the likes of Bobby Jindal are still in the race
Retromelon
Member
Because he feels like the country is headed in the wrong direction and wants to see it do better, you're welcome
Him and Perry both. I have no idea how they still have money to keep going.
They're surviving on PAC money, no?
All without any coordination between them and their campaigns of course!
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
The hope is that people get bored of Trump/Carson (like they did with Cain) and gravitate to the extreme candidate for the month. Then he leads the polls for two weeks and gets nice future book sales out of it.
But the fringe has already decided on Trump so Jindal's time (and thus future book sales) won't come.
RustyNails
Member
If people are foolish enough to donate to Bobby, who are we to ask why? He's gonna milk em dry and maybe get a book deal or a gig at Fox out of it. Besides, he gets to travel around the country, stay in posh hotels and gets to leave Louisiana. It's a win from all angels. I highly doubt anyone in his office believes he's gonna win.
I assume so, I know Perry had to stop paying people a couple of weeks back.
Black Mamba
Member
Nearly every pollster has to weight their polls down because of more GOP voters or demographics that are more GOP leaning.
That's great and all that your grandpappy won't participate, but the reality is it's easier to poll republicans than democrats. Republicans are not some underrepresented group these days in polling. It's far easier to find 1000 Republicans to take a poll anywhere than Democrats. The Democrat coalition is from people that are harder to reach (minorities, youth, working poor) while the GOP is much easier (retired folks, housewives/househusbands, religious). Midwest, South, Northeast, it don't fucking matter. You know how hard it is to poll a Southern White Obama supporter versus a Southern White GOP supporter? Get out of here!
This is like that bullshit that a lot of Republicans believe but is actually the opposite. You know, like how Obama and Dem give handouts to secure elections when the majority of food stand recipients are white and the poorest congressional districts overwhelmingly voted Romney/GOP.
I think we all know who the real hacks are:
The lesson seems to be that Democrats hate Trump more than Republicans hate Obama. And that's saying something.
You're measuring this on percentage points, But that's almost always the wrong approach. In terms of percentages, the GOP change is worse. The Dem movement from Trump to Obama is just under 100%. The GOP move from Obama to Trump is over 100%. Not that it matters much, it's not much of a difference. Both sides are being ridiculous.
Almost always measure in percentage changes, not percentage points.
Also, I hope you were being silly intentionally.
Jack Remington
Banned
The electoral college advantage is that the Dems would get well over 270 EVs with a perfect 50/50 split in the general election popular vote. They'd probably get over 270 even if they lost 49-51.
At 48-52 they'd probably lose.
At 48-52 they'd probably lose.
benjipwns
Banned
It's being held at the Reagan Presidential Library. Probably in the Air Force One hanger if the past is anything to go by.It's actually called that?
Holding one (either party) at the Clinton Presidential Library would be funny though.
RustyNails
Member
Hell why not just make the next one happen on the top of mount rushmore? Or maybe inside a giant set made to look like bald eagle's nest, and the candidates hatch out of eggs wrapped in American flag?
Aaron Strife
Banned
Nothing, just the posting of charts reminded me of charts
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked