Can Democrats afford to lose Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 18, 2024, 09:30:20 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Can Democrats afford to lose Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Can Democrats afford to lose Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin?  (Read 686 times)
Suburbia
bronz4141
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,684
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 11, 2014, 07:05:23 PM »

In in the future a Democratic ticket wins key prizes like Ohio, Virginia, and Florida, but loses IA, WI, MI, and MN, do they basically lose the White House essentially? Can you see this scenario happening?
Logged
Blue3
Starwatcher
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,048
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2014, 09:05:40 PM »

You're a bit obsessed with the Midwest.
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 #2 on: May 11, 2014, 09:41:03 PM »
« Edited: May 12, 2014, 06:47:58 AM by Never Convinced »

I could see a Democrat losing Iowa and Wisconsin while winning the White House if there were a Plains-state Republican nominee, but Michigan and Minnesota seem too far to the left for a Democrat to lose them if they can win in Ohio, Virginia, and Florida.

It seems a bit of a stretch for Ohio to go Democratic with so many of the other states in the Midwest going Republican. Ohio is probably going to remain the most Republican-leaning state in the Midwest (or even in the North, for that matter) other than Indiana.

Here is a more likely result for the scenario envisioned:



Democrat - 298 electoral votes
Republican - 240 electoral votes

I shaded most of the Plains states and Indiana as >60% because I am assuming that the  Republicans are performing extraordinarily well in the region in order to pull off victories in the Midwestern swing states while losing VA and FL.
Logged
retromike22
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,452
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2014, 09:44:16 PM »

You're a bit obsessed with the Midwest.

bronz4141 is like a Midwest nationalist.
Logged
sg0508
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,056
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2014, 09:50:50 PM »

They're not going to, so don't worry.  If the GOP couldn't really make any inroads to these states in the last 10 years, they probably won't.  In fact, I think the Democrats' strength in MN, WI and MI has gotten that much stronger in the past few years.  IA is a bit more hazy.
Logged
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,125
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 12, 2014, 06:29:15 AM »

They're not going to, so don't worry.  If the GOP couldn't really make any inroads to these states in the last 10 years, they probably won't.  In fact, I think the Democrats' strength in MN, WI and MI has gotten that much stronger in the past few years.  IA is a bit more hazy.

Dems have gotten better organized in MN, but they've done quite poorly in WI- ever heard of the Scott Walker recall?

Of course, that's on the state level, where party organization (and gerrymandering) matters. Michigan is actually to the left of Minnesota (though not by much) but the DFL and MI GOP are both extremely strong state parties which are able to successfully win and get their agenda passed.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« 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 0.036 seconds with 12 queries.