*Official Election 2005 Results Thread* (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 09, 2024, 06:22:29 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  *Official Election 2005 Results Thread* (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: *Official Election 2005 Results Thread*  (Read 102490 times)
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
« on: November 08, 2005, 11:45:47 PM »
« edited: November 08, 2005, 11:51:51 PM by Politico »

None of the precincts in Los Angeles, Santa Clara, Contra Costa, Alameda  and San Francisco have been reported yet. All of these propositions are going to be defeated.
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2005, 11:53:58 PM »

None of the precincts in Los Angeles and San Francisco have been reported yet. All of these propositions are going to be defeated.

Gore vs. Bush 2004

Honestly, I don't think it would have even been close. Instead of the election being about Kerry and gay marriage, it would have been about the poor state of the economy compared to the late 90s, and the war in Iraq. I think we would have seen a very surprising landslide much like 1980:



Good calls on both

Ignore my first prediction, my final predictions on election eve are:

Virginia

Kilgore....50
Kaine......48

New Jersey

Corzine......51
Forrester....48


Good calls.
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
« Reply #2 on: November 09, 2005, 02:36:57 AM »
« Edited: November 09, 2005, 02:41:12 AM by Politico »

Kaine's victory backs up the argument that VA is probably the southern state, excluding Florida, that's most likely to go to the Democrats in the '08 presidential election.

Given the right opponent and circumstances, I can see Gore carrying VA and TN in '08. Edwards and Warner would also most likely be competitive in both states.
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
« Reply #3 on: November 09, 2005, 02:42:27 AM »

Arnold is toast if none of these pass. Tonight may cause him to pull a Ventura and opt not to run for re-election. Democrats certainly do not want to see Arnold make another prime time speech at the Republican National Convention in 2008.
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
« Reply #4 on: November 09, 2005, 02:52:22 AM »
« Edited: November 09, 2005, 02:57:08 AM by Politico »

Kaine's victory backs up the argument that VA is probably the southern state, excluding Florida, that's most likely to go to the Democrats in the '08 presidential election.


How so? Warner's victory in 2001 and further successes and high approval ratings still kept Virginia solidly Republican on both the state, national, and presidential levels. Winning one of three elections this time around, combined with zero of two Senate seats, puts you nowhere near winning Virginia, except with the current Governor at the top of the ticket.

Let's not forget that Kerry, a Massachusetts liberal, managed to get 46% of the vote in VA last year without spending a dollar or a minute in the state. Unless Allen is the GOP's nominee, it's going to be a battleground state in '08.

Kaine, a Democrat who opposes the death penalty, wasn't supposed to win. Kilgore had a ten point lead on him just a couple of months ago. Kaine managed to pull off a nearly sixteen point swing in two months, and you're trying to tell me that Democrats can't be competitive in the state at the national level? There's no doubt about it: VA is a purple state now, and its Democrats know how to get out the vote.
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
« Reply #5 on: November 09, 2005, 02:59:33 AM »

Public service announcement for our Democratic friends:
YALL HAD THIS SEAT BEFORE.  THIS IS NOT A PICK-UP FOR YOU.  YOU BARELY HELD ON TO A SEAT YOU ALEADY HAD.  END TRANSMISSION.


That's funny you'd say that the Democrats "barely held on to the seat" after all of the talk you Republicans gave the nation about Bush having a mandate after he was re-elected by a much slimmer margin.

Kaine won by nearly 6 points in a race he shouldn't have won.
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
« Reply #6 on: November 09, 2005, 03:18:30 AM »
« Edited: November 09, 2005, 03:21:43 AM by Politico »

Arnold is toast if none of these pass. Tonight may cause him to pull a Ventura and opt not to run for re-election. Democrats certainly do not want to see Arnold make another prime time speech at the Republican National Convention in 2008.

Once again, we see what your position is really about.

Arnold tries to save California.  All you can think of is politics.

Very sad.

Arnold's rejected propositions were about giving him and his corporate masters more power, not improving California.

So putting redistricting in the hands of an independent group of judges to prevent political bias is giving power to supposed "corporate masters"?  Puhleeeze....

Putting redistricting in the hands of retired judges who were mostly appointed by Republicans would have had the same effect on CA as the recent redistricting in TX. It would have helped Tom "Scandal of the Day" DeLay maintain control of the House in '06. So, yes, it would have helped Arnold's "corporate masters."

You do know that the DeLay thing was done in the state legislature, right?
See - that's the way ya'll redistrict now.  You do it the Delay way.  Arnold offered you reform.

You do know that DeLay has basically been accused of breaking TX's campaign finance laws, which may be ultimately how the Republicans gained control of the State Legislature in '02, right? It has been alleged that without DeLay's illegal activities, the GOP would have never gained control of TX's House and therefore we wouldn't have had the redistricting debacle there.

There is a culture of corruption in the GOP, and it has even managed to infect Arnold Schwarzenegger. Thankfully, California's voters now see through the facade.
Logged
Politico
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,862
« Reply #7 on: November 09, 2005, 03:30:47 AM »
« Edited: November 09, 2005, 03:46:53 AM by Politico »

All in all... a status quo election. Ballot measures defeated in CA and OH, NJ and VA retain Dem Govs and by similar margins as 2001 (though the GOP only got the AG in '01, this time Lt Gov and AG).

Totally meaningless with regard to 2006. Totally. Anyone suggesting otherwise on either side is just not rational.



I think this year's elections ultimately show that Democratic-held seats, even ones in southern states like Virginia, are relatively safe. Of course, that may change. On the other hand, today's elections show that Republican incumbents, including even the mighty Arnold Schwarzenegger (Who, BTW, is up for re-election next year, but may decide not to run after tonight's embarrassing losses), MAY be vulnerable next year (Yeah, big surprise! I know haha)

Obviously I think all of this also shows that Bush MAY be a liability for Republican incumbents across the nation, even in "red states" (Blue states on here, I guess) like Virginia. For all we know, he may have cost Kilgore three or four points. He certainly didn't help Kilgore. It seems quite clear that Bush is not likely to be of any help to the vast majority of Republican incumbents in '06.

All in all, 2005 was a Democratic Year. Obviously '06 may be a GOP year, but nobody knows how it's going to turn out. If you're a Republican, I suggest letting the Democrats enjoy their day in the sun, but make sure to prepare yourself for some hard fought battles next year.
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 0.033 seconds with 12 queries.