Nevada continues to drift away from Republicans (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 15, 2024, 12:06:49 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Nevada continues to drift away from Republicans (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Nevada continues to drift away from Republicans  (Read 1687 times)
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,894
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW
« on: June 29, 2016, 12:05:22 PM »

The non-white population is simply growing too fast in Nevada for Republicans to have a shot anymore - Not after Trump. Even if they could have won it this cycle, Trump has absolutely ruined the GOP in the eyes of minorities and by the time a reasonable Republican comes around, perhaps in 2020, it'll be too late. Nevada's electorate will have diversified even further and they will not be hospitable to a Republican presidential candidate after what Trump has done.

The GOP might be better served investing their resources in the rust belt for a long-term electoral strategy.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,894
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2016, 09:15:38 PM »
« Edited: June 29, 2016, 09:25:27 PM by Virginia »

McGinty isn't going to be the 50th or 51st seat though. It's probably the 54th. So if McGinty wins, great. If she loses, who cares? Hillary doesn't need her.

Wulfric, that logic makes no sense. Democrats / Hillary know full well that if they don't pick up as many seats as possible this cycle, then they will be at a much higher risk of losing the Senate again in 2018. How are they supposed to confirm federal judges and fill possible USSC seats if they lose the Senate in 2018? They have every incentive to pick up as many seats as possible, and PA is winnable for them this year, so if something is lacking in that race (funding or support from Clinton), then it won't be due to DNC folks saying "meh, we don't really need it anyway."

And I don't understand what you mean by "isn't going to be the 50th or 51st seat", there is no order to this, unless you want to say that IL and WI are sure things and would definitely count as the 47th and 48th seats. Atlas is really going overboard with this "if they win this state, they've already won"-logic. The combinations of states people are using this logic for is getting quite amusing.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,894
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 03, 2016, 11:15:54 AM »

If the Democrats don't win the PA Senate seat, I can't see how they'll carry the Senate.

Marco Rubio's back in the race in FL, and while he's not helped himself, he is a slight fave.  

But why? What makes it so that somehow PA's Senate race is an accurate marker of how other Senate races are going? Individual races have their own issues but will also be influenced by straight ticket voting. What if some real juicy dirt on McGinty surfaces, or she commits some terrible gaffe and hands the race to Toomey even as 4 - 5 other Senate races go Democratic? If they was polling near or within the MoE come election day, then it might just come down to which presidential candidate wins the state and by how much. The same might be said for Florida and Ohio as well. I just don't get why PA is special here.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.023 seconds with 13 queries.