Jump to content
270soft Forum

2020 Election (v. 1.0) is now up!


vcczar

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, vcczar said:

It doesn't surprise me that a Democrat would crush Cruz, but I wish the result would have come out more accurately. TN and NE and ND would have definitely gone for Cruz. LA and MS would have most likely, even though the large African-American population of those states might tilt the state for Harris, if Cruz was unpopular. 

Agree there for the most part, though maybe for different reasons.  Cruz replacing DJT on the 2020 would anger Trump's midwest base.  Though, they are the type of voters that may abandon Trump in 2020 if he isn't able to achieve much of his promised agenda.  But, on that same note, those same voters could be encouraged by Cruz promising to deliver on those promises DJT broke. Doubtful though since those voters aren't really THAT conservative.

But, yeah, if Harris wins AZ, MS, TN, & MS: She would win GA and SC.  It's not the high African American vote as much as how well the Democrat does among whites here.  White voters in GA/MS/TN/LA are VERY conservative.  Though, in states like Georgia, there is a growing suburban population that is college educated white which bodes better for Dems there. A 29% A/A electorate in LA probably means R's win by 10+%.  A 29% A/A electorate in NC, on the other had (which is more of what Georgia is turning into with the A/A population and college educated whites), would probably lead to a mid single digit win for the Democrat. Whereas a 29% A/A electorate in WI, would likely be a mid double digit Dem win.  A 16% race would be what you would expect with a DEM flipping MS, LA, & IN.  This i why I look forward to the favorability feature that has been talked about gets implemented.  That should help make results more consistent.  It would make a DEM winning MS, LA & TN mean that the DEM almost certainly would carry GA & SC. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I just weakened Sherrod Brown in the polls to increase Warren. She's a clear frontunner over Booker now, but by only 4%, instead of less than 1%

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

I just weakened Sherrod Brown in the polls to increase Warren. She's a clear frontunner over Booker now, but by only 4%, instead of less than 1%

I still don't see any chance what so ever of Warren running. Not just because of her age, either. (She would be 71)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should let Gov. Edwards be available at the beginning with the rest of the Governors.  In the 2016 scenario, he didn't appear til after the 2015 Gubernatorial election as he wasn't Governor until then.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, booth088 said:

I still don't see any chance what so ever of Warren running. Not just because of her age, either. (She would be 71)

That didn't stop Clinton (69), Trump (70), or Sanders (75?). Even, Joe Biden (73) would likely have run if Clinton hadn't run.

She might be happy in the Senate, but I think she might be the most high profile progressive that can win the Sanders vote. She has more name recognition than Sherrod Brown, Tulsi Gabbard, Alan Grayson and other progressives that are known outside of their states. Not a single governor is a Sanders-Warren progressive. The only other senator than these two is Sherrod Brown. I think by default she might have to run, unless she can push Brown to draw more attention to himself.  

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

That didn't stop Clinton (69), Trump (70), or Sanders (75?). Even, Joe Biden (73) would likely have run if Clinton hadn't run.

She might be happy in the Senate, but I think she might be the most high profile progressive that can win the Sanders vote. She has more name recognition than Sherrod Brown, Tulsi Gabbard, Alan Grayson and other progressives that are known outside of their states. Not a single governor is a Sanders-Warren progressive. The only other senator than these two is Sherrod Brown. I think by default she might have to run, unless she can push Brown to draw more attention to himself.

Or Reagan, Dole, or McCain, or going further back, Buchannan or William Henry Harrison...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Playing through the scenario now for a third time (different challenger to DJT each time) and decided to do a 2016 rematch.  (I turned Johnson off since he has said he won't run again)

Going into the Democratic convention, DJT is imploding.  Clinton isn't doing especially well, Trump's numbers are just terrible.  Libertarian nominee, Ventura, is actually leading in Utah.  19% Ventura-17.1% Trump-15.3% Clinton-15.3% Stein.

 

Nationally it is

Clinton 53%

Trump 29.8%

Ventura 3.3%

Stein 1.4%

 

99.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, booth088 said:

Playing through the scenario now for a third time (different challenger to DJT each time) and decided to do a 2016 rematch.  (I turned Johnson off since he has said he won't run again)

Going into the Democratic convention, DJT is imploding.  Clinton isn't doing especially well, Trump's numbers are just terrible.  Libertarian nominee, Ventura, is actually leading in Utah.  19% Ventura-17.1% Trump-15.3% Clinton-15.3% Stein.

 

Nationally it is

Clinton 53%

Trump 29.8%

Ventura 3.3%

Stein 1.4%

 

99.png

I need to do something to prevent some of these states from going so solidly Blue. What's the popular vote % for Clinton and Trump in this scenario?

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

I need to do something to prevent some of these states from going so solidly Blue. What's the popular vote % for Clinton and Trump in this scenario?

I am now in August. 

Update on Utah:

Trump: 32.8%

Ventura 20.8%

Stein: 17.3%

Clinton 14.8%

99.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, CalebsParadox said:

Would you consider releasing a preliminary update early with just updated percentages, or do you prefer to do it all in one finished and polished release?

I'll probably just do all the updates at once, since it will make it easier. I may adjust the numbers further. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, booth088 said:

Here was the final result of my Clinton/Castro v. Trump/Gingrich:


*See the CSV attachment for state-by-state numbers*

99.png

2020 ClintonTrump.csv

Yeah, NE and KY, and TN seem to be going blue too often, which is odd. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Patine said:

Not to mention Texas. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the state hasn't gone blue since Johnson ran in 1964.

It went for Carter in 1976

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

It went for Carter in 1976

Well Texas going blue here by ~8% when the national margin is 15.1% is reasonably consistent, particularly with Castro as a running mate.  I am going to run the same scenario as Trump this time and see how I can make things play out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, booth088 said:

Well Texas going blue here by ~8% when the national margin is 15.1% is reasonably consistent, particularly with Castro as a running mate.  I am going to run the same scenario as Trump this time and see how I can make things play out. 

cool. please post results

Link to post
Share on other sites

@booth088 @CalebsParadox @Dallas @ThePotatoWalrus @Sanser2016 @Patine @warren2016 @michaelsdiamonds

Since you guys have played this and seen my events, which are Republic dominated, both the positive and negative events, I was wondering what positive and negative events would be good to add for the following candidates:

Elizabeth Warren 

Cory Booker

Kirsten Gillibrand

Sherrod Brown

Alan Grayson

Martin Heinrich

Kamala Harris

The Republican events sort of carried the narrative, because Trump sort of creates events at will. I'd like to balance this out a bit. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vcczar said:

@booth088 @CalebsParadox @Dallas @ThePotatoWalrus @Sanser2016 @Patine @warren2016 @michaelsdiamonds

Since you guys have played this and seen my events, which are Republic dominated, both the positive and negative events, I was wondering what positive and negative events would be good to add for the following candidates:

Sure thing fam. I'll get some ideas. I'm particularly interested in Kirsten Gillibrand Tulsi Gabbard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@vcczar

I don't know if you'd considered it (or considered it probable) but, given Trump almost tore apart the GOP in the primaries in 2016, campaigned much moreso on economic rebuilding and renegotiation on trade treaties than he truly committed to the hard-right conservative wing of the party, making his base, in fact, moreso around the disgruntled blue-collar workers than the rural Deep South or Heartland core, and his questionable moral centre by American social conservative standards, what about the Tea Party die-hards attempting a possibly reasonably-successful, if not victorious, Third Party bid on a pure Tea Party ticket not actually a subset of the Republican ticket?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Ima playthrough one more time to get the grips of it and post my results here.

Republicans: Trump, Cruz, Kasich
Democrats: Warren, Brooker, Gabbard (me)
Libertarian: Petersen
Green: Stein

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...