Most Likely 269-269 Tie?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 30, 2024, 05:03:43 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
  Most Likely 269-269 Tie?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Most Likely 269-269 Tie?  (Read 2073 times)
NHLiberal
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 790


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: July 09, 2014, 07:14:38 PM »



I agree that a 269-269 is unlikely given the results of the 2012 election, but how likely is this scenario? Nebraska's 3rd is unlikely to swing, but it would have to for this scenario to happen.

Clinton/Hagel seems like a possibility here.

Clinton/Hagel vs. Portman/Ayotte? This map is pretty ridiculous though.

True, the map is far-fetched, especially since have a Nebraska congressional district vote Democratic during a tie does seem like a cop-out. Still, if it happened, it would probably have to involve someone from that state like Hagel.

This thread seems pretty useful in explaining how difficult it would be to have an electoral college tie in the near future.

Really? 269-269 is something I have never ever ever considered to be something even remotely likely to happen, but the Warner/Gillibrand vs. Walker/Kasich map made the idea seem a lot less unrealistic to me (but still not at all realistic).
Logged
Never
Never Convinced
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,623
Political Matrix
E: 4.65, S: 3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: July 09, 2014, 07:28:16 PM »



I agree that a 269-269 is unlikely given the results of the 2012 election, but how likely is this scenario? Nebraska's 3rd is unlikely to swing, but it would have to for this scenario to happen.

Clinton/Hagel seems like a possibility here.

Clinton/Hagel vs. Portman/Ayotte? This map is pretty ridiculous though.

True, the map is far-fetched, especially since have a Nebraska congressional district vote Democratic during a tie does seem like a cop-out. Still, if it happened, it would probably have to involve someone from that state like Hagel.

This thread seems pretty useful in explaining how difficult it would be to have an electoral college tie in the near future.

Really? 269-269 is something I have never ever ever considered to be something even remotely likely to happen, but the Warner/Gillibrand vs. Walker/Kasich map made the idea seem a lot less unrealistic to me (but still not at all realistic).

Thanks for the kind words on my map! Smiley

While I made my map with the intention of it being as plausible as possible, it still assumes that Walker be the Republican nominee (not a given), will choose a governor from the same region as him (again, not a given), and that Warner would be the Democratic nominee (this would only happen in the unlikely event that Hillary Clinton doesn't run, and it would still be entirely possible that another Democrat could outmaneuver Warner and win the nomination in this scenario). Counting on all of those things happening just seems shaky.

Anyhow, I agree with you that the idea of a 269-269 tie isn't that realistic.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,782
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: July 09, 2014, 08:39:51 PM »



Ryan/Toomey vs. Clinton/Warner

I'm surprised no one else has proposed this.  It's probably the second most likely 269-269 map after the CO+VA->D/IA+WI->R scenario.  And there has been plenty of polling showing Hillary with an unusual edge in Florida.  Florida would certainly be an easier get for a Dem in a tie than a Nebraska CD.
Logged
NHLiberal
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 790


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: July 09, 2014, 08:42:11 PM »



Ryan/Toomey vs. Clinton/Warner

I'm surprised no one else has proposed this. It's probably the second most likely 269-269 map after the CO+VA->D/IA+WI->R scenario.  And there has been plenty of polling showing Hillary with an unusual edge in Florida.  Florida would certainly be an easier get for a Dem in a tie than a Nebraska CD.

Because Paul Ryan sure as hell ain't beating Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania, no matter who his running mate is.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,782
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: July 09, 2014, 08:53:45 PM »



Hillary Clinton/Sherrod Brown vs. Martinez/Pence

It's compelling, but OH->D/NV+IA->R might be on par with the PA->R/FL->D scenario.  And there isn't a single issue/candidate to really drive the weirdness (unlike Ryan and the FL Medicare patients).
Logged
Never
Never Convinced
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,623
Political Matrix
E: 4.65, S: 3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: July 10, 2014, 07:45:30 AM »



Ryan/Toomey vs. Clinton/Warner

I'm surprised no one else has proposed this. It's probably the second most likely 269-269 map after the CO+VA->D/IA+WI->R scenario.  And there has been plenty of polling showing Hillary with an unusual edge in Florida.  Florida would certainly be an easier get for a Dem in a tie than a Nebraska CD.

Because Paul Ryan sure as hell ain't beating Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania, no matter who his running mate is.

It might not be as unlikely as one would initially think. If the Democrats deteriorate further with white voters and Republicans deteriorate more with minorities, this map could very well happen. That kind of trend could very well deliver Pennsylvania to the Republican ticket. Colorado might appear to be a glaring fault in this scenario, but it is important to keep in mind that the state is historically known for fiscal conservatism and that Clinton's poll numbers there have been lackluster. Paul Ryan seems like he could take advantage of this.
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 0.242 seconds with 11 queries.