The General Election

[HuskerNation1]

By my posts, you know I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm also a conservative and will not vote for Hillary. So 'I ain't got a dog in this fight' other than to say I'm pro-America and want the best person possible for this country.

 

But I'm going to make a not so bold prediction (since I could flip a coin and get the same answer 50% of the time). I get a gut feeling that Trump is going to pull this off and will be our next president. As posted many times before, I don't think he has the temperament or experience to be our president.

 

I base this on the following:

1. Hillary's negatives are almost as about as bad as Trumps

2. The repubs have a universal dislike for Hillary (except for a few establishment types who say they will voter for her)

3. The dems don't necessarily have a universal dislike for Trump, but the large Sander voting block doesn't like Hillary either and may stay home

4. I think there will be more anti-dem Hillary's staying home than Anti-trump conservatives

5. Both the Sander Dems and the anti-establishment Repubs (Cruz and Trump supporters) want change. Hillary won't be seen as a change agent.

6. I don't think the liberal Sander voters will vote for Trump (as noted above, I think they stay home) but I think there will be more moderates moving towards him - those old Reagan blue dog dems - union workers, middle class, patriotic

7. Trump's garbage isn't sticking to him. People want change regardless.

8. Hillary's garbage is getting old - replay of the 1990s, her tenure as SOS, Foundation fund raising, and the FBI email probe could end up being the lid that seals that garbage can and seal her chances.

 

 

I am in the same boat as you and am a pretty mainstream conservative with Rubio as my top choice. Once he left the race, I have been completely disillusioned and am not sure I will watch either party convention this year. There is not much to be excited about. With that said, as each day goes by, I do feel Trump has a good chance of winning the election, as the shock factor of him as a major party's Presidential candidate wears off and people start accepting its going to either be Trump or Hillary. In addition to what you said, here is how I think things may play out:

 

1. Trump is an entertainer and knows how to captivate crowds and the media. Hillary is the polar opposite. Those who are not scared by some of Trumps crazy statements will find him warm and entertaining compared to Hillary who is cold and calculating.

 

2. Trump has more in common with Bernie than Hillary does. Trump is against trade policies that hurt blue collar jobs which is in step with Bernie and will help Trump win potentially Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Also, Trump has been pretty kind toward Bernie, and I saw a poll out the other day that said more Bernie supporters would be voting for Trump than Hillary. Things can certainly change, but that is pretty amazing.

 

3. Trump's is putting together a coalition that goes against the grain, getting fewer Republicans than Romney or McCain got, but way more Independents and Reagan Democrats. Trump has also made some inroads in the black community, and his frank style of talking about how bad Democratic policies have been for blacks may pull in the highest number of blacks voting for the GOP in years.

 

4. Trump is masterful and highlighting his opponents negatives and making them stick.

 

5. While common sense would suggest that Trump has a problem with women voters, when Bill's women come forward and talk about how Hillary was involved in covering up the affairs, it's not going to be pretty. Think about the "swift boat" attacks against Kerry in 2004, with numerous women coming forward to tell their story about Hillary's role in hiding their fake marriage.

 

6. Hillary has been on the political scene for years and has little accomplishments to show, and thus most voters know what they are getting (or not getting) with her. Trump is a bit of a wildcard that could have some upside if he can actually cut deals and make things happen, so if Americans are in a mood to give an outsider a try this cycle, he will get 75+% of those voters.

[HuskerShark]

 

 

 

 

I would agree with you that the Dems will unify behind Hillary more than the Repubs behind Trump.

The problem for the Democrats is that many of them will end up voting for Trump. Many Republicans who don't want to vote for Trump will probably go 3rd party with their votes.

What basis do you have for making this statement?

Not going to look it up right now, but there was a poll of Bernie supporters and 30+% said they'd vote for Trump in the general election.

[Whistlebritches]

 

 

 

I would agree with you that the Dems will unify behind Hillary more than the Repubs behind Trump.

The problem for the Democrats is that many of them will end up voting for Trump. Many Republicans who don't want to vote for Trump will probably go 3rd party with their votes.

What basis do you have for making this statement?

Not going to look it up right now, but there was a poll of Bernie supporters and 30+% said they'd vote for Trump in the general election.

 

You may be right but it's still way too early to know. I'd group a lot of that 30% with all the #nevertrump people. Come November and their choice is the opposite party it's going to be a fairly easy decision.

[HuskerShark]

 

 

 

 

I would agree with you that the Dems will unify behind Hillary more than the Repubs behind Trump.

The problem for the Democrats is that many of them will end up voting for Trump. Many Republicans who don't want to vote for Trump will probably go 3rd party with their votes.

What basis do you have for making this statement?

Not going to look it up right now, but there was a poll of Bernie supporters and 30+% said they'd vote for Trump in the general election.

 

You may be right but it's still way too early to know. I'd group a lot of that 30% with all the #nevertrump people. Come November and their choice is the opposite party it's going to be a fairly easy decision.

 

 

I think the results in the Democratic primaries are pretty telling. Hillary is obviously going to win, it's out of reach for Sanders, and he keeps winning states. He's won 3 of the last 4, in fact, and the 1 he didn't win, he lost by like .5%. That tells me that a lot of people are (rightfully) unwilling to vote for Hillary.

 

People keep saying that Trump "has no chance" against Hillary. While I have a fair amount of bias, I can honestly say I see Trump winning, and I don't think it will be particularly close. So much of our country is just sick and tired of the same old political garbage in the White House, and this is the movement that's going to change that. And plus, I just honestly don't understand what type of stance it would take to support Hillary Clinton...

[BigRedBuster]

I personally believe that a large portion of the Bernie supporters simply won't vote in the general. He was largely supported by people in their 20s and those tend to already be very low in voter turnout compared to other age groups. Without the Bern in the election, they will see no reason to vote.

[Red Five]

http://www.270towin.com/maps/clinton-trump-electoral-map

 

 

This site is great. It also illustrates Trump's (and any other R's) problem with getting elected. The below is a map of every state that has voted the same in the last 4 elections (since 2000). Assuming that doesn't change, Hillary has a huge head start and only needs 28 more votes to win. Basically Trump has to win Ohio and Florida to have any chance. And even then he has to flip some states that have been D over the last 2 elections (NV, CO, NM, IA, VA, NH) or PA which some think is in play, but hasn't gone R since 88.

 

 

[knapplc]

Yep. Trump has a major uphill battle, and once the Bernie supporters concede defeat and throw their weight behind Hillary, it gets much, much harder for Trump.

 

Bernie Sanders fans may not like Hillary Clinton, but they won't vote for Donald Trump

 

Presuming Clinton gets the delegates she needs for a presidential run, she may brilliantly nominate Sanders as her Veep, which would basically lock up the presidency for her. Trump's only shot is to 1) have Bernie run a third-party campaign, something I doubt seriously he'd do because it could put Trump in the White House, or 2) court Bernie voters to take away from Clinton's base. Problem with that is, Bernie & Trump are about the most opposite of all candidates in this field (see below). It's a far shorter leap to support Clinton than Trump for Bernie Fans.

 

[Danny Bateman]

Red, 270toWin is awesome. I've had some pretty good discussion lately about how a Clinton v. Trump election could change the electoral map. Trump seems to be under the delusion that he could win blue fortresses like PA or even NY. I can't tell if he really believes it or if it's just the bluster. He'll never win NY and I seriously doubt PA.

Anybody got any ideas on how the map could change? Personally, I'm of the mind Trump's complete lack of minority support could put AZ and GA in play to go blue, with high Hispanic and minority population around Atlanta booming. Trump's best shot to expand his map would be the Rust Belt, IMO, with his talk on trade deals. I could see it selling there.

 

Knapp, I'm pretty sure the only Sanders supporters who'd vote Trump have bought in fully to the "anti-establishment" line he's drawn in the sand and view it as a big FU to a system they view as corrupt. They're the ones who have bought too fully into the portrait that Sanders has painted that Clinton is completely corrupt and completely a puppet to special interests. I also suspect they likely have higher level of privilege than most of us and feel most insulated from the horrific steps backwards a Trump presidency would bring. Policy-wise, they can't agree with him on anything except anti-free trade, pro-protectionism, but they definitely view him as anti-establishment.

 

Also, one of the most critical planks of Bernie's platform in his own mind is climate change. I'll just leave this here...

 

[Red Five]

Red, 270toWin is awesome. I've had some pretty good discussion lately about how a Clinton v. Trump election could change the electoral map. Trump seems to be under the delusion that he could win blue fortresses like PA or even NY. I can't tell if he really believes it or if it's just the bluster. He'll never win NY and I seriously doubt PA.

 

Anybody got any ideas on how the map could change? Personally, I'm of the mind Trump's complete lack of minority support could put AZ and GA in play to go blue, with high Hispanic and minority population around Atlanta booming. Trump's best shot to expand his map would be the Rust Belt, IMO, with his talk on trade deals. I could see it selling there.

 

Taking Trump/Hillary out of the picture, that map above outlines the Rs problem in winning no matter who the candidates are. The Rs are currently at a disadvantage in winning the presidency and need to do something to change that. What it is, I don't know. But I also don't think that Trump is the answer.

 

Looking at 2016, NY isn't in play. Period. Anyone who suggests otherwise is delusional. I guess PA could be in play, but I doubt it.

 

I don't know about GA, but I could totally see AZ going D just due to the changing demographics.

 

I wonder if the Clinton name could carry any states that Bill won in 92/96 but have been R since. Somewhere like Missouri where Obama was within 0.1% of winning in 08?

[Danny Bateman]

 

Red, 270toWin is awesome. I've had some pretty good discussion lately about how a Clinton v. Trump election could change the electoral map. Trump seems to be under the delusion that he could win blue fortresses like PA or even NY. I can't tell if he really believes it or if it's just the bluster. He'll never win NY and I seriously doubt PA.

 

Anybody got any ideas on how the map could change? Personally, I'm of the mind Trump's complete lack of minority support could put AZ and GA in play to go blue, with high Hispanic and minority population around Atlanta booming. Trump's best shot to expand his map would be the Rust Belt, IMO, with his talk on trade deals. I could see it selling there.

 

Taking Trump/Hillary out of the picture, that map above outlines the Rs problem in winning no matter who the candidates are. The Rs are currently at a disadvantage in winning the presidency and need to do something to change that. What it is, I don't know. But I also don't think that Trump is the answer.

 

Looking at 2016, NY isn't in play. Period. Anyone who suggests otherwise is delusional. I guess PA could be in play, but I doubt it.

 

I don't know about GA, but I could totally see AZ going D just due to the changing demographics.

 

I wonder if the Clinton name could carry any states that Bill won in 92/96 but have been R since. Somewhere like Missouri where Obama was within 0.1% of winning in 08?

 

 

I highly doubt PA as well. From my understanding of the state, too much of the population is centered in Philly, and that's likely going to go Clinton by a wide enough margin that it outweighs Trump's efforts in the more rural parts of the state. Several Philly folks I've talked with on Reddit seem convinced that he has no shot.

 

I view GA and AZ as long shots, but you never know. I think Trump could open up states that a weak red leans like that. Demographics are huge. It sounds crazy now, but someday we'll talk about Texas as a purple state, if the Hispanic population continues growing there.

 

Not a Bill Clinton state, but I think Trump also puts North Carolina in play as well. Obama won it by the narrowest of margins (.32 points) in 2008 and lost it in 2012.

[HuskerNation1]

 

http://www.270towin.com/maps/clinton-trump-electoral-map

 

 

This site is great. It also illustrates Trump's (and any other R's) problem with getting elected. The below is a map of every state that has voted the same in the last 4 elections (since 2000). Assuming that doesn't change, Hillary has a huge head start and only needs 28 more votes to win. Basically Trump has to win Ohio and Florida to have any chance. And even then he has to flip some states that have been D over the last 2 elections (NV, CO, NM, IA, VA, NH) or PA which some think is in play, but hasn't gone R since 88.

 

 

 

 

Sometimes looking at recent election styles can be a good predictor of the next election. This year, however, I think all the rules are thrown out the door. We are starting with 2 candidates who both have high negatives, one is a bully, and the other a pathological liar. The bully has a long history of "winning" and despite what some may feel about his personality, it's hard to argue that he's not been a successful businessman overall (I know he declared bankruptcy). The pathological liar has spent her entire life on the political scene preparing for this opportunity to become POTUS, and despite her many years in service, "successful" is not a word that would immediately come to mind. With all that said, here is how the 2016 map may look different than 2008 and 2012:

 

1. Florida is Trump turf given his ties to that state. Hillary is popular there too, but I see this as a flip.

 

2. Upper Midwest-This is the biggest region where you may see some states flip in Trump's favor. His messaging about blue collar workers getting screwed is similar to Bernie's message and plays well in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin. Of those 4 states, Ohio is the most purple to begin with, and I would place odds on Trump winning Ohio. If he flips just one or two of the other states, its pretty much over.

 

3. A few other states are going to be very close, including New Hampshire, Nevada, and Colorado.

 

4. The question should be raised as to where can Hillary expand the elector map from what Obama got last time. Obama won North Carolina in 2008, and Romney won it in 2012. This is the ONLY state I could see Hillary flipping from 2012.

 

So here is my early prediction of the flips.

 

1. Trump picks up Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nevada, and New Hampshire.

 

2. Hillary doesn't pick up any new states but gets all the states Obama won minus those just mentioned that Trump flips.

 

Where does this put the final tally:

 

Trump at 279 electoral votes

 

Hillary at 259 electoral votes

 

Now what is interesting about this, if Hillary could flip North Carolina, she would win. Meanwhile, if everything predicted holds true, but Hillary holds Wisconsin, they are deadlocked at 269 each. How fitting would that be for an end to this crazy presidential cycle.

 

Oh one more thing. I am a mainstream Conservative and not a Trump fan, but he was able to take down the deepest and most talented and diverse pool of candidates to ever run on either side of the aisle, so this notion that he can't beat Hillary is ludicrous at this point. A new national poll just came out tonight and he's besting HIllary by 3 points.

[darkhorse85]

That three points is within the margin of error, however. But it definitely seems that he's gaining ground.

[TGHusker]

I personally believe that a large portion of the Bernie supporters simply won't vote in the general. He was largely supported by people in their 20s and those tend to already be very low in voter turnout compared to other age groups. Without the Bern in the election, they will see no reason to vote.

Just what I was saying above. as I noted, I think the Cruz supports will for the most part come around to Trump. I see a lot of the younger Bernie supporters fading back into the political back waters - not to be seen or heard from until Elizabeth Warren announces her intentions to run in 2020

[TGHusker]

 

 

Red, 270toWin is awesome. I've had some pretty good discussion lately about how a Clinton v. Trump election could change the electoral map. Trump seems to be under the delusion that he could win blue fortresses like PA or even NY. I can't tell if he really believes it or if it's just the bluster. He'll never win NY and I seriously doubt PA.

 

Anybody got any ideas on how the map could change? Personally, I'm of the mind Trump's complete lack of minority support could put AZ and GA in play to go blue, with high Hispanic and minority population around Atlanta booming. Trump's best shot to expand his map would be the Rust Belt, IMO, with his talk on trade deals. I could see it selling there.

 

Taking Trump/Hillary out of the picture, that map above outlines the Rs problem in winning no matter who the candidates are. The Rs are currently at a disadvantage in winning the presidency and need to do something to change that. What it is, I don't know. But I also don't think that Trump is the answer.

 

Looking at 2016, NY isn't in play. Period. Anyone who suggests otherwise is delusional. I guess PA could be in play, but I doubt it.

 

I don't know about GA, but I could totally see AZ going D just due to the changing demographics.

 

I wonder if the Clinton name could carry any states that Bill won in 92/96 but have been R since. Somewhere like Missouri where Obama was within 0.1% of winning in 08?

 

 

I highly doubt PA as well. From my understanding of the state, too much of the population is centered in Philly, and that's likely going to go Clinton by a wide enough margin that it outweighs Trump's efforts in the more rural parts of the state. Several Philly folks I've talked with on Reddit seem convinced that he has no shot.

 

I view GA and AZ as long shots, but you never know. I think Trump could open up states that a weak red leans like that. Demographics are huge. It sounds crazy now, but someday we'll talk about Texas as a purple state, if the Hispanic population continues growing there.

 

Not a Bill Clinton state, but I think Trump also puts North Carolina in play as well. Obama won it by the narrowest of margins (.32 points) in 2008 and lost it in 2012.

 

Does putting Newt on the ticket (like some have speculated) bring GA into the Trump camp or is Newt more of a negative within the state?

[Red Five]

 

 

http://www.270towin.com/maps/clinton-trump-electoral-map

 

 

This site is great. It also illustrates Trump's (and any other R's) problem with getting elected. The below is a map of every state that has voted the same in the last 4 elections (since 2000). Assuming that doesn't change, Hillary has a huge head start and only needs 28 more votes to win. Basically Trump has to win Ohio and Florida to have any chance. And even then he has to flip some states that have been D over the last 2 elections (NV, CO, NM, IA, VA, NH) or PA which some think is in play, but hasn't gone R since 88.

 

 

 

 

Sometimes looking at recent election styles can be a good predictor of the next election. This year, however, I think all the rules are thrown out the door. We are starting with 2 candidates who both have high negatives, one is a bully, and the other a pathological liar. The bully has a long history of "winning" and despite what some may feel about his personality, it's hard to argue that he's not been a successful businessman overall (I know he declared bankruptcy). The pathological liar has spent her entire life on the political scene preparing for this opportunity to become POTUS, and despite her many years in service, "successful" is not a word that would immediately come to mind. With all that said, here is how the 2016 map may look different than 2008 and 2012:

 

1. Florida is Trump turf given his ties to that state. Hillary is popular there too, but I see this as a flip.

 

2. Upper Midwest-This is the biggest region where you may see some states flip in Trump's favor. His messaging about blue collar workers getting screwed is similar to Bernie's message and plays well in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin. Of those 4 states, Ohio is the most purple to begin with, and I would place odds on Trump winning Ohio. If he flips just one or two of the other states, its pretty much over.

 

3. A few other states are going to be very close, including New Hampshire, Nevada, and Colorado.

 

4. The question should be raised as to where can Hillary expand the elector map from what Obama got last time. Obama won North Carolina in 2008, and Romney won it in 2012. This is the ONLY state I could see Hillary flipping from 2012.

 

So here is my early prediction of the flips.

 

1. Trump picks up Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nevada, and New Hampshire.

 

2. Hillary doesn't pick up any new states but gets all the states Obama won minus those just mentioned that Trump flips.

 

Where does this put the final tally:

 

Trump at 279 electoral votes

 

Hillary at 259 electoral votes

 

Now what is interesting about this, if Hillary could flip North Carolina, she would win. Meanwhile, if everything predicted holds true, but Hillary holds Wisconsin, they are deadlocked at 269 each. How fitting would that be for an end to this crazy presidential cycle.

 

Oh one more thing. I am a mainstream Conservative and not a Trump fan, but he was able to take down the deepest and most talented and diverse pool of candidates to ever run on either side of the aisle, so this notion that he can't beat Hillary is ludicrous at this point. A new national poll just came out tonight and he's besting HIllary by 3 points.

 

 

A lot to comment on in here, but I will point out 2 things in red above

 

I don't think that Hillary has anything to worry about in MN, WI, or MI. I especially can't see a WI flip. It was one of the few states where Trump wasn't very competitive in the primary, losing by 13 points. And if Ryan doesn't get fully onboard with Trump, not sure WI follows suit. There aren't very many recent polls there (last one 4/20), but Hillary has lead by about 10 points in all of the ones in 2016.

 

As for the deepest, most talented, and most diverse pool of candidates... Well there were 15ish, so that's deep. And there was a woman, a African American, and a Latino, so I guess that's diverse. But most talented? I don't know about that. If those are the most talented candidates that we have, god save this county. I mean Ted Cruz by all accounts is the most hated man in the Senate and finished 2nd. We will agree to disagree there.