Page 129 of 146 FirstFirst ... 2979119127128129130131139 ... LastLast
Results 2,561 to 2,580 of 2912
  1. #2561
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by PackMan97 View Post
    I think this is only news if it is Trump voters abandoning Trump, and it's not in the least.
    Well, he did lose The Mooch. . . .

    My takeaway from that video is -- the Dems should nominate a moderate. But dead horse and all that.
    1991 -- 1992 -- 2001 -- 2010 -- 2015

  2. #2562
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Well, he did lose The Mooch. . . .
    Probably, on purpose, like most people.

  3. #2563
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    I'd tell ya, but then I'd have to kill ya
    Quote Originally Posted by PackMan97 View Post
    I don't know why that would scare anyone in the GOP.

    1. We have a woman who didn't vote for Trump in 2016 (wrote in McCain) saying she wouldn't vote for Trump in 2020.
    2. We have a man who voted against Hillary and truth be told, will likely vote against the Democrat again.
    3. We have a young person who will do what young people do and vote for a Democrat.

    how is any of that scary?

    I think this is only news if it is Trump voters abandoning Trump, and it's not in the least.
    You are absolutely correct on 1 and 2.

    However, on 3 the GOP should be scared. Yes, the youngsters have never turned out like they should (though I believe that is changing somewhat). But every day there are more of them turning 18, and every day there are fewer old white men.

  4. #2564
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North of Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by dudog84 View Post
    You are absolutely correct on 1 and 2.

    However, on 3 the GOP should be scared. Yes, the youngsters have never turned out like they should (though I believe that is changing somewhat). But every day there are more of them turning 18, and every day there are fewer old white men.
    I agree with you in theory, though as one who is rapidly approaching the day when I join the cohort of “old white man” it is worth noting that that group does repopulate itself to some extent.

  5. #2565
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Lynchburg, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by dudog84 View Post
    You are absolutely correct on 1 and 2.

    However, on 3 the GOP should be scared. Yes, the youngsters have never turned out like they should (though I believe that is changing somewhat). But every day there are more of them turning 18, and every day there are fewer old white men.
    It's also true that every day some young voters become middle-aged voters and some middle-aged voters become senior voters. A person who votes with one party in their youth may or may not vote the same way as they age. There's some reason to believe that voters become more conservative over time (this is a study of voting patterns in the UK, but the psychological process of aging would explain a similar pattern in American politics).

    By taking the average of seven different groups of several thousand people each over time – covering most periods between general elections since the 1960s – we found that the maximum possible ageing effect averages out at a 0.38% increase in Conservative voters per year. The minimum possible ageing effect was only somewhat lower, at 0.32% per year.

    This may not sound like a massive effect, but over the course of a lifetime these increments do add up. Even if only the minimum estimate is correct, the difference between 20- and 80-year-olds is nearly 20 percentage points...

    Our evidence suggests that this is probably not due to “social ageing” (getting married, having children or an increasing income), but rather to the direct psychological processes of ageing that tend to make people more resistant to change. This, in turn, makes people gravitate towards parties that defend the status quo.

  6. #2566
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    CNBC article on the impact the trade war with China is having on farmers, to put some meat to our recent discussion on the topic:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/10/trum...----china.html
    1991 -- 1992 -- 2001 -- 2010 -- 2015

  7. #2567
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    CNBC article on the impact the trade war with China is having on farmers, to put some soybean to our recent discussion on the topic:
    FIFY
    Rich
    "Failure is Not a Destination"
    Coach K on the Dan Patrick Show, December 22, 2016

  8. #2568
    Quote Originally Posted by mph View Post
    It's also true that every day some young voters become middle-aged voters and some middle-aged voters become senior voters. A person who votes with one party in their youth may or may not vote the same way as they age. There's some reason to believe that voters become more conservative over time (this is a study of voting patterns in the UK, but the psychological process of aging would explain a similar pattern in American politics).
    This would be of more importance if there were a 1:1 exchange and population proportions remained static and all voted at the same rates. That's not the case. In the last few years the younger generations' turnout rates are beginning to catch up to their recent eligible voter share dominance. Gen X, Millennials, and Post-Millennials became the majority of total eligible voters in 2010 but in 2014 were still casting fewer total votes than older eligible voters. That is, their turnout sucked while the older folks' rate stayed in the 65%-ish range.

    The younger generation turnout rate skyrocketed in the 2018 mid-terms though and partially explains the Democrats' success. For the first time in a while, their total vote roughly matched the older generations' total vote. All that being said, due to life expectancy increases and hitting the crest of boomers, the 2020 old fogie proportion of eligible voters is expected to increase slightly. Here's Pew on some additional 2020 electorate trends.
    Last edited by bundabergdevil; 08-12-2019 at 05:26 PM.

  9. #2569
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    This would be of more importance if there were a 1:1 exchange and population proportions remained static and all voted at the same rates. That's not the case. In the last few years the younger generations' turnout rates are beginning to catch up to their recent eligible voter share dominance. Gen X, Millennials, and Post-Millennials became the majority of total eligible voters in 2010 but in 2014 were still casting fewer total votes than older eligible voters. That is, their turnout sucked while the older folks' rate stayed in the 65%-ish range.

    The younger generation turnout rate skyrocketed in the 2018 mid-terms though and partially explains the Democrats' success. For the first time in a while, their total vote roughly matched the older generations' total vote. All that being said, due to life expectancy increases and hitting the crest of boomers, the 2020 old fogie proportion of eligible voters is expected to increase slightly. Here's Pew on some additional 2020 electorate trends.
    Fascinating. I wonder how this breaks down in the PA —> OH —> WI swath? If the electorate in that section of the country skews Boomer+, I think Biden and Warren will perform best on the D side of the aisle.
    Carolina delenda est

  10. #2570
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Per Nate Silver, the trade war is likely lowering Trump’s re-election chances by 5% to 10%. Significant for a candidate who has rarely tried to expand his base.

    https://twitter.com/natesilver538/st...491345925?s=21
    1991 -- 1992 -- 2001 -- 2010 -- 2015

  11. #2571
    With 2 weeks to qualify, here's where the current Dem candidates stand in terms of who's in and who's out. Copying the list of to-date qualifiers below. I'm pretty surprised by how poorly a couple of the Democratic governors running have fared...just no momentum or interest despite some solid experience bona fides.

    Apologize for formatting. First 2 checks indicate they've qualified. Next numbers are qualifying polls and number donors

    CANDIDATE POLL DONORS POLLS DONORS
    Joe Biden ✓ ✓ 13 >130k
    Pete Buttigieg ✓ ✓ 13 >130
    Kamala Harris ✓ ✓ 13 >130
    Bernie Sanders ✓ ✓ 13 >130
    Elizabeth Warren✓ ✓ 13 >130
    Cory Booker ✓ ✓ 10 >130
    Beto O’Rourke ✓ ✓ 8 >130
    Amy Klobuchar ✓ ✓ 6 >130
    Andrew Yang ✓ ✓ 4 >130

  12. #2572
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    With 2 weeks to qualify, here's where the current Dem candidates stand in terms of who's in and who's out. Copying the list of to-date qualifiers below. I'm pretty surprised by how poorly a couple of the Democratic governors running have fared...just no momentum or interest despite some solid experience bona fides.

    Apologize for formatting. First 2 checks indicate they've qualified. Next numbers are qualifying polls and number donors

    CANDIDATE POLL DONORS POLLS DONORS
    Joe Biden ✓ ✓ 13 >130k
    Pete Buttigieg ✓ ✓ 13 >130
    Kamala Harris ✓ ✓ 13 >130
    Bernie Sanders ✓ ✓ 13 >130
    Elizabeth Warren✓ ✓ 13 >130
    Cory Booker ✓ ✓ 10 >130
    Beto O’Rourke ✓ ✓ 8 >130
    Amy Klobuchar ✓ ✓ 6 >130
    Andrew Yang ✓ ✓ 4 >130
    Interesting, thanks. Castro is one poll result away; Steyer is one poll and some donors short. Everyone else seems like a long shot but not sure how many more qualifying polls there are.
    1991 -- 1992 -- 2001 -- 2010 -- 2015

  13. #2573
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    definite progress to the extent that I have a pretty good idea of who these people are...

  14. #2574
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Per Nate Silver, the trade war is likely lowering Trump’s re-election chances by 5% to 10%. Significant for a candidate who has rarely tried to expand his base.

    https://twitter.com/natesilver538/st...491345925?s=21
    To be honest, his Trade War with China is one of the things I think he's doing right...but China is what keeps me up at night these days. I pray daily for the folks in Hong Kong that only want the right to self rule.

  15. #2575
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Quote Originally Posted by PackMan97 View Post
    To be honest, his Trade War with China is one of the things I think he's doing right...but China is what keeps me up at night these days. I pray daily for the folks in Hong Kong that only want the right to self rule.
    He's still reasonably strong in the soybean states who are thus far the big losers in all this...not sure the government subsidies can last forever...

  16. #2576
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by PackMan97 View Post
    I pray daily for the folks in Hong Kong that only want the right to self rule.
    I honestly cannot see any end to the Hong Kong crisis that does not involve either a) China capitulating and severing Hong Kong's leadership from Beijing's control or b) a brutal, armed crackdown that will likely make Tiananmen Square seem tame by comparison.

    I suspect you can guess which of those is way way way more likely.

    -----------------------------------------------------------

    Sorry for the distraction... back to Presidential politics. Here is a look at news coverage of the candidates last week that shows Beto had a very, very good week (because his hometown had a very, very bad week) and Kamala Harris' star continues to fade.



    -Jason "if Beto surges in polling, it will be strange to reflect on how his campaign may have been saved by a terrible, random tragedy" Evans
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  17. #2577
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    In the category of "It will not go this way on election day," NY Magazine has taken a look at Trump's approval rating on all 50 states and used that to extrapolate how the electoral college would go if the election were to be held today. They have the democratic nominee winning in a squeaker, 419 electoral votes to 119 for Trump.



    It is worth noting that this thing is badly flawed in that folks can disapprove of a candidate and still vote for that candidate. I am sure there are a lot of folks who did not particularly like Trump in 2016 but liked Hillary a lot less and so they voted for Donald. Approval ratings are a lot lot lot different from "who would you vote for?" The notion that Utah is trending blue is patently absurd.

    -Jason "until we actually knnow the Dem nominee, head-to-head polls are sorta not meaningful, IMO" Evans
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  18. #2578
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    It is worth noting that this thing is badly flawed in that folks can disapprove of a candidate and still vote for that candidate. I am sure there are a lot of folks who did not particularly like Trump in 2016 but liked Hillary a lot less and so they voted for Donald. Approval ratings are a lot lot lot different from "who would you vote for?" The notion that Utah is trending blue is patently absurd.

    -Jason "until we actually knnow the Dem nominee, head-to-head polls are sorta not meaningful, IMO" Evans
    I think this bears repeating because people tend to forget (or not realize this). Just because I support policy X doesn't mean I am going to vote for the candidate who is loudest about X or has the strongest stance on X. Quite possibly I'm voting primarily based on issue Y, so long as my chosen candidate has some bare minimum level of support for X (I may even vote solely based on Y without regard for X, even though I ostensibly support X as well).

    That would have been much easier with real issues but I was worried it would run afoul of neutrality even if I intentionally picked policies that aren't mine as examples.

  19. #2579
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    In the category of "It will not go this way on election day," NY Magazine has taken a look at Trump's approval rating on all 50 states and used that to extrapolate how the electoral college would go if the election were to be held today. They have the democratic nominee winning in a squeaker, 419 electoral votes to 119 for Trump.



    It is worth noting that this thing is badly flawed in that folks can disapprove of a candidate and still vote for that candidate. I am sure there are a lot of folks who did not particularly like Trump in 2016 but liked Hillary a lot less and so they voted for Donald. Approval ratings are a lot lot lot different from "who would you vote for?" The notion that Utah is trending blue is patently absurd.

    -Jason "until we actually knnow the Dem nominee, head-to-head polls are sorta not meaningful, IMO" Evans
    Yes and no. Yes, in that Utah will almost certainly go red in 2020, even if it is Trump. No, in that it does not surprise me in the least to see President Trump's approval rating in the dirt there. In fact, Utah is only one of 3 states (along with AZ and NM) where his approval rating has dropped from majority approve to majority disapprove.

    Two reasons for that --- 1) While Utah is very socially conservative, to say that Trump's personal style contrasts with the Mormon cultural norms, would be a rather big understatement, and; 2) Unlike other socially conservative Republicans, Mormons embrace and encourage progressive, humane immigration policies. Mormonism is one of the fastest growing religions in the world and, in the US, part of that is on the back immigrants. Here's one article from SL Tribune with some quotes from the Mormon church. Plenty of others out there but many of there stances fall more under the Dem's umbrella than Trump's...

  20. #2580
    I think it's fascinating that Texas might turn blue. There are a few reason for the democratic optimism. Following a national trend, those with college degrees are shifting to voting democrat over republican. Texas has had a large increase in college educated population over the years. To a lesser extent, the demographics of Texas have changed with more Hispanics. Hispanic voting is not as linear as many think (see Florida Hispanic/Latino Republicans) but Texas has a lot of Mexican-Americans and surprisingly, a lot of the Puerto Ricans displaced by the hurricane have made their way to Texas. Because they are U.S. Citizens, those Puerto Ricans living in Texas are immediately eligible to vote. It is safe to say they will vote Dem (or more accurately, vote against Trump). With NY and California solidly blue; Texas voting blue would be bad news for any republican looking to win a national election.

    It makes you wonder if Dems are willing to put in the resources necessary to turn Texas. Those resources could be used in Florida and the Midwest. What if you allocate resources to Texas and still lose the state? That could be a HUGE mistake.

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/08/polit...020/index.html
    https://washingtonmonthly.com/2019/0...s-permanently/

Similar Threads

  1. 2020 Duke men's basketball recruiting
    By Duke95 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 850
    Last Post: 08-22-2019, 08:20 AM
  2. One n dones and returning players. 2018-2020
    By proelitedota in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-18-2017, 10:03 AM
  3. Coming to the 2020 Olympics: 3-on-3 basketball!
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-09-2017, 11:44 AM
  4. Cutcliffe Extended Through 2020-21
    By BD80 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-01-2017, 04:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •