Revealed: First Look at Border Wall Prototypes..!

Tony Stark said:
Indeed.The odds of beating 90 +% odds twice in the row is very unlikely though.
More...

You don't have another candidate who has a 90% chance of being coronated so there is no "twice" involved. And without a candidate that strong, the odds of having just an electoral college victory without a popular vote victory go down too.

In addition, if Trump runs he will be running as an incumbent the next time. The odds for an incumbent winning are considerably higher than running as total outsider as he did the first time.

Find another pacifier. Your current one is not working.
 
Last edited:
TreeFrogTrader said:
In addition, if Trump runs he will be running as an incumbent the next time. The odds for an incumbent winning are considerably higher than running as total outsider as he did the first time.
More...


Not ones who loss the popular vote,only one President who lost the popular vote got a second term.

Not ones with a below 46% approval rating.No President with an approval rating of 45 or below has won re election since polling for it began in 1937.
 
Last edited:
Tony Stark said:
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/332970-voter-turnout-dipped-in-2016-led-by-decline-among-blacks


Voter turnout dipped in 2016, led by decline among blacks
By Reid Wilson - 05/11/17 02:05 PM EDT

The percentage of eligible Americans who showed up to the polls in November dipped slightly to the lowest rate in sixteen years, led by a sharp drop-off in the number of black voters casting ballots.

New data released Wednesday by the Census Bureau shows an estimated 61.4 percent of Americans over the age of 18 cast ballots, down from the 61.8 percent who voted in 2012 and well below the 63.8 percent who voted in 2004, the recent high-point of voter participation.

White voters were most likely to turn out; 65.3 percent of whites told Census Bureau surveyors they voted in 2016, more than a full percentage point higher than their participation rate in 2012.

But voter turnout among black voters fell almost seven percentage points, to 59.4 percent, the Census figures show — after hitting an all-time high of 66.2 percent in 2012.

Fewer than half of Asian Americans and Hispanic Americans turned out to vote; 49 percent of Asians and 47.6 percent of those of Hispanic origin showed up to the polls last year.

Demographers point to declining black turnout and relatively low Hispanic turnout — two voting blocs on whom Democrats are increasingly reliant — as two of a handful of reasons Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton fell short in a handful of key battleground states last year.

Black turnout fell 2 points and Hispanic turnout tumbled by a whopping 34 points in Michigan, a state President Trump won by just over 10,000 votes after Clinton fell short of matching President Obama's vote totals in Detroit.

In Wisconsin, another state Trump barely won, fewer than half of black voters cast a ballot; four years ago, when Obama carried the state, 78 percent of blacks voted.

Turnout among black voters fell seven points in Florida, and turnout among Hispanic voters there, who make up critical voting blocs stretching from Miami-Dade County to Orlando, fell eight points. That ended a streak of four consecutive elections in which black and Hispanic voters showed up in increasing numbers. At the same time, white voters, who disproportionally backed Trump, turned out at a slightly higher rate in Florida than they had in 2012.

"These numbers point up a fairly pervasive decline in black turnout along with modest though uneven gains for whites," said William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institute. The declining turnout and Republicans' success in winning over more white voters "helped to explain shifts to Trump in several swing states."

November's contests were decided by an electorate that looked whiter than what many demographers had expected. Between 1980 and 2012, the share of the electorate made up of non-Hispanic whites dropped from 87.6 percent to 73.7 percent; in 2016, demographers expected that number to drop again, as the diverse millennial generation takes on a larger role in the body politic, replacing older generations that were less racially diverse.

But the Census Bureau data shows that 73.3 percent of the electorate in 2016 was made up of non-Hispanic whites, a statistically insignificant drop from four years before. The unexpected stasis, even as the country becomes more racially diverse, is explained by the drop in minority turnout.

That made 2016 only the second election since 1980 that the share of the electorate made up of non-Hispanic whites did not decline by a significant margin.

The decline in black participation is all the more stark after 2012, when for the first time the Census Bureau said blacks voted at a higher share than non-Hispanic whites. Still, the percentage of blacks who voted in 2016 was six points higher than the recent nadir, in 1996, when only 53 percent of blacks cast a ballot.

The data offers both hope and warning signs to Democrats plotting their political comeback, and Republicans trying to hold on to their victories.

On one hand, the data shows Democrats can chart a path back to political power by boosting turnout even at the margins among Hispanic and black voters. The party does not need to replicate Obama's 2008 and 2012 turnout machines; it simply needs to come close in large urban centers in key states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Florida.

On the other, it shows the demographic shift that threatens to doom Republicans — who are more reliant than ever on white voters — is manifesting itself more slowly in the electorate than in the population as a whole. That fact gives Republicans time to build new inroads to minority communities, where the party has struggled to attract support.

Younger voters grew as a share of the electorate, both as more millennials reach voting age and as they become turnout targets for both parties. Michael McDonald, a political scientist at the University of Florida, said turnout among voters between 18 and 29 years of age grew by 2.5 percentage points, the largest increase of any age group.

But older voters are still much more likely to cast a ballot: More than 70 percent of those over the age of 65 voted in November, far higher than the 43.4 percent of 18-29 year olds who voted. Two-thirds of those between the ages of 45 and 64 voted, according to Frey's analysis.

The Census Bureau's data relies on a survey the agency conducts to supplement the much larger Current Population Survey.

Other surveys have concluded that a smaller number of eligible voters actually cast ballots: One study for the group Nonprofit Vote, in which McDonald took part, found 60.2 percent of the nation's 231 million eligible voters cast a ballot in November.

That figure was higher than the percentage of eligible voters who turned out in presidential elections between 1972 and 2000, though it fell below the recent pinnacle achieved in 2008.
More...


So an entire article saying people voted less and the last sentence literally saying more people voted with exception to 2008 which is what I said.

What cherry picking.
 
peilthetraveler said:
So an entire article saying people voted less and the last sentence literally saying more people voted with exception to 2008 which is what I said.

What cherry picking.
More...

Minority turnout was way down.I said we(democrats) had low turnout

Tony Stark said:
Fine with most dems,gives many democrats an incentive to go out and vote in 2020 so we dont have such low turn out as we did in 2016
More...
 
Tony Stark said:
So you think Trump is going to win the popular vote next time? I don't giggle but that made me laugh.
More...


It could go either way. Trump will probably campaign to win if he runs. If you have changed the constitution by next time to eliminate the electoral college then he will probably focus more on the popular vote. Otherwise, the dems could get even more of the popular vote by getting out even more of the vote in places like California, Oregon, and New York where you already got all of the electoral votes so even more popular vote there doesn't get you anything- unless you want to spend years like you and Hillary are doing now- arguing that you won- when you lost.

You and Hillary are about as stuck on stupid as you can get. Savvy candidates who want to win are going to campaign for electoral votes like they are nuggets of gold. Go get more or less popular vote and be right about everything- while the "loser" takes the White House if that works for ya. Works for me.

You are like one of these guys whose wife leaves you because you are loser but you have twenty reasons why she should not have left and therefore will be coming back next year. Meanwhile, she has happily remarried, has a couple kids with the new husband. Get a clue for Christ's sake. That ship has sailed. You may or may not win back the white house in 2020 but all of your desperate panting about why it absolutely must happen and will happen is off into psycho territory. You don't control all of that. And since your analysis of the last election was delusional and left you blind-sided that does not bode will for your future delusions does it? Oh, that's right "I always said Hillary would get more votes so I was right all along, blah, blah, blah." So why have you been pulled up into a fetal position since last November sucking on your thumb with your favorite blankie if you were so right about everything.

Pretty funny in some ways. Trump truly destroyed your brain. I see why you post all the Media Matters packages now. You just cannot function when you try to think it through yourself. That's what they look for when they recruit people like you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top