Bishop Hedd Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 Thoughts? Gone soon will be that indelible image of the 2004 electoral map of the US which had the whole west coast, most of the Great Lake states and the Eastern seaboard Blue with everything else a big Red. It will continue like this thanks to changing demographics. North Carolina and Virginia have changed that much in the last four years alone that they are in play now. The Gorgia of today has changed in the respect that it bears little resemblence to what it was 8 years ago, let alone 20 or 30. Can we even think about Texas in the blue 8 years from now?
pBills Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 Virginia looks as though it will be blue. You are right to question Texas. McCain only up 10pts Texas... that's odd. He should be by 15-20pts.
Chilly Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 Virginia looks as though it will be blue. You are right to question Texas. McCain only up 10pts Texas... that's odd. He should be by 15-20pts. Don't know much about politics in Texas, eh?
molson_golden2002 Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 A lot depends on how Obama--assuming he wins--and the Democratic majority run the country. If they do even a reasonably good job people will keep voting Democratic
Bishop Hedd Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 Do you know what a realigning election is?Do us all a favor and look up the term at Wiki and explain it to us. Jeezus!
ieatcrayonz Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 Is it true that they picked blue for Democrats so it wouldn't be so obvious that many of them are communists and that red would tip their hand? Plus most Republicans are cold hearted and blue would emphasize this.
Chilly Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 well then enlighten me Party ID in Texas isn't nearly that far off, it's been around a 10% difference between responders to the first part of the question. The gap becomes even more narrow when you take into account leaners to be about equal. Do us all a favor and look up the term at Wiki and explain it to us. Jeezus! How bout you go open a textbook instead? You might realize that realigning elections are based off of coalition groups, which haven't changed all that much this election.
pBills Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 Party ID in Texas isn't nearly that far off, it's been around a 10% difference between responders to the first part of the question. The gap becomes even more narrow when you take into account leaners to be about equal. How bout you go open a textbook instead? You might realize that realigning elections are based off of coalition groups, which haven't changed all that much this election. Texas is one of those states where it shouldn't be that close. That was my point.
Chilly Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 Texas is one of those states where it shouldn't be that close. That was my point. Let's review the conversation: 1.) You said it shouldn't be "that close". 2.) I pointed out that the Republican lead is currently slightly higher than the Party ID advantage (and around historical Party ID averages). 3.) You again claim it shouldn't be "that close". What about part #2 didn't you understand?
pBills Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 Let's review the conversation: 1.) You said it shouldn't be "that close". 2.) I pointed out that the Republican lead is currently slightly higher than the Party ID advantage (and around historical Party ID averages). 3.) You again claim it shouldn't be "that close". What about part #2 didn't you understand? I am looking at it this way... in pretty much every state he currently running half of where Bush was in 2004. And in typically over the top red states. That can't be good. McCain +10.6 Now Bush +22.9 2004 Bush +21.3 200
ieatcrayonz Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 I am looking at it this way... in pretty much every state he currently running half of where Bush was in 2004. And in typically over the top red states. That can't be good. McCain +10.6 Now Bush +22.9 2004 Bush +21.3 200 Like it or not, and I don't , there are many hippies in the media. They always report in favor of democrats. It would be interesting to see the polls from Early October in 2000 and 2004. You really can't compare October poll numbers to actual election results if if the hippies want to make you look at it that way.
Chilly Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 I am looking at it this way... in pretty much every state he currently running half of where Bush was in 2004. And in typically over the top red states. That can't be good. McCain +10.6 Now Bush +22.9 2004 Bush +21.3 200 Do you happen to know which state Bush was the governor of, by chance?
ieatcrayonz Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 Do you happen to know which state Bush was the governor of, by chance? The state of confusion?
erynthered Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 The state of confusion? The state of De nile?
pBills Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 Do you happen to know which state Bush was the governor of, by chance? Ummm , let me think? why do I bother with you.
Chilly Posted October 7, 2008 Posted October 7, 2008 Ummm , let me think? why do I bother with you. Let me rephrase, then. Expecting McCain to come close to a Presidential Candidate who was a popular governor in his state, when the results weren't inline with general Party ID, is unrealistic.
Recommended Posts