|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2020, 01:41:40 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)
  2050
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: 2050  (Read 3962 times)
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,558
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 23, 2006, 09:17:55 am »
« edited: September 24, 2006, 08:31:03 am by DownWithTheLeft »

Took some time and used 2000 numbers plus growth rates to figure out an approximate of electoral votes in 2050, here it is:

Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,558
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2006, 09:19:09 am »

R90= -5+
R50= -3 or 4
R30= -1 or 2
GRY= +0
B30= +1 or 2
B50= +3 or 4
B90= +5 or more
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,832
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2006, 03:22:33 pm »

Interesting, but of course states will not grow at the same rates for 60 years (stating the obvious).

I've always thought that it was interesting that only Washington and Oregon (and sort of California) are the only fast-growing states that have been mostly Democratic during their growth.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,558
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2006, 04:24:17 pm »

Interesting, but of course states will not grow at the same rates for 60 years (stating the obvious).

I've always thought that it was interesting that only Washington and Oregon (and sort of California) are the only fast-growing states that have been mostly Democratic during their growth.

Yes, but the 5 fastest growing all went for Bush in 04' (although NV should soon change)
Logged
Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,083
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: September 26, 2006, 10:03:18 am »

Interesting, but of course states will not grow at the same rates for 60 years (stating the obvious).

I've always thought that it was interesting that only Washington and Oregon (and sort of California) are the only fast-growing states that have been mostly Democratic during their growth.

Yes, but the 5 fastest growing all went for Bush in 04' (although NV should soon change)

The 5 fastest growing states are also becoming more democratic too.
Logged
ATFFL
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,756
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: September 26, 2006, 12:23:57 pm »
« Edited: September 26, 2006, 02:09:14 pm by Tredrick »

Interesting, but of course states will not grow at the same rates for 60 years (stating the obvious).

I've always thought that it was interesting that only Washington and Oregon (and sort of California) are the only fast-growing states that have been mostly Democratic during their growth.



Yes, but the 5 fastest growing all went for Bush in 04' (although NV should soon change)

The 5 fastest growing states are also becoming more democratic too.
What?

The top 5 in 2005 were (in order)
1. Nevada
2. Arizona
3. Idaho
4. Florida
5. Utah
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,638
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: September 26, 2006, 01:48:43 pm »

I think that also Virginia will gain at least one seat in the coming 50 years.
Logged
Colin
ColinW
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,692
Papua New Guinea


Political Matrix
E: 3.87, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: September 26, 2006, 07:03:10 pm »

Interesting, but of course states will not grow at the same rates for 60 years (stating the obvious).

I've always thought that it was interesting that only Washington and Oregon (and sort of California) are the only fast-growing states that have been mostly Democratic during their growth.



Yes, but the 5 fastest growing all went for Bush in 04' (although NV should soon change)

The 5 fastest growing states are also becoming more democratic too.
What?

The top 5 in 2005 were (in order)
1. Nevada
2. Arizona
3. Idaho
4. Florida
5. Utah

Well I don't know about you ATFFL but I'm certain that Idaho and Utah are thrusting leftward as we speak.
Logged
TomC
TCash101
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,901


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: September 28, 2006, 10:23:31 pm »
« Edited: September 28, 2006, 10:25:08 pm by VP TCash101 »

Interesting, but of course states will not grow at the same rates for 60 years (stating the obvious).

I've always thought that it was interesting that only Washington and Oregon (and sort of California) are the only fast-growing states that have been mostly Democratic during their growth.



Yes, but the 5 fastest growing all went for Bush in 04' (although NV should soon change)

The 5 fastest growing states are also becoming more democratic too.
What?

The top 5 in 2005 were (in order)
1. Nevada
2. Arizona
3. Idaho
4. Florida
5. Utah

Well I don't know about you ATFFL but I'm certain that Idaho and Utah are thrusting leftward as we speak.

Idaho and Utah have nowhere to go but left. Not that they'll go Democratic-, maybe from wingnut right to patrician right, but really, nowhere to go but left.
Logged
Platypus
hughento
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,457
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: September 29, 2006, 09:02:46 am »

your colours are wrong for Nebraska, Alabama and Maine.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,558
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 01, 2006, 05:07:56 pm »

your colours are wrong for Nebraska, Alabama and Maine.

I described my problem w/NE and ME, idk about AL, I think I messed up the map and the number should be like 7 or 8
Logged
Colin
ColinW
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,692
Papua New Guinea


Political Matrix
E: 3.87, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 19, 2006, 06:28:53 pm »


The patrician right? I didn't know the Republican Party included Roman noblemen.
Logged
KEmperor
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,453
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 19, 2006, 06:33:14 pm »


The patrician right? I didn't know the Republican Party included Roman noblemen.

You mean you aren't one of us?

SPQR 4 life!
Logged
nini2287
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,624


Political Matrix
E: 2.77, S: -3.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 21, 2006, 05:29:55 pm »

Let's up PA doesn't lose any more or else PA-13 won't exist!
Logged
TeePee4Prez
Flyers2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,489


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 22, 2006, 02:08:32 am »

Let's up PA doesn't lose any more or else PA-13 won't exist!

I think the Southeast and Poconos will grow and we might actually see another CD in our area.  The rest of the state, you will see some very large CD's in area.  PA is taking a lot of NJ, NY, and even some MD/DC transplants so we won't be so bad.
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