NY MAG: Why Hillary Clinton Is Probably Going to Win the 2016 Election

[Statistikhengst]

Why Hillary Clinton Is Probably Going to Win -- NYMag

(Jonathan Chait is an OUTSTANDING and level-headed writer, one of the brightest of the bunch anywhere)

Unless the economy goes into a recession over the next year and a half, Hillary Clinton is probably going to win the presidential election. The United States has polarized into stable voting blocs, and the Democratic bloc is a bit larger and growing at a faster rate...

...Here are the basic reasons why Clinton should be considered a presumptive favorite:

Chait then lists 5 very strong, debatable points:

1. The Emerging Democratic Majority is real.
2. No, youngsters are not turning Republican.
3. Clinton isn't that unpopular.
4. Obama is trending up.
5.Is it time for a change?


Now, there is a lot that can be debated, here. I think that his first point is his strongest, namely, that an emerging Democratic Majority is VERY real. Pollsters, pundits and statisticians are calling it the BLUE WALL.

Here is the BLUE WALL:

Those are the states that have gone reliably BLUE now for 6 cycles in a row (1992, 1996, 2000, 2004, 2008 and 2012). 8 of those states + DC as well are actually 7-for-7 states, going back to 1988: Washington State, Oregon, Hawaii, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and DC. Minnesota is now a 10 for 10 BLUE State. All said and told, the BLUE WALL, where polling continues to show no chance for the GOP, amounts to 242 EV. This is where the Democratic Party STARTS.


Add to that the states that are 5-for-6 DEM states, and the math looks like this:

That would bring the Democratic Party to 257 as the baseline for a Blue-Wall. I am not so sure about Iowa, it can be a quirkly little state, and frankly, the Latino demographic in Nevada says that that state is more likely to be a permanent blue wall member soon, although it is a 4-for-6 D state (Bush won NV in both 2000 and 2004).

I did a large analysis on this more than two years ago, it might be interesting reading for some:

Statistikhengst s ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond ELECTORAL COLUMNS - a map display

(that link also goes over the RED WALL as well, so it could be very informative for many)

And this link as well:

Statistikhengst s ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond The Clinton 6 vs. The Obama 3

(the "Clinton 6" refers to Bill Clinton, not Hillary, but the information is indeed relevant)


But back to Chait's point no. 1: a Democratic majority, in presidential elections, is indeed forming. The mistake that many on a losing side make is to want to equate mid-term successes with the coming presidential election, but there is no real correlation between mid-terms and the next presidential election. Were that the case, then neither Eisenhower nor Reagan nor Clinton would have been re-elected.

So, have sun reading the write-up, and discuss.

 

[Sonny Clark]

Why Hillary Clinton Is Probably Going to Win -- NYMag

(Jonathan Chait is an OUTSTANDING and level-headed writer, one of the brightest of the bunch anywhere)

Unless the economy goes into a recession over the next year and a half, Hillary Clinton is probably going to win the presidential election. The United States has polarized into stable voting blocs, and the Democratic bloc is a bit larger and growing at a faster rate...

...Here are the basic reasons why Clinton should be considered a presumptive favorite:

Chait then lists 5 very strong, debatable points:

1. The Emerging Democratic Majority is real.
2. No, youngsters are not turning Republican.
3. Clinton isn't that unpopular.
4. Obama is trending up.
5.Is it time for a change?


Now, there is a lot that can be debated, here. I think that his first point is his strongest, namely, that an emerging Democratic Majority is VERY real. Pollsters, pundits and statisticians are calling it the BLUE WALL.

Here is the BLUE WALL:

View attachment 39649

Those are the states that have gone reliably BLUE now for 6 cycles in a row (1992, 1996, 2000, 2004, 2008 and 2012). 8 of those states + DC as well are actually 7-for-7 states, going back to 1988: Washington State, Oregon, Hawaii, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and DC. Minnesota is now a 10 for 10 BLUE State. All said and told, the BLUE WALL, where polling continues to show no chance for the GOP, amounts to 242 EV. This is where the Democratic Party STARTS.


Add to that the states that are 5-for-6 DEM states, and the math looks like this:

View attachment 39650

That would bring the Democratic Party to 257 as the baseline for a Blue-Wall. I am not so sure about Iowa, it can be a quirkly little state, and frankly, the Latino demographic in Nevada says that that state is more likely to be a permanent blue wall member soon, although it is a 4-for-6 D state (Bush won NV in both 2000 and 2004).

I did a large analysis on this more than two years ago, it might be interesting reading for some:

Statistikhengst s ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond ELECTORAL COLUMNS - a map display

(that link also goes over the RED WALL as well, so it could be very informative for many)

And this link as well:

Statistikhengst s ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2015 and beyond The Clinton 6 vs. The Obama 3

(the "Clinton 6" refers to Bill Clinton, not Hillary, but the information is indeed relevant)


But back to Chait's point no. 1: a Democratic majority, in presidential elections, is indeed forming. The mistake that many on a losing side make is to want to equate mid-term successes with the coming presidential election, but there is no real correlation between mid-terms and the next presidential election. Were that the case, then neither Eisenhower nor Reagan nor Clinton would have been re-elected.

So, have sun reading the write-up, and discuss.

What I would like to know is, what difference does it make who wins? Seriously. Really, do we not all know what "The Washington Brotherhood" is like, what it does, has done, and will continue to do? What real difference does it make whether a Democrat or a Republican wins? Have we not had both Republican and Democrat administrations in Washington over the past half century, and yet we have steadily declined as a people and as a nation? What makes anyone think that this time will be any different?

How stupid of us to continue to elect them, expecting a different result, and end up with the "same ol' same ol'". What will it take for voters to finally wake up and smell the coffee? Discussing this subject, debating the candidates, and arguing among ourselves is fruitless and stupid. A divided citizenry can not defeat the "The Washington Brotherhood". Haven't any of you realized yet that "The Washington Brotherhood" is an entity unto itself, answerable to no one except itself? Do any of you actually believe that anyone in Washington politics has or will represent the citizens of this country? Have all of you had your heads buried in the sand for the past 50 plus years?

Can anyone explain to me exactly how any of us will directly benefit from electing either a Democrat or a Republican president and administration? And, please, do not even mention the stupid line, " the lesser of two evils". That line is stupid, and makes one appear to be badly misinformed and ignorant of the game in Washington politics. For your information, they're all evil, anti-America, self-serving, greedy, power hungry, egotists that really couldn't care less about you and your family.

It's simply amazing that voters still fall for the campaign rhetoric, the meaningless promises, the smooth talking Dr. Feelgood speeches, and the "I'll fight for you" line of BS. Yes, it's obvious that the majority of voters are gullible, easily swayed and manipulated, and fooled into voting the crooks into office. And, I have no doubt that the same will happen in 2016. What exactly will it take to wake you folks up? Do we have to hit the proverbial rock bottom before the light comes on for you people?