Jump to content
270soft Forum

2020 Election Scenario Candidates (VCczar)


vcczar

Recommended Posts

Would you consider possibly adding Sarah Palin and/or Michele Bachmann for the Republicans? Both sought to run for the 2016 election, and ultimately decided against it. Though, I highly doubt either one would run against Donald Trump, given their compassionate support for his candidacy. Just a thought. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dallas said:

Would you consider possibly adding Sarah Palin and/or Michele Bachmann for the Republicans? Both sought to run for the 2016 election, and ultimately decided against it. Though, I highly doubt either one would run against Donald Trump, given their compassionate support for his candidacy. Just a thought. 

I probably won't but enough people think that they might, then I would. I'll probably just have them as endorsers. I plan on having a poll once I do the first release titled "Who Do You Think Is Likely to Run in 2020?" for candidates I have not included. This is different from who you would like to run in 2020. For instance, I'd love it if Dennis Kucinich would run, but I know he won't. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update: I've created events from October 2019 to May 2020. Interesting stuff--in-fighting, Tweet wars, Trade War, Russian aggression, Supreme Court nomination battles

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update: Finished the 2020 Senators and Governors. Republicans still maintain a lead in both categories; although, the lead is cut noticeably in the governorships. Senate is either 51-49 or 50-50 (Pence breaks tie). I didn't really count, but there didn't seem to be any movement one way or the other. I'm assuming the House will still be a Republican majority as well, but much slighter. Republicans will have much more infighting, which will sometimes be to the Democrats advantage in the scenario events. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Update: Finished the 2020 Senators and Governors. Republicans still maintain a lead in both categories; although, the lead is cut noticeably in the governorships. Senate is either 51-49 or 50-50 (Pence breaks tie). I didn't really count, but there didn't seem to be any movement one way or the other. I'm assuming the House will still be a Republican majority as well, but much slighter. Republicans will have much more infighting, which will sometimes be to the Democrats advantage in the scenario events.

Are you assuming King lost his Senate seat in 2018 (or retired), or that he firmly and formally joined one party over the other?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, vcczar said:

Update: Finished the 2020 Senators and Governors. Republicans still maintain a lead in both categories; although, the lead is cut noticeably in the governorships. Senate is either 51-49 or 50-50 (Pence breaks tie). I didn't really count, but there didn't seem to be any movement one way or the other. I'm assuming the House will still be a Republican majority as well, but much slighter. Republicans will have much more infighting, which will sometimes be to the Democrats advantage in the scenario events. 

How do you figure the Republicans lose any seats? Every Republican seat that cycle is ruby-red except for the one in Nevada, whereas the Democrats have to protect themselves across a slew of battleground (or even Red) states such as Indiana, Missouri, Montana, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, North Dakota, and so on. I know the rule about how Midterms always go against the incumbent party, but there comes a point where it is a bit difficult to believe the opposition holding the line everywhere, especially when turnout during that part of the cycle is to their disadvantage.

I'd be curious who you chose to survive or get picked-off through 2018, however.

Edit: I also believe that King and Sanders are both going to remain as Independents; despite the talk of having joined the Democratic Party, Sanders seems to have walked back that commitment and returned to the former status quo of "accepting endorsement" by the VDP. Not that it really matters, as you said both are going to lean strongly Democratic, whether thrown into the Party or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Lahbas said:

How do you figure the Republicans lose any seats? Every Republican seat that cycle is ruby-red except for the one in Nevada, whereas the Democrats have to protect themselves across a slew of battleground (or even Red) states such as Indiana, Missouri, Montana, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, North Dakota, and so on. I know the rule about how Midterms always go against the incumbent party, but there comes a point where it is a bit difficult to believe the opposition holding the line everywhere, especially when turnout during that part of the cycle is to their disadvantage.

I'd be curious who you chose to survive or get picked-off through 2018, however.

Edit: I also believe that King and Sanders are both going to remain as Independents; despite the talk of having joined the Democratic Party, Sanders seems to have walked back that commitment and returned to the former status quo of "accepting endorsement" by the VDP. Not that it really matters, as you said both are going to lean strongly Democratic, whether thrown into the Party or not.

Actually, I just double checked and the balance will remain the same. I have Democrats winning the seats in AZ and NV, and Reps taking MT and ND.

The Reps will lose some of their advantage, but maintain it, in the governor houses. Democrats have a pretty good pool of younger state figures. It's a pretty good sign for Democrats, actually. I'm also presuming that voters may usher in some Democratic governors in order to balance out a Republican dominated federal government. This often occurs. 

Republicans keep their lead in the House. 

Republicans will have the advantage on the Supreme Court, too. And state legislatures....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update: I set the issues, and adjusted all the candidate's issues. I also did the region issues. Endorsers and surrogates are done. Events are done through June. 

Here are the percentages when all candidates are turned ON:

Republicans: Trump 28%, Rubio 15%, Cruz 14%, Kasich 7%, Paul 4%,  Cotton 3%, Martinez 3%, Sasse 3%, Huntsman 2%, Graham 1%

Democrats: Warren 15%, Booker 15%, Brown 10%, Harris 9%, Clinton 9%, Gillibrand 7%, Heinrich 6%, Schultz 5%, Gabbard 3%, Castro 2%, Grayson 1%

Initial lead: Democrats 233-215 with 90 tossups (WI, MI, FL, NC, PA). Dems have 1.5% lead in the popular vote with 20% undecided. 

Playthrough:

By the end of October 2019: Republicans project 283 EVs, despite Democrats leading with 3% in the popular vote. Cruz passes Rubio for 2nd in the Republican Polls. 

By the end of November 2019: Democrats project 357 EVs and 8% lead in the popular vote. Cruz within striking distance of Trump. Booker surpasses Warren for Democratic frontrunner. Cruz and Booker get most of the early endorsements of their respective parties. 

By the end of December 2019: Republicans project 273 EVs with a virtual tie in the popular vote. Trump up by 2% over Cruz. Warren regains the lead over Booker as Democratic frontrunner. Romney and George W. Bush endorse Rubio. 

By the end of January 2020: Trump's campaign collapses. Democrats project 329 EVs and 8% lead over Republicans in the PV. Trump increases his lead over Cruz by 4%. Clinton emerges in second place for Democrats, having jumped over Booker, Brown and Harris in the polls. Warren has a 1% lead over Clinton. 

February: Cotton and Clinton win Iowa. Cotton and Gillibrand win New Hampshire. Sasse and Clinton win South Carolina. Schultz and Huntsman win Nevada. 

March: Democrats project 278 EVs and 4% PV lead over Republicans. Cruz, Cotton and Graham are the big Super Tuesday winners for Republicans. Heinrich and Clinton are the big Super Tuesday winners for Democrats. Trump is the clear frontunner in the polls for Republicans with Cruz, Martinez and Rubio virtually tied for second place. Warren still leads Clinton in the polls for Democrats. Booker is within striking place of Clinton for second place. Cruz and Heinrich perform well in the primaries throughout the month. Kasich performs well at the end of the month. Schultz, Paul, and Rubio drop out. Gabbard drops out and endorses Warren. 

April: Democrats project 309 EVs and 8% PV lead over Republicans. Trump leads Cruz by 4%, who leads Kasich by 1%. Cruz leads in delegates, followed by Cotton and Trump. Warren leads Clinton and Booker by 4%. Gillibrand leads in delegates, followed by Brown and Clinton. Cruz and Warren win Wisconsin. Graham, Sasse, Martinez, Huntsman and Castro drop out. Gillibrand and Cruz win New York. Kasich and Booker win a group of primary states. 

May: Democrats project 345 EVs and 9% PV lead over Republicans. Trump leads Cruz by 4% in the polls. Cruz leads in delegates, following by Kasich, Cotton and Trump. It now seems likely that the Republican Convention will be brokered, and likely not to renominate President Trump. Warren leads Clinton by 3%, who leads over Brown and Booker by 1%. Gillibrand has the most delegates, followed by Brown, Booker and Clinton. Democrats look at a likely brokered convention. In a surprise move, Clinton drops out of the race. Harris drops out and endorses Gillibrand. Trump and Warren win Oregon. 

June: Democrats project 422 EVs and 15% PV lead over Republicans. Trump leads Cruz by 2%, who leads Kasich by 1%. Cruz and Trump are nearly tied in the delegate count. Warren leads Booker by 7%. Gillibrand leads in the delegate count with popular frontunner Warren in 6th place in delegates. Booker drops out. Warren and Trump win California. Cotton drops out. Grayson drops out and endorses Warren. Heinrich drops out. Kasich drops out. 

July: Democrats project 399 EVs and 12% PV lead over Republicans. Trump leads Cruz by 3% and by 130 delegates. Warren leads Gillibrand by 4%, but has 400 less delegates than Gillibrand. Warren is now second in delegates. At the Republican Convention, neither Trump nor Cruz can reach a majority and John Kasich is selected as a compromise choice with Cruz's help. Kasich selects Fallin as his VP. Trump becomes the first sitting president to lose his party's nomination since Chester A. Arthur. At the Democratic Convention, Gillibrand heads in with most of the delegates, but Warren leads in the polls. Clinton and Heinrich throw their support to Gillibrand, handing her the nomination. Gillibrand selects Warren as her VP, making this the first major party ticket to composed of two women. 

August: Gillibrand leads Kasich with 397 EVs and 12% lead in the polls. 

September: No change. Kasich and Gillibrand draw at the debate 5 to 5. 

October: Gillibrand leads Kasich with 356 EVs and 10% lead in the polls. VP Debate cancelled. Gillibrand wins a later debate 9 to 6. Kasich wins the final debate 4 to 3. 

November: Heading into the last week, Gillibrand leads Kasich with 356 EVs and 10% in the polls. Arizona and Georgia are leaning blue. Ohio and Texas are tossups. 

Election day:

Gillibrand/Warren 385 EVs 55.3% PV  [wins AZ, IA, FL, TN, GA, NC, VA, OH, PA, MI, WI, NH--TN never polled Democrat]

Kasich/Fallin 153 EVs 43.6% PV 

Result: Abandoning the incumbent president probably hurt the Republican Party. Additionally, neither candidate was aggressive in the general election, which allowed Gillibrand to keep her large advantage. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure I see AZ or MT as extremely in play for 2018. (Though, who knows what the first two years of Trump could look like)  Flake is probably safe so long as he shakes off a primary challenge.   Tester probably has a decent shot at winning reelection.  Bullock kept his Governorship in 16, by 3.8%, despite Trump carrying the state by 20.5%.  Dem's probably have the most difficult holds in ND & IN.  Though, it's unclear who the GOP will pick in IN in 2018. Heitkamp could very well hold on.  Dems won IN in 2012 because the GOP put up a candidate that imploded.  The GOP didn't put up a perfect candidate in ND, but it's wasn't exactly a GOP disaster there.  NV will be tough for the GOP in 2018.  An open Governor's mansion and their own party in the White house will make a really tough year there for the GOP.  Manchin is probably going to win WV without much trouble and Kaine, Nelson, McCaskil are probably in decent shape.  52-48, though as a baseline, is probably about right unless something really strange develops. 

 

I agree with Governorships will be a different story.  Ducey could have a tough one in AZ, but he probably hangs on.  AK probably stays with the Independent. Dems have a decent shot at MA, NJ, IL, MD, FL, MI, NV, NM, & ME.  So that would be D +9.  Which would leave us with 25 GOP, 24 DEM, 1 IND.  GOP's best chances are MN (but it's a long shot.  Dems have a bench a mile long here.), CO (again, tough),  & PA (This one being the easiest, but still really difficult).  Outside Dem chances are probably OH, IA, WI, AZ, GA, VT.  Considering how relatively well Clinton performed in GA & AZ, the right candidate for the Dems coupled with a not so popular Trump could flip those. 

 

I would really hesitate to call out any "establishment" Dems as not having a chance to run in 2020.  After 2016 Trump, the nation may have a tendency to snap back.  Just because Clinton lost, doesn't mean Dems will jump to the far-left.  And, keep in mind, Clinton did get >2 million more votes than Trump.  So, it's not like she died from lack of support.  She just didn't get the "right" votes from targeting the right places. 

 

Here is my (relatively long short list for Dems):

Amy Klohuchar (Sen-MN)

Al Franken (Sen-MN)

Cory Booker (Sen-NJ)

Kirsten Gillibrand (Sen-NY)

Julian Castro (Fmr. Sec-TX)

Kamala Harris (Sen-CA)

Chris Murphy (Sen-Dem)

Other Dems that are unlikely to run, but could and maybe do fairly well:

Brian Schatz (Sen-HI)

Tammy Duckworth (Sen-IL)

Catherine Cortez Masto (Sen-NV)

Tammy Baldwin (Sen-WI)

Kate Brown (Gov-OR)

Lin-Manuel Miranda (actor, would be first Puerto Rican POTUS)

There are others but I won't mention them all.  I don't see Warren (will be 71) or Sanders (will be 79) as options. 

Mark Cuban could be an interesting Dem choice.  He was a Clinton surrogate this year and could go toe to toe with Trump on wealth. 

One note on the GOP side: What if Evan McMullin either runs as an independent again, or if he tries to challenge Trump for the GOP nomination?  That could be fun.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/24/2016 at 4:51 PM, booth088 said:

Not sure I see AZ or MT as extremely in play for 2018. (Though, who knows what the first two years of Trump could look like)  Flake is probably safe so long as he shakes off a primary challenge.   Tester probably has a decent shot at winning reelection.  Bullock kept his Governorship in 16, by 3.8%, despite Trump carrying the state by 20.5%.  Dem's probably have the most difficult holds in ND & IN.  Though, it's unclear who the GOP will pick in IN in 2018. Heitkamp could very well hold on.  Dems won IN in 2012 because the GOP put up a candidate that imploded.  The GOP didn't put up a perfect candidate in ND, but it's wasn't exactly a GOP disaster there.  NV will be tough for the GOP in 2018.  An open Governor's mansion and their own party in the White house will make a really tough year there for the GOP.  Manchin is probably going to win WV without much trouble and Kaine, Nelson, McCaskil are probably in decent shape.  52-48, though as a baseline, is probably about right unless something really strange develops. 

 

I agree with Governorships will be a different story.  Ducey could have a tough one in AZ, but he probably hangs on.  AK probably stays with the Independent. Dems have a decent shot at MA, NJ, IL, MD, FL, MI, NV, NM, & ME.  So that would be D +9.  Which would leave us with 25 GOP, 24 DEM, 1 IND.  GOP's best chances are MN (but it's a long shot.  Dems have a bench a mile long here.), CO (again, tough),  & PA (This one being the easiest, but still really difficult).  Outside Dem chances are probably OH, IA, WI, AZ, GA, VT.  Considering how relatively well Clinton performed in GA & AZ, the right candidate for the Dems coupled with a not so popular Trump could flip those. 

 

I would really hesitate to call out any "establishment" Dems as not having a chance to run in 2020.  After 2016 Trump, the nation may have a tendency to snap back.  Just because Clinton lost, doesn't mean Dems will jump to the far-left.  And, keep in mind, Clinton did get >2 million more votes than Trump.  So, it's not like she died from lack of support.  She just didn't get the "right" votes from targeting the right places. 

 

Here is my (relatively long short list for Dems):

Amy Klohuchar (Sen-MN)

Al Franken (Sen-MN)

Cory Booker (Sen-NJ)

Kirsten Gillibrand (Sen-NY)

Julian Castro (Fmr. Sec-TX)

Kamala Harris (Sen-CA)

Chris Murphy (Sen-Dem)

Other Dems that are unlikely to run, but could and maybe do fairly well:

Brian Schatz (Sen-HI)

Tammy Duckworth (Sen-IL)

Catherine Cortez Masto (Sen-NV)

Tammy Baldwin (Sen-WI)

Kate Brown (Gov-OR)

Lin-Manuel Miranda (actor, would be first Puerto Rican POTUS)

There are others but I won't mention them all.  I don't see Warren (will be 71) or Sanders (will be 79) as options. 

Mark Cuban could be an interesting Dem choice.  He was a Clinton surrogate this year and could go toe to toe with Trump on wealth. 

One note on the GOP side: What if Evan McMullin either runs as an independent again, or if he tries to challenge Trump for the GOP nomination?  That could be fun.

 

Thanks for your feedback!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...