A 2016 prediction

[op2]

I think she may have beaten Mitt because he would not have brought out a lot of first time voters like Trump did with his populist appeal for some folks. In retrospect, I'm glad she lost, if she had won then that would have been 12 years of Democrats in the white house and the GOP could have continued to suck up state offices and just based their appeal on opposing the Democrats. With Trump at the helm they have to show they can govern and they aren't exactly broadening their base. "Demographics" may cause chuckles on here but I like statistics and the GOP is doing badly with groups that are growing and doing great with groups that are shrinking.

One good thing about Trump winning is that all this stuff about men abusing women coming out would never have come out had Hillary lost and although it's chaotic now it's going to be better in the long run.

The long run demographics are indeed against the GOP unless they can broaden their appeal. I thought the demographic consideration was going to kick in in the 2016 POTUS election but I underestimated just how bad a candidate Hilary was. But it's going to kick in eventually unless the GOP broadens their appeal.

 

[mneilmont]

In retrospect I think anyone the Republicans nominated would have beaten Hillary in 2016. I misjudged just how bad a candidate Hillary was.

Opie, did you intend to use "thank" instead of "think" for your 4th word? You never did impress me as a strong Hillary supporter.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

Don't think so. Trump won, as I predicted he would

You mean like this?

When Trump announced he was running in June of 2015......I made the prediction that he would easily beat Hillary. I had no idea why he has repeatedly done such ridiculous and dumb things. He had a golden opportunity to become the President and he totally blew it.

 

[dave]

I think she may have beaten Mitt because he would not have brought out a lot of first time voters like Trump did with his populist appeal for some folks. In retrospect, I'm glad she lost, if she had won then that would have been 12 years of Democrats in the white house and the GOP could have continued to suck up state offices and just based their appeal on opposing the Democrats. With Trump at the helm they have to show they can govern and they aren't exactly broadening their base. "Demographics" may cause chuckles on here but I like statistics and the GOP is doing badly with groups that are growing and doing great with groups that are shrinking.

Just based on elections Id say the the GOP is doing pretty good with groups that are voting. The county by county map is stil 85% red if not more.

 

[Keyser76]

Just based on elections Id say the the GOP is doing pretty good with groups that are voting. The county by county map is stil 85% red if not more.

Then sleep well with that knowledge, the GOP is doing fine.

 

[MichiganHerd]

If Trump did somehow get the republican nomination, the polls say Hillary Clinton would beat him by a 59% to 34% margin. She leads all republican candidates by double digits, so that’s not a surprise. But a gap that wide means that if Trump were the opponent, he’d be looked on so unfavorably that even a decent number of republicans would vote for Hillary just to keep him from winning.

You probably should refrain from making fun of other people's predictions.

You mean like this?

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

You probably should refrain from making fun of other people's predictions.

I'm not surprised you can't tell the difference between me quoting a poll and me actually making a prediction.

 

[mneilmont]

I think she may have beaten Mitt because he would not have brought out a lot of first time voters like Trump did with his populist appeal for some folks. In retrospect, I'm glad she lost, if she had won then that would have been 12 years of Democrats in the white house and the GOP could have continued to suck up state offices and just based their appeal on opposing the Democrats. With Trump at the helm they have to show they can govern and they aren't exactly broadening their base. "Demographics" may cause chuckles on here but I like statistics and the GOP is doing badly with groups that are growing and doing great with groups that are shrinking.

You and Opie rely too much on demographics. Opie predicted, way back there, that Republicans would never win a national election after Obama was elected. He based that statement on his prediction of blacks and Hispanics being deciding factors in all future elections. Says Repubs are not investing in those two groups like Dems are. With poor turnouts for elections, all you need is to get party base stirred for either party to win. That is unless either party has a HHH, Dukakus , Goldwater, or someone of that ilk who simply were not liked for that position. All good people, just not for president.

 

[op2]

Opie, did you intend to use "thank" instead of "think" for your 4th word? You never did impress me as a strong Hillary supporter.

I make a distinction between (a) who I want to win and (b) who I think will win. If WVU is 2-8 and playing undefeated Texas then I want WVU to win but I think Texas will win.

It's my opinion that Hillary was such a bad candidate that any GOP nominee would have beaten her. Maybe that's wrong, but it's my opinion.

As far as who I wanted to win, I voted for Hillary so I wanted her to win over Trump. But although Trump has performed far below my expectations, if I could vote again I'd seriously consider voting 3rd party. I wouldn't vote for Trump, but Hillary and some segments of the Left have been so odious since the election that I'm starting to think to myself, geesh, you mean if Hillary had won these people would be in power now? Trump is bad in power but would these people be any better?

If I had it to do over among all candidates in 2016 I'd take Kasich or barring that Rubio. Not that they're that great but they and their supporters aren't crazy whereas I can't say the same about Trump and Hillary.

One thing that amazes me is that the Left just can't stop embracing the entertainment industry. I can't believe they don't see how bad these people look to a significant segment of the country even aside from the recent revelations, which were not surprising anyway.

 

[op2]

You and Opie rely too much on demographics. Opie predicted, way back there, that Republicans would never win a national election after Obama was elected. He based that statement on his prediction of blacks and Hispanics being deciding factors in all future elections. Says Repubs are not investing in those two groups like Dems are. With poor turnouts for elections, all you need is to get party base stirred for either party to win. That is unless either party has a HHH, Dukakus , Goldwater, or someone of that ilk who simply were not liked for that position. All good people, just not for president.

To be clear, I said the GOP wouldn't win national elections after Obama if they didn't broaden their appeal and I was wrong about that in 2016 because I underestimated how bad Hillary would be but make no mistake, the demographics still are against the GOP. They have to broaden their appeal. The Dems offered up a historically bad candidate and the GOP still only got 46% of the vote and barely won. They have to start getting more votes and you can only go so deep into the white voter pool before you start to run out.

Here are the GOP percentages since 2000. (The 1990s percentages are misleading because there was a significant 3rd party candidate.)

2000 47.9
2004 50.7
2008 45.7
2012 47.2
2016 46.1

The GOP won three of those despite getting over 50% just once. They just can't continue that forever.

 

[MichiganHerd]

You've made it clear many times that you erroneously think Trump will beat the Democratic nominee and I've shown you proof otherwise. America isn't that stupid. And yes, I think Bernie will beat Hillary.

How about this one?

I'm not surprised you can't tell the difference between me quoting a poll and me actually making a prediction.

 

[dave]

One good thing about Trump winning is that all this stuff about men abusing women coming out would never have come out had Hillary lost and although it's chaotic now it's going to be better in the long run.

The long run demographics are indeed against the GOP unless they can broaden their appeal. I thought the demographic consideration was going to kick in in the 2016 POTUS election but I underestimated just how bad a candidate Hilary was. But it's going to kick in eventually unless the GOP broadens their appeal.

Winning California and the Northeast is never going to be a winning proposition.

 

[wvu2007]

How about this one?

LOL Country just got OWNED!

 

[op2]

Winning California and the Northeast is never going to be a winning proposition.

Actually that's one reason I was wrong, namely I was thinking in terms of total percentage instead of Electoral Votes. You can rack up bigger and bigger wins in places like CA but you still don't get any extra Electoral Votes. So in that sense you can get a reprieve for awhile from the effects of getting smaller and smaller percentages of the popular vote. But eventually it catches up with you.

 

[dave]

Actually that's one reason I was wrong, namely I was thinking in terms of total percentage instead of Electoral Votes. You can rack up bigger and bigger wins in places like CA but you still don't get any extra Electoral Votes. So in that sense you can get a reprieve for awhile from the effects of getting smaller and smaller percentages of the popular vote. But eventually it catches up with you.

Or it just gets worse and worse. If California ends up splitting into 2 states like some there want the dnc is really screwed.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

How about this one?

Good one. Well played.

Racist.

The pic turned out smaller than I expected but here is the text of his post:

"City council must be full of educated house niggaz, cause field niggaz would have only thought to burn down the local sporting goods store and swipe some Jordans."

 

[MichiganHerd]

Good one. Well played.

Racist.

Thanks.

 

[op2]

Or it just gets worse and worse. If California ends up splitting into 2 states like some there want the dnc is really screwed.

Cali ain't gonna split and neither are any other states. One reason, among many, it won't happen is because if something like that happened and helped the GOP, like No Cal getting their own state and voting GOP, then some Dem parts of GOP states would start to try to split off and we'd have chaos.

It is interesting historically speaking why Cali was made such a big state to begin with. There's problem a story behind that but I don't know what it is. But you'd have thought they'd make it 2 or 3 states. It sounds like something that would be interesting to read up on.

 

[roadtrasheer]

I think & could be wrong but a lot of blue collar workers are leaving the democrats in droves, I was always told that I was a Democrat so I voted Democrat then they changed or I started reading more & now I'm independent leaning to what is now right .

 

[mneilmont]

Opie, the "white voter pool" is still quiet substantial. You are basing your opinion on blacks, who are not reliable, and Hispanics, who are still undecided about being a block vote. You cannot rely on early polls since they are so biased toward liberals.

You may be right some day in the future, but not what we can really see. As Dave pointed out more Hispanics in California gives you no more votes - just a bigger margin in the state. You are going to have to rely on which states have the growth - plural. Growth in particular states or districts could steal a house seat from another state, but that is going to be very minute.

Instead of relying on the future changes that you predict, it is easier to get votes by strengthening the appeal of the party to get a larger % involved in the process. Do you think it is possible for a meaningful number to switch registration to Republican after the population compares what the conservative candidate has done for the country after 8 years of nothingburger? Didn't think I would ever find a place to use that word.

 

[dave]

Cali ain't gonna split and neither are any other states. One reason, among many, it won't happen is because if something like that happened and helped the GOP, like No Cal getting their own state and voting GOP, then some Dem parts of GOP states would start to try to split off and we'd have chaos.

It is interesting historically speaking why Cali was made such a big state to begin with. There's problem a story behind that but I don't know what it is. But you'd have thought they'd make it 2 or 3 states. It sounds like something that would be interesting to read up on.

If the crazies in Cali dont simmer down it is going to split or people will start moving away.

 

[op2]

Opie, the "white voter pool" is still quiet substantial. You are basing your opinion on blacks, who are not reliable, and Hispanics, who are still undecided about being a block vote. You cannot rely on early polls since they are so biased toward liberals.

You may be right some day in the future, but not what we can really see. As Dave pointed out more Hispanics in California gives you no more votes - just a bigger margin in the state. You are going to have to rely on which states have the growth - plural. Growth in particular states or districts could steal a house seat from another state, but that is going to be very minute.

Instead of relying on the future changes that you predict, it is easier to get votes by strengthening the appeal of the party to get a larger % involved in the process. Do you think it is possible for a meaningful number to switch registration to Republican after the population compares what the conservative candidate has done for the country after 8 years of nothingburger? Didn't think I would ever find a place to use that word.

Trump won and gets to stay in office so every day his backers get to feel good every day because he won but the thing is, there are no elections for a bunch of days and nothing changes in terms of officeholders and then there's an election day and things can change. It's not like we're having election days every day and Trump keeps winning.

If things keep going how they are then come election day in 2020 the Dems are going to be VERY energized. The GOP won't be quite as energized, since complacency is normal. Trump's approval rating is low even though the economy is doing very well, which ought to worry Trump backers since those ratings will probably get worse if the economy slows down a bit, which is likely to happen eventually.

And on top of that I don't think people realize that Trump's victory really was narrow in 2016. When he was bragging about how much he won by after the election, he was slinging BS. It was very close. And on top of that the Dems are likely to present a better, and possibly much better, candidate in 2020.

Just because you get to say every day "Yay, our side is in office" doesn't mean things are going well for you in terms of the next election. As far as the next election goes, if there's no 3rd party candidate (which is a big unknown at this point) I would say the Dems chances look pretty good right now. (Then again, I was wrong about the 2016 election.)