Democratic blowout presidential election

chubascochubasco Posts: 18,390 Officer
University of Virginia political science professor Larry Sabato latest “Crystal Ball” prediction of the 2016 presidential election spells gloom for the Republican Party this November.

The longtime political analyst is predicting that if it’s a Hillary Clinton–Donald Trump matchup, it will be an electoral college blowout, 347-191.

Sabato’s Crystal Ball is a weekly online political newsletter and website that analyzes American politics. In the new column, written by Sabato, Kyle Kondik, and Geoffrey Skelley, the authors acknowledge that while it’s an “extra-early, ridiculously premature projection” that could change after the conventions and a possible third-party candidacy. However at the moment, the electoral map doesn’t look very competitive for the GOP going into November.

Nearly a year ago, Sabato put Florida into the “toss-up” column, but no longer.

Now the Sunshine State is being put into the same bucket of other swing states like Virginia, Ohio, New Hampshire, Nevada, Iowa and Colorado. The Sabado Crystal Ball has now moved all seven states from “toss-up” last May, to now “leaning Democratic.”

“While some will fall to the Democrats less readily than others, it is difficult to see any that Trump is likely to grab,” the authors write, adding that four normally Republican states (Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, and Missouri) “would be somewhat less secure for the GOP than usual.”

But what about the possibility of Trump expanding the electoral map, as some pundits have speculated could happen with his stances on trade and other issues that could bring along disaffected white workers?

“The problem is, there is little evidence that the non-college voters supporting Trump in the primaries are defectors from the Democrats; most have been backing GOP candidates fairly consistently, so the net addition for Trump could be small,” the authors write. “Nor do we buy the theory that increased Republican primary turnout this year means Trump is going to bring out millions more white and primarily male voters that weren’t excited by John McCain in 2008 and Mitt Romney in 2012. Maybe there will be higher white male voter participation, but there will probably be augmented, heavily Democratic minority turnout to balance it.”

Although a Clinton-Trump matchup could be an electoral embarrassment for the GOP, Sabato says that because of the political polarization in the country, this would not be an overwhelming victory for the Democrats with the popular vote, as were the blowouts in 1964 and 1972. He sees Clinton taking less than 55% of the two-party vote.

The Crystal Ball believes that Ted Cruz would definitely be an electoral improvement for the Republicans, but he would not have enough to secure victory over Clinton. He writes that the “irony” is that Clinton was always an eminently beatable candidate, but more mainstream candidates like John Kasich and Marco Rubio simply haven’t inspired Republican voters.

polling-03.31.png

http://altoday.wpengine.com/?p=9654
_____________________________________

Going to be hard to find anyone to bet against Hillary.
Chubasco.jpg

Replies

  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 19,252 AG
    So you think Joe Biden can carry all those states?
  • FibberMckeeFibberMckee Posts: 12,837 Officer
    Last time I looked odds makers still had Hillary beating Trump by double digits.

    After Trump's latest embarrassments that lead could have only increased.
  • MGTeacherMGTeacher South GaPosts: 1,800 Captain
    It's a shame when the election is decided by the northern states. I wish they would do away with the electoral college and let the majority vote getter win.
    My Favorite Smile Is Vertical
  • rickcrickc Posts: 9,171 Admiral
    MGTeacher wrote: »
    It's a shame when the election is decided by the northern states. I wish they would do away with the electoral college and let the majority vote getter win.

    **** and jr would have never gotten elected if we went by the majority vote. Think how much better off our country would have been without jr as president!
  • MGTeacherMGTeacher South GaPosts: 1,800 Captain
    rickc wrote: »
    **** and jr would have never gotten elected if we went by the majority vote. Think how much better off our country would have been without jr as president!

    That's fine with me. The majority should rule. It would also cut out some of the BS corruption.
    My Favorite Smile Is Vertical
  • sjm1582002sjm1582002 Posts: 4,309 Captain
    Nearly identical to the drubbings received by McCain and Romney.

    Yet, this time against a weak and unattractive candidate that is either reviled or mistrusted (or both) by a wide majority of the public.

    Notice how the New England and upper mid west states, home to upper income whites and very few blacks or Hispanics, are again rejecting the GOP presidential nominee.

    Is it the message (Trump's sure is different) or is the memory of the last GOP president so tarnished that few are willing to again trust the GOP with command of our nation's armed forces or the regulation of its financial institutions?
  • navigator2navigator2 Posts: 22,430 AG
    sjm1582002 wrote: »
    Nearly identical to the drubbings received by McCain and Romney.

    Yet, this time against a weak and unattractive candidate that is either reviled or mistrusted (or both) by a wide majority of the public.

    Notice how the New England and upper mid west states, home to upper income whites and very few blacks or Hispanics, are again rejecting the GOP presidential nominee.

    Is it the message (Trump's sure is different) or is the memory of the last GOP president so tarnished that few are willing to again trust the GOP with command of our nation's armed forces or the regulation of its financial institutions?

    That's no surprise. New Zealand never worries about ISIS terrorists, most have never seen a muzzie before. The only minorities the New England states have seen play for the Patriots. :Spittingcoffee
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • fins4mefins4me Posts: 14,328 AG
    I think each state should get to cast one vote. The vote should be decided by a simple majority vote of the citizens of that state. It would eliminate coastal enclaves dominating the political fortunes of the rest of the nation.
    ALLISON XB 21,, MERCURY 300 Opti Max Pro Series (Slightly Modified) You can't catch me!!!
    "Today is MINE"
  • FibberMckeeFibberMckee Posts: 12,837 Officer
    CA has over 38.8 million people. WY has 584,000 people. 6 states have populations under 1 million. 8 states have populations over 10 million, 2 more are over 9.9 million.

    fins4me wrote: »
    I think each state should get to cast one vote. The vote should be decided by a simple majority vote of the citizens of that state.
    fins4me wrote: »
    It takes a real idiot to believe that
    Only an idiot.

    "Only a real idiot" would "think each state should get to cast one vote".
  • sjm1582002sjm1582002 Posts: 4,309 Captain
    navigator2 wrote: »
    That's no surprise. New Zealand never worries about ISIS terrorists, most have never seen a muzzie before. The only minorities the New England states have seen play for the Patriots. :Spittingcoffee

    Seems like roles have reversed.

    Back in the 70's and 80's the Dem's could not win the White House while the Rep's were always a minority in the House of Reps and only rarely able to control the Senate.

    Now the Rep's cant take the WH while most likely to control one, if not both, legislatures.
  • FibberMckeeFibberMckee Posts: 12,837 Officer
    States with small populations are already way over represented. CA has 38.8 million people, more than 66 times as many people as WY, with just 584,000 people. But CA only has 55 Electoral Votes, just 18 times as many as WY's 3 Electoral Votes.

    If Electoral Votes were assigned proportionately & WY got those 3, to achieve equal representation CA would need to have 66 times that number of Electoral Votes. A whopping 198 Electoral Votes! Nearly 4 times their number of Electoral Votes!

    It's regressive, similar to the infamous Red & Blue map that depicted empty acres, NOT participating voters.
  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 19,252 AG
    CA has over 38.8 million people. WY has 584,000 people. 6 states have populations under 1 million. 8 states have populations over 10 million, 2 more are over 9.9 million.






    "Only a real idiot" would "think each state should get to cast one vote".

    The federal government, including the president, is a government of the states, regardless of size. One state, one vote.
  • MGTeacherMGTeacher South GaPosts: 1,800 Captain
    How about no state gets a vote. The citizens vote for the candidate and the one with most votes wins? Equal representation for every citizen.
    My Favorite Smile Is Vertical
  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 19,252 AG
    MGTeacher wrote: »
    How about no state gets a vote. The citizens vote for the candidate and the one with most votes wins? Equal representation for every citizen.

    we are not a democracy
  • MGTeacherMGTeacher South GaPosts: 1,800 Captain
    we are not a democracy

    We are described as one, but you're right, we are not a true democracy.
    My Favorite Smile Is Vertical
  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 19,252 AG
    No we arent. The federal government is a league of states. Actually to allow more votes per state would allow one state to bully or overrun another state. States should have equal power. It is the House of Reps and the SCOTUS that is supposed to represent the people, not the Senate nor the President.
  • MGTeacherMGTeacher South GaPosts: 1,800 Captain
    No we arent. The federal government is a league of states. Actually to allow more votes per state would allow one state to bully or overrun another state. States should have equal power. It is the House of Reps and the SCOTUS that is supposed to represent the people, not the Senate nor the President.

    The term democracy has changed over time. But, you are correct with the intent of the Declaration of Independence.
    http://www.ushistory.org/gov/1c.asp
    My Favorite Smile Is Vertical
  • FlashFlash Posts: 11,120 AG
    Probably so. The USA need to continue in its decline for the Middle East to follow its destiny. The Dems will help speed it up.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Never seem more learned than the people you are with. Wear your learning like a pocket watch and keep it hidden. Do not pull it out to count the hours, but give the time when you are asked. --- Lord Chesterfield
  • FinfinderFinfinder Posts: 9,808 Admiral
    MGTeacher wrote: »
    How about no state gets a vote. The citizens vote for the candidate and the one with most votes wins? Equal representation for every citizen.

    then the candidates would only campaign in a handful of states
  • rain dograin dog Posts: 3,245 Captain
    Flash wrote: »
    Probably so. The USA need to continue in its decline for the Middle East to follow its destiny. The Dems will help speed it up.

    as long as we listen to democrat spokesmen like mark zuckerberg and the pope telling us the only way to deal with ISIS terror is thru empathy and love we will most certainly continue the downward spiral.
  • navigator2navigator2 Posts: 22,430 AG
    rain dog wrote: »
    as long as we listen to democrat spokesmen like mark zuckerberg and the pope telling us the only way to deal with ISIS terror is thru empathy and love we will most certainly continue the downward spiral.

    People who live in ivory towers generally have the most body guards.

    Mr Bookface has a battalian.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • FibberMckeeFibberMckee Posts: 12,837 Officer
    As I pointed out, small states are very heavily over represented.
    The federal government, including the president, is a government of the states, regardless of size. One state, one vote.

    It is a terribly regressive situation that begs to be reformed.
  • FibberMckeeFibberMckee Posts: 12,837 Officer
    This is an extremely regressive idea.
    States should have equal power.

    All individuals "should have equal power" IF the idea of All Men Are Created Equal is to ever prevail.

    WY with only 584,000 people "should NOT have equal power" as CA's 38.8 million people. It's the worst kind of gerrymandering & is the opposite of The Will of the People.
  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 19,252 AG
    Because the federal government is the coalition of the states and should represent them equally. It is up to each state to serve its own people as they want, not the federal government.. Why is the concept of the Constitution and the desire of the founders lost on those that embrace the nanny state?
  • FibberMckeeFibberMckee Posts: 12,837 Officer
    Most "of the founders" had satisfied their "desire" to be slave owners & they all gave slavery a pass. And "the founders" had no "desire" to have women participate in state or federal government. You may still be hung up on "the desire of the founders" - But the times have changed.

    CA has 66 times as many people as WY. The Federal government "should represent" those 38.8 million "people equally" - WY is "the nanny state" when it comes to representation. The people of CA are being screwed.
  • Big BatteryBig Battery Posts: 19,252 AG
    They should not actually... The federal government should not be in any position that what they do would serve the needs of California over the needs of Vermont. With 66 times the population of WY, it would seem to me that California has the resources to take care of themselves. You big government types certainly have a skewed sense of fairness. This is why we are NOT a democracy.
  • Joe McJoe Mc Posts: 721 Officer
    sjm1582002 wrote: »
    Nearly identical to the drubbings received by McCain and Romney.

    Yet, this time against a weak and unattractive candidate that is either reviled or mistrusted (or both) by a wide majority of the public.

    Notice how the New England and upper mid west states, home to upper income whites and very few blacks or Hispanics, are again rejecting the GOP presidential nominee.

    Is it the message (Trump's sure is different) or is the memory of the last GOP president so tarnished that few are willing to again trust the GOP with command of our nation's armed forces or the regulation of its financial institutions?
    Yup the memory of the last GOP president. Dubya et al did a lot of damage.
  • FibberMckeeFibberMckee Posts: 12,837 Officer
    You're the big government type here by condoning small states being grossly over represented. You're also a hypocrite for ranting about states getting only one vote, then flip-flopping to approve 3 votes to a state with only 584,000 people.

    If you were consistent you'd go for 1 vote for the smallest states - at the very least.

    If you believed in equality you'd go for 1 vote for each multiple of that population.
    They should not actually... The federal government should not be in any position that what they do would serve the needs of California over the needs of Vermont. With 66 times the population of WY, it would seem to me that California has the resources to take care of themselves. You big government types certainly have a skewed sense of fairness. This is why we are NOT a democracy.

    It's not about resources any more than it's about acreage. This is about equal representation, a TRUE "sense of fairness".

    We are not a democracy b/c a tiny ultrawealthy minority controls everything, often against the will of the people.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/13/is-the-united-states-of-america-a-republic-or-a-democracy/
Sign In or Register to comment.