-
Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .
[RD] The Republican nomination
- Thread starter onejayhawk
- Start date
There's a particular funny outcome I'm looking for if the GOP splits and either Trump or an anti-Trump runs as an independent. I want to see Mississippi become a blue state.
It could happen. In the last election, 98% of black voters supported Obama while 90% of white voters supported Romney, with the result that Romney won 55.3-44.8%. The racial polarization and its demographics mean that it will always vote 40-46% Democrat, no more and no less. If the white voters split just right, it could swing blue. Louisiana could do the same, as potentially could other states in the Deep South.
Although now that I think about it, that result might cause an anti-voting-rights backlash and new very strict voting requirements beyond what we're already seeing with voter ID laws, per the history of the Deep South. And with the Voting Rights Act neutered, this might actually survive in court as long as there's no racial preference explicitly written into the law. So actually never mind.
It could happen. In the last election, 98% of black voters supported Obama while 90% of white voters supported Romney, with the result that Romney won 55.3-44.8%. The racial polarization and its demographics mean that it will always vote 40-46% Democrat, no more and no less. If the white voters split just right, it could swing blue. Louisiana could do the same, as potentially could other states in the Deep South.
Although now that I think about it, that result might cause an anti-voting-rights backlash and new very strict voting requirements beyond what we're already seeing with voter ID laws, per the history of the Deep South. And with the Voting Rights Act neutered, this might actually survive in court as long as there's no racial preference explicitly written into the law. So actually never mind.
Im kinda sold on Tim's hypothesis that a Trump or Anti-Trump running as a 3rd party just helps to get more Republicans elected down-ballot. So I would really rather just see Cruz win outright. I feel that there is a good chance that Trump will accept an outright loss to Cruz because he once again promised to support the Republican nominee.
On the other hand if there is a brokered convention, Trump will just claim "I promised to support the 'people's nominee not some illegitimate backroom candidate." Even if pundits try to point out that the brokered nominee is still in-fact the nominee, Trump will just hand-wave that off and say "Nope I only pledged to support the real nominee."
On the other hand if there is a brokered convention, Trump will just claim "I promised to support the 'people's nominee not some illegitimate backroom candidate." Even if pundits try to point out that the brokered nominee is still in-fact the nominee, Trump will just hand-wave that off and say "Nope I only pledged to support the real nominee."
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
But there's more of a chance that Trump wins outright.
Yes of course you're right, and frankly Trump winning outright and running un-contested by any 3rd party Republican 11th hour challengers is the 2nd best outcome. But at this point I have to admit that I no longer regard Trump as a longshot vs. Hillary. I think that the Trump v. Clinton election is going to be close, like 2000 close, and I'm not looking forward to the very real possibility Trump wins.
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
I don't think so. Trump may energize his base but he will energize the anti-trump crowd even more. There are even many republican in the house/senate that would probably prefer Clinton over Trump.
J's endless repetition that Hillary could never win notwithstanding, she is a rather weak candidate with consistently negative net favorability ratings. Candidates who aren't Trump or Cruz would have a very good chance of beating her, and even those two have a non-negligible chance.
Even though I voted for Cruz, my dream scenario is one where Kasich wins the nomination first ballot. This is one case where I trust the polls, I think he would match up best against Clinton. I also think he'd make the best president of the Republicans. He's really grown on me.
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
Kasich would easily be the best person to beat Clinton but a brokered convention is the only way he'd be the nominee. I still think if the brokered convention happens, they'll have to choose between trump and cruz. Which is like choosing between drinking battery acid and toilet cleaner.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
Forget "notwithstanding." That and that she is personally unexciting, boring even, is all I ever said. It's enough. She is unelectable in the general, even against Cruz and especially against a showman like Trump.
Kasich is Clinton without the personal baggage. In an event driven by excitement, he's reliable.
J
I don't really think there's any strong evidence yet to dispute the logical conclusion that Clinton would defeat Trump in an absolute landslide. The fact that he continues to lead the Republican field doesn't mean anything other than that he'd probably get at least 20% of the vote in a general election.
If this is a 're-alignment' election, there's every chance that traditionally 'red' states become 'blue', and vice versa. After all, e.g. Louisiana (which has a Democratic governor) turning blue would just be a reversion to what you had before the last re-alignment. It would be interesting to think what states would be most likely to flip in such a re-alignment. Probably Arizona, perhaps states like Kansas in which Trump did poorly. If you were to take the other position, that the GOP can build support amongst a traditionally unionist constituency, then states like Michigan and Pennsylvania would surely become more red.
Of course, it might be more likely that this is an aberration, rather than a re-alignment, and the red states will stay red through the foreseeable future.
If this is a 're-alignment' election, there's every chance that traditionally 'red' states become 'blue', and vice versa. After all, e.g. Louisiana (which has a Democratic governor) turning blue would just be a reversion to what you had before the last re-alignment. It would be interesting to think what states would be most likely to flip in such a re-alignment. Probably Arizona, perhaps states like Kansas in which Trump did poorly. If you were to take the other position, that the GOP can build support amongst a traditionally unionist constituency, then states like Michigan and Pennsylvania would surely become more red.
Of course, it might be more likely that this is an aberration, rather than a re-alignment, and the red states will stay red through the foreseeable future.
The only thing that might make it interesting is that Trump could conceivably contest New York. It probably isn't enough to win given his issues elsewhere, but a Trump campaign could definitely alter the map.
Trumps manipulation of the media takes perfect advantage of our short attention spans. That makes any future race even more difficult to predict, as long as Trump is in it. The more chaos, the shorter our attention span, and time becomes compressed. By the time November rolls around, today's news will seem like events that happened years ago.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
There is no evidence to support, "the logical conclusion that Clinton would defeat Trump in an absolute landslide." It is not a logical conclusion. It is an opinion common to Democrats and left-leaning international observers. The opposite opinion is common to Republicans and right-leaning international observers. There is not even a concensus.
J
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
No, that's what head to head polls say too. Trump loses to anyone in a landslide.
metalhead
Angry Bartender
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2002
- Messages
- 8,031
Logic tells me that on every single negative of Hillary's, Trump has something worse. He changes positions daily on thimgs like torture, and says in private that his immigration stance is flexible. She has emails; he may be subpoenad to testify in a fraud case with a university that has his name on it.
I think there is some truth to the idea that anti-Trump voters are energized, but I don't know if that translates into Hillary votes. Sure they vote against him in the primary, but once he is nominated, do they vote for Hillary? Republicans? I think that's a stretch.
