Reasonable 2008 maps?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 28, 2024, 04:57:00 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  Reasonable 2008 maps?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3
Poll
Question: Are these maps reasonable?
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 34

Author Topic: Reasonable 2008 maps?  (Read 5317 times)
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 20, 2005, 10:07:20 PM »

Hillary vs. Santorum




Santorum - 307
Hillary - 231

Feingold vs. Santorum



Santorum - 281
Feingold - 257


Just two hypothetical matchups for 2008. I think both Clinton and Feingold have great shots at the Democratic nomination and if Santorum is re-elected, he has a decent chance at winning the GOP nomination. The reason why I ask if these maps are reasonable is to see why some can't possibly see Santorum winning the Presidency.
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,451


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 20, 2005, 10:08:51 PM »

These maps are hilarious.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2005, 10:11:10 PM »


Sorry, I just don't see Hillary or Feingold taking Wyoming, Smash.


Please tell me what else is wrong.
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,451


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2005, 10:17:19 PM »


Sorry, I just don't see Hillary or Feingold taking Wyoming, Smash.


Please tell me what else is wrong.

Santorum's foot in the mouth disease is really going to hurt him in a National election.  Remember how well the GOP used the Voted for it before I voted against it comment by Kerry.  Well Santorum's comments will be fuel on the fire. Santorum is one of the few people I thinK Hillary can beat (along with Frist & Newt) & Feingold IMHO will be an excellent candidate for the Dems.  Tons of charisma, very likeable guy, excellent speaker, doesn't suffer from foot in the mouth disease, and despite being socially liberal has a lot of populist appeal
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 20, 2005, 10:19:07 PM »


Sorry, I just don't see Hillary or Feingold taking Wyoming, Smash.


Please tell me what else is wrong.

Santorum's foot in the mouth disease is really going to hurt him in a National election.  Remember how well the GOP used the Voted for it before I voted against it comment by Kerry.  Well Santorum's comments will be fuel on the fire. Santorum is one of the few people I thinK Hillary can beat (along with Frist & Newt) & Feingold IMHO will be an excellent candidate for the Dems.  Tons of charisma, very likeable guy, excellent speaker, doesn't suffer from foot in the mouth disease, and despite being socially liberal has a lot of populist appeal

What states were "wrong", Smash.
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,451


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 20, 2005, 10:23:21 PM »


Sorry, I just don't see Hillary or Feingold taking Wyoming, Smash.


Please tell me what else is wrong.

In the map against Hillary I would say Florida, Wisconsin, Iowa & Colorado are wrong.  Against Feingold Ohio, PA & FL are wrong.  Feingold may even be able to take Missouri with his midwest appeal
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 20, 2005, 10:26:49 PM »


Sorry, I just don't see Hillary or Feingold taking Wyoming, Smash.


Please tell me what else is wrong.

In the map against Hillary I would say Florida, Wisconsin, Iowa & Colorado are wrong.  Against Feingold Ohio, PA & FL are wrong.  Feingold may even be able to take Missouri with his midwest appeal

Hillary takes FL, WI, IA and CO? Are you crazy?

Feingold does not take Missouri under any circumstance. The state is trending GOP more and more each year.
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,451


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 20, 2005, 10:37:52 PM »


Sorry, I just don't see Hillary or Feingold taking Wyoming, Smash.


Please tell me what else is wrong.

In the map against Hillary I would say Florida, Wisconsin, Iowa & Colorado are wrong.  Against Feingold Ohio, PA & FL are wrong.  Feingold may even be able to take Missouri with his midwest appeal

Hillary takes FL, WI, IA and CO? Are you crazy?

Feingold does not take Missouri under any circumstance. The state is trending GOP more and more each year.

Against Santorum?  YES Against most other Republican possible candidates other than Frist?  Probably not
Logged
Akno21
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,066
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: May 20, 2005, 10:44:22 PM »

Overall, they are both good.

I'd give Hillary Wisconsin and take away New Mexico.

I'd also give Feingold Florida and Ohio should be closer. (I can't tell if that's the lightest shade of blue, but I think it's not)
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: May 20, 2005, 10:48:32 PM »


Sorry, I just don't see Hillary or Feingold taking Wyoming, Smash.


Please tell me what else is wrong.

In the map against Hillary I would say Florida, Wisconsin, Iowa & Colorado are wrong.  Against Feingold Ohio, PA & FL are wrong.  Feingold may even be able to take Missouri with his midwest appeal

Hillary takes FL, WI, IA and CO? Are you crazy?

Feingold does not take Missouri under any circumstance. The state is trending GOP more and more each year.

Against Santorum? 

Do you realize that Santorum is about as conservative as Bush and Clinton is usually seen in a more negative way?

Also, while Florida would be closer because of a higher than usual Jewish turnout for Feingold, the state is moving more towards the GOP.
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,451


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: May 20, 2005, 10:52:31 PM »


Sorry, I just don't see Hillary or Feingold taking Wyoming, Smash.


Please tell me what else is wrong.

In the map against Hillary I would say Florida, Wisconsin, Iowa & Colorado are wrong.  Against Feingold Ohio, PA & FL are wrong.  Feingold may even be able to take Missouri with his midwest appeal

Hillary takes FL, WI, IA and CO? Are you crazy?

Feingold does not take Missouri under any circumstance. The state is trending GOP more and more each year.

Against Santorum? 

Do you realize that Santorum is about as conservative as Bush and Clinton is usually seen in a more negative way?

Also, while Florida would be closer because of a higher than usual Jewish turnout for Feingold, the state is moving more towards the GOP.

Santorum is more socially conservative than Bush & will not come across as the compassionate conservative Bush was able to come off as (& doesn't have 9/11 to harp on).  Florida isn't moving all that much more to the GOP.  Against the Natl Average Florida was only about 2% more GOP in 2004 than it was in 2000, and 2004 was the height of the President's brother (the govenor) popularity shortly after the devistating hurricanes that hit Florida
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 20, 2005, 10:57:23 PM »


Santorum is more socially conservative than Bush & will not come across as the compassionate conservative Bush was able to come off as (& doesn't have 9/11 to harp on).  Florida isn't moving all that much more to the GOP.  Against the Natl Average Florida was only about 2% more GOP in 2004 than it was in 2000, and 2004 was the height of the President's brother (the govenor) popularity shortly after the devistating hurricanes that hit Florida


I disagree that Santorum is more socially conservative. Concerning Florida, the Democrats had the perfect opportunity to get back at the GOP for 2000. They felt the race was stolen from them. They were going to win it this time. All eyes on Ohio and Florida. What happened?

Bush won by about five points and state/local Republicans had some victories. Overall, it's not going that great for Florida Dems. In fact, there was recently an article done on Jeb Bush and how Florida is trending towards the GOP. I saw it on Yahoo the other day.
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,451


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 20, 2005, 11:03:04 PM »


Santorum is more socially conservative than Bush & will not come across as the compassionate conservative Bush was able to come off as (& doesn't have 9/11 to harp on).  Florida isn't moving all that much more to the GOP.  Against the Natl Average Florida was only about 2% more GOP in 2004 than it was in 2000, and 2004 was the height of the President's brother (the govenor) popularity shortly after the devistating hurricanes that hit Florida


I disagree that Santorum is more socially conservative. Concerning Florida, the Democrats had the perfect opportunity to get back at the GOP for 2000. They felt the race was stolen from them. They were going to win it this time. All eyes on Ohio and Florida. What happened?

Bush won by about five points and state/local Republicans had some victories. Overall, it's not going that great for Florida Dems. In fact, there was recently an article done on Jeb Bush and how Florida is trending towards the GOP. I saw it on Yahoo the other day.

Few things

1.  Florida was only 2.5% more GOP than the Natl average in 2004 as oppsoed to .5% more GOP in 2000.

2.  Much of that shift (if not all of it) can be contributed to the carry factor Bush got from his brother being a popu;lar Govenor during a time of crisis in the state.

While you can argue that Santorum may not be more conservative than Bush (although I disagee) perception is key & with some of the comments Santorum has made he can be preceived to be far right on Social issues
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,866
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: May 20, 2005, 11:24:40 PM »

Reasonable, but I do not like them much.

Something other than WI needs to be <40% in the first map.

Carrying CO would make FL pretty close.

The general point is, while totally possible, this situation would end up with a number of these states being very close - on the first map, WI, IA, and FL could easily change in theory.

On the second map, all >40% states plus FL and OH could change pretty easily.

They're possible, but those two races are rather depressing and boring.
Logged
Moooooo
nickshepDEM
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,909


Political Matrix
E: -0.52, S: 3.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: May 21, 2005, 12:24:21 AM »

Both seem pretty reasonable to me.  You could flip a couple states on both maps and have realisitic outcomes w/ different winners.
Logged
Gabu
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,386
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -4.32, S: -6.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: May 21, 2005, 12:57:35 AM »

Phil, you're obsessed with Santorum, seriously. Smiley
Logged
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: May 21, 2005, 01:00:24 AM »

How can Jewish turnout go up?

Hillary/Santorum would be close. Rick would smoke Feingold.
Logged
danwxman
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,532


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: May 21, 2005, 01:05:16 AM »


Sorry, I just don't see Hillary or Feingold taking Wyoming, Smash.


Please tell me what else is wrong.

In the map against Hillary I would say Florida, Wisconsin, Iowa & Colorado are wrong.  Against Feingold Ohio, PA & FL are wrong.  Feingold may even be able to take Missouri with his midwest appeal

Hillary takes FL, WI, IA and CO? Are you crazy?

Feingold does not take Missouri under any circumstance. The state is trending GOP more and more each year.

Against Santorum? 

Do you realize that Santorum is about as conservative as Bush and Clinton is usually seen in a more negative way?

Also, while Florida would be closer because of a higher than usual Jewish turnout for Feingold, the state is moving more towards the GOP.

Santorum is more socially conservative than Bush & will not come across as the compassionate conservative Bush was able to come off as (& doesn't have 9/11 to harp on).  Florida isn't moving all that much more to the GOP.  Against the Natl Average Florida was only about 2% more GOP in 2004 than it was in 2000, and 2004 was the height of the President's brother (the govenor) popularity shortly after the devistating hurricanes that hit Florida


I think what you said is very important. Santorum will NOT be seen as a "compassionate conservative" and he will be seen as more socially conservative then Bush. He will get crushed among moderates and independants.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,866
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: May 21, 2005, 01:05:36 AM »

I do not think that, being divorced, Feingold is any longer a viable candidate, so I think that point is moot.
Logged
No more McShame
FuturePrez R-AZ
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,083


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: May 21, 2005, 01:24:50 AM »

I don't see Hillary winning Nevada.  It would be close though.
Logged
Akno21
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,066
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: May 21, 2005, 07:09:41 AM »


Just like religous right turnout can go up.

Anyway, it went more for Bush in 2004 than in 2000, and Feingold would reverse that.
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,079
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: May 21, 2005, 08:23:35 AM »


Just like religous right turnout can go up.

Anyway, it went more for Bush in 2004 than in 2000, and Feingold would reverse that.

The main reason it peaked in 2000 was thanks to Lieberman.  I expected the Jewish-Democratic vote to go down in 2004.
Logged
WalterMitty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,572


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: May 21, 2005, 09:21:35 AM »

reality check for keystone phil.....

phil bredesen/blanche lincoln (D)  376
rick santorum/sam brownback (R) 162

Logged
Akno21
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,066
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: May 21, 2005, 09:32:18 AM »

reality check for keystone phil.....

phil bredesen/blanche lincoln (D)  376
rick santorum/sam brownback (R) 162



Odds of that happening? 1000:1?

Keep in mind the liberal Democrats might not fall in line behind Bredesen.
Logged
WalterMitty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,572


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: May 21, 2005, 09:35:14 AM »

bredesen's ideology seems very similar to bill clinton's
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
« 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 0.065 seconds with 14 queries.