USA 2016 Presidential Election Thread

[Guest MattP]

No chance, centrist candidates win elections.

Against Bernie Sanders I'd back him to win but Clinton will win comfortably, female vote alone would win it.

[Rincewind]

I had that this same epiphany several weeks back. My wife and I we're watching the election results for our home state, and Trump absolutely crushed the competition (Rubio and Cruz at the time). Meanwhile Hilary lost in a rather shocking upset. We just looked at each other and started laughing because at that moment we knew we were F'ed.

 

That being said, I've been trying to come to terms with it, but every time I hear Donald Trump speak I just can't believe that it is really happening. It's like a joke that was taken too far. At first it was funny to watch Trump make a mockery out of the system, but now it's too late to hit the emergency breaks and come to a full stop in time. I suppose he is exactly what we deserve.

Same in the UK. Cameron does the talk and walk and the public follow. Baaa.

[leicsmac]

I think Trump winning is a terrible possibility, but it'll only happen if the dems fall out amongst themselves...which is again possible (Bernie or Bust, give me a fvcking break).

If you look at the election map, as long as the dems hold every state they've held since 1992 then they only need one of Florida, Ohio or any two of the other swing states. The repubs would have to win the lot.

[Alf Bentley]

No chance, centrist candidates win elections.

 

 

 

Generally, I'd agree with that. But sometimes enough of the electorate is sick of the status quo to vote for major change (to varying degrees): e.g. Hitler 1932-33, Attlee 1945, Thatcher 1979.

 

A significant minority of people in the US do seem to be sick of "Washington" / "business as usual". A lot of this seems to be connected not only to perceptions of Washington as out of touch and divisions in society, but also to personal insecurity and/or hopelessness. A lot of people seem to be struggling in crap, underpaid jobs or out of work with low living standards, feel hopeless or massively resentful. I've seen 1 or 2 Newsnight reports on "rust belt" cities like Detroit. I also recently read Paul Theroux's "Deep South", a travel book about the US South (highly recommended). Some of these places make our deindustralised northern cities / former mining areas seem like glamorous boom towns!

 

I'm no expert on American politics. I'm sure the Democrats will win most of the East and West Coast states, as usual. Likewise, I'm sure the Republicans will win most of the South, Far West & Mid-West, as usual. But I wonder if Trump could pick up some surprisingly good results in "rust belt" states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, even Michigan. If he continues to project his "Make America great again" message, advocates protectionism of US interests and calls for a halt in Mexican/Muslim migration, that message could have a lot of appeal to angry/despairing people in rust belt states. Particularly to the white working-class / lower middle-class, but even to black people in similar circumstances. UKIP won a lot of Labour votes at our election, didn't they? Of course, he's more than capable of alienating millions of people with extremist or stupid statements/policies, but if he avoids that, maybe this could be one of those "time for a major change" moments? 

[DJ Barry Hammond]

My hunch on this is largely down to the way Trump has been able to set the agenda. He says something and the other politicians then end up reacting to it, meaning the initial idea gets more airtime.

He's clearly quite shrewd at what he's doing. Whether it's built on any substance is another thing, but a lot of voters don't care much about substance when casting a vote.

I do also ponder whether something really damaging will come out of the closet for Hillary. There's rummors aplenty and if anyone is likely to prize this out into the open it will be Trump.

[Claridge]

Ten months ago a certain football club were accused of all sorts (often guilty) and were vilified by many. Now they are the fairy-tale of world sport.

Trump tones downs the rhetoric and he can easily win the election, especially as Clinton is hardly an inspiring choice. I think Trump has played the perfect race so far, everyone in the states is talking about Trump and as they say no publicity is bad publicity.

[foxy boxing]

be honest who wants to thump the trump? can clinton win(a ton)(of votes)?

[bluscouse]

Trump, Boris Johnson and Putin, it's possible.  Do you think the Chinese will let me go to Mars with them?

[The Horse's Mouth]

these candidates just get worse and worse, the next lineup will have to try pretty hard to beat these two though

[Dr The Singh]

I wouldake America great

I would make America great

[Harry - LCFC]

Generally, I'd agree with that. But sometimes enough of the electorate is sick of the status quo to vote for major change (to varying degrees): e.g. Hitler 1932-33, Attlee 1945, Thatcher 1979.

 

A significant minority of people in the US do seem to be sick of "Washington" / "business as usual". A lot of this seems to be connected not only to perceptions of Washington as out of touch and divisions in society, but also to personal insecurity and/or hopelessness. A lot of people seem to be struggling in crap, underpaid jobs or out of work with low living standards, feel hopeless or massively resentful. I've seen 1 or 2 Newsnight reports on "rust belt" cities like Detroit. I also recently read Paul Theroux's "Deep South", a travel book about the US South (highly recommended). Some of these places make our deindustralised northern cities / former mining areas seem like glamorous boom towns!

 

I agree with this. The cycle of mundane politics - small steps to the left, small steps to the right - typically holds but not always. 'Anti-politics' candidates can sometimes do well if people feel sufficiently disillusioned.

 

I hope, and expect, that Trump's substantial negative ratings will encourage Americans to vote tactically to keep him out of office.

[MPH]

I agree with this. The cycle of mundane politics - small steps to the left, small steps to the right - typically holds but not always. 'Anti-politics' candidates can sometimes do well if people feel sufficiently disillusioned.

 

I hope, and expect, that Trump's substantial negative ratings will encourage Americans to vote tactically to keep him out of office.

 

 

 

And that there is the problem..

 

Hilary - positives= not trump, negatives = Hilary

 

Trump- Positives = Not Hilary, negatives = Trump

[Harry - LCFC]

And that there is the problem..

 

Hilary - positives= not trump, negatives = Hilary

 

Trump- Positives = Not Hilary, negatives = Trump

 

If I were a US citizen this would be a thoroughly unpleasant election to experience. I expect we'll see a poor quality debate between two candidates who both have questionable motives.

[Guest MattP]

Got some work writing on the betting for this election so will have to keep a closer eye on it than I wanted too, been looking at polling all morning and I'm amazed how close it is in some states. Trump isn't out of this at all, Ohio looks likely to go Democrat but there is less than a percentage point in it in Florida and Pennsylvania. If Trump wins thouse two he'll probably end up in the White house.

 

The gender gap in Pennsylvania is incredible, Clinton leads among women by 19% yet Trump leads among men by 21%.  Trump is regarded as a brute and an oaf by most of the population yet he's more trusted on the economy and tackling terrorism than Hillary. It's going to be one of the weirdest elections for years.

 

Female turnout and Blue collar males in swing states will probably decide this election.

[leicsmac]

Got some work writing on the betting for this election so will have to keep a closer eye on it than I wanted too, been looking at polling all morning and I'm amazed how close it is in some states. Trump isn't out of this at all, Ohio looks likely to go Democrat but there is less than a percentage point in it in Florida and Pennsylvania. If Trump wins thouse two he'll probably end up in the White house.

The gender gap in Pennsylvania is incredible, Clinton leads among women by 19% yet Trump leads among men by 21%. Trump is regarded as a brute and an oaf by most of the population yet he's more trusted on the economy and tackling terrorism than Hillary. It's going to be one of the weirdest elections for years.

Female turnout and Blue collar males in swing states will probably decide this election.

Haven't got the map and figures to hand but if I remember correctly Trump needs Florida AND Ohio AND Pennsylvania AND one other reasonable size swing state to win if the dems just hold on to their usual holdouts (the ones they've carried since 1992).

Of course, a lot can happen between now and November.

[Guest MattP]

Sorry mate I've written that wrong.

Ohio is likely to go Republican not Democrat, Trump has a four point lead there.

He needs two of the three to stand a chance.

[Guest MattP]

Clinton could have the same problem as the Labour party have over here, too many dead votes piled up in safe states but failing to cut into the average voter.

 

Swing states very close, democrat states will be huge wins, it's possible Trump could win the election and lose the popular vote quite heavily.

[leicsmac]

I actually felt that I didn't have enough current information about this, so having just got back from work I thought I'd engage in a nice bit of number crunching. 

 

Taking any poll with a 4 point or less margin as a swing state, and assuming a Hillary v Trump showdown, this is the latest on how it would go. I used the latest polls from realclearpolitics.com - great resource - to collate. When I've been unable to find a suitable poll, I've resorted to educated (I think) guesswork. With 270 electoral college votes needed for an overall win:

 

Democrat Strongholds

 

New Hampshire (4)

Massachusetts (11)

New York (29)

California (55)

Arizona (11)

New Jersey (14)

Maryland (10)

Delaware (3)

DC (3)

Connecticut (7)

Hawaii (4)

Illinois (20)

Maine (4)

Michigan (16)

New Mexico (5)

Oregon (7)

Rhode Island (3)

Vermont (3)

Virginia (13)

Washington (12)

Wisconsin (10)

 

TOTAL: 244

 

 

Republican Strongholds

 

West Virginia (5)

Indiana (11)

Alaska (3)

Montana (3)

Alabama (9)

Arkansas (6)

Colorado (9)

Idaho (4)

Kansas (6)

Kentucky (8)

Louisiana (8)

Mississippi (6)

Missouri (10)

Nebraska (5)

North Dakota (3)

Oklahoma (7)

South Dakota (3)

South Carolina (9)

Tennessee (11)

Texas (38)

Wyoming (3)

 

TOTAL: 167

 

 

Swing States

 

Florida (29)

Ohio (18)

Pennsylvania (20)

Georgia (16)

North Carolina (15)

Iowa (6)

Minnesota (10)

Nevada (6)

Utah (6)

 

TOTAL: 126

 

Now, I'm not a massive expert on this (where is @@Jordan when you need him) but I think my numbers regarding where each state might go at this point are reasonably sound...but feel free to pick at it as you like.

 

Edit: Adjusted NC into the swing state column and somehow missed out South Carolina and stuck in Wisconsin twice.

 

So the overall story at this stage - now that I've actually got my numbers straight - is that Hillary only needs Florida out of the swing states to win it all, or any two of OH, PN, GA or NC, or (possibly) all four of the little ones. Trump needs Florida, at least three of OH, PN, GA and NC plus at least two of the others - that's six out of nine total, including four out of five of the biggies - to win.

[Guest MattP]

Good post, certainly saves me going through the amount of electoral votes for each state as well

 

A couple of changes though -

 

North Carolina went to the Republicans last time out, not a Democrat stronghold (15 electoral)

Virginia would be a swing state rather solid Democrat (3.87% last time) (13 electoral)

South Carolina not there, safe Republican (9 electoral)

 

Hillary still way in front obviously but she'll need 3-4 of those swing states rather than one.

 

Colorado (you have that in Republican) and New Hampshire are both only just over the threshold as well of what we would see as "safe" - both held by Democrats.

[leicsmac]

Good post, certainly saves me going through the amount of electoral votes for each state as well

 

A couple of changes though -

 

North Carolina went to the Republicans last time out, not a Democrat stronghold (15 electoral)

Virginia would be a swing state rather solid Democrat (3.87% last time) (13 electoral)

 

Hillary still way in front obviously but she'll need 3-4 of those swing states rather than one.

 

Colorado and New Hampshire are both only just over the threshold as well of what we would see as "safe" - both held by Democrats.

 

Then give me a +1, you cheapskate. 

 

Looking more closely at the two states you've picked out:

 

NC is closer than I thought, RCP average has it as Clinton + 3.3 (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nc/north_carolina_trump_vs_clinton-5538.html), so move that to the swing state column.

 

VA has solid leads for Hillary across the board (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/va/virginia_trump_vs_clinton-5542.html) so no real need to change that. 

 

So that means Hillary needs two swing states (or one of the big ones), and Trump needs seven or eight from nine. 

[Guest MattP]

Add the nine in from South Carolina and she needs another one.

 

That's a great website btw

[leicsmac]

Add the nine in from South Carolina and she needs another one.

 

That's a great website btw

 

Done. Think I've got the original post lined up right now.

 

Regarding Colorado, RCP shows a pretty clear lead for Trump in polls, so I think he's going to take that one.

[Jattdogg]

Just come to canada and call it a day. Donuts, maple syrup, poutine, snow and celine dion. What else coukd you ask for?

[Dr The Singh]

Defo Trump now:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-36273568

 

India Hindu group prays for Donald Trump win

• 5 hours ago
•  
• From the sectionIndia

Image copyrightREUTERSImage captionAround a dozen members of Hindu Sena lit a ritual fire and prayers in a park in Delhi

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has gained some unlikely fans - including a right-wing Hindu group in India.

Members of the Hindu Sena held a prayer in support of Mr Trump winning the US presidential election.

The little-known group said they supported Mr Trump "because he is hope for humanity against Islamic terror".

Mr Trump has proposed a ban on Muslims entering the US - drawing widespread criticism at home and abroad.

He has also advocated killing the families of terrorists and invading Syria to eradicate the so-called Islamic State group and appropriate its oil.

Around a dozen members of Hindu Sena lit a ritual fire and prayers in a park in Delhi on Wednesday, and hung a banner declaring their support for Mr Trump.

Image copyrightREUTERSImage copyrightREUTERS

Surrounded by statues of Hindu gods, they threw offerings such as seeds, grass and ghee (clarified butter) into a small ritual fire.

"Only Donald Trump can save humanity," Vishnu Gupta, founder of the group, told the Associated Press news agency.

He also told The Indian Express newspaper that the group had planned "several events to express its wholehearted support for Mr Trump".

The nationalist group has previously been known for vandalism and assault, attacking the office of a political party in 2014, and spraying a legislator who protested against a ban on eating beef.

 

 

[MPH]

I think more so than ever the next president will be the one who can galvanize their arm chair politicians to get up and vote more so than their opponents.

 

 

If Trumps scare tactics work, he could be in for a landslide, yet at the same time the motivation to not have trump as a president could cause very long lines at the voting station