Political Prediction Thread

He only needs to do that well with whites in places like Ohio and Florida, not the US as a whole. As for NH, again, this is not so much Trump alone as a spoiler effect from a write-in campaign by the Bernie or Bust crowd.

Admittedly, this was my worst-while-still-being-plausable case scenario for HRC. I believe I have on this board, if not this thread, said that a HRC v Trump scenario with no splinter groups would look like 2008/2012, the best case for her being the addition of Georgia, Arizona, and perhaps Missouri.
 
Why not? That is exactly what he appears to be doing. Substantially larger.

J

LOL...please explain where you come by this piece of data. Given that we are talking about general election, not Republican primary results. There is absolutely no indication that Drumpf could win the non-Hispanic white vote by 20%, particularly since over 50% of that vote is women, where Trump does horribly. There's a fair chance that Trump couldn't even win given how poorly he will do with women, much less win by well in excess of 20 points.
 
He only needs to do that well with whites in places like Ohio and Florida, not the US as a whole. As for NH, again, this is not so much Trump alone as a spoiler effect from a write-in campaign by the Bernie or Bust crowd.

Admittedly, this was my worst-while-still-being-plausable case scenario for HRC. I believe I have on this board, if not this thread, said that a HRC v Trump scenario with no splinter groups would look like 2008/2012, the best case for her being the addition of Georgia, Arizona, and perhaps Missouri.

Problem. Even in Ohio and Florida he has to do substantially better than Romney did in the same places, and in those places Romney did historically well among non-Hispanic whites already. Just like he did overall. The GOP knew going in that there was no way to win without doing better outside the non-Hispanic white demographic because they were already dominating that as much as any candidate could be expected to do. Instead they have Drumpf alienating every other demographic for them.

At any rate, I'll continue along respecting your prediction as bold and see how we fare.
 
I will cosign that Joecoolyo has made a prediction... and a bold ballsy one at that. I think he's wrong but that's the point. Make real predictions and be clearly right or clearly wrong. No waffling or hedging. I salute you sir :salute:

This is a strange and tumultuous election season. If there's been any time for bold and ballsy predictions, it's now!
 
That being said, if you wanted to argue that Clinton, if she campaigned and executed well, could pull off Georgia in a three-way race, I wouldn't argue too hard.
The one thing I think your maps are missing is Clinton's chance at winning Arkansas (her "home" state).
To actually win I'd bet he will need a Reaganesque 34 point margin among non Hispanic whites.
Unlikely. Trump is to Prez Reagan as Dennis Rodman is to Michael Jordan. Hes a niche player, the best at what he does, and also great at attracting tons of attention, pissing people off, and selling tons of sneakers and jerseys... but he ain't leading the team to a finals win.
 
If the GOP splits, either by the GOP leadership denying Trump causing him to run as an independent or by Trump getting the nomination and the GOP leadership running an independent candidate, then Hillary will win in a landslide rivaling Nixon's trouncing of McGovern.
So, would this go in a scenario that Trump breaks his pact with the GOP to not run as an independent if he loses the nomination? Since I recall some time ago that he agreed to such a pact in the early stages of the nomination process.
 
The pledge was contingent on the GOP treating him "fairly," which really means whatever the hell he wants it to. If he is stopped somehow, he'll likely have foundation to consider the pledge void.
 
I'm gonna be crazy and go against downtown's far more knowledge-based prediction. :)

1. Hillary is the Democrats' nominee.

I'd prefer Sanders, but I don't see how he can win.

2. Trump will get the Republican nomination.

I think he will have enough popular support that the Republican leadership won't dare to oust him.

3. Donald John Trump will beat Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton and become the 45th President of the United States of America.

Trump is the positive, aspirational candidate. Hillary is the political establishment. You only vote for the latter if you've given up.

As for their different policies: Trump is gonna change his tone once he has become the Republican nominee. He'll say the stuff that can attract the most voters, and "forget" to mention the stuff that attract too small groups of voters on the fringe. Hillary will only be able to communicate two policies: She's a woman, and she's still the establishment! The former might help, the latter will definitely hurt.

4. President Trump won't be as crazy as everyone assumes.

Lot's of the controversial stuff he's been talking about isn't actually possible. He'll hand out a bunch of executive orders, but so did several presidents before him. He won't be able to bypass the Constitution or any of the stuff. Mostly it's gonna be business as usual (as far as usual is applicable to US politics, that is).

5. I can't yet predict what his actual policies will be. He's not actually as rightwing as he currently sounds, but it all comes down to which advisors he will surround himself with. So this isn't a prediction for the time being.
 
Trump wins the Republican nomination by conquest victory.
New York state votes Republican in the Presidential Election.
Georgia will be too close to call throughout election night.

As far as the Clinton/Sanders contest and all related elements are concerned... my crystal ball remains too murky to make anything out.


...

A debate between Trump and the Democratic nominee on the West Coast will be canceled due to race rioting.

Romney won the white vote by TWENTY points. How much better do you expect Trump, or anyone else, could possibly do?

Trump is capable of making gains among nonwhite voters in ways that Romney wasn't. This effect is theoretically mitigated if Sanders gets the nomination instead of Hillary. The problem with Sanders is the establishment wants him less than they want Trump. Trump's approval issues are manageable. Sander's wildcard leanings toward social issues less so. Hillary win is icing on the cake if they can get it, but Hillary has failed the mission so far.
 
So, would this go in a scenario that Trump breaks his pact with the GOP to not run as an independent if he loses the nomination? Since I recall some time ago that he agreed to such a pact in the early stages of the nomination process.

True. I was replying to downtown's prediction that:

IF that happens, I think
1) there is violence at the convention
2) Donald Trump runs as a third party, and wins multiple deep south states.

My prediction is that dark forces within the GOP leadership will have Trump assassinated before the convention in order to prevent either a schism within the party or Trump's usurping of their control over the party.
 
Mitt Romney couldn't codeswitch away from elitist WASP, but Trump is a reality TV star. With nomination in hand Trump will be free to convincingly pander to blue-collar, yet democratic crowds (ie he'll be more relatable as a candidate).

Relatable? We were talking about him making inroads with the non-white vote. You were saying he had access that Romney lacked. So far his "access" appears to be that he has gone wildly out of his way to make most people believe he is a further out of the closet white supremacist than any candidate since Wallace. Please, do tell how he is going to "codeswitch" out of that.
 
Relatable? We were talking about him making inroads with the non-white vote. You were saying he had access that Romney lacked. So far his "access" appears to be that he has gone wildly out of his way to make most people believe he is a further out of the closet white supremacist than any candidate since Wallace. Please, do tell how he is going to "codeswitch" out of that.

He helped Republicans believe he was Republican this year, despite being left-of-center in previous election years (especially with financial contributions). His seemingly racist personality is a facade entended to ensnare a portion of his targeted audiences.
 
He helped Republicans believe he was Republican this year, despite being left-of-center in previous election years (especially with financial contributions). His seemingly racist personality is a facade entended to ensnare a portion of his targeted audiences.

You should always fact check Ted Cruz.

International Business Times said:
According to an International Business Times review of data from Political Moneyline, Trump has given nearly $1.5 million to GOP candidates and political groups on the federal level since 1979. The billionaire has donated roughly $405,000 to Democratic politicians and committees during that same span of time.

As to his racist facade...that isn't particularly easy to just toss aside. For a couple reasons. First off, the minorities aren't generally disposed to accept "oh I was just kidding." Second, in the casting off he loses everything. The voters that love him because of the facade are lost, obviously, but he also loses the whole 'straight talking no PC pandering here' shtick that is basically the core element of his campaign to date.
 
For all the talk of Angry White People I'm going to throw this one out there:

If Donald Trump is the nominee, he will outperform among minority voters, at least African American voters, compared to every republican of the last 20 years.
 
Back
Top Bottom