Alternate US States
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:56:43 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderator: Dereich)
  Alternate US States
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23
Author Topic: Alternate US States  (Read 154594 times)
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #500 on: August 03, 2018, 08:18:54 AM »


2016 snip



Hillary Clinton: 277 (+45)
Donald J. T***p: 261 (-45)

I'm incredibly glad you decided to come back and bump this thread with the 2016 results. After reading through all your posts over the past few years for the other elections this was a fitting conclusion and raises a lot of interesting questions about whether, in your world, the "suburban"-type states like inland California would have completed the Romney-Clinton swing and changed the election or whether Trump would have brought his campaign there like he focused on swing states IRL. All in all an interesting conclusion to a hyuge undertaking, glad you came back for it.

Thank you very much!

Yeah, campaign strategy is the big question lurking behind all this, and it's even harder in an election as crazy as 2016. On the one hand, T***p has been a lot better at targeting swing States in general, which Hillary neglected mostly because she thought she had them in the bag and wanted to reach for longer shots like Arizona. On the other hand, (new) California is more like Arizona demographically and culturally than like, say, Wisconsin or Pennsylvania, and it's a State Obama lost last time around, so it's not crazy to think Hillary would want to spend time and money there. Nevada is probably the best comparison here, and it's one of the few States Hillary did carry. Also, 2 points is a pretty solid margin and I don't think T***p campaigning marginally more there would move the needle all that much (although I guess this plus the possibility of a competitive Senate race just might). So, overall, yeah, I'd say Hillary probably would narrowly edge it out under this map.
Logged
nerd73
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 958
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -7.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #501 on: August 03, 2018, 11:09:10 AM »

Out of curiosity, what was the exact margin in Erie?
Logged
JG
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,146


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #502 on: August 03, 2018, 12:36:32 PM »


2016 snip



Hillary Clinton: 277 (+45)
Donald J. T***p: 261 (-45)

I'm incredibly glad you decided to come back and bump this thread with the 2016 results. After reading through all your posts over the past few years for the other elections this was a fitting conclusion and raises a lot of interesting questions about whether, in your world, the "suburban"-type states like inland California would have completed the Romney-Clinton swing and changed the election or whether Trump would have brought his campaign there like he focused on swing states IRL. All in all an interesting conclusion to a hyuge undertaking, glad you came back for it.

Thank you very much!

Yeah, campaign strategy is the big question lurking behind all this, and it's even harder in an election as crazy as 2016. On the one hand, T***p has been a lot better at targeting swing States in general, which Hillary neglected mostly because she thought she had them in the bag and wanted to reach for longer shots like Arizona. On the other hand, (new) California is more like Arizona demographically and culturally than like, say, Wisconsin or Pennsylvania, and it's a State Obama lost last time around, so it's not crazy to think Hillary would want to spend time and money there. Nevada is probably the best comparison here, and it's one of the few States Hillary did carry. Also, 2 points is a pretty solid margin and I don't think T***p campaigning marginally more there would move the needle all that much (although I guess this plus the possibility of a competitive Senate race just might). So, overall, yeah, I'd say Hillary probably would narrowly edge it out under this map.

To be honest, Hillary didn't neglect states she thought she had in the bag to reach for longer shots. She neglected them for typical swing states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina and Florida but her efforts there didn't pan out. The investment in Georgia and Arizona were marginal and came very late into the campaign.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #503 on: August 05, 2018, 08:32:29 AM »

Out of curiosity, what was the exact margin in Erie?

Here are the full results:

Hillary 50.01%
T***p 44.74%
Johnson 2.95%
Others 2.31%

That's a margin of 5.27, which means a PVI of 3.18 (the lowest ever for all the elections I have data for).

@JG: That's a fair point, although I'm not sure she invested as much into Pennsylvania and Ohio as she should have.
Logged
Calthrina950
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,937
United States


P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #504 on: August 05, 2018, 04:25:34 PM »

Out of curiosity, what was the exact margin in Erie?

Here are the full results:

Hillary 50.01%
T***p 44.74%
Johnson 2.95%
Others 2.31%

That's a margin of 5.27, which means a PVI of 3.18 (the lowest ever for all the elections I have data for).

@JG: That's a fair point, although I'm not sure she invested as much into Pennsylvania and Ohio as she should have.

Trump, if I am not mistaken, is the first Republican in a long while to come within single digits in Erie.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #505 on: August 06, 2018, 06:17:12 AM »

Out of curiosity, what was the exact margin in Erie?

Here are the full results:

Hillary 50.01%
T***p 44.74%
Johnson 2.95%
Others 2.31%

That's a margin of 5.27, which means a PVI of 3.18 (the lowest ever for all the elections I have data for).

@JG: That's a fair point, although I'm not sure she invested as much into Pennsylvania and Ohio as she should have.

Trump, if I am not mistaken, is the first Republican in a long while to come within single digits in Erie.

Since George Bush Sr. in 1988, yes. They lost it by similar margins, but of course the difference is that Bush won the national PV by 8 points.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,124
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #506 on: August 06, 2018, 06:43:44 AM »

Out of curiosity, what was the exact margin in Erie?

Here are the full results:

Hillary 50.01%
T***p 44.74%
Johnson 2.95%
Others 2.31%

That's a margin of 5.27, which means a PVI of 3.18 (the lowest ever for all the elections I have data for).

@JG: That's a fair point, although I'm not sure she invested as much into Pennsylvania and Ohio as she should have.

Trump, if I am not mistaken, is the first Republican in a long while to come within single digits in Erie.

Since George Bush Sr. in 1988, yes. They lost it by similar margins, but of course the difference is that Bush won the national PV by 8 points.
Did Trump win Erie minus Cuyahoga County?
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #507 on: August 06, 2018, 08:01:09 AM »

Out of curiosity, what was the exact margin in Erie?

Here are the full results:

Hillary 50.01%
T***p 44.74%
Johnson 2.95%
Others 2.31%

That's a margin of 5.27, which means a PVI of 3.18 (the lowest ever for all the elections I have data for).

@JG: That's a fair point, although I'm not sure she invested as much into Pennsylvania and Ohio as she should have.

Trump, if I am not mistaken, is the first Republican in a long while to come within single digits in Erie.

Since George Bush Sr. in 1988, yes. They lost it by similar margins, but of course the difference is that Bush won the national PV by 8 points.
Did Trump win Erie minus Cuyahoga County?

Easily, yeah. Hillary won Erie by 117K votes but she won Cuyahoga by 214K.
Logged
Calthrina950
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,937
United States


P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #508 on: August 06, 2018, 12:51:34 PM »

Out of curiosity, what was the exact margin in Erie?

Here are the full results:

Hillary 50.01%
T***p 44.74%
Johnson 2.95%
Others 2.31%

That's a margin of 5.27, which means a PVI of 3.18 (the lowest ever for all the elections I have data for).

@JG: That's a fair point, although I'm not sure she invested as much into Pennsylvania and Ohio as she should have.

Trump, if I am not mistaken, is the first Republican in a long while to come within single digits in Erie.

Since George Bush Sr. in 1988, yes. They lost it by similar margins, but of course the difference is that Bush won the national PV by 8 points.

I see. What about Adirondack? I had read somewhere that Clinton won New York by just 10,000 votes if you took out New York City. Obviously, your state of New York includes the adjacent suburbs, and removing those gives Trump the remainder.
Logged
MR DARK BRANDON
Liam
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,098
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -0.65, S: -1.57

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #509 on: August 06, 2018, 05:55:23 PM »

Why is Trump’s name bleeped our?
Logged
OBD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,575
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #510 on: August 06, 2018, 08:53:04 PM »

Extreme dislike I guess
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #511 on: August 07, 2018, 07:29:24 AM »

Out of curiosity, what was the exact margin in Erie?

Here are the full results:

Hillary 50.01%
T***p 44.74%
Johnson 2.95%
Others 2.31%

That's a margin of 5.27, which means a PVI of 3.18 (the lowest ever for all the elections I have data for).

@JG: That's a fair point, although I'm not sure she invested as much into Pennsylvania and Ohio as she should have.

Trump, if I am not mistaken, is the first Republican in a long while to come within single digits in Erie.

Since George Bush Sr. in 1988, yes. They lost it by similar margins, but of course the difference is that Bush won the national PV by 8 points.

I see. What about Adirondack? I had read somewhere that Clinton won New York by just 10,000 votes if you took out New York City. Obviously, your state of New York includes the adjacent suburbs, and removing those gives Trump the remainder.

Yup:

Hillary 45.69%
T***p 47.92%
Johnson 3.77%
Others 2.62%

T***p won it by about 60K votes. Meanwhile, Hillary carried almost 2/3 of the vote in the new New York State.
Logged
Calthrina950
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,937
United States


P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #512 on: August 07, 2018, 11:51:54 AM »

Out of curiosity, what was the exact margin in Erie?

Here are the full results:

Hillary 50.01%
T***p 44.74%
Johnson 2.95%
Others 2.31%

That's a margin of 5.27, which means a PVI of 3.18 (the lowest ever for all the elections I have data for).

@JG: That's a fair point, although I'm not sure she invested as much into Pennsylvania and Ohio as she should have.

Trump, if I am not mistaken, is the first Republican in a long while to come within single digits in Erie.

Since George Bush Sr. in 1988, yes. They lost it by similar margins, but of course the difference is that Bush won the national PV by 8 points.

I see. What about Adirondack? I had read somewhere that Clinton won New York by just 10,000 votes if you took out New York City. Obviously, your state of New York includes the adjacent suburbs, and removing those gives Trump the remainder.

Yup:

Hillary 45.69%
T***p 47.92%
Johnson 3.77%
Others 2.62%

T***p won it by about 60K votes. Meanwhile, Hillary carried almost 2/3 of the vote in the new New York State.

So there was a kind of native-son effect that took place in New York back in 2016, even though the extent of it was obscured by Clinton's 22 point margin of victory. Without New York City (but including the suburbs around it), New York would have been the closest state in the election.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #513 on: August 08, 2018, 06:33:22 PM »

NYC suburbs were a mixed bag in terms of trends. Hillary improved in the inner ring of suburbs (Westchester, Rockland, Nassau) but lost ground in the outer ring, especially Suffolk.



I'm guessing if Hillary had a home-state advantage, it makes sense that Manhattanites and Westchesterites would be the most sensitive to it, while T***p, himself a Queens guy, did better there and around Long and Staten Islands.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,072
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #514 on: August 08, 2018, 06:36:01 PM »

You were wrong about Feingold.

But seriously, what do 2016 Senate and Gubernatorial look like?
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #515 on: August 10, 2018, 06:34:31 PM »


I mean, I wasn't wrong. My predictions reflected the consensus of the time, and the consensus of the time showed Feingold as a modest favorite. The fact that things turned out differently doesn't mean that it was the wrong call at the time.

Anyway, here's for gubernatorial elections.


2016 Gubernatorial Elections



Democrats: 3
Republicans: 5

Just like IRL, Republicans pick up MO and Democrats pick up NC by a hair. In Indiana, Holcomb wins even more comfortably. Finally, in NE, Hassan would have no reason to retire, but with the strong Republican trend this region had IRL I figured she'd still lose narrowly, let's say to Phil Scott since he seems like the strongest Republican from the region. RIP CLIMBIN' MAGGIE, FF.


Governorship Control in 2017:

Democrats: 16 (+1)
Republicans: 34 (=)
Independents: 1 (=)


Senate results coming hopefully tomorrow.
Logged
Politician
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,986
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.13, S: -0.87

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #516 on: August 10, 2018, 06:35:38 PM »
« Edited: August 11, 2018, 10:11:54 AM by Massguy »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Somewhere, MT Treasurer shed a tear for what could have been.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #517 on: August 11, 2018, 10:43:08 AM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Somewhere, MT Treasurer shed a tear for what could have been.

Calm VT men beat out angry NH women. Cheesy
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #518 on: August 11, 2018, 11:14:54 AM »

2016



Democrats: 12 (=)
Republicans: 22 (=)

In keeping with RL results, I had the Senate map match the Presidential map perfectly - and just like IRL, this leads to a pickup of two seats for Democrats. The easiest pickup for Dems is Rio Grande, where an already old and stale Cornyn is unable to resist a high-turnout, increasingly Hispanic electorate. There's really only one logical choice for who would beat him, and that's obviously our friend Beto O'Rourke (even if he loses statewide, I fully expect him to beat Cruz by double digits in the parts of RL Texas that make up Rio Grande). The nailbiter of this cycle (equivalent to RL NH) would be California, where I could see a decent Democratic challenger narrowly edge it out. Maybe Ami Bera, since he's used to squeaking by in semi-unfriendly territory? Let me know if you have better suggestions. Apart from that, it's mostly just incumbents getting reelected (including Murray in WA, Portman in OH, Miller in NF, Reed in AD, Abbott in JF, Rodgers in OR, and, unlike RL but unsurprisingly given the new makeup of the State, Kirk in IL). All in all a disappointing year for Democrats but by no means a terrible one.


The 115th Senate (2017-2019)



Democrats: 46 (-2)
Republicans: 56 (+4)

The particularly unfavorable makeup of the other two classes compared to IRL for Democrats (especially, ironically, the 2012 one) means that Republicans maintain a comfortable 10-seat majority, far more daunting than their RL one of just 4 at this point in time. Flipping Jeff Sessions' Alabama seat later in the year would only marginally reduce it to 8, meaning that Republicans would still have little trouble pushing forward their agenda. Of course, this would be far less consequential without a President T***p to actually sign the bills that come out of such a GOP-dominated Congress - but then again, that would be a double-edged sword for Democrats' electoral prospects going into 2018.

This is where we hit the limits of projects like these when it comes to actually predicting alternate election outcomes: once it changes who actually wins the Presidency, the repercussions far exceed the simple role of geographic redrawings. Having a different President in office means different issues, different events both at home and abroad, and a different political climate. If this map was
actually in place, Democrats would be facing obliteration in 2018, with 5 seats all but gone and 6 others in serious danger. Republicans would almost certainly emerge from it with a filibuster-proof majority, ready to enact draconian policy changes as soon as the White House would fall to them (which, let's face it, would be very likely in 2020). Again, kind of terrifying tbh.

Of course, since this thread is about alternate election results rather than an alternate timeline as such, I will be covering 2018 results based on the actual political climate we are seeing IRL. So don't worry, you should still expect a lot of read on the 2018 maps. Tongue
Logged
nerd73
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 958
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -7.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #519 on: September 10, 2018, 07:47:00 AM »

Preliminary guesses (not really ranked in order of competitiveness between states in the same category):

Pacific: Safe D, almost certain to be D vs D if OTL California primary system is kept
Chicago: Safe D
Maryland: Safe D
New York: Safe D
Massachusetts: Safe D
Washington: Safe D
Pennsylvania: Safe D
New England: Safe D
Rio Grande: Safe D, if it was a Clinton midterm it would be more interesting
Michigan: Safe D/Likely D, pretty much the same as OTL
Wisconsin: Likely D, pretty much the same as OTL
California: Lean D/Tilt D, as long as Democrats can keep their gains from 2016
Nevada: Tilt D/Tossup, pretty much the same as OTL
Lincoln: Tossup, could move to Lean D or Lean R depending on the candidate
South Florida: Tossup, I have no idea how this one will go.
North Florida: Tossup, Bill Nelson could be in serious trouble here, but generally he does pretty well with Dixiecrats
Indiana: Tossup/Tilt R, the lack of Gary in the north pushes Indiana somewhat to the right, making re-election harder for Donnelly. Still winnable for Democrats though.
Allegheny: Lean R/Likely R, Rick Santorum is pretty far-right and a Conor Lamb-style Democrat could make this race close, but Allegheny's partisan lean probably allows Republicans to pull it out in the end
Ohio: Likely R, can't really see Democrats flipping this seat, but they held it as late as 2013, and they can't be completely counted out.
Texas: Likely R/Safe R, again, can't really see Democrats flipping this, seems significantly more Republican than OTL texas.
Jefferson: Safe R, nothing to see here.

States that are the same as OTL were not included in these ratings. Tell me if I missed anything.
Logged
nerd73
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 958
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -7.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #520 on: November 13, 2018, 08:40:02 AM »
« Edited: November 15, 2018, 09:22:49 PM by nerd73 »

My guess for the results:



Indiana: Donnelly is toast.
Lincoln: Given Tester only narrowly hanged on with the OTL map and how badly Heitkamp lost, it seems reasonable to think that Lincoln's Class 1 seat flips.
North Florida: Given that Scott is leading with the OTL map with South Florida, can't see the Republicans losing North Florida.
South Florida: Although Republicans overperformed here, Scott's very narrow margin statewide (and the Republican win in North Florida) probably means this seat flips blue.
California: This is difficult to guess given that there was no D-R election in OTL California, but I'd guess Democrats would narrowly pick it up.
Allegheny: RicK Santorum wins re-election probably by high single digits/low double digits.
Logged
P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong
razze
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,070
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -4.96


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #521 on: November 13, 2018, 06:47:17 PM »

Beautiful!
Logged
America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS
Solid4096
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,730


Political Matrix
E: -8.88, S: -8.51

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #522 on: November 13, 2018, 07:26:15 PM »

Early 2020 predictions:

Republican incumbents lose easily in New England and Colorado.

Arizona special election could possibly give Democrats a gain, as could Illinois, Iowa, and North Carolina.

Alabama is the only vulnerable Democratic seat.

Reach targets for Democrats in Allegheny, Georgia, Kansas, and Alaska.
Logged
bagelman
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,602
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -4.17

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #523 on: November 13, 2018, 10:41:22 PM »

My guess for the results:



Indiana: Donnelly is toast.
Lincoln: Given Tester only narrowly hanged on with the OTL map and how badly Heitkamp lost, it seems reasonable to think that Lincoln's Class 1 seat flips.
North Florida: Given that Scott is leading with the OTL map with South Florida, can't see the Republicans losing North Florida.
South Florida: Although Republicans overperformed here, Scott's very narrow margin statewide (and the Republican win in North Florida) probably means this seat flips blue.
California: This is difficult to guess given that there was no D-R election in OTL California, but I'd guess Democrats would narrowly pick it up.
Pennsylvania: RicK Santorum wins re-election probably by high single digits/low double digits.


This I would assume would be in a world where Trump won like in ours. In a Clinton midterm I actually thing that de Leon's overpreformance OTL shows signs of the GOP holding on in California.
Logged
Politician
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,986
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.13, S: -0.87

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #524 on: November 18, 2018, 07:37:26 PM »

My guess for the 2018 Gubernatorial elections:

Phil Scott wins with close to 60% in New England.
Republicans narrowly hold Adriondack.
Allegheny flips due to Corbett's unpopularity (I think Wolf narrowly carried this part of IRL Pennsylvania).
LaTourette gets crushed in Erie.
Republicans hold Illinois.
Walker still loses in Wisconsin-adding the upper peninsula would just make it even closer.
California narrowly flips.
Rio Grande flips by double digits.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23  
« 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 0.105 seconds with 12 queries.