2016 US Presidential Election Thread IX - Page 14 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-24-2016, 09:59 PM   #196
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,262
Local Time: 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
But there are millions of them. MILLIONS.
The Hidden Importance Of The Sanders Voter | FiveThirtyEight


"There’s a key twist, though, in tracking how Sanders voters are affecting Clinton’s general election prospects. Unless you break out the numbers for Sanders voters specifically, as YouGov does, you may miss their importance.

That’s because a lot of Sanders voters don’t identify as Democrats. Exit polls have been conducted in 27 primary and caucus states so far, and Clinton has won among voters who identify as Democrats in all but Vermont, New Hampshire and Wisconsin (where she tied Sanders). But she’s won self-identified independents only in Alabama, Georgia and Mississippi. (I keep using that term “self-identified” because the exit poll asks voters how they “usually think of” themselves — Democrat, Republican or independent. A voter’s self-identification may differ from her party registration, and some states do not have party registration at all.)"



24% of Democratic primary voters have been self-identified independents. That comes out to 5.6 million voters just if you add the current cumulative Bernie/Clinton vote totals together (which don't even take into account caucuses because they don't have voter totals). Sanders has won this group by 31 points.

100 - 31 = 69. 69/2 = 34.5. 34.5 + 31 = 64.5% of Independents for Sanders compared to 35.5% for Clinton.

64.5% of 5.6 million = 3.6 million voters.

And again, that doesn't count the caucuses. You are now looking at Sanders probably finishing this primary season with nearly the same amount of non-Democrats as the margin that Obama won the general election by in 2012.


Also, if Sanders had won every single one of those voters, he would still trail Clinton by roughly a million votes. 5.6 million independents already voting is nothing to sneeze at, but it's not enough to overcome the fact that 3/4 of the voters are Democrats. Clinton clobbers him 63.5 to 36.5 among those voters. That's huge and explains why having all of these independent voters isn't enough to overcome that. Clinton is beating him by about six million voters among just Democrats.
__________________

__________________
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 05-24-2016, 10:34 PM   #197
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,262
Local Time: 05:49 PM
For fun, let's try this exercise on for size. Turnout dropped 3.3% from 2008 to 2012 and resulted in an increase in the popular vote share for the Republican candidate of 1.5%. Romney still lost the popular vote to Obama by 3.9%.

So, for Trump to win the popular vote (and just considering him a "generic" Republican candidate rather than going into his negatives), he would need turnout to drop by about 8.8% from the 2012 level alone. That would mean turnout would be at only 46.1% which would be insanely low for a Presidential election year.

Why is this number of 46.1% turnout fair? Because I'm figuring that the continued "loss" for Republicans every four years due to new young liberals and more Republicans dying off is baked into the difference from 2008 to 2012. I know, apples and oranges in terms of candidates and America's situation, etc. But that's a fair way to go about things if you're just considering the Republican to get those sort of votes regardless.

Now, turnout can certainly drop from that 54.9% mark last time. Clinton has high unfavorables and is no Obama while Trump isn't well liked either. Meanwhile, voter ID laws are certainly going to help lower the totals (and mostly harm Democratic leaning voters).

The real risk would be Trump's favorability being high enough within his own party that he gets the McCain/Romney share while Clinton's unfavorables drastically lower the overall turnout total. Then things could be close.

But where it stands now? Trump's been regularly earning 42% of the vote in polling. McCain got 45.7% in the election and Romney received 47.2%. Sounds about right.

But if Democratic turnout were to drop off significantly since Clinton is no Obama, you can start seeing Trump edge up to 43% and 44% and so forth...that share of the pie suddenly becomes larger when one side doesn't bother to vote.
__________________

__________________
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:12 PM   #198
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,410
Local Time: 05:49 PM
stop fucking whining
__________________
DaveC is online now  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:12 PM   #199
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,262
Local Time: 05:49 PM
Also, before people start coming in here just saying "exit polls are lies" or whatever other crap because it doesn't suit their narrative, I have one question for you. Why on earth is it so hard to believe that Sanders, a far-left candidate in 2016, has had 3.6 million non-Democrats vote for him when Ralph Nader, a far-left candidate in 2000 earned 2.9 million votes. Doesn't really take too much effort to figure out that there's always been a group of people on the far left that feel the Democrats don't suit their best interests. It's just that for the first time in recent history they've actually had a far-left contender to vote for within the party.
__________________
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:16 PM   #200
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,890
Local Time: 05:49 PM
You cited Nate Silver earlier, who has been getting his ass kicked since the beginning of primary season.
__________________
PhilsFan is online now  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:16 PM   #201
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BEAL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,588
Local Time: 10:49 PM
Last week with John Oliver

https://youtu.be/_S2G8jhhUHg

Samantha Bee

https://youtu.be/nTnPCF9OWHM


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
BEAL is online now  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:20 PM   #202
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,262
Local Time: 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
You cited Nate Silver earlier, who has been getting his ass kicked since the beginning of primary season.
Yeah, but the math I just did above has nothing really to do with his opinions. It's merely the end result from the data in those polls. Either you think people are just lying and the amount of self-identified independents in the Democratic primary has been like 5% or less or the idea of millions of non-Democrats being brought into the fold by Sanders (something reiterated over and over by the media as fact) is certain truth.

Also, Nate Silver didn't fuck up anything statistically. The polling models have been fine this primary season. It was the conjecture about why Trump would eventually fail that ended up not coming to fruition. That's not data or science driven.
__________________
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:38 PM   #203
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 05:49 PM
Nader voters should continue to apologize to each and every one of us each and every day.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:41 PM   #204
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,262
Local Time: 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BEAL View Post
Last week with John Oliver

https://youtu.be/_S2G8jhhUHg
The answer to me seems pretty damn obvious. One person, one vote. No superdelegates, no caucuses, no voting for delegates to presumably vote for your person at the convention.

I mean, the entire idea of having delegates is just like the Electoral College. The latter is basically because of slavery and the former is because the parties used to choose the candidates themselves. Neither serves a purpose in the modern day, nor would you need SuperDelegates to really stop a Lyndon LaRouche from winning the Democratic primary or whatever.

And it would probably be even smarter to just stop the state-by-state nonsense and have a single primary day for all parties in, say, early June. The candidates have months to ramp things up and then everybody in the country can vote on major issues, local officials and the one party they decide to choose to vote within. There could then be a runoff day a few weeks later for the top two candidates or that could be avoided entirely with Instant Runoff Voting.

In a world where there's the internet and quick spread of information, I really don't think the results would have been much different if we all just voted in June. Sanders would get like 45% or a bit more and lose to Clinton while Trump would win a plurality, etc.
__________________
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:43 PM   #205
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,262
Local Time: 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Nader voters should continue to apologize to each and every one of us each and every day.
Or Clinton/Gore should apologize for moving the party rightward and alienating those on the left along with the Clinton blowjobs that alienated the stupid.
__________________
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:48 PM   #206
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,410
Local Time: 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
stop fucking whining
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
stop fucking whining
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
stop fucking whining
please
__________________
DaveC is online now  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:49 PM   #207
45:33
 
cobl04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Point to Shaolin
Posts: 55,041
Local Time: 09:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
You cited Nate Silver earlier, who has been getting his ass kicked since the beginning of primary season.
Really? What for? (genuine question)

I fucking love his site
__________________
cobl04 is offline  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:53 PM   #208
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 02:49 PM
because he and his contributors let their bias creep into their projections and the articles they would cite and post, in 2008 he was more on the money, was credible, now just another asshat
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:54 PM   #209
Vocal parasite
 
Axver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1853
Posts: 151,039
Local Time: 09:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
Or Clinton/Gore should apologize for moving the party rightward and alienating those on the left along with the Clinton blowjobs that alienated the stupid.
I hope you enjoy voting indirectly for President Trump.
__________________
"Mediocrity is never so dangerous as when it is dressed up as sincerity." - Søren Kierkegaard

Ian McCulloch the U2 fan:
"Who buys U2 records anyway? It's just music for plumbers and bricklayers. Bono, what a slob. You'd think with all that climbing about he does, he'd look real fit and that. But he's real fat, y'know. Reminds me of a soddin' mountain goat."
"And as for Bono, he needs a colostomy bag for his mouth."

U2gigs: The most comprehensive U2 setlist database!
Gig pictures | Blog
Axver is offline  
Old 05-24-2016, 11:55 PM   #210
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 05:49 PM
2016 US Presidential Election Thread IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
Or Clinton/Gore should apologize for moving the party rightward and alienating those on the left along with the Clinton blowjobs that alienated the stupid.


Or some of us could get over ourselves and vote like it matters. Because it does.

Minorities, women, and LGBT voters don't have the luxury of Jill Stein votes, or of inflating Sanders' ego whereby he, a soundly losing candidate, exacts petty demands lest he refuse to unite the party. Let's see if Sanders cares about defeating Trump, or if Sanders cares about Sanders. You want to splinter the left and erode Clinton support and then blame her? Was it what she was wearing? You want to mindlessly equivocate between Trump and Clinton as Jill Strin has done? Do you actually think the parties are the same? Would a President Gore have done what W did?

It only took 100,000 assholes in FL to give us the Bush nightmare.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com