2018 - Elections and Trends

[GopherRock 1765]

21 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Somebody help me here - 2020 has - what?  11 Dems and 21 Repubs trying to hold seats in the middle of the Trump impeachment hearings?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2020

Highlights include:

- Special election in Arizona for John McCain's seat 

- Doug Jones defending in Alabama

- Multiple high profile Republicans have their seats up, including but not limited to McConnell, Collins, Gardner (CO), Ernst (IA), Perdue (GA), Tillis in the NC seat that has flipped every time it's on the schedule, Graham, and Alexander

[Bama Chick 28596]

lol Someone took their defeat a little hard.

“YOU CAN’T FIRE ME! I QUIT!”

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

9 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

You live in Cypress I assume. You should move 

Two days in a row I have liked and Icono post. The world must be ending. 

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

10 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

lol Someone took their defeat a little hard.

“YOU CAN’T FIRE ME! I QUIT!”
 

Yeah...I heard about this morning. Jesus god. 

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

Least them lil' monsters ain't part of that there caravan or nothin'

[Buzzrock 14920]

In more important news, you can now order alcohol at a restaurant at 11am on Sunday in Georgia. #realissues

[G650 14256]

9 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

In more important news, you can now order alcohol at a restaurant at 11am on Sunday in Georgia. #realissues

Why not all day like non-reconstruction era States?

[Js1 85334]

So, predictive of nothing, but if you look at U.S. House popular vote by State and compare to the Electoral College Map

D - 314 (Democrats recapture Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania; Iowa and FL lean Dem; 1 of Maine's electoral votes leans D)

R - 224 (1 of Nebraska's electoral votes leans R; NC, AZ and Texas lean R)

**Per Silver, if you shift the vote 6 points towards the GOP (more what you get in a presidential year) - D 278, R 260 (PA/MI/WI flip back).  This is the likely path.  Do not go through the Sunbelt or you will lose.

[BrickHorn 18233]

1 minute ago, Js1 said:

So, predictive of nothing, but if you look at U.S. House popular vote by State and compare to the Electoral College Map

D - 314 (Democrats recapture Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania; Iowa and FL lean Dem; 1 of Maine's electoral votes leans D)

R - 224 (1 of Nebraska's electoral votes leans R; NC, AZ and Texas lean R)

**Per Silver, if you shift the vote 6 points towards the GOP (more what you get in a presidential year) - D 278, R 260 (PA/MI/WI flip back).  This is the likely path.  Do not go through the Sunbelt or you will lose.

Interesting.  What if you shift all the points to the GOP, because tyranny and suspension of free elections? 

[HenryJames 66052]

 

[Js1 85334]

Just now, HenryJames said:

 

Out of all the 2017 Special Elections for House that the Democrats lost, THIS ONE was the one the Democrats flipped in 2018.  And the best one of them all, I think. 

[gmr548 16580]

So, predictive of nothing, but if you look at U.S. House popular vote by State and compare to the Electoral College Map

D - 314 (Democrats recapture Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania; Iowa and FL lean Dem; 1 of Maine's electoral votes leans D)

R - 224 (1 of Nebraska's electoral votes leans R; NC, AZ and Texas lean R)

**Per Silver, if you shift the vote 6 points towards the GOP (more what you get in a presidential year) - D 278, R 260 (PA/MI/WI flip back).  This is the likely path.  Do not go through the Sunbelt or you will lose.

Do agree that working to take back MI, WI, and PA is the easiest path for Ds. Should be obvious - they lost by less than 100k cumulatove votes in a perfect storm scenario and the numbers are looking better for them these days. PA in particular should swing back without much work. Philly Democrats will not make the mistake of taking their state for granted again.

 

Chasing AZ, GA, and especially TX in 2020 are pipe dreams. I don't even think you can consider FL or IA anything more than a tossup, and I think R leans are more appropriate.

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[Aqua Buddha 14596]

Depending on the candidate, they might have an easier time in Texas than Ohio and I'm being serious.  Romney got 57%, Trump got 52%, and Cruz got 51%.  GOP vote total was basically flat in all of those races at 4.5, although Cruz was slightly less.  Democratic total vote:

2012 -- 3.3M

2016 -- 3.8M

2018 -- 4M

If the GOP holds flat to down like it did in those three elections and the Democrats increase their total count by 10%, Texas is then a tossup.  It's interesting to me that the GOP vote count has a hard ceiling.  Didn't know that until I looked.

[Huckleberry 32859]

Looked up some stuff just to see the variation. Keep in mind that there were uncontested races in places, the more local the race type the more uncontested races of course. I got data from here.

Total votes per party in Texas U.S. Senate election:

Republican - 4,241,098 (50.9%)
Democrat - 4,019,058 (48.3%)
Others - 65,178 (0.8%)

Total votes per party in Texas U.S. House elections:

Republican - 4,117,820 (50.5%)
Democrat - 3,828,052 (46.9%)
Others - 213,973 (2.6%)

Total votes per party in Texas State House elections:

Republican - 4,043,115 (52.5%)
Democrat - 3,585,231 (46.5%)
Others - 76,664 (1.0%)

Edited November 8, 2018 by Huckleberry

[RayDog 682]

8 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Depending on the candidate, they might have an easier time in Texas than Ohio and I'm being serious.  Romney got 57%, Trump got 52%, and Cruz got 51%.  GOP vote total was basically flat in all of those races at 4.5, although Cruz was slightly less.  Democratic total vote:

2012 -- 3.3M

2016 -- 3.8M

2018 -- 4M

If the GOP holds flat to down like it did in those three elections and the Democrats increase their total count by 10%, Texas is then a tossup.  It's interesting to me that the GOP vote count has a hard ceiling.  Didn't know that until I looked.

Republican voters are dying off as fast as they are being replaced. The demographic shift is about 3% every 2 years toward the Democrats. 2024 was and still is the real target date for the switch, unless the Democrats have a really great candidate.

[Js1 85334]

17 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Depending on the candidate, they might have an easier time in Texas than Ohio and I'm being serious.  Romney got 57%, Trump got 52%, and Cruz got 51%.  GOP vote total was basically flat in all of those races at 4.5, although Cruz was slightly less.  Democratic total vote:

2012 -- 3.3M

2016 -- 3.8M

2018 -- 4M

If the GOP holds flat to down like it did in those three elections and the Democrats increase their total count by 10%, Texas is then a tossup.  It's interesting to me that the GOP vote count has a hard ceiling.  Didn't know that until I looked.

I don't disagree with Texas > Ohio.  Ohio looks like it's going the way of Missouri.  Hard right and it ain't stopping.

[Huckleberry 32859]

Regarding 2020 and the midwest votes, I think it's basically a certainty that the tariffs are pulled back in the summer of 2020 and victory is declared in the trade war with China.

The victory part will be 100% bullshit, of course, but that's the obvious political play.

[kevwun 15787]

It will be like thanking the person strangling you for stopping right before you died.

[Huckleberry 32859]

Well that and the part where millions of voters are dumb enough to think "but he would never do it again."

[Js1 85334]

Also, my absolute hope, and this applies to many of the Texans in TX-21, TX-22, etc....

Jon Ossoff started building an infrastructure in his special election loss in 2017 in GA-6. Where there was no infrastructure.

Lucy McBath was given something to start off with and flipped it a year later.

 

Kosper and Kulkarni built an infrastructure in 21 and 22.  The 2020 candidates have something to start with.  Absolutely flippable. 

[Brisketexan 105136]

1 minute ago, RayDog said:

Republican voters are dying off as fast as they are being replaced. The demographic shift is about 3% every 2 years toward the Democrats. 2024 was and still is the real target date for the switch, unless the Democrats have a really great candidate.

3% is too high.  It's closer to 2% (but see my numbers below...maybe I'm wrong).  Here's the way I looked at the current spread:

When the GOP runs a strong candidate, and the Dems run a shitty one, the spread is around 12% (see Abbott v. Valdez).

When the GOP runs a shitty/unlikable candidate, and the Dems run a good one (or even a "good enough" one), the spread is around 3% to 4% (See Cruz (2.8%), Patrick (4.1%), Paxton (3.2%)).

When it's a generic GOP candidate vs. a generic Dem candidate (the example I use is Supreme Court races, because nobody knows ANYTHING about those folks other than the letter next to their name), its 6% to 7%.  SO, in a high-turnout election, the current generic R to D gap in Texas is around 7%.  Last election, the gap in SCOTX races was 13% to 16% (wow, that surprises me - and WOW, it was even bigger in 2014 -- the gap was 21%-24% for R v. D SCOTX seats).  The presidential gap -- with two loathsome candidates, was 9% in favor of the R.

So, has Texas gone from "generic" +9 down to +7 (if we compare the top-ballot races)?  Or has it gone from generic +13-16% down to +7%?  Is the movement 2% between cycles?  Or is it higher?  Shit, this is interesting.

[Huckleberry 32859]

State House went from 95/55 to 83/67. 

Additionally, there are 6 Republicans who won by less than 3 percent versus 2 Democrats who did so. The 2 Democrats who did so flipped previously Republican seats, of course.

I'm just glad we're heading into an era where both sides have a reason to put up good candidates. Fuck having worthless candidates like Valdez, Paxton, Patrick, etc.

Edited November 8, 2018 by Huckleberry

[Huckleberry 32859]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

3% is too high.  It's closer to 2% (but see my numbers below...maybe I'm wrong).  Here's the way I looked at the current spread:

When the GOP runs a strong candidate, and the Dems run a shitty one, the spread is around 12% (see Abbott v. Valdez).

When the GOP runs a shitty/unlikable candidate, and the Dems run a good one (or even a "good enough" one), the spread is around 3% to 4% (See Cruz (2.8%), Patrick (4.1%), Paxton (3.2%)).

When it's a generic GOP candidate vs. a generic Dem candidate (the example I use is Supreme Court races, because nobody knows ANYTHING about those folks other than the letter next to their name), its 6% to 7%.  SO, in a high-turnout election, the current generic R to D gap in Texas is around 7%.  Last election, the gap in SCOTX races was 13% to 16% (wow, that surprises me - and WOW, it was even bigger in 2014 -- the gap was 21%-24% for R v. D SCOTX seats).  The presidential gap -- with two loathsome candidates, was 9% in favor of the R.

So, has Texas gone from "generic" +9 down to +7 (if we compare the top-ballot races)?  Or has it gone from generic +13-16% down to +7%?  Is the movement 2% between cycles?  Or is it higher?  Shit, this is interesting.

GOP does better in Presidential years. I see a genuine chance for Democrats to catch up in the 2022 midterms but fall behind in 2024. In reality off the top of my head I'd say it's a possibility the state is GOP in 2020, straight purple in 2022, GOP in 2024, straight purple for all elections after that.

[gmr548 16580]

Depending on the candidate, they might have an easier time in Texas than Ohio and I'm being serious.  Romney got 57%, Trump got 52%, and Cruz got 51%.  GOP vote total was basically flat in all of those races at 4.5, although Cruz was slightly less.  Democratic total vote:
2012 -- 3.3M
2016 -- 3.8M
2018 -- 4M
If the GOP holds flat to down like it did in those three elections and the Democrats increase their total count by 10%, Texas is then a tossup.  It's interesting to me that the GOP vote count has a hard ceiling.  Didn't know that until I looked.

That is interesting. And significant. Three times is a trend. Something so simple, yet so important managed to evade my attention as we've all discussed so much Texas election recently. I think I might have the stupid.

I don't disagree with Texas > Ohio.  Ohio looks like it's going the way of Missouri.  Hard right and it ain't stopping.

Agreed. You saw the margins of those two states converge in 2016 as they trend opposite directions. 2016 was weird so OH might not vote more R than TX in 2020 - they did just re elect a D senator without much issue after all - but after that it will likely be a waste of time for Democrats.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Aqua Buddha 14596]

Regarding Ohio going the way of Missouri, that's very accurate even though Brown won re-election.  Florida is also moving back rightward, even though it's still a swing state.  A lot of olds have moved there since the 08/12 Obama wins.  

On the flip side, Virginia, Colorado, and Nevada are basically blue states at this point and not even really swingy.  It's a net loss to Ohio and Florida but it's interesting nonetheless.  North Carolina would cancel that out, though, but they're more in the swing bucket.

[Brisketexan 105136]

And looking back at other gaps -- in 2012, the top ballot races (President and Senator) were each about +16 for the R.  Top ballot went from 16, to 25 (cornyn's senate race in 2014), to 9, to 2.8.

I think top ballot races are hard to draw conclusions from -- they are so heavily covered and based more on personality than party affiliation than other races are.  I think for overall trends, the generic races tell us more.

And those tell us that SCOTX seat margins, from 2014 to 2018, were +22 (although 2012 is hard to get a read on -- the Dems only had a candidate for 1 of the 3 seats), +21-24%, +13-16%, and now +7%.  Trendline is a reduction in 8 points from 14 to 16, a reduction of around 7 points from 16-18, and from 18 to 20....????

[Js1 85334]

2 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

Agreed. You saw the margins of those two states converge in 2016 as they trend opposite directions. 2016 was weird so OH might not vote more R than TX in 2020 - they did just re elect a D senator without much issue after all - but after that it will likely be a waste of time for Democrats.
 

Montana re-elected a Democrat Senator and so did WV but I sure as hell don't expect the 2020 D nominee to campaign in either places.

Don't go to Ohio at the expense of Michigan/Wisconsin/Pennsylvania.

[RayDog 682]

From 2012 to 2016 in the 11 largest Texas counties with 50% of the vote the Republican vote percentage dropped 7.5% on average. About 3% of that though went to Libertarian and Green candidates.

 I have not looked up the real county by county results to see which ones fell on that line and which didn't. And figure out which way the one-time Libertarian voters went.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

I think we should be very worried about 2020.  Trump is going to spend the next two years talking about manufacturing to get those midwest states again.  and if he does, he'll win again because all the rest of the states he got are going to stay with him to the end.

[RayDog 682]

I still think we will have a recession sometime in the next two years.

[retread 2951]

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/07/upshot/2018-midterms-blue-wave-democrats.html

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

Last Electoral Map:

 

 

Net approval

 

 

Underwater in IA, MI, MN, PA, UT, which he all won in 2016.

 

UT and IA will vote R.   Trump won IA handily but it has voted D recently.  UT doesn't vote D.

 

That really only leaves the midwest for the presidency.  Maybe AZ could be a battle.  Maybe Kansas somehow after electing a D governor (but I basically think everyone just held their noses because they all knew Kobach was so crooked).

 

 

[Tuco 5076]

Last Electoral Map:
 
Maybe Kansas somehow after electing a D governor (but I basically think everyone just held their noses because they all knew Kobach was so crooked).
 
 

Don’t forget that Kansas is still suffering from Brownback’s fiscal policies. Eventually that will blow over.

[atomheartbevo 89663]

58 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I think we should be very worried about 2020.  Trump is going to spend the next two years talking about manufacturing to get those midwest states again.  and if he does, he'll win again because all the rest of the states he got are going to stay with him to the end.

After Tuesday, I can’t picture a scenario where he wins Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.  Hillary ignored those states in 2016, and he won them by less than 90,000 votes. Those states have now rejected statewide candidates that Trump held rallies for (LoL I know, the rallies were actually for Trump).  There’s not many jobs he can bring back in two years.  Hell, Wisconsin folks are going to be pissed at Rs for years over the Great Foxconn Fucking.

[Stringer 1439]

Florida is the most interesting to me.  With allowing felons to vote, that increases the rolls by 1.4M people.  Say half of that votes and 60% votes D (probably low).  That gives D's a 140,000 vote boost.  

That puts Nelson in the Senate, Gillum in the State House and gives Hillary Florida.  

[BrickHorn 18233]

Y’all think we’ll still be voting in 2020.  That’s adorable.

[David Dennison 18856]

This country is ruled by the minority.

That's going to bring about unwanted resistance at some point.

[kevwun 15787]

Think about what you just typed really hard and it might come to you.

[Gil Bang 25957]

1 minute ago, tjhooker said:

What do you mean by this?  More people voted for Hillary?  Curious.

He means that CA and NY have the same number of Senators as Montana and Wyoming despite those states having the populations of a couple of blocks in NYC

[David Dennison 18856]

Just now, tjhooker said:

What do you mean by this?  More people voted for Hillary?  Curious.

More people vote for Democrats. By a lot. It leads to minority rule and a diminished democracy.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13512]

Chasing TX in 2020 might be a pipedream for the Dems, but the Dems can't just let TX go.   Beto almost singlehandedly put Fletcher and Allred in the House for the Dems, and added many more local Dem officials.  Now he wasn't enough to win a state-wide race for anyone, especially himself but he hurt the TX GOP and many many county GOP parties.   

If the Dems let TX revert back in 2020 or 2022, they screwed up.   I've now talked myself into thinking they will do that.

[Patrick Bateman 3913]

21 minutes ago, Stringer said:

Florida is the most interesting to me.  With allowing felons to vote, that increases the rolls by 1.4M people.  Say half of that votes and 60% votes D (probably low).  That gives D's a 140,000 vote boost.  

That puts Nelson in the Senate, Gillum in the State House and gives Hillary Florida.  

 

[Js1 85334]

4 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Chasing TX in 2020 might be a pipedream for the Dems, but the Dems can't just let TX go.   Beto almost singlehandedly put Fletcher and Allred in the House for the Dems, and added many more local Dem officials.  Now he wasn't enough to win a state-wide race for anyone, especially himself but he hurt the TX GOP and many many county GOP parties.   

If the Dems let TX revert back in 2020 or 2022, they screwed up.   I've now talked myself into thinking they will do that.

They can't let it revert back.  They now have 2 critical House seats to defend and Hurd is still going to have a target on his back. 

[Tuco 5076]

So Nebraska passed 427 which forces the ACA Medicaid expansion in the state. [53% to 42%]. They also re-elected the governor who had vetoed it multiple times (59/41), and the entire Congressional delegation which has voted to dismantle the ACA.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

3 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Regarding Ohio going the way of Missouri, that's very accurate even though Brown won re-election.  Florida is also moving back rightward, even though it's still a swing state.  A lot of olds have moved there since the 08/12 Obama wins.  

On the flip side, Virginia, Colorado, and Nevada are basically blue states at this point and not even really swingy.  It's a net loss to Ohio and Florida but it's interesting nonetheless.  North Carolina would cancel that out, though, but they're more in the swing bucket.

Not sure about Florida.  Its lasting growth is Latino.  It does get a lot of olds migration, but they have a high churn rate, and are basically moving there to die rather than having children there.  I don't think that the olds migration rate has picked up substantially enough to make a long term difference, but it does keep the state a swing state even while all other demographics have begun shifting toward a diverse urban population.

It looks like Florida is 20% olds.  In comparison, Texas is 12%, and Ohio is 16%. I think most of the rust belt ends up red at some point, but it will happen at about the same time that Texas turns blue.

Edited November 8, 2018 by FondrenRoad

[Fozzz 152]

It's funny how conservative policies often help conservatives electorally.  Don't spend any money on schools - the rich get richer and the state gets more Trumpian!

 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Keeping people stupid and poor while making them think they’re smart and rich has been at great strategy for the GOP

[Huckleberry 32859]

Hmm. Still playing with numbers and I noticed something. Conventional wisdom, at least nationally speaking, is that the GOP does better in Presidential election years. However, in Texas that isn't necessarily true. The Democrats had Presidential dips only in 2004 (GWB reelection) and 2008 (Obama versus McCain). Generally speaking, though, Democrats actually do better in those elections than in midterms in Texas.

Anyway, still just sharing data and this one actually went counter to my instincts so thought I'd post it.

[Aqua Buddha 14596]

4 hours ago, Fozzz said:

It's funny how conservative policies often help conservatives electorally.  Don't spend any money on schools - the rich get richer and the state gets more Trumpian!

 

 

Ohio is the Florida of the Midwest.

[Michael Knight 12977]

Does anyone have Soros's number? I took like 12 caravan people to vote at 6 different polling places and I still haven't gotten my check yet