PDA

View Full Version : The Electoral Map Is A Dose Of Reality For The Republicans To Chew On



Mark III
05-04-2016, 10:24 AM
Republicans have a massive electoral map problem that has nothing to do with Donald Trump https://www.facebook.com/chris.cillizza







Politico reported today on a Florida poll (http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/florida/2016/05/8598048/florida-poll-republican-brand-damage-bolsters-clinton) conducted for a business group in the state that shows Hillary Clinton beating Donald Trump by 13 points and Ted Cruz by nine.


Why is that important? Because if Clinton wins Florida and carries the 19 states (plus D.C.) that have voted for the Democratic presidential nominee in each of the last six elections, she will be the 45th president. It's that simple.



Here's what that map would look like:
https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2016/05/Screen-Shot-2016-05-02-at-2.21.53-PM.png&w=1484

And here's the underlying math. If Clinton wins the 19 states (and D.C.) that every Democratic nominee has won from 1992 to 2012, she has 242 electoral votes. Add Florida's 29 and you get 271. Game over.


The Republican map — whether with Trump, Cruz or the ideal Republican nominee (Paul Ryan?) as the standard-bearer — is decidedly less friendly. There are 13 states that have gone for the GOP presidential nominee in each of the last six elections. But they only total 102 electorate votes. That means the eventual nominee has to find, at least, 168 more electoral votes to get to 270. Which is a hell of a lot harder than finding 28 electoral votes.


(http://cookpolitical.com/assets/public/documents/presidential-voting-by-state.pdf)https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2016/05/Screen-Shot-2016-05-02-at-2.30.17-PM.png&w=1484

Many Republicans — particularly in Washington — are already preparing to blame a loss this fall, which many of them view as inevitable, on the divisiveness of Trump. That's not entirely fair to Trump, though.


While his dismal numbers among women and Hispanics, to name two groups, don't help matters and could — in a worst-case scenario for Republicans — put states such as Arizona and even Utah in play for Democrats, the map problems that face the GOP have very, very little to do with Trump or even Cruz.

Instead they are, largely, demographic problems centered on the GOP's inability to win any large swath of nonwhite voters. New Mexico, a state in which almost half the population is Latino, is the ur-example here. In 2004, George W. Bush won the Land of Enchantment in his bid for a second term. (His margin over John Kerry was 588 votes.) Eight years later, Barack Obama won the state by 10 points over Mitt Romney; neither side targeted it in any meaningful way.







What has become increasingly clear is that any state with a large or growing nonwhite population has become more and more difficult for Republicans to win. Virginia and North Carolina, long Republican strongholds, have moved closer and closer to Democrats of late. (Obama won both states in 2008 and carried Virginia in 2012.)


At the same time as these states have grown friendlier to Democrats, there are very few states that are growing increasingly Republican. Wisconsin and Minnesota are two, but neither is moving rapidly in Republicans' favor just yet.
What you are left with then is an electoral map in which the Democratic nominee begins at a significant advantage over the Republican one.

continue article https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/02/republicans-have-a-massive-electoral-map-problem-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-donald-trump

Mark III
05-04-2016, 10:26 AM
If Clinton wins every state that has voted for the Democrat in all of the last 6 presidential elections + Florida, she wins.

That is what Trump is up against to start.

MMC
05-04-2016, 11:08 AM
:wink:

How Donald Trump scrambles the general election map The Electoral College landscape has been fairly stable over the past four presidential elections. Trump might change that.

The Electoral College landscape has been fairly stable over the past four presidential elections: 40 states have voted for the same party in every race since 2000. But Trump’s candidacy — and a unique base of support that’s carried him to victory in places as varied as Alabama and Massachusetts — is raising the prospect of a scrambled November landscape that features longtime Democratic strongholds in play and states that have been firmly Republican for a half-century in jeopardy.

But at the same time, there are fewer of these voters overall. Whites without a college degree made up just 36 percent of the electorate in 2012, according to exit polls. And a projection (http://cookpolitical.com/story/8608) from the Cook Political Report shows that number could fall to under one-third in 2016.

But consider the record turnout in GOP primaries and caucuses across the country this year — and the fact Trump has done best among working-class white voters. In the 13 states where Edison Research has conducted entrance or exit polls — all but solidly Democratic Vermont shattered set new high-water marks for turnout — Trump has performed better among white voters without a college degree in all 13, relative to his overall share of the vote.

In a two-candidate race, which battleground states could trend toward Trump? Overwhelmingly white states like Iowa (93 percent of 2012 voters there in 2012 were white, according to exit polls), New Hampshire (93 percent), Ohio (79 percent), Pennsylvania (78 percent) and Wisconsin (86 percent) top the list. Some, like Ohio, are traditional battlegrounds. Others, like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, have voted Democratic for decades at the presidential level.

Trump’s appeal to working-class whites is only half the story: Democrats have been rapidly shedding these voters over the past decade or so, and Clinton has especially struggled among them in the Democratic primaries and caucuses thus far. Most of the contests Bernie Sanders has won thus far have been in whiter states.

Beck said he wouldn't expect a Clinton-Trump race to scuttle Ohio’s bellwether status, but he said Trump could crack traditionally Democratic, though culturally conservative, areas of the state. A number of counties in eastern and southern Ohio voted twice for Bill Clinton — but flipped for George W. Bush and have continued trending more Republican, even as Obama carried the statewide vote in both 2008 and 2012.....snip~

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/trump-2016-general-election-map-220196#ixzz47hhe8JbO
Follow us: @politico on Twitter (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=bKDyiUp9mr3OhNab7jrHcU&u=politico) | Politico on Facebook (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bKDyiUp9mr3OhNab7jrHcU&u=Politico)

Adelaide
05-04-2016, 11:11 AM
I could be wrong but I remember watching a segment of news discussing Trump and that he is creating a higher voter turnout effect. I'm not sure if that will translate over to the general election, but Clinton is completely uninspiring so I think we can expect turnout for her to be less than optimal.

Captain Obvious
05-04-2016, 11:19 AM
Mark is shit-pants terrified of Trump.

lawl

domer76
05-04-2016, 11:24 AM
continue article https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/02/republicans-have-a-massive-electoral-map-problem-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-donald-trump

That map is generous to Drumpf. Colorado and New Mexico go to Clinton. Perhaps Virginia as well.

MMC
05-04-2016, 11:27 AM
More on how Trump can change up the Electoral Map.




How Trump vs. Clinton could reshape the electoral map.....


A prospective general election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton could significantly alter which states are in play this fall and heighten more than in any recent election the racial, class and gender divisions within the national electorate.

After successive campaigns in which President Obama expanded the Democrats’ electoral map options by focusing on fast-growing and increasingly diverse states, a 2016 race between Clinton and Trump could devolve principally into a pitched battle for the Rust Belt.

With a focus on trade issues and by tapping anti-establishment anger, Trump would seek to energize white working-class Americans, who Republicans believe have been on the sidelines in recent elections in substantial numbers. Trump would also attempt to peel away voters who have backed Democrats, a potentially harder task.

“If he drives big turnout increases with white voters, especially with white male voters, that has the potential to change the map,” said a veteran of Obama’s campaigns, who spoke anonymously in order to share current analysis of the fall campaign.

Republican Schmidt, however, warned Democrats that Trump could prove more appealing to minority voters, especially African Americans, than they assume. “He’s an asymmetric threat,” Schmidt said. “He fits into none of the conventions. He has a completely unorthodox style.”....snip~

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-trump-vs-clinton-would-reshape-the-electoral-map/2016/03/19/783a834c-ed35-11e5-b0fd-073d5930a7b7_story.html

birddog
05-04-2016, 01:31 PM
Trump will pick up a few blue states plus retain all the reds. Pa, NY, and Florida is his.