Two weeks out - 266

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Horns11, Oct 26, 2016.

  1. Horns11

    Horns11 10,000+ Posts

    I think it's the best Trump can do. And, even with Utah up for grabs by McMullin, it seems as though 272 is the worst Hillary can do at this point.

    I've pretty much switched over every swing state within the margin of error to Trump, and I keep getting 266 (including the Nebraska/Maine at-large districts). Something would need to happen in PA, NH, CO, MI, WI, VA, or MN, but that something would need to be BIG. Like, ghost voters to a big marching tune, to push the Trump percent of voters between the top 2 candidates to <0.1 percent win for Trump.
    PA: About 6-7 percent (180K voters using the "minimum" ghost swing)
    NH: 5-8 percent (34K)
    CO: 3-6 percent (81K)
    MI: 5-10 percent (250K)
    WI: 3-7 percent (85K)
    VA: 4-10 percent (160K)
    MN: 6-10 percent (165K)

    Putting that in perspective, Ohio was decided by about 120K votes in the contested 2004 election, so it COULD happen. Polling data showed that Kerry was ahead by a little less than 1 percent heading into the election week, and the wrongly-criticized Ohio state government held firm even though there was some pretty shady stuff going down with the long lines and forcing some voters to mail in ballots at places where they didn't need to. But Ohio would have been in the margin of error stuff that I gave to the GOP in this. Some of those aforementioned states aren't even within 7 or 8 if you look at the most recent data.

    There could also be... you know... news about either HRC or Trump that pushes the percentages either direction within the next 13 days, but I think that's less likely than undecideds just making up their minds and getting out to vote.

    My final prediction: HRC gets 323. She keeps NV, NC, FL, NH, and the Maine at-large district.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

  3. UTChE96

    UTChE96 2,500+ Posts

    Sounds reasonable to me. Dont see any way that Trump wins this.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    Yeah, it's really going to be hard for the Republicans with the way the electoral college is currently set up. Trump could win the the popular vote and still lose. However, republicans will have a better chance in 2020 when the census shakes up the electoral college more in favor of the red states.
     
  5. Horns11

    Horns11 10,000+ Posts

    Revised census data wouldn't affect the electoral college until 2024 because the results typically aren't finalized until the winter of the new administration in the following odd year. But I think the GOP has much better odds to unite behind a better candidate in 2020, especially if the predicted gloom and doom of an HRC administration comes to fruition.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    Is the pace of growth of the Red States outpacing the Blue States. Even if that is true, aren't the internal demographic changes of places like Texas pushing it from Red to Purple?

    Now, I think 2020 will be advantageous to Republicans if they can hold the party together (read: co-opt Trump supporters) if only because 12 years of having a Democrat in charge will further thin enthusiasm for a Dem ticket.
     
  7. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    If what you're saying is true then I'm not sure if any republican can win. The way it's set up the republican has to win Florida and Ohio and then knock off 2-3 democrat leaning states. Not impossible but very improbable.
     
  8. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    The red states are outpacing the blue states. Texas will eventually become purple but it will probably stay red for a few more elections.
     
  9. Horns11

    Horns11 10,000+ Posts

    It looks like Texas is going to be the only place (with maybe Florida as a close second) that will gain more than 1 Congressional seat in the 2020 census. There's going to be one helluva microscope on the process when redistricting comes around.

    [​IMG]

    Based on the demographics of the current election, it's a near-wash with the new electoral data. If you turn existing state leaders (including the mild leans for the swing ones) for 2016 and pretend the math works with the new 2020 census, it's only a +1 gain for the Red States. For all the gains made in Texas, California/Oregon cancel it out.
     
  10. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    Reappointment isn't going to save the GOP. As you showed, it's just not big enough of an impact in one ten-year period. The GOP has to find a way to stop getting killed in urban areas and start retaking the suburbs outside of the South by appealing to educted professionals who are currently voting Democratic but aren't ideological liberals. It would take a pretty radical shift and require unrealistic shifts in ethnic minority voting to make states like California or New York competitive again. However, with significant but realistic progress, they could start bringing states like New Jersey, Connecticut, Washington, and Oregon back into play and bring Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina, Florida, Colorado, and Nevada into the "lean red" category.

    Obviously, this would require a significant rebranding, and of course a nominee like Trump could not have been a bigger step in the wrong direction.
     
  11. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

    You might be surprised but I agree with you on 266. I think Trump wins NC, FL, OH, IA, and NV (50:50 on the last one). So, if I had to guess today, the difference is 1-2 states. HOWEVER, there is still a good percentage of undecideds and potential vote switchers. I think that is the focus of the Trump campaign in the last 12 days.
     
  12. Brad Austin

    Brad Austin 2,500+ Posts

    The electoral college is def a tough, unforgiving hill to climb for Trump or any Rep.

    However, the poll discrepancies are really showing their inaccuracies since Thurs.

    Non-Lib ties: Rasmussen (HC +1), LA Times (tie), and Fox (HC +3)
    Known Lib sources: ABC (HC +6), NY Times (+7), USA Today (+8)

    I think people will be shocked how inflated the Lib run polls are. At the same time, it's still a long shot Trump sweeps all the states needed in electoral college.

    It's really disturbing but not surprising the media is portraying Trump's candidacy as already defeated in an attempt to squash enthusiasm of those who favor him.

    It's clear as day what they are doing. All week long I've seen spots on them discussing if Trump will concede when he loses. No talk about if HC would.

    Oh what I wouldn't give for a Brexit result. I'd love to see the faces of the culprits when their corrupt election stealing scheme blew up in their faces.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

    Game changer if Trump gets 20% of black vote.
     
  14. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    Given what we all know about the Black vote, do we really think Trump has any chance of getting 20%?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

  16. Brad Austin

    Brad Austin 2,500+ Posts

    Two things will be vastly different with the black vote this election. One, overall cast ballots by AA's will sharply decline from 2008 and 2012.

    Two, it's more taboo and dangerous for AA's to voice support for Trump than any race.

    And that's saying something since I've declined (white male) to answer both times I was asked in casual conversation by a person I'm not very familiar with.

    The other side just doesn't get it. For MANY backing Trump it's just not worth the almost guaranteed scowl, criticism, or worse by making your intentions known.

    At the same time, the vast majority behind Trump (even casually) are strongly motivated to make their vote count.

    Way too many insults have been absorbed not to follow it through with a vote. As for the casual HC supporter, I highly doubt that level of conviction will show up.
     
  17. Horns11

    Horns11 10,000+ Posts

    To be clear, I don't think there's any chance Trump gets to 266. I'm saying that's the best he could possibly do INCLUDING massive "margin of error errors" and get-out-the-vote movements to undecideds in these last two weeks.

    The issue with mchammer's video link is that Donald-Kyei doesn't realize that the "buffer" of black votes is already built in to the existing polling data in the aggregate sites, like fivethirtyeight, the CNN poll of polls, Princeton Election Consortium, etc. They take the data and then extrapolate that blacks will vote for Trump at higher rates than:
    a. they voted for the GOP against Obama AND
    b. the existing data says at the moment.

    For example, she talks about how Fox News says that only 5 percent will be voting for Trump. What she vainly attempts to tell the public is that he's going to get more than that. With a MoE of 8.5 (!!) percent, it's obvious he's going to get more than 5 percent. I don't think anyone disputes that. So the aggregate sites build in a pretty hefty weight to what is more in line with other existing data. Now, he's not going to get 25 percent. At that point, you're basically making up data.

    So what makes the "Non-Lib" ties more relevant, accurate, etc? Because of perceived notions of rigging by the campaign? Because Kellyanne said so in her weekly email? Were the "Lib" sources wrong in 2008/12?

    I think the biggest example that the GOP rushes to over liberal polling bias is Ohio in 2004, which is why I mentioned it in the OP. Many polling sites (including Rasmussen, btw, which has a conservative lean) had Kerry winning Ohio by a percent or more. He lost by 2 percent. I think that the "rushes to judgment" regarding polling data have cleaned up a little since then, especially because no one wants more Wolf Blitzer type moments of calling a state for a certain candidate.

    I'm not going to be surprised if the major dailies are a percent off (or even more), but that still keeps them within the MoE and a HRC win. Plus, I focused on state-by-state data, not national polling for popular vote.

    Side note: do you think HRC won't concede? Did she give a "I'll keep you in suspense" quote to make people think she wouldn't?
     
  18. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

    How is it a national poll shows Hillary +11 and state polls show NC, FL, OH within margin of error? Agree that national polls are irrelevant if not distracting at this point.
     
  19. Brad Austin

    Brad Austin 2,500+ Posts

    266 is not Trump's best possible outcome. Even Lib sources admit there are narrow paths to 270.
     
  20. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    Trump won't get 16 percent of the black vote, and even if he did, it's more than nullified by his poor performance among white voters.
     
  21. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

    Clinton lead down to +3 pts in average of polls since 10/22 (most range between +1 and +5). Going to get interesting.
     
  22. Horns11

    Horns11 10,000+ Posts

    Keep in mind that I already gave Trump every single swing state within 3 in the OP. That's your FL, NC, OH, IA, AZ, NV, and the at-large congressional districts.

    I also mentioned the states that would have the chance of tipping the election to Trump. So which one is it? NH keeps sliding more to the left with each poll. VA has been solidly in the blue since before the October Access Hollywood reveal. WI seems like it could flip, but with their Senate race, I think the blue votes have better turnout than expected.
     
  23. Horns11

    Horns11 10,000+ Posts

    WHICH average of polls? Three major ones have her +5, +6, +6.
     
  24. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

    Polls since 10/22. You have to do the math yourself. Looking ahead here assuming future polls are likewise.
     
  25. Horns11

    Horns11 10,000+ Posts

    I did 36 polls from the last 6 days (your range that you gave) and it's Clinton +5.222. Now, if you're selectively getting rid of the ones that had her up +10 and keeping the LA Times ones, then sure, it goes down to 3. I think it's more likely that you'd need to balance it out.
     
  26. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

    I just used the polls in RCP that have start date of 10/22 (or 10/21 for tracking polls). Sorry for the confusion.
     
  27. Horns11

    Horns11 10,000+ Posts

    Sorry this is circular. I also used the RCP data and all of the aggregates. If we're really worried about how much HRC is going to win the popular vote by, then I guess this is a nice thread, but my original intent was to discuss the EC. There are scenarios in which she can win the popular vote by 5+ percent and still lose the EC, although that has like a 0.01 percent chance of happening.

    You said it yourself: the state polls are the ones that matter anyhow, and I told Brad and the rest of the thread which states are the ones that Trump should be focusing on. Winning FL isn't enough. Winning OH isn't enough. Winning AZ isn't enough. He'd need to tackle one of the 7 I named. Knowing that he ALSO needs a presence in the MoE states that I awarded him in the OP is going to spread him super-thin. His team would need to be super-selective in getting one of those 7 states. Everyone keeps assuming NH is the one because the math works out nicely, but NH keeps trending upwards for HRC. I think WI or CO are his best shots.
     
  28. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

    I think MN. It is basically northern Iowa, where Trump is doing well. They have elected entertainers before (Ventura and Franken).
     
  29. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

    NV and MN putting Trump over the top. Wouldn't that be crazy!
     
  30. Horns11

    Horns11 10,000+ Posts

    Cray Cray. I don't think it'll be MN, because like I showed in the OP, it would need to be about 165K voters (at the minimum) who were underrepresented in polling data, or just randomly flipped from undecided to Trump within the next 11 days. That's a lot more than the OH 2004 swing, and MN isn't nearly as populated as OH.
     

Share This Page