• 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 2016 |OT12| The last days of the Republic

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dany

Banned
http://www.theonion.com/article/tru...tm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing

Love this

“The possibilities are truly endless in this position. I could be on Anderson Cooper 360° defusing Mr. Trump’s latest impulsive remarks on anything from nuclear proliferation to criminal justice, and then just an hour or two later on CNN Tonight, I might need to explain away a series of antagonistic and barely comprehensible tweets targeting a particular journalist or politician that I read right before going on-air. Every day is a new adventure.”
Click to expand...
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
s4zHrZv.png



lol
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
So I decided to look at the chances of Hillary winning each state in the polls-only model on 538. The result was interesting!

DC: >99.9%
Maryland: >99.9%
California: 99.8%
Hawaii: 99.7%
New York: 99.4%
Massachusetts: 99.3%
Illinois: 98.7%
Vermont: 97.0%
Connecticut: 97.0%
Washington: 96.4%
Oregon: 96.0%
Rhode Island: 95.3%
New Jersey: 95.3%
Delaware: 94.6%
New Mexico: 92.1%
Virginia: 87.9%
Michigan: 86.5%
Minnesota: 84.3%
Wisconsin: 84.1%
Maine: 83.3%
Pennsylvania: 82.4%
Colorado: 80.3%
New Hampshire: 72.2%
Florida: 65.9%
North Carolina: 61.7%
Ohio: 55.2%
Iowa: 50.6%
Arizona: 44.5%
Georgia: 24.3%
Alaska: 23.2%
Missouri: 16.8%
South Dakota: 14.5%
Montana: 14.4%
South Carolina: 12.6%
Texas: 12.5%
Indiana: 10.0%
Kansas: 8.9%
North Dakota: 7.6%
Mississippi: 4.6%
Louisiana: 3.7%
Nebraska: 3.6%
Tennessee: 3.2%
Kentucky: 3.0%
Utah: 2.4%
Wyoming: 2.0%
Arkansas: 1.8%
Idaho: 1.0%
West Virginia: 0.9%
Oklahoma: 0.6%
Alabama: 0.4%

You easily get a sense of where the race is, and why Hillary doing better nationally would have little marginal effect on her EV numbers. Arizona is only currently-Trump state that is even close, with Georgia and Alaska a pretty decent ways behind. It also points to Alaska as a state we don't talk about, but obviously should.

Interestingly, the 25th state here is North Carolina, which has a 61.7% of going Clinton. You also get a sense of the electoral power of the Dem map when the median state is almost 20 points lower of a % of the eventual winner.
 
J

jiggle

Member
whyamihere said:
So I decided to look at the chances of Hillary winning each state in the polls-only model on 538. The result was interesting!

DC: >99.9%
Maryland: >99.9%
California: 99.8%
Hawaii: 99.7%
New York: 99.4%
Massachusetts: 99.3%
Illinois: 98.7%
Vermont: 97.0%
Connecticut: 97.0%
Washington: 96.4%
Oregon: 96.0%
Rhode Island: 95.3%
New Jersey: 95.3%
Delaware: 94.6%
New Mexico: 92.1%
Virginia: 87.9%
Michigan: 86.5%
Minnesota: 84.3%
Wisconsin: 84.1%
Maine: 83.3%
Pennsylvania: 82.4%
Colorado: 80.3%
New Hampshire: 72.2%
Florida: 65.9%
North Carolina: 61.7%
Ohio: 55.2%
Iowa: 50.6%
Arizona: 44.5%
Georgia: 24.3%
Alaska: 23.2%
Missouri: 16.8%
South Dakota: 14.5%
Montana: 14.4%
South Carolina: 12.6%
Texas: 12.5%
Indiana: 10.0%
Kansas: 8.9%
North Dakota: 7.6%
Mississippi: 4.6%
Louisiana: 3.7%
Nebraska: 3.6%
Tennessee: 3.2%
Kentucky: 3.0%
Utah: 2.4%
Wyoming: 2.0%
Arkansas: 1.8%
Idaho: 1.0%
West Virginia: 0.9%
Oklahoma: 0.6%
Alabama: 0.4%

You easily get a sense of where the race is, and why Hillary doing better nationally would have little marginal effect on her EV numbers. Arizona is only currently-Trump state that is even close, with Georgia and Alaska a pretty decent ways behind. It also points to Alaska as a state we don't talk about, but obviously should.

Interestingly, the 25th state here is North Carolina, which has a 61.7% of going Clinton. You also get a sense of the electoral power of the Dem map when the median state is almost 20 points lower of a % of the eventual winner.
Click to expand...
Ny and ca are going to trump
Along with those secret states
 
B

balladofwindfishes

Member
whyamihere said:
You easily get a sense of where the race is, and why Hillary doing better nationally would have little marginal effect on her EV numbers. Arizona is only currently-Trump state that is even close, with Georgia and Alaska a pretty decent ways behind. It also points to Alaska as a state we don't talk about, but obviously should.

Interestingly, the 25th state here is North Carolina, which has a 61.7% of going Clinton. You also get a sense of the electoral power of the Dem map when the median state is almost 20 points lower of a % of the eventual winner.
Click to expand...

I was wondering about Alaska as a possible swing state in the near future, but it has so few EVs, it hardly seems worth the effort for anyone to campaign way out there, so even if it was, technically, a tossup between the two candidates, they might not really make a big deal about it.
 
I

IggyChooChoo

Member
Wheeljack539 said:
What would be the correct pronunciation for Louisville?
Click to expand...
There isn't one single one. It seems to vary by social class and by degree of "country-ness." This is not a huge surprise to me since Nashville (where I am from) is kind of that way, too. Meant as light-heartedly and non-judgmentally as possible: Yankee outsiders say "Nash-ville," locals with some college in them say "Nash-vul," and country folk say "Naysh-vul."
 
C

Christian

Member
jiggle said:
Ny and ca are going to trump
Along with those secret states
Click to expand...

Darn. I yearn for the days when Trump was spending money campaigning in those states. Good times.

And as if we needed any more reason why Hawaii is the best place on earth. Dat democratic stronghold.
 
B

BigAl1992

Member
Joe Shlabotnik said:
uh

hillary just sent out a fundraising email titled "bedwetting"

HEY GUYS



Good guy Mook respecting Diablos' wishes
Click to expand...

Well. That confirms the idea of NeoGAF being one of the top five websites referred to Clinton's campaign wasn't total bollocks then.
That e-mail make this place feel very important all of a sudden.
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
balladofwindfishes said:
I was wondering about Alaska as a possible swing state in the near future, but it has so few EVs, it hardly seems worth the effort for anyone to campaign way out there, so even if it was, technically, a tossup between the two candidates, they might not really make a big deal about it.
Click to expand...

The idea of sending Trump to Anchorage in October is endlessly amusing to me.
 
G

Gotchaye

Member
The "you don't trust women" line on abortion is pretty good. It takes advantage of the awkwardness of the pro-life position about women who choose abortion. It's obviously a nonsense response to a sincere pro-lifer - a law against abortion is no more untrusting of women than a law against murder is untrusting of everyone - but of course the pro-lifer can't make that analogy. They can't suggest that women who get abortions might deserve punishment. Instead they've got to deny that the women have agency - they're tricked or pressured into getting abortions - and "you don't trust women" highlights how infantilizing this is while placing the focus on the woman's choice.
 
B

balladofwindfishes

Member
whyamihere said:
The idea of sending Trump to Anchorage in October is endlessly amusing to me.
Click to expand...

I do wonder if a candidate would bother spending an entire day campaigning in a 3 EV state. Campaigning in Alaska would basically be the only thing you could do for that entire day. Would it be worth it for 3 EVs?

Versus NH, which is also 3, but you can travel all over since it's in the middle of New England.
 
C

cooljeanius

Member
balladofwindfishes said:
I do wonder if a candidate would bother spending an entire day campaigning in a 3 EV state. Campaigning in Alaska would basically be the only thing you could do for that entire day. Would it be worth it for 3 EVs?

Versus NH, which is also 3, but you can travel all over since it's in the middle of New England.
Click to expand...
I wish being in NH meant that I could travel all over... but then again, I'm not a presidential candidate, so...
 
B

Beer Monkey

Member
SexyFish said:
Turnout levels due to the silent majority voting for Trump.

We're doomed.
Click to expand...

I actually think there maybe, might be "shy" Trump voters in the general even though there weren't in the primary. This is possible for Republican voters that didn't vote for him in the primaries.

They still wouldn't be a majority. And they might be offset by Republican wives that are "shy" Hillary voters.
 
R

RastaMentality

Banned
More Mook comments:
Mook: 2.7m Floridians have requested to vote by mail, compared to 1.8m at same time in 2012

Mook: “We do expect Donald Trump to come much better prepared to this debate” #expectationsgame

Mook claims re FL: “We are turning out more of our low-propensity voters than Republicans”

Mook says campaign hopes that FL will extend voter reg deadline to account for the storm
Click to expand...
via @ZekeJMiller
 
H

Holmes

Member
I did say a while back when absentee ballot requests were starting and it was looking really good for Democrats that midway through early voting, Republicans might abandon North Carolina - at least privately. Mook seems to have a similar idea.
 
N

Nazgul_Hunter

Member
Holmes said:
I did say a while back when absentee ballot requests were starting and it was looking really good for Democrats that midway through early voting, Republicans might abandon North Carolina - at least privately. Mook seems to have a similar idea.
Click to expand...
I bet most political scientists are salivating at being able to measure the effects of GOTV efforts. Usually they cancel each other out or it's a small edge; but we're talking about a political operation bigger and better than Obama'a vs.... nothing on trumps side.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
So.

I just got a flyer from the Trump campaign, addressed directly to me. Paid for by The New York Republican Party.

They're so good at targeting supporters. SO GOOD.
 
T

Teggy

Member
Peter Nicholas ‏@PeterWSJ 7m7 minutes ago Washington, DC
.@HillaryClinton campaign manager Robby Mook says they've asked Weather Channel to roll back campaign ads in deference to hurricane severity
Click to expand...

.
 
I

ISWThunder

Member
adam387 said:
So.

I just got a flyer from the Trump campaign, addressed directly to me. Paid for by The New York Republican Party.

They're so good at targeting supporters. SO GOOD.
Click to expand...

I get at least two phone calls a week from Trump... on the work line that I've had for about 10 years.
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
The article we've been waiting for.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ralph-nader-voters_us_57f55aa4e4b0b7aafe0ba7f1?j5q4zpvi

Chris Savage had had enough of Bill Clinton and his shenanigans by the time the 2000 election rolled around, and he wasn’t thrilled about putting his vice president, Al Gore, back in the White House for another four years. But as a Democrat, there was no way the 36-year-old Michigan resident was going to vote for George W. Bush either.

Then, he found Green Party candidate Ralph Nader.

“He was pretty convincing in terms of the things he was advocating for. And he did have some very progressive positions and ideas, so those appealed to me,” Savage recounted.

He soon put a Nader sign in his yard, became politically active and was all in to send a message to the establishment.

But this cycle, Savage isn’t even considering voting third party. He’s now an outspoken Hillary Clinton supporter and literally works for the establishment as Democratic Party chair of Washtenaw County in Michigan.

And he wants to make sure that disaffected voters know exactly what they’re doing in this election before they go pull the lever for a third-party candidate like Jill Stein of the Green Party or Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party.

“I was somewhat uninformed and felt like there wasn’t that big a difference between Gore and Bush, believe it or not,” he said. “Obviously, in retrospect, it was a moronic way to look at things.”

The Huffington Post spoke with Nader voters who have since figured out that the best way to fix the two-party system is to join it. They’ve worked in Democratic politics for years ― some as penance for what they did in 2000 ― and they worry that Stein voters are going to be making the same mistake they did with Nader.

“If you think there’s no difference between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, then you’re not paying attention,” said Joe Rospars, who was the chief digital strategist for both of Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns and voted for Nader in Virginia when he was 19. “I don’t think that I’m just an old person now saying what an old person would have said to me 16 years ago. ... Voting for Jill Stein in a battleground state or Gary Johnson for any reason is just not a useful way to operate the electoral system.”
Click to expand...

“Those of us who voted for Ralph Nader in 2000, most of us, if we had to do it over again, would not do it,” said Kurt Ehrenberg, 58, who served as Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-Vt.) New Hampshire political director but now solidly backs Clinton. “You feel, in some small way, responsible for all this stuff that George W. Bush was able to do because he was elected president ― even though it was the closest race in my lifetime and there’s still some question as to whether, if all the votes had been counted, Bush would’ve won.”
Click to expand...

“Part of what is going on with these voters is they’re mostly younger people who had very little experience with electoral politics before the Bernie campaign,” he said. “And their main opponent all through the primaries is Hillary Clinton. So they really continue to view Hillary Clinton as sort of the enemy when clearly, to me, and clearly if you listen to Bernie Sanders, she’s not the enemy.”

“A lot of them have the luxury of having Obama for eight years,” added Irene Lin, who was 24 and living in California when she voted for Nader and has since worked on Democratic campaigns. “I think they take for granted how bad it was before. Especially when I worked on the Hill in 2005, and it was Bush and then Republicans had control of the Senate and the House and it was just miserable.”

Some of these Nader-voters-turned-Democratic-operatives also said they underestimated just how bad Bush would be. They were, after all, primarily focused on the Clinton administration and devoting energy to criticizing the Democratic Party.

“I think at the time, a lot of people were under the illusion he wasn’t as bad as he turned out to be,” Rospars said. “Not that I would have ever voted for him, but ...you wouldn’t have imagined that even from just a policy perspective, that it was as bad as it wound up being based on the campaign and the broader media environment during the election.”
Click to expand...

Also, I did not know this!

Some Nader supporters have officially joined the Democratic Party as elected leaders. Kyrsten Sinema, for example, worked on Nader’s presidential campaign in 2000 and is now a Democratic member of the House from Arizona.
Click to expand...
 
H

Holmes

Member
What annoys me is that period in late July/early August when we were getting one or two Georgia polls a week and now barely anything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5 6
263
51K
Topher replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
60K
DGrayson replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
Top Bottom