WA/NE-Emerson (pre-debate): Clinton +6 in WA, Trump +27 in NE (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 26, 2024, 10:54:00 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  WA/NE-Emerson (pre-debate): Clinton +6 in WA, Trump +27 in NE (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: WA/NE-Emerson (pre-debate): Clinton +6 in WA, Trump +27 in NE  (Read 3137 times)
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,866
United States


« on: September 28, 2016, 05:15:07 PM »

The Washington Senate result is 48-41 Murary.  The primary was about 59-36, so...no.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,866
United States


« Reply #1 on: September 29, 2016, 05:08:34 AM »

If WA is so close(5.8% margins). it could be #battlegroundOregon as I said before? Wink

I think the days of Oregon being only 0-2 points left of national margin  (Bush '00 and '04) are long gone.  Portland metro is just too big vs the rest of the state now.

Even with a absolute best case scenario for Trump (winning +5 nationally), my guess is he still loses OR by 2-3 points.

If Trump wins a squeaker nationally, I think OR will still be Clinton +6 to +8.  100% vote by mail here helps keep that dominant Portland D turnout up in all scenarios.

Portland metro growth doesn't account for most of Oregon's swing.  The Portland metro counties went from 55.8% of the state's votes in 2004 to 57.0% in 2012.  Oregon voted D+4.2 in 2004.  If you simply account for the vote growth of the Metro area versus the rest of the state, without any change in voting patterns within either portion, Oregon would have voted only D+4.5 in 2012.  It voted D+12.1, so obviously an increasingly Metro-heavy electorate is nowhere near the main factor.

Instead, the shift was because voters statewide became more Democratic.  Non-metro Oregon moved from R+9.2 in 2004 to R+3.2 in 2012, for a swing of D+6.0.  Metro Oregon moved from D+21.9 to D+31.3, for a swing of D+9.5.  It was a change in what the votes were, not where the votes came from, that drove Oregon's shift toward the Democrats.

Also, I know you weren't claiming otherwise, but Oregon has voted entirely vote-by-mail since 1999, before the close 2000 and 2004 elections.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,866
United States


« Reply #2 on: September 29, 2016, 01:09:41 PM »
« Edited: September 29, 2016, 02:13:30 PM by Alcon »

Portland metro growth doesn't account for most of Oregon's swing.

No, I didn't say that.  Almost nothing to do with population growth.  But everything to do with the size of Portland's vote and the degree to which it goes Democrat.  Perhaps stated more clearly, Democrats are running up much larger margins in the Portland metro area than they did 20 years ago, too much for the rest of the state to make up for.

Look at Multnomah county, the most urban county in the state and the highest raw turnout.  It's gone from voting for Clinton in the high 50% range to Obama in the high 70% range.

Same for Lane county, which is dominated by Eugene.  Gore won it +11, Obama won it +27 and +23.  There are pockets of rural Oregon that went about 5 points more for Obama than Bush, but for the most part, rural Oregon is just as Republican as it was 20 years ago.

And whatever definition you're using for "non-metro" seems likely broken.  The next biggest areas of D gains (behind urban Portland) in Oregon are Eugene and the Portland suburbs/exurbs, like Beaverton, Hillsboro, Wilsonville, etc.  Since it appears you don't live here, I'll forgive you for not understanding how ridiculous it would be to define Eugene or Hillsboro as non-metro areas.

A few things:

1. I wasn't talking about population growth, nor was I taking you to mean population growth.  I was talking about growth in votes.  I realize just using "growth" in the first sentence didn't specify which sort of growth, but everything I talked about after that was growth in vote count, and was explicitly identified as such.

2. You wrote, "Portland metro is just too big vs the rest of the state now."  You apparently meant that the Democratic vote shares are just too big vs. the rest of the state now, but that's not what you wrote.

3. I started the post referring to the Portland metro.  Why would you think my subsequent references to "Metro" would include Eugene?  I also have no idea why you think I excluded Beaverton, Hillsboro, and Wilsonville.  The numbers I cited for "Metro Portland" were the counties of Multnomah, Washington, and Clackamas.  Also, while Wilsonville itself has swung pretty D, Clackamas overall has been a drag on Democratic margins in the state, considering it's much more Republican than state average and has had a smaller swing than state average (D+4.95), mostly due to population growth in the county's more conservative areas.

But since it doesn't appear you know what you're talking about, I'll forgive you for your unnecessary condescension.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,866
United States


« Reply #3 on: September 29, 2016, 02:37:42 PM »

But since it doesn't appear you know what you're talking about, I'll forgive you for your unnecessary condescension.

Okay, good luck with your thread.  Hope it brings you some enjoyment.

I don't even know what you're trying to say, that I tried to kick you out of the thread?  Because no, I'd welcome a reply.

Otherwise, idk, that's some pretty vague passive-aggression you have going there.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,866
United States


« Reply #4 on: September 29, 2016, 07:55:20 PM »

I look forward to moving back home to Clackamas County and trying to do my part in turning it from its stubbornly Republican (compared to Washington and Multnomah) ways.

Clackamas is a trip, and  although I still don't feel like I have a total grasp on it, you have this weird scene where one of the wealthiest cities in Oregon Lake Oswego becoming heavily Democratic in '08 and '12, similar to trends in places like Gladstone and West Linn, and also old blue collar working-class places like Oregon City and Milwaukie....

Even if you adjust out the "rural" parts of the county much of the Republican base these days is actually in fast growing expensive exurban communities like Happy Valley and Damascus, and the Uninc areas around them....

Thinking its more like upper-middle class types that want "more house" and longer commute, since it doesn't appear that Blue Collar types are abandoning the Dem Party in Clack. and there has been Dem growth in wealthy and upper-middle class cities closer to the City.

Thoughts???

Oh, I certainly agree. It's almost like Clark County in that way, I think.

That being said, I feel like Happy Valley has become a little more like Lake Oswego over the past 10 years or so--granola wealthy gradually replacing the typical suburban wealthy.

Do you know how Estacada votes? I lived in Carver for several years (now part of Damascus, but sort of its own entity), and the stretch along 212/224 from 82nd drive all the way out to Estacada always struck me as a pretty typically blue collar Republican stronghold. But this was about 10 years ago now. And the area along Sunnyside and near Clackamas High School just north of there is more suburban-feeling... I dunno, the whole northwestern (populated) part of Clackamas County feels like a mix of very, very different classes, styles, etc.

Estacada was a super-narrow Obama win in 2012.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,866
United States


« Reply #5 on: September 29, 2016, 08:15:13 PM »

Estacada was a super-narrow Obama win in 2012.

I guess that doesn't surprise me, really. Though I haven't been back that way for quite a while, if it hasn't changed too much, I'd expect that to be one of the few places in the Portland metro area to swing significantly towards Trump this cycle. What do you all think?

I think there's a good chance.  Very low rates of college education but not really low-income.  Very strong area for Trump in the primary, and a 2-to-1 win for Sanders.  Besides the population not being particularly old, it seems like a relatively good area for a Trump swing.
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 0.027 seconds with 11 queries.