|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 09, 2020, 08:47:46 pm
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: Virginiá)
  "Lean" Democratic states
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: "Lean" Democratic states  (Read 3470 times)

excelsus
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 692
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 25, 2013, 11:12:31 am »

Some states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin or even Minnesota have long since been considered toss-ups or "lean Democratic" by the media / polling agencies before a presidential election. After election night, however, the rude awakening comes. Every time.
Why do some people not accept that those states are ineradicably Democratic?
And are there any counterparts on the Republican side?
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 25, 2013, 04:30:29 pm »

Lean Democratic is fair. But I do find it hilarious how PA somehow manages to be called a "toss up" every single election, when the only time in the past few decades it was one was 2004.
Logged
Cory Booker
olawakandi
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,472
Jamaica


Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: December 25, 2013, 05:35:09 pm »
« Edited: December 25, 2013, 05:36:44 pm by OC »

I think pollsters confuse battleground with tipping pt states. Outside of Ia, NV, NM. OH, Va and Co, the others like Wisc and MI are battlegrounds. Florida is as much of a battleground as Pa. The winner can have won the election without it. Hillary is the one that can make AZ the next tipping pt state.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,053


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: December 25, 2013, 05:37:12 pm »

I think pollsters confuse battleground with tipping pt states. Outside of Ia, NV, NM. OH, Va, the others like Wisc and MI are battlegrounds. Florida is as much of a battleground as Pa. The winner can have won the election without it. Hillary is the one that can make AZ the next tipping pt state.

You've got NM in the wrong place - the GOP is more likely to win MI or WI than NM.
Logged

excelsus
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 692
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: December 26, 2013, 03:15:20 am »

I think pollsters confuse battleground with tipping pt states. Outside of Ia, NV, NM. OH, Va, the others like Wisc and MI are battlegrounds. Florida is as much of a battleground as Pa. The winner can have won the election without it. Hillary is the one that can make AZ the next tipping pt state.

You've got NM in the wrong place - the GOP is more likely to win MI or WI than NM.

Maybe that was just a typo?
Logged
LeBron FitzGerald
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,842
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.00, S: -6.78


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: December 26, 2013, 03:48:00 am »

The thing with these states is that they've been on the downward trend for years in population loss from their large cities. You're right in saying they lean Democratic because the strong worker and union forces in those states have helped Democrats carry them for nearly 3 decades straight. The closest state out of all of them would be Wisconsin because it narrowly went for Kerry, but still tend to be elastic in nature.
Logged
Cory Booker
olawakandi
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,472
Jamaica


Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: December 26, 2013, 06:55:43 am »

No matter if it is 273 with Combo of Az,NV or CO or it is 272 with NV,CO,NH or 271 with OH, and IA, Dems are finding it much easier to expand the map than the GOP.
Logged
Non Swing Voter
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,281


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: December 26, 2013, 07:40:00 pm »

Because GOP trolls (many on this board included) think if they say something enough times it makes it true

I could see some of those states becoming competitive but they are currently not very competitive.

The GOP IMO is just seriously in denial... they still think VA, CO, NV are lean Republican states when in fact they are at best tossups, but probably lean Democrat states.
Logged
MATTROSE94
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,572
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -6.43

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: January 04, 2014, 11:38:16 am »

I would probably add Virginia, New Hampshire, Nevada and New Mexico to your list of lean Democratic states. In addition, I would consider Arizona, Georgia and Missouri lean Republican states. The main swing states in my opinion are Ohio, Colorado, Florida, North Carolina and Iowa. The Democrats have a slight advantage in Florida and Iowa, while the Republicans have a slight advantage in North Carolina, Ohio and Colorado.
Logged
Kevin
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,401
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: January 04, 2014, 12:27:16 pm »

Because GOP trolls (many on this board included) think if they say something enough times it makes it true

I could see some of those states becoming competitive but they are currently not very competitive.

The GOP IMO is just seriously in denial... they still think VA, CO, NV are lean Republican states when in fact they are at best tossups, but probably lean Democrat states.

Well look who's talking there!
Logged
Nichlemn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,925


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: January 04, 2014, 06:04:06 pm »

Some states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin or even Minnesota have long since been considered toss-ups or "lean Democratic" by the media / polling agencies before a presidential election. After election night, however, the rude awakening comes. Every time.
Why do some people not accept that those states are ineradicably Democratic?
And are there any counterparts on the Republican side?

Because they're only slightly more Democratic than the national average, and Democratic hacks think that winning or having close losses in the last few elections indicates a pro-Democratic national average, rather than just small sample sizes. It would be like someone saying before 1992 that Illinois was solidly Republican, because it hadn't gone Democratic since 1964. In reality, it had a Democratic lean overall for those elections, and predictably it went Democratic when a Democrat won in 1992.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,105
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: January 04, 2014, 06:42:11 pm »

Lean Democratic is fair. But I do find it hilarious how PA somehow manages to be called a "toss up" every single election, when the only time in the past few decades it was one was 2004.

Pennsylvania barely missed being the tipping-point state in 2012.
Logged

excelsus
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 692
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: January 04, 2014, 08:11:30 pm »

I would probably add Virginia, New Hampshire, Nevada and New Mexico to your list of lean Democratic states.

New Hampshire and Nevada are likely Democratic states.
New Mexico is safe Democratic.

In addition, I would consider Arizona, Georgia and Missouri lean Republican states.

Missouri is a tossup state when it comes to a Southern Democratic candidate.
Logged
WeAreDoomed
outofbox6
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,717
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: January 04, 2014, 08:13:06 pm »

Nah, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Pennsylvania are the "lean" Democratic states in my opinion. Perhaps Virginia too.
Logged
Pessimistic Antineutrino
Pessimistic Antineutrino
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,712
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: January 04, 2014, 10:03:18 pm »

Where is the "Virginia = Lean D" argument coming from? I have yet to see any conclusive evidence that Virginia is a Lean Democratic state. The 2013 gubernatorial election may be an indicator of Virginia's trend, it may be a fluke. But a single data point is not enough to create a new case.
Between 2008 and 2012 Virginia only trended from R+1 to EVEN. If we use that as a baseline, then in 2016 Virginia will be D+1, a Democratic tilt but hardly a Lean D state.
If we use 2004 - 2012 as a baseline, Virginia went from R+6 to EVEN, which translates to a D+3 in 2016.
In 2004 Virginia was not contested by Kerry which led to the 8-point margin of victory there. It was heavily contested in 2008 and 2012, and most likely will be in 2016, so I doubt that it will trend as much as it did from 2004-2008.
No one is saying that Virginia, or Colorado and Nevada for that matter, are Lean R. I would say that Virginia and Colorado are tossups and Nevada is a very slight Lean D.

I mostly agree with the OP's list of Lean D states- MI, MN, and WI (I'm unsure about PA at this moment but I would put it in Lean D), as well as NV.
I would say NC is the only Lean R state. It did go D in 2008, but if Bush had won by that margin either time he would have swept the aforementioned five states.
In my opinion, the tossup states are as follows: Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire. Advantage R in Florida and Ohio and advantage D in Colorado, Iowa and New Hampshire. Virginia is split evenly.
Logged
WeAreDoomed
outofbox6
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,717
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: January 04, 2014, 10:07:59 pm »

Nice argument on Virginia, but if Iowa is a tossup state, then PA is also.
Nevada is going to be hard for Republicans, unless we start really focusing on the latino vote. I think the minority vote is 48% in Nevada.
Logged
WeAreDoomed
outofbox6
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,717
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: January 04, 2014, 10:18:04 pm »

Anyway, here are what I think will be the big nine states of 2016:
New Hampshire
Pennsylvania (especially if Christie is GOP nominee)
Ohio
Wisconsin (especially if Walker is GOP nominee)
Iowa
Virginia
Florida
Colorado
And in a GOP blowout:
Minnesota
Note that nine states went from Republican to Democratic from 2004 to 2008
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,105
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: January 05, 2014, 12:46:35 am »

Likely tipping-point states based on previous elections

2012 -- Colorado
2008 -- Iowa
2004 -- Ohio
2000 -- Florida
1996 -- Pennsylvania
1992 -- Tennessee
1988 -- Michigan
1984, 1980 -- who cares?
1976 -- Wisconsin

Closeness to the national average but not otherwise mentioned:

2012 -- Virginia
2004 -- Nevada
1996 -- New Hampshire, New Mexico
1992 -- New Jersey
1976 -- Mississippi

If you see any pattern other than states not included, then show it.
 
Logged
Mr. Illini
liberty142
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,543
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -4.35


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: January 05, 2014, 02:05:55 am »

I think it is mostly the media trying to keep things more interesting than they might be.

GOP counter-parts might be Missouri and Indiana.
Logged
DS0816
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,173
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: January 05, 2014, 03:09:21 am »
« Edited: January 05, 2014, 03:19:42 am by DS0816 »

Some states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin or even Minnesota have long since been considered toss-ups or "lean Democratic" by the media / polling agencies before a presidential election. After election night, however, the rude awakening comes. Every time.
Why do some people not accept that those states are ineradicably Democratic?
And are there any counterparts on the Republican side?

Because they're only slightly more Democratic than the national average, and Democratic hacks think that winning or having close losses in the last few elections indicates a pro-Democratic national average, rather than just small sample sizes. It would be like someone saying before 1992 that Illinois was solidly Republican, because it hadn't gone Democratic since 1964. In reality, it had a Democratic lean overall for those elections, and predictably it went Democratic when a Democrat won in 1992.


Right! Winning the U.S. Popular Vote only once in the last six election cycles means the Republicans have the advantage in presidential elections.

The type of answer Nichlemn just gave answers for excelsus why, if anyone from this thread is trying to be a hack, it's Nichlemn.

I posted a number of months ago the status of the two parties' states nowadays with the electoral map, and Nichlemn bitched up a storm that I had the nerve to say that, because Pennsylvania has had a Democratic tilt since after the 1940s and that Indiana did flip and carry Democratic in 2008, it was Indiana going Democratic before Pennsylvania would go Republican. Oh, no! We're supposed to be swayed that Pennsylvania will be going Republican because it was less than a full two points above the national margin with the re-election of Barack Obama in 2012 while that was also the case with the re-election of Bill Clinton in 1996.

Emotionally wound up Republican forum posters like Nichlemn would prefer to ignore numerous electoral histories, acknowledge whatever is figured to be a fine example here or there and which suits one's narrative, and then continue to double down on one's messaging that the Republicans are still kicking electoral ass in this period just as they had with the previous one and two generations ago.

We're in a new era, Nichelmn, where it's not the Republicans but the Democrats with overwhelming electoral-map advantage. No amount of your efforts to attempt to say otherwise will persuade those who respect facts to believe you.
Logged
Nichlemn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,925


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: January 05, 2014, 03:42:06 am »
« Edited: January 05, 2014, 03:45:03 am by Nichlemn »

Some states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin or even Minnesota have long since been considered toss-ups or "lean Democratic" by the media / polling agencies before a presidential election. After election night, however, the rude awakening comes. Every time.
Why do some people not accept that those states are ineradicably Democratic?
And are there any counterparts on the Republican side?

Because they're only slightly more Democratic than the national average, and Democratic hacks think that winning or having close losses in the last few elections indicates a pro-Democratic national average, rather than just small sample sizes. It would be like someone saying before 1992 that Illinois was solidly Republican, because it hadn't gone Democratic since 1964. In reality, it had a Democratic lean overall for those elections, and predictably it went Democratic when a Democrat won in 1992.


Right! Winning the U.S. Popular Vote only once in the last six election cycles means the Republicans have the advantage in presidential elections.

The type of answer Nichlemn just gave answers for excelsus why, if anyone from this thread is trying to be a hack, it's Nichlemn.

I posted a number of months ago the status of the two parties' states nowadays with the electoral map, and Nichlemn bitched up a storm that I had the nerve to say that, because Pennsylvania has had a Democratic tilt since after the 1940s and that Indiana did flip and carry Democratic in 2008, it was Indiana going Democratic before Pennsylvania would go Republican. Oh, no! We're supposed to be swayed that Pennsylvania will be going Republican because it was less than a full two points above the national margin with the re-election of Barack Obama in 2012 while that was also the case with the re-election of Bill Clinton in 1996.

Emotionally wound up Republican forum posters like Nichlemn would prefer to ignore numerous electoral histories, acknowledge whatever is figured to be a fine example here or there and which suits one's narrative, and then continue to double down on one's messaging that the Republicans are still kicking electoral ass in this period just as they had with the previous one and two generations ago.

We're in a new era, Nichelmn, where it's not the Republicans but the Democrats with overwhelming electoral-map advantage. You can either get with the current period … or get out of here.


lolololol. You've still yet to address my basic point from last time - if we're in a "new era" where Democrats have an "overwhelming electoral map advantage", you should be able to cite some kind of correlation that proves that past performance is indicative of future results. But a quick analysis shows no such correlation. A quick exercise in Excel shows there's been a negligible correlation between how many times a party has won in the last six (or five, or seven, or three, or any other number) and its likelihood of winning the next election. So for all intents and purposes, factoids like "Dems have won the popular vote in five of the past six elections!" may be interesting, but they don't tell us anything about what the Dem's future chances are. Anyone who made such crude extrapolations in the past would have been wrong as often as they were right.

This isn't about thinking the Republicans "still have" an advantage. They never had it to begin with, and neither do the Dems today. Democrats may still well be favoured to win the next elections, but it won't be because the past few elections "predicted" it.
Logged
WeAreDoomed
outofbox6
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,717
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: January 05, 2014, 08:55:42 am »

Some states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin or even Minnesota have long since been considered toss-ups or "lean Democratic" by the media / polling agencies before a presidential election. After election night, however, the rude awakening comes. Every time.
Why do some people not accept that those states are ineradicably Democratic?
And are there any counterparts on the Republican side?

Because they're only slightly more Democratic than the national average, and Democratic hacks think that winning or having close losses in the last few elections indicates a pro-Democratic national average, rather than just small sample sizes. It would be like someone saying before 1992 that Illinois was solidly Republican, because it hadn't gone Democratic since 1964. In reality, it had a Democratic lean overall for those elections, and predictably it went Democratic when a Democrat won in 1992.


Right! Winning the U.S. Popular Vote only once in the last six election cycles means the Republicans have the advantage in presidential elections.

The type of answer Nichlemn just gave answers for excelsus why, if anyone from this thread is trying to be a hack, it's Nichlemn.

I posted a number of months ago the status of the two parties' states nowadays with the electoral map, and Nichlemn bitched up a storm that I had the nerve to say that, because Pennsylvania has had a Democratic tilt since after the 1940s and that Indiana did flip and carry Democratic in 2008, it was Indiana going Democratic before Pennsylvania would go Republican. Oh, no! We're supposed to be swayed that Pennsylvania will be going Republican because it was less than a full two points above the national margin with the re-election of Barack Obama in 2012 while that was also the case with the re-election of Bill Clinton in 1996.

Emotionally wound up Republican forum posters like Nichlemn would prefer to ignore numerous electoral histories, acknowledge whatever is figured to be a fine example here or there and which suits one's narrative, and then continue to double down on one's messaging that the Republicans are still kicking electoral ass in this period just as they had with the previous one and two generations ago.

We're in a new era, Nichelmn, where it's not the Republicans but the Democrats with overwhelming electoral-map advantage. No amount of your efforts to attempt to say otherwise will persuade those who respect facts to believe you.
This guy isn't for real, right?
Logged
DS0816
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,173
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: January 05, 2014, 09:29:20 am »

Because GOP trolls (many on this board included) think if they say something enough times it makes it true

I could see some of those states becoming competitive but they are currently not very competitive.

The GOP IMO is just seriously in denial... they still think VA, CO, NV are lean Republican states when in fact they are at best tossups, but probably lean Democrat states.

True.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines