Sabato's Crystal Ball: Electoral Map

[KSRBEvans]

Larry Sabato is a UVA Government Professor, the head of UVA's Center for Politics and a straight shooter when it comes to political prognostication. His Center for Politics puts out Crystal Ball predictions on House, Senate and Presidential races.

Here's what they had for an early electoral map in May 2015:



Here's what they have now:



Sabato doesn't think it gets into 1964 or 1972 landslide territory, but Clinton would win the swing states and probably North Carolina (which went for Obama in 2008).

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/cry...-that-matters/

[suncat05]

I hope he's way off.
Of course, this criminal investigation into her e-mail server and the contents therein, and this Benghazi situation will be the "flies in the ointment" for her. Especially if the FBI comes back with indictable offenses and the DOJ refuses to indict her over this e-mail server case.
Americans still have a very strong sense of 'fair play'. If it is determined that she broke federal laws and in any way endangered American interests with her conduct, then she IS NOT fit to be the President of the United States. Period.

[KSRBEvans]

His projected map is pretty close to the 2008 electoral map:



Obama beat McCain by 7 points (52.9-45.7).

In that article, Sabato estimates that Hillary wouldn't beat Trump by 1964-1972 landslide numbers, but could get around 55%, which would be a little better than the 2008 numbers.

You can't go just by "this popular margin=this electoral margin", but it's something to consider.

[dan_bgblue]

BE does his crystal ball have any result predictions if Trump is not the candidate and say, Rubio is?

[KSRBEvans]

Dan, I voted for him, but I don't think Rubio's going to be anyone's nominee anytime soon. I could see the convention turning to Cruz, or as a compromise turning to someone who didn't run at all (like Paul Ryan, although I think it's unlikely he'd accept), but I doubt that someone who got trounced would get the nomination.

He talks in the article about what happens if Cruz is the nominee (short version: the outlook improves), but doesn't do a separate map. Here's a snippet:

Now, let’s suppose the Republican nominee is Ted Cruz and not Donald Trump. How much difference would it make in November? Probably, a Clinton-Cruz contest would be closer. RealClearPolitics’ polling average has Clinton defeating Cruz by about three points, while HuffPost’s average has Clinton winning by about four points. Unquestionably, Cruz would have a better chance of overcoming a gap of three or four points than Trump would of bridging a 10 or 11-point difference. At the least, Cruz could firm up the GOP’s chances in Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, and Missouri, and he could turn some of our Leans Democratic states back into Toss-ups.

[dan_bgblue]

Thanks

[StuBleedsBlue2]

If Trump is denied the nomination, he'll run as a 3rd party, or his supporters will stay at home. The Republican party has killed itself by aligning itself with extremists. The inability to nominate a rational moderate in Kasich, or even Rubio to an extent, has basically resulted in the moderate nation to turn its back on considering their nominee, be it Trump or Cruz.

That 2008 map is most likely going to be replicated and considering the high unfavorable ratings, it will be an indictment on the party, more than a coronation for Hillary. However, Democrats will take it and will continue to move a positive, progressive agenda, with the first line of action to appoint the most, hardcore liberal judge to the court, as a punitive action to Republicans.

[CitizenBBN]

Yeah, if the gop was only reasonable Hillary would appoint a moderate.

The gop and the democrats have the same problem, a huge percentage of Americans are sick of their corrupt politics. That's why a guy like trump is willing and why a 74 year old socialist is doing do well too. Same exact reasons, both sides are full of people reaching out to extremists as the only answer to party politics.

Kasich is the obvious choice and the gop would love that choice, but trump keeps winning votes for the same reason Sanders does. If the gop had a choice trump wouldn't win and if the democrats had a choice Sanders wouldn't be running.

My hope is that for once justice prevails and Hillary is indicted. Then this whole thing becomes a chaotic mess and maybe done good comes from it.

Sent using Forum Runner

[suncat05]

Probably not going to happen CBBN.

[bigsky]

Hilary will not only not be indicted; she will be the next president

[CitizenBBN]

I said it was a hope, I didn't say it was much of one.

it's stunning really. Against any reasonable candidate, literally anyone in the initial GOP field but Trump, she loses. Even half the people voting for her don't think she can be trusted.

[KeithKSR]

It's too early to predict electoral votes, as there are unpredictable events that will happen between now and the election that will impact the outcome. Without hurricane Sandy it is likely Romney is running for a second term right now. Hillary is losing ground quickly to Sanders.

People want a change and not politics as usual, Hillary is most definitely politics as usual.

[Doc]

Well, now that Syracuse is out of the NCAA tourney, Bernie can get back to campaigning



vs

[KSRBEvans]

Graphic showing average Democratic Presidential vote in each state from 2000-2012. Interesting to see trends in states like FL, OH, VA, NC, CO, etc.:

[KeithKSR]

Those numbers are based upon the 2012 turnout. I'm doubting that Hillary will get the turnout Obama got in 2012.

[ShoesSwayedBlue]

Those numbers are based upon the 2012 turnout. I'm doubting that Hillary will get the turnout Obama got in 2012.

Yeah she will. Trump's mouth assures it.

[KeithKSR]

Yeah she will. Trump's mouth assures it.

Turnout for Hillary will be nothing like it was for Obama, not even close.

[badrose]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...te_house_watch

[dan_bgblue]

That is interesting. Thanks badrose

[KeithKSR]

That is interesting. Thanks badrose

That poll hasn't gotten much play in the national news. I think this election will be difficult to project, you can't use the 2012 election turnout as a basis for the poll.

[badrose]

That poll hasn't gotten much play in the national news. I think this election will be difficult to project, you can't use the 2012 election turnout as a basis for the poll.

She'll get a bump when this fiasco investigation clears her from wrongdoing.

[CitizenBBN]

She'll get a bump when this fiasco investigation clears her from wrongdoing.

I'm praying, quite literally, that the FBI Director stands up for the rule of law and the future of this nation and publicly calls for an indictment.

Even if one doesn't come and the politicians bury it, if he were to stand up and say the FBI has concluded there is sufficient proof of these felonies, it would at least send a message that these things are still wrong and that the rule of law is still important.

Forget the election, this is about losing our way as a people and putting the rule of individuals ahead of the rule of law. NO ONE can be above the law, no one can be too powerful or too popular to be held accountable for legal wrongdoing.

It is the most bedrock principle of this nation and of Western ideals. we desperately need good people at the FBI and career DOJ offices to stand up and defend that principle even if it costs them their careers. That is a small price to pay for defending the foundation of this nation's liberty.

[Catonahottinroof]

We could only hope for that. I don't see that happening though. It may be a very slow leak of data from disgruntledntled FBI informants or WikiLeaks.

I'm praying, quite literally, that the FBI Director stands up for the rule of law and the future of this nation and publicly calls for an indictment.

Even if one doesn't come and the politicians bury it, if he were to stand up and say the FBI has concluded there is sufficient proof of these felonies, it would at least send a message that these things are still wrong and that the rule of law is still important.

Forget the election, this is about losing our way as a people and putting the rule of individuals ahead of the rule of law. NO ONE can be above the law, no one can be too powerful or too popular to be held accountable for legal wrongdoing.

It is the most bedrock principle of this nation and of Western ideals. we desperately need good people at the FBI and career DOJ offices to stand up and defend that principle even if it costs them their careers. That is a small price to pay for defending the foundation of this nation's liberty.

[CitizenBBN]

We could only hope for that. I don't see that happening though. It may be a very slow leak of data from disgruntledntled FBI informants or WikiLeaks.

I hope for it, but I sure don't hold out hope of it. The Clintons are vicious, they will have made it clear they will go after anyone who dares stand up to them, so it will take a lot of guts to do the right thing.

Obama has already shown the way, with use of the IRS and other agencies to harass people who just have the gall to be donors to the GOP cause. Imagine what they'll do to this guy.

but he MUST take that on and see that what happens to him is nothing compared to the principle he's there to uphold. Law enforcement officers put their very lives on the line every day, he's being asked to do far less.

[KSRBEvans]

FWIW, since 1972 the leader in every polling average 30 days after both conventions has gone on to win the popular vote:



https://mobile.twitter.com/NateSilve...2932161537?p=v

[dan_bgblue]

Thanks BE. That is interesting info to me. Appears that the voting public has their minds made up way ahead of the the actual election and campaigning afterwards does little if anything to change their minds

[KeithKSR]

FWIW, since 1972 the leader in every polling average 30 days after both conventions has gone on to win the popular vote:



https://mobile.twitter.com/NateSilve...2932161537?p=v

Other than the Obama elections, which are turnout anamolies, it appears that the polls undercount the GOP numbers and over count the DNC numbers.

It should also be noted that the earlier than normal convention dates mean 30 days after the conventions are not as close to the elections as they were in the past.

[MickintheHam]

I have no hope that anyone other than the Hildabeast wins.

[badrose]

Rasmussen: Trump: 44% Clinton: 37% (as of Monday)

[KSRBEvans]

BTW, if you want to start freaking out (either positively or negatively), here's Nate Silver's "now cast," a snapshot of what they predict would happen if the election were held today, 7/25:



Of course, the election's not being held today. Dems have their convention this week which will probably move the needle at least a little for them, and lots of time between now and November for events, debates, Russian leaks , etc. But I think the picture's interesting if for nothing else than to see what a Trump road to victory needs to look like: Ohio (no GOP candidate has ever won without winning Ohio), Florida, Pennsylvania. He could lose some group of North Carolina, Nevada, Iowa and/or New Hampshire and still have 270, but he can't lose any of the other big ones and still get there. That's a tough group to win, but if anyone's going to flip rust-belt states it's Trump.

BTW, if you like playing a what-if game, if Trump won all of the states listed above EXCEPT Pennsylvania, you get a 269-269 tie. To the House of Representatives!