Trump versus Clinton?

[TheRealJoeFish]

I believe I asked you to link to a post where I said it was Texas only. Why do you lack the integrity to acknowledge your dishonest argumentation?


I'm well aware of how it works, thankyouverymuch, Woggie.  As I said earlier, no one knows, and that includes you.

Hopefully you will have noticed also that I didn't assert that it would tip the scales against Trump, but only that they were doing it to stiffen opposition to Trump. You're new to this reading stuff, aren't you?

I get it, you dislike the idea of non-Aryans voting. But fer chrissakes, kid, at least target the point being made. Doing otherwise only makes you look dumber ... no mean feat, that.

Stiffen opposition?  Are you for real?  Do you really think that the Dems are going to win any Red States in November?  They'll be lucky to keep all of the Blue States with Trump running.  

Now get this through your thick skull:  The Dems don't need any of the Red States to win the Presidency if the Dems in the Blue States show up and vote for the Dem Candidate.  So it doesn't make a rat's ass difference how many Hispanics vote for the Dem candidate in the Red States.  That's because she/he can win without them.  They only matter if they vote for the Dems in the lower offices.  

Now on the flip side, the Repub candidate can get every single vote in all of the Red States and he will lose the election unless he wins a lot of the Blue States.  

So, as far as the Presidential election is concerned, the only voters that matter are the Dem voters in the Red States. They determine who will be the President.

I mean, listen... there are ways to look at this analytically.

FiveThirtyEight created an interactive map tool called "What Would It Take to Flip States in the 2016 Election?"  It displays each state in a heat map-form according to how red or blue they were in the 2012 election, and then, using demographics (updated for 2016 population levels), allows you to alter, among different voting blocs, the turnout % and the distribution of votes to see how that would effect the state and national races.

The five voting blocs, along with their turnouts and vote allocations in 2012, are:

1. College-educated White: 77% voter turnout, 56-44 split Republican to Democrat
2. Non-college-educated White: 57% voter turnout, 62-38 split Republican to Democrat
3. Black: 66% turnout, 93-7 split Democrat to Republican
4. Hispanic/Latino: 48% turnout, 71-29 split Democrat to Republican
5. Asian/Other: 49% turnout, 67-33 split Democrat to Republican

If those same ratios hold in the 2016 election, the Dems win easily, 332-206.

Let's suppose Trump runs.  If we alter only the Hispanic/Latino vote to 50% turnout, 80-20 split Democrat to Republican, which I don't think is unreasonable at all, one state changes from Red to Blue: North Carolina.

Let's keep that Hispanic/Latino distribution, and see what it takes to get the Republicans the 270 needed electoral votes.

If voter turnout remains the same across both blocs of white voters, and assuming equal increases in Republican distribution among both blocs, the Republicans would need to turn the 56/44 and 62/38 distributions into 61/39 and 67/33.  This would send North Carolina back red, and switch Colorado, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire, getting them 283 votes to 255 for the democrats.

That would be a huge swing, though, and at least a couple of those states are individually swinging more blue than red by the day.  Additionally, there are a ton of people who absolutely will not vote for Donald Trump; even within the white voter blocs, I believe the proportion of women and evangelicals who would vote for Rubio or Cruz but not Trump is being understated.  Here's my predicted split:

College-educated White: 78% turnout, 55-45 split republican to democrat
Non-college-educated White: 60% turnout, 68-32 split republican to democrat
Black: 65% turnout, 95-5 split democrat to republican
Hispanic/Latino: 52% turnout, 80-20 split democrat to republican
Asian/Other: 50% turnout, 70-30 split democrat to republic

This would put the electoral results at democrats 308, republicans 230. Ohio, Iowa, and North Carolina would be red, but Pennsylvania, Colorado, New Hampshire and Florida go blue.

I think this is pretty close to accurate.  I've said before that, of the states that voted blue in 2012, I can see maybe four of them switching, quite possibly Virginia, Ohio, Nevada, and New Mexico, with perhaps Missouri (or mayyyyyyyybe North Carolina) switching to blue from red.  A Trump candidacy, though, would almost certainly cement New Mexico as blue (this is the one state in which Hispanic/Latino voter mobilization/coordination could be the difference).  Trump would have an outside chance at Pennsylvania, but, as I've stated, the Keystone State's getting bluer by the day, and almost certainly wouldn't win Florida; the situation's reversed for Cruz, who could have a chance at Florida but almost certainly wouldn't get Pennsylvania.  My prediction is that both PA and FL will go blue, but that's not too much more likely than a 1/1 split (maybe 50 to 45, with a 5% chance of both somehow going red).

I'm resigned to the fact that Ohio will go red: they have an actually fiscally competent, moderate (if only compared to the others) conservative as a Governor, and there seems to be a little more conservative rumblings in the state than in years past.  After Florida, it's almost certainly where the republicans' biggest offensive will take place.  I have a feeling that Virginia will go red too, although objectively there's no reason they should like either Cruz or Trump more than Romney, who they didn't go for last time out (the Virginia voting bloc is the definition of "beltway insiders", and traditionally likes mainstream candidates).

So, ultimately, I think the small gains for dems in the black and muslim votes (and definitely hispanic, if Trump wins) will effectively balance out any swing red for non-college-educated white voters.  I actually believe college-educated white voters will be a touch bluer this time around, entirely due to 1) the population skewing younger and 2) more women going red to blue than men going blue to red.  This should give the dems a somewhat comfortable victory, though not quite an Obama-like romp.