Page 1 of 72 123451151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 1783

Thread: U.S. 2014/2016 Election Thread

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default U.S. 2014/2016 Election Thread

    The 2014/2016 U.S. Election Thread!


    I can hear you all groaning with excitement! It's that time of year again, for American citizens to be inundated with annoying television commercials and tacky yard signs as the months widdle away toward only 40% go to the ballot box!

    Before the start of the thread I would like to give you several links to help you out.
    Nate Silver, pollster that uses several confusing equations to help tell how elections will turn out
    Washington Post, a great go to source for up to date US Political news and national topics
    Real Clear Politics, a great quick read if you are looking for politics/polls
    Cook Political Report, a great way to get a partisan rating of a district or state, these ratings give a idea of the built in advantage a certain politician has when running for reelection

    Please everyone feel free to join in with their picks, guesses, and news updates but be sure to give a reasonable explanation on why you think a person or party will win, or why that news update is relevant.


    Political Maps ( Users )

    YourFavoriteUser: Senate ( GOP +4 )
    YourFavoriteUser: Governor ( Dem +2 )

    John Madden: Senate ( GOP + 1 to Push )
    John Madden: Governor ( Dem + 7 )

    Political Maps ( Media/Pundits )

    Washington Post: Senate ( GOP + 8 )
    Last edited by BigLutz; 7th May 2014 at 12:55 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Creeping on your boyfriend
    Posts
    1,781

    Default

    Yeah, so I approved this thread despite me/sogeking closing the last one.

    I'm going to be plain, this thread is going to be watched over constantly by myself. There was too much democrat v. republican ******** happening in other threads for my tastes (I mean come on guys I'm Canadian :P). If you guys **** up this thread and get it closed I won't be happy and there's going to be bans for everybody involved. I'm not being nice right now but there have been two threads in this section closed because of petty bickering so I think this is well warranted.

    In the words of RuPaul: Good luck and don't **** it up.

    Star-Lord

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    978

    Default

    before we really get started ITT I'd like to add just one more link to the mix: the Princeton Election Consortium, headed by one Sam Wang

    their methodology's actually openly out there (that's to be expected, being a blog run by Princeton academics) and they managed to get the 2004, 2008 and 2012 EV results exactly right, as well as 2006 and 2012's Congressional results, and their errors in 2010 were about the size of Silver's
    Last edited by John Madden; 15th April 2014 at 12:29 PM.
    last.fm
    facebook


    OFFICIAL ATTACK HUCKSTER OF SPP
    If you see this sig in the debate forum, you're definitely doing something wrong.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,470

    Default

    All right, I'll get things started. I've compiled my predictions for senate here and my predictions for governor here. I expect the GOP to gain for seats in the senate, picking up Arkansas, West Virginia, South Dakota, and Montana, mostly because the map is ridiculously GOP favored ( There are 7 D-held seats up in Romney states and only one R-held seat in an Obama state), but the fact that the president's party has a tendency to take a beating in the second midterm and Obama's below water approval ratings aren't exactly making things easier. On the other hand, I have Democrats gaining three governors seats (Maine, Pennsylvania, and Florida), while only losing Arkansas, for a net change of D+2. The governor's races are going to go a lot better than the senate for the D's for a couple of reasons. Republicans have to defend a number of unpopular governors, many in Obama states. Even Georgia, Kansas, and South Carolina are potentially in play, thanks to their respective governors horrible approval ratings. Additionally, governors races are dominated by local issues, so national politics will have much less of an effect here than in congressional races.

    Regarding 2016, I'm going to state the obvious: Hillary is the clear frontrunner. There's nobody in the Democratic primary that can touch her, and she leads all of her potential Republican opponents. That being said, I don't think a Hillary presidency is inevitable. Polls right now mean nothing, and only really indicate name recognition. Besides, history has shown that it's extremely difficult for one party to win three elections in a row. Even if Hillary looks strong now, Democrat fatigue and Obama's approval can doom her.

    Now that I've given my own long analysis, I should probably give my personal preference for 2016. Unlike most Democrats, I'm not #ready4hillary. In fact, the prospect of a Hillary Clinton presidency absolutely terrifies me. I don't think I could ever support anyone on record voting for both the Iraq War and PATRIOT act. And looking at her long political career, what has she actually accomplished? She was a do-nothing senator and the highlight of her tenure as First Lady was a botched attempt at health care reform. She wasn't really that great of a SoS either. As someone on the left so has been severely disappointed by Obama, Hillary only looks like she'll be worse.

    Also she tried to ban violent video games ew.

    So, who do I support? Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. The independent senator from Vermont, Sanders is the only democratic socialist serving in American government and without a doubt the closest to me ideologically. He's one of the few people who have expressed any interest in challenging Hillary from the left, and he brings many of the same criticisms of her as I did. Even if he has next to no chance, a contested primary is healthy for the party and no one candidate should be allowed to waltz into the nomination unquestioned like so many seem fine with Hillary doing. If Sanders does end up running, I'll be proud to support him.
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YourFavoriteUser View Post
    Regarding 2016, I'm going to state the obvious: Hillary is the clear frontrunner. There's nobody in the Democratic primary that can touch her, and she leads all of her potential Republican opponents. That being said, I don't think a Hillary presidency is inevitable. Polls right now mean nothing, and only really indicate name recognition. Besides, history has shown that it's extremely difficult for one party to win three elections in a row. Even if Hillary looks strong now, Democrat fatigue and Obama's approval can doom her.
    I am curious, as this question will come up if she runs, what are her qualifications? Alot of the main things she did as Secretary of State have largely blown up like Russia and Libyia.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    I am curious, as this question will come up if she runs, what are her qualifications? Alot of the main things she did as Secretary of State have largely blown up like Russia and Libyia.
    Honestly, I have no idea what qualified her. Her senate career was about as notable as John Boozman's and her tenure as SoS was rocky to say the least. I know a lot of people respect her active role as First Lady, but what did she accomplish there anyway? Hillary care? Lol. Laura Bush and Michelle Obama were both probably much better First Ladies.
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    I am curious, as this question will come up if she runs, what are her qualifications? Alot of the main things she did as Secretary of State have largely blown up like Russia and Libyia.
    What I'm curious about is, who her opponent will be.

    Up until a few months ago, the only possible GOP contender that most pundits considered able to challenge her was Christie.

    But not anymore.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    What I'm curious about is, who her opponent will be.

    Up until a few months ago, the only possible GOP contender that most pundits considered able to challenge her was Christie.

    But not anymore.
    The GOP has a rather wide field of candidates that have been prepped over the last few years.

    Jeb Bush
    Chris Christie
    Marco Rubio
    Bobby Jindal
    Scott Walker
    Paul Ryan
    Ted Cruz
    Rand Paul

    The list goes on and on, the GOP has spent years prepping a list of young experienced candidates to take on a national stage, call it a Farm Team to use baseball analogies. That may pay dividends in the next few presidential elections.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    What I'm curious about is, who her opponent will be.

    Up until a few months ago, the only possible GOP contender that most pundits considered able to challenge her was Christie.

    But not anymore.
    Jeb Bush is probably the frontrunner right now. The other two establishment candidates (Walker and Christie), have been plagued by recent scandals. Bush has a fairly decent record as governor and could easily secure the key swing seat as Florida. While right now the GOP field is so crowded it could be anyone, if someone put a gun to my head and asked me to guess the nominee, I'd say we'd be looking at a Bush vs. Clinton matchup
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,340

    Default

    With due respect, YFU, Jeb's very name is anathema. Even his mother has advised him not to run. The memories of the two wars his brother started because of WMD that didn't exist, the deaths they caused and the fortune it cost, are still lingering. The name "Bush" is not a name that will likely be successful in politics again.

    Of course, if you use the "gun to my head" analogy, I guess I'd have to say so. I'd still say Jeb would lose, however.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    The memories of the two wars his brother started because of WMD that didn't exist
    Afghanistan was because of WMDs?

    Mind you if luggage from a previous administration is bad, then wouldn't Clinton's time as Sec of State hurt her?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    978

    Default

    Going to make an extremely preliminary 2014 prediction for the Senate and governor races (I'll make a preliminary House prediction when the Bayesian Crew makes theirs).

    Senate: R+1 to push (Rs gain South Dakota and West Virginia by wide margins, Ds barely gain Kentucky and Georgia, everything else is a hold - I'm not as sure about Montana as anything else on either side). 114th Congress: 54-46 or 55-45.

    Governors: D+7 (reverse-2010: Dems gain Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island; Arizona, Arkansas, New Mexico, Ohio and Wisconsin all too close to call on election night, with the most probable switches being Arizona and Arkansas). Governorship lean stands at 28-22 going into 2015.

    Senate race map
    Governor race map

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    Mind you if luggage from a previous administration is bad, then wouldn't Clinton's time as Sec of State hurt her?
    Only if you expect Benghazi to be a major issue in 2016, as I feel the situation in Ukraine has exploded a bit too recently for Clinton's actions at State to have been a major contributor in most people's eyes.
    Last edited by John Madden; 15th April 2014 at 8:22 PM.
    last.fm
    facebook


    OFFICIAL ATTACK HUCKSTER OF SPP
    If you see this sig in the debate forum, you're definitely doing something wrong.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Madden View Post
    Going to make an extremely preliminary 2014 prediction for the Senate and governor races (I'll make a preliminary House prediction when the Bayesian Crew makes theirs).

    Senate: R+1 to push (Rs gain South Dakota and West Virginia by wide margins, Ds barely gain Kentucky and Georgia, everything else is a hold - I'm not as sure about Montana as anything else on either side). 114th Congress: 54-46 or 55-45.

    Governors: D+7 (reverse-2010: Dems gain Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island; Arizona, Arkansas, New Mexico, Ohio and Wisconsin all too close to call on election night, with the most probable switches being Arizona and Arkansas). Governorship lean stands at 28-22 going into 2015.

    Senate race map
    Governor race map
    The Republican governor of Iowa is extremely popular and leads all of his challengers in the polls by wide margins. It's very unlikely we take him out.

    And Rhode island is already held by a Democrat
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Madden View Post

    Only if you expect Benghazi to be a major issue in 2016, as I feel the situation in Ukraine has exploded a bit too recently for Clinton's actions at State to have been a major contributor in most people's eyes.
    Maybe not Benghazi specifically but the pure lawlessness in Libya after our actions there

    As for Ukraine remember that picture of the reset button that thing will be in every campaign ad against her as long as Russia remains a problem. It doesn't matter that Ukraine wasn't a problem while she was there, the picture is just deadly in terms of image and a quick sound bite instead of a more nuanced perspective

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    978

    Default

    Rhode Island is held by an independent, and I'm not entirely convinced that Branstad's going to be particularly strong going into the fall (mainly because he keeps showing up on the wrong side of 45%)

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    Maybe not Benghazi specifically but the pure lawlessness in Libya after our actions there
    I'm gonna be blunt here - I don't expect this to be much of a factor, solely because it doesn't involve Americans getting shot at.

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    As for Ukraine remember that picture of the reset button that thing will be in every campaign ad against her as long as Russia remains a problem. It doesn't matter that Ukraine wasn't a problem while she was there, the picture is just deadly in terms of image and a quick sound bite instead of a more nuanced perspective
    I can see that this might be a problem, but she can probably easily throw Kerry under the bus to avoid any real repercussions.
    Last edited by John Madden; 15th April 2014 at 8:37 PM.
    last.fm
    facebook


    OFFICIAL ATTACK HUCKSTER OF SPP
    If you see this sig in the debate forum, you're definitely doing something wrong.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Madden View Post
    Rhode Island is held by an independent, and I'm not entirely convinced that Branstad's going to be particularly strong going into the fall (mainly because he keeps showing up on the wrong side of 45%)
    Chafee joined the Democratic party last May
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,340

    Default

    Okay, Lutz, let's address all of those "potential candidates":


    Jeb Bush: The reason I already claimed.


    Chris Christie: One word: Bridgegate. His popularity is falling like a brick.


    Marco Rubio: Won't even be nominated. The more ultra-conservative GOPs are sure to remember this:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_4569472.html

    Rubio is actually helping the Democrats far more than any actual Democrat in Florida.


    Scott Walker. Scandals are plaguing him too, and stuff like this:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5147443.html

    ...are making him look like a fool.


    Bobby Jindal: He opposes anti-discrimination laws: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_4569472.html

    Defended Phil Robertson's comparison of homosexuality to bestiality: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/search...q=Bobby+Jindal

    And I'll let this one speak for itself: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_4921083.html

    You must admit, he has no chance.


    Ted Cruz: No comment


    Rand Paul: One word: Plagiarism. (You people complain that Mr. Obama uses a teleprompter, but at least he doesn't copy other people's work.) Anyone with an MA knows that this act is an unforgivable crime in academia, and all Ms. Clinton has to do is mention it in her ads. Not to mention, Paul wants pilots to carry guns, and made a racist comment aimed at Mr. Obama shown here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_4994953.html


    Paul Ryan: Have you even read Ryan's budget plan? Not only did both he and the rest of the GOP know it would never be voted on by the Senate - let alone signed by the President - but it simply would not have worked. There were no provisions in the plan at all to pay for any of the initiatives. Ryan is hailed by the GOP as a "financial genius", and yet, he has done nothing to show it.

    Besides, he has history against him. Not once has a failed VP candidate won the Presidency. Not once.


    I notice you didn't mention Janet Brewer, another name that is often brought up, but I'll mention her anyway. the fact that she even considered signing that legalized discrimination bill makes her reviled in even her own state. She's out too.


    I've given my reasons.

    What baggage does Ms. Clinton have? All I've heard from the GOP is her age and Benghazi, a phony scandal which is embarrassing the Republicans more than ever now.
    Last edited by Maedar; 15th April 2014 at 9:35 PM.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    978

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YourFavoriteUser View Post
    Chafee joined the Democratic party last May
    It's still technically a Democratic gain from how things stood in 2010 :P

    (Also, I'm going to go ahead and say the GOP nominee in 2016 is going to be one of Bush, Christie, or Ryan.)
    last.fm
    facebook


    OFFICIAL ATTACK HUCKSTER OF SPP
    If you see this sig in the debate forum, you're definitely doing something wrong.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    Marco Rubio: Won't even be nominated. The more ultra-conservative GOPs are sure to remember this:
    Sort of like how the far right stopped McCain and Romney from winning the nomination?
    Besides, he has history against him. Not once has a failed VP candidate won the Presidency. Not once.
    Except for those four times
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...election,_1920
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,340

    Default

    Warren G. Harding was never a candidate for VP.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    Warren G. Harding was a successful VP candidate. Under Coolidge. I said failed VP candidate.
    Check James Cox's running mate
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

  22. #22
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,340

    Default

    Touche, but FDR had a few things in his favor.

    One. Harding took the blame for the Great Depression, so likely, most people regretted not voting for Cox.

    Second, during the twelve year interim, FDR was a moderately successful governor of New York, and had made a name for himself in the Democrat Party, distancing himself from Cox.

    Paul Ryan has not done that. He has "Romney" written all over him, and it shows.

    The problem is, YFU, I'm starting to wonder if Ryan was any better a choice for the position than Sarah Palin was. You saw his budget plan. It was wishful thinking. Not only would it never happen, the GOP would be in a crisis if it actually was passed, because they could NOT have made it happen. Ryan just doesn't know how to do his job.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    978

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    One. Harding took the blame for the Great Depression, so likely, most people regretted not voting for Cox.
    well, not really - it was a combination of people blaming Hoover for the Depression and people blaming Hoover's attempts at stimulus for the economy continuing to worsen

    Harding and Coolidge didn't really play into anything as far as public opinion c. 1932 went
    last.fm
    facebook


    OFFICIAL ATTACK HUCKSTER OF SPP
    If you see this sig in the debate forum, you're definitely doing something wrong.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    Chris Christie: One word: Bridgegate. His popularity is falling like a brick.
    Do you honestly think people will care about it in 2016? Especially if it is used in the primary season and becomes a non topic by the time the election rolls around?

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    Marco Rubio: Won't even be nominated. The more ultra-conservative GOPs are sure to remember this:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_4569472.html

    Rubio is actually helping the Democrats far more than any actual Democrat in Florida.
    John McCain and Mitt Romney say hi about being moderate Republicans

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    Scott Walker. Scandals are plaguing him too, and stuff like this:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5147443.html

    ...are making him look like a fool.
    Really? You attribute that to him? Something he has no control over?

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    Bobby Jindal: He opposes anti-discrimination laws: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_4569472.html

    Defended Phil Robertson's comparison of homosexuality to bestiality: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/search...q=Bobby+Jindal

    And I'll let this one speak for itself: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_4921083.html

    You must admit, he has no chance.
    Kind of like Obama being connected to a terrorist and a rabid preacher? Yeah no way that guy could be elected.

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    Rand Paul: One word: Plagiarism. (You people complain that Mr. Obama uses a teleprompter, but at least he doesn't copy other people's work.) Anyone with an MA knows that this act is an unforgivable crime in academia, and all Ms. Clinton has to do is mention it in her ads. Not to mention, Paul wants pilots to carry guns, and made a racist comment aimed at Mr. Obama shown here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_4994953.html
    First: How was that a racist comment?
    Second: No one cares about a plagiarism scandal

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    Paul Ryan: Have you even read Ryan's budget plan? Not only did both he and the rest of the GOP know it would never be voted on by the Senate - let alone signed by the President - but it simply would not have worked. There were no provisions in the plan at all to pay for any of the initiatives. Ryan is hailed by the GOP as a "financial genius", and yet, he has done nothing to show it.
    You realize he is one of the best to describe his plan, and his knowledge and smarts have even been acknowledged by Obama

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    I notice you didn't mention Janet Brewer, another name that is often brought up, but I'll mention her anyway. the fact that she even considered signing that legalized discrimination bill makes her reviled in even her own state. She's out too.
    No one will care, especially in the primary


    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    I've given my reasons.

    What baggage does Ms. Clinton have? All I've heard from the GOP is her age and Benghazi, a phony scandal which is embarrassing the Republicans more than ever now.
    Libya? Russia? Just to name two?

    Quote Originally Posted by Maedar View Post
    The problem is, YFU, I'm starting to wonder if Ryan was any better a choice for the position than Sarah Palin was. You saw his budget plan. It was wishful thinking. Not only would it never happen, the GOP would be in a crisis if it actually was passed, because they could NOT have made it happen. Ryan just doesn't know how to do his job.
    If "Not knowing how to produce a budget" was a killer for the Presidency, then Obama would never have been reelected. How many of the White House budgets have actually passed Congress? I believe the last few have been DOA with almost no one, not even Democrats voting for it.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    Do you honestly think people will care about it in 2016? Especially if it is used in the primary season and becomes a non topic by the time the election rolls around?
    It's entirely possible that Bridgeghazi could derail his governorship and keep him from running altogether. If things get worse for Christie, it's entirely possible the legislature impeaches him or he ends up being recalled. This is all hypothetical, of course, but to say this scandal hasn't significantly hurt Christie's chances in 2016 is simply naive.

    Anyway, this is how I'd rank the GOP primary, based on who I think is most likely to win the nomination:
    1. Jeb Bush
    2. Scott Walker
    3. Rand Paul
    4. Chris Christie
    5. Mike Huckabee
    6. Marco Rubio
    7. Ted Cruz
    8. Paul Ryan
    9. Rick Santorum
    10. Rob Portman
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

Page 1 of 72 123451151 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •