Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Blue Waves and Red Waves

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    So something is amiss. In 2016, according to this, Trump received 53% of the vote in the Ohio 12th district, and Clinton received 42%, a spread of 11%. As of tonight, the spread in the special election is 0.9%. That's a shift of 10 percentage points to the left, which is consistent with most of the other special elections.

    So I'm not sure where your data comes from, or why it appears to be so off. I'll see if I can figure it out.
    My data is broken into each county in the district. In EACH county, the percentage remained basically the same - with the exception of Richland County where the Republicans all but stayed away but the Dems didn't at the same rate (30% to 20% of the POTUS totals)
    That's what
    - She

    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
    - Stephen R. Donaldson

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
      My data is broken into each county in the district. In EACH county, the percentage remained basically the same - with the exception of Richland County where the Republicans all but stayed away but the Dems didn't at the same rate (30% to 20% of the POTUS totals)
      OK - so here is the problem with your chart.

      If you take the totals (from your data), you see a clue to the problem. From your table, Balderson received a total of 101,772 votes to O'Connor's 100,208. So Balderson received 50.4% of the 201,980 total votes, and O'Connor received 49.6%. The 2016 election saw four times as many voters, and Trump secured 385,012 votes to Clinton's 439,919 votes, which means Trump received 46.7% of the 824,931 voted to Clinton's 53.3%. In other words according to your data, Clinton won that district and it shifted over 7 percentage points to the right in the special election. But that is not consistent with 2016 election results, which says that Trump won that district by 11% points.

      Here's the error: your data appears to include all of Franklin county, one of the most populous counties in Ohio. In fact, Ohio 12th only contains a fraction of Franklin county. So your data includes numbers that rightfully belong to adjoining congressional districts. That error is badly skewing the results.
      The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

      I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
        OK - so here is the problem with your chart.

        If you take the totals (from your data), you see a clue to the problem. From your table, Balderson received a total of 101,772 votes to O'Connor's 100,208. So Balderson received 50.4% of the 201,980 total votes, and O'Connor received 49.6%. The 2016 election saw four times as many voters, and Trump secured 385,012 votes to Clinton's 439,919 votes, which means Trump received 46.7% of the 824,931 voted to Clinton's 53.3%. In other words according to your data, Clinton won that district and it shifted over 7 percentage points to the right in the special election. But that is not consistent with 2016 election results, which says that Trump won that district by 11% points.

        Here's the error: your data appears to include all of Franklin county, one of the most populous counties in Ohio. In fact, Ohio 12th only contains a fraction of Franklin county. So your data includes numbers that rightfully belong to adjoining congressional districts. That error is badly skewing the results.
        The overall purpose, even with the unavoidable inclusion of all of Franklin County (as that's how POTUS elections are counted), shows a dramatic drop in voter turnout, and especially the Republican turnout. It's not possible to tell if anyone switched, or "shifted" their vote, so all we can look at is overall turnout, which favored the Democrats. It's typical with special elections for there to be a dramatically lower voter turnout, but counting on it to remain so on a normal election day is foolish.
        That's what
        - She

        Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
        - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

        I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
        - Stephen R. Donaldson

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
          The overall purpose, even with the unavoidable inclusion of all of Franklin County (as that's how POTUS elections are counted), shows a dramatic drop in voter turnout, and especially the Republican turnout. It's not possible to tell if anyone switched, or "shifted" their vote, so all we can look at is overall turnout, which favored the Democrats. It's typical with special elections for there to be a dramatically lower voter turnout, but counting on it to remain so on a normal election day is foolish.
          Sorry, Bill, but your statements just are not accurate. The data for the Ohio 12th is readily available. In 2016, Trump took the Congressional district by 11 percentage points. Currently, the gap between O'Connor and Balderson is 0.8%. Yes, there is a smaller voter turn-out. That is true of most (if not all) midterm elections. It certainly does not mean that the distribution of all voters has shifted 11% points. It does mean that the distribution of voters willing to turn out for such elections at the midterm has shifted by that much. For 2018 - that's all that is needed.

          For 2020, a different math will apply. But then again, Trump won his office by 100,000 votes in three states. So he doesn't need to lose much to lose 2020. The available data suggests he has already lost that much, and perhaps much more. And if Democrats hold their own in the Senate in 2018, losing no more than a seat or two, the foot will be in the other shoe in 2020, when Republicans will be defending a LOT of seats, and democrats only need to pick up a couple.

          From my perspective, Democrats should be hopeful, and Republicans should be bracing for loses, despite the extreme gerrymandering of 2010. After that, there is a significant chance Democrats will capture both houses and the executive branch in 2020. If that does indeed happen, our country will have over-shifted to the left, and I'll be cheering for Republicans to take at least one of the houses of Congress. Frankly, I'd be happy in 2020 (or 2022), if we settled on a Republican judiciary and House, and a Democratic Senate and Executive branch. That would achieve some degree of balance.
          Last edited by carpedm9587; 08-09-2018, 07:55 PM.
          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

          Comment


          • #50
            My guess, and I admit its entirely a guess, is that Trump will win the reelection but the Democrats will take more seats.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
              My guess, and I admit its entirely a guess, is that Trump will win the reelection but the Democrats will take more seats.
              His reelection isn't up til NEXT cycle, so.... are you saying "more seats" then. than they will in the upcoming mid-term?
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                My guess, and I admit its entirely a guess, is that Trump will win the reelection but the Democrats will take more seats.
                Assuming you're talking about 2020 - I cannot imagine he can successfully overcome his problems. He has locked in his core base (and apparently most Republicans - with 84% approval). He has thoroughly alienated Democrats (7% approval) and (most importantly) has badly eroded his base among independents. It will take a democratic candidate as hated as Hillary was for that to change. I don't think he will be primaried (thought Kasich may try), but I can't see him making it in the general election. His success was very narrow in 2016 (despite the grandiose claims otherwise), and he has eroded it too badly.
                The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                  Sorry, Bill, but your statements just are not accurate. The data for the Ohio 12th is readily available. In 2016, Trump took the Congressional district by 11 percentage points. Currently, the gap between O'Connor and Balderson is 0.8%. Yes, there is a smaller voter turn-out. That is true of most (if not all) midterm elections. It certainly does not mean that the distribution of all voters has shifted 11% points. It does mean that the distribution of voters willing to turn out for such elections at the midterm has shifted by that much. For 2018 - that's all that is needed.
                  This wasn't a mid-term election. It was a special election, and those have historically not reflected voter turnout for the major election day races. The distribution of voters hasn't shifted, despite what the press has painted this special election cycle we have had.


                  For 2020, a different math will apply. But then again, Trump won his office by 100,000 votes in three states. So he doesn't need to lose much to lose 2020.
                  And his approval numbers have gone up quite a bit since he took office, so him losing ground doesn't make much sense.

                  The available data suggests he has already lost that much, and perhaps much more.
                  Not really. Again, his approval numbers have gone up, especially among black voters.

                  And if Democrats hold their own in the Senate in 2018, losing no more than a seat or two, the foot will be in the other shoe in 2020, when Republicans will be defending a LOT of seats, and democrats only need to pick up a couple.
                  We'll see...


                  From my perspective, Democrats should be hopeful, and Republicans should be bracing for loses, despite the extreme gerrymandering of 2010. After that, there is a significant chance Democrats will capture both houses and the executive branch in 2020. If that does indeed happen, our country will have over-shifted to the left, and I'll be cheering for Republicans to take at least one of the houses of Congress. Frankly, I'd be happy in 2020 (or 2022), if we settled on a Republican judiciary and House, and a Democratic Senate and Executive branch. That would achieve some degree of balance.
                  Obama saw no need to balance anything when he was in charge of the Executive Branch. He just executive Ordered his way into getting his way.
                  That's what
                  - She

                  Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                  - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                  I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                  - Stephen R. Donaldson

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                    This wasn't a mid-term election. It was a special election, and those have historically not reflected voter turnout for the major election day races. The distribution of voters hasn't shifted, despite what the press has painted this special election cycle we have had.
                    Voter turnout is historically lower in special elections and mid-terms. This year, voter turnout for special election has been, if anything, higher than normal mid-terms. Although Republicans have won 8 of the 9 elections, what is often lost in that statistic is that each of these elections has been significantly closer than they normally would have been, special election or otherwise. We are seeing a 10-20 point shift to the left in most elections. This should be of concern to most Republicans, but most appear to be doing what you are doing: waving it away. I have no problem with that. It's exactly what Democrats did in 2016.

                    None of that changes the fact that your data was flawed because it included the entire vote count for Franklin County, only part of which is associated with Ohio 12.

                    Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                    And his approval numbers have gone up quite a bit since he took office, so him losing ground doesn't make much sense.
                    Actually, that is not true. Trump had one day when his approval numbers were dead even: 45% for, 45% against on the day of his inauguration. Then they dropped precipitously, and eventually achieved a negative margin of -21 percentage points in mid-December, 2017. Since then they have recovered a bit, and stabilized around 40% (his negative margin has been between 9-11% with a few fluctuations outside that range). So it's accurate to say his polls have climbed since hitting their lowest level. It is not accurate to say they have climbed since he was elected. This is based on poll aggregation - not a single poll.

                    Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                    Not really. Again, his approval numbers have gone up, especially among black voters.
                    Sources, please. Nothing I am finding is indicating that he has made any significant strides with black voters. Yes, as with the general polls, he has gained some ground since his worst level. But overall he sits at about 21% as of August 7th.

                    Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                    We'll see...
                    Of course we will...

                    Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                    Obama saw no need to balance anything when he was in charge of the Executive Branch. He just executive Ordered his way into getting his way.
                    Trump had signed 77 Executive Orders by the end of July. He had been in office 1.5 years by then, so that's an average of about 51/year. Obama's average for his entire 8 year presidency was 35/year (note that this site places Trump's average at 54/year, not 51, so he has apparently signed more of them in August).

                    So who exactly is EOing their way into getting their way?

                    Also, the whole "EOing to get their way" argument is a bit lame. The grand-daddy of all presidents was FDR, at an average of 307 EOs per year. Hoover ran a close second at 242/year. To find a president with fewer EOs/year than Obama you have to go back to Cleveland's first presidential term: 1885-1889. Trump's number is also fairly conservative. To find a president with fewer EOs' per year than Trump you have to go back to .... well, look at that ... Obama ... 2009-2016.
                    Last edited by carpedm9587; 08-11-2018, 01:31 PM.
                    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Another district has slipped from "solid, likely, leans" Republican to "Toss up."

                      And Vox (yes, they are notoriously VERY left leaning) had this article recently, predicting the "blue wave" would be a "blue flood."
                      The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                      I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                        It is interesting to note that every single candidate that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (the socialist who won the upset victory in the New York primary) had endorsed has lost and at least in a few cases been trounced.
                        Another of the candidates that Ocasio-Cortez endorsed and stumped for came in fourth with just 6.3% of the vote in the Democrat primary for U.S. House District 1 in Hawaii (represents Honolulu). The winner, regarded as a fiscal conservative, also handily defeated Lt. Gov. Doug Chin (40% to 25.5%), who as Attorney General took the Trump administration to court over the travel ban which was ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court.

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                          Another district has slipped from "solid, likely, leans" Republican to "Toss up."

                          And Vox (yes, they are notoriously VERY left leaning) had this article recently, predicting the "blue wave" would be a "blue flood."
                          Weren't they predicting two possible outcomes for the 2016 presidential race -- either Hillary winning or Hillary winning by a landslide?

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                            Voter turnout is historically lower in special elections and mid-terms. This year, voter turnout for special election has been, if anything, higher than normal mid-terms. Although Republicans have won 8 of the 9 elections, what is often lost in that statistic is that each of these elections has been significantly closer than they normally would have been, special election or otherwise. We are seeing a 10-20 point shift to the left in most elections. This should be of concern to most Republicans, but most appear to be doing what you are doing: waving it away. I have no problem with that. It's exactly what Democrats did in 2016.
                            You had the point, and then you missed it. Even with higher than normal turnout, driven primarily by Democratic Party hysteria, the Dems are still losing. Even when Republican voter turnout is following the historically significantly lower trend, and Dem turnout is amped up from historic precedent. It will be beyond hard to get a higher Dem turnout for the regular election at the rate we are seeing in these special elections. That's why I am saying all of this talk of a "swing" in votes makes no sense.

                            None of that changes the fact that your data was flawed because it included the entire vote count for Franklin County, only part of which is associated with Ohio 12.
                            It was an error of too much information, yes, but doesn't change the fact of the other individual counties and their turnout numbers and margin of victory. Forecasting a similar increase in overall democrat turnout for the general elections simply isn't warranted, nor is projecting a blue win because of inflated blue turnout on a non-standard voting day.

                            Actually, that is not true.
                            Depends on who you ask.


                            Trump had one day when his approval numbers were dead even: 45% for, 45% against on the day of his inauguration. Then they dropped precipitously, and eventually achieved a negative margin of -21 percentage points in mid-December, 2017. Since then they have recovered a bit, and stabilized around 40% (his negative margin has been between 9-11% with a few fluctuations outside that range). So it's accurate to say his polls have climbed since hitting their lowest level. It is not accurate to say they have climbed since he was elected. This is based on poll aggregation - not a single poll.
                            Sorry. I forgot who I was talking to. I'll try to be more precise when I talk. Nits picked successfully.


                            Sources, please. Nothing I am finding is indicating that he has made any significant strides with black voters. Yes, as with the general polls, he has gained some ground since his worst level. But overall he sits at about 21% as of August 7th.
                            Source: https://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/08/04/new_national_polls_put_black_voters_support_for_trump_very_very_close_to.html


                            Aug. 4 2016 9:27 PM

                            If the election were held today, here’s the percentage of black voters that said they would cast their ballot for Donald Trump:
                            WSJ/NBC News Poll: 1 percent (Clinton, 91 percent)
                            Marist Poll: 2 percent (Clinton, 93 percent)
                            Fox News Poll: 4 percent (Clinton, 87 percent)

                            © Copyright Original Source



                            Now, this is likely voters, and not approval rating, but the numbers are telling of where polls put his support and where he is at now is quite a bit better.


                            Trump had signed 77 Executive Orders by the end of July. He had been in office 1.5 years by then, so that's an average of about 51/year.
                            Comparing RAW numbers of EOs is simply wrong. A majority of EOs are simply declarations of one sort or another - not making significant changes to any law. The ones of SIGNIFICANCE that directly thumbed their nose at Congress are what I am referring to.

                            Obama's average for his entire 8 year presidency was 35/year (note that this site places Trump's average at 54/year, not 51, so he has apparently signed more of them in August).

                            So who exactly is EOing their way into getting their way?
                            untitled.jpg
                            That's what
                            - She

                            Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                            - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                            I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                            - Stephen R. Donaldson

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                              Weren't they predicting two possible outcomes for the 2016 presidential race -- either Hillary winning or Hillary winning by a landslide?
                              Who?
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                                Weren't they predicting two possible outcomes for the 2016 presidential race -- either Hillary winning or Hillary winning by a landslide?
                                They? You mean RCP?

                                No. RCP simply aggregates the polls from others, and then links articles from a variety of perspectives. The aggregate presidential polls had Hillary up by 8-10 points, but that began to slide when the Comey letter came out. By the date of the vote, she was up by 2-4 points, which is well within the margin of error, and consistent with the national vote. For the state-by-state vote, they showed her with more "likely, lean, solid" states than Trump, but neither had enough in that category to project a win. Each of them needed to pick up some of the toss-ups. As it turned out, Trump took most of them, narrowly winning in 3 states that turned the electoral tide.
                                The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                                I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                96 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                282 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                109 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                195 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                356 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X