U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-21-2012, 01:29 PM
 
Location: Maryland
18,563 posts, read 15,831,850 times
Reputation: 6259

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy View Post
Barbados, Trinidad, Bermuda.
Quote:
Barbados has been an independent country since 30 November 1966. It functions as a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy, modelled on the British Westminster system, with Elizabeth II, Queen of Barbados, as head of state, represented locally by the Governor-General, Elliott Belgrave, and the Prime Minister as the head of the government. The number of representatives within the House of Assembly has gradually increased from 24 at independence to its present composition of 30 seats.
Looks like an old white lady is still in charge but Barbados is a good example.

Indians make up the largest group in Trinidad, so we'll have to eliminate them from your list. The crime rate there is pretty bad too.

Bermuda is an overseas British territory.

So in short based on your list, if a Black entity maintains strong relationships with Whites it flourish otherwise it resembles Haiti.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-21-2012, 01:30 PM
 
Location: Maryland
18,563 posts, read 15,831,850 times
Reputation: 6259
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy View Post
You are going to use racial division and bigotry to attempt to turn one group of people against another?

So this is your plan?

This is funny.

The ENTIRE Black population of the United States are socialist.

In the long run Conservatives are destined to lose. You are simply too driven by own ignorance hatred and bigotry to see people as anything other than a skin color and characterize everybody with that skin color instead of seeing people as individuals.
I'm just playing Obama's game. If conservatives lose, we all lose.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2014, 07:29 PM
 
Location: United States
5,888 posts, read 4,492,818 times
Reputation: 1906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mictlantecuhtli View Post
Demographics

First, a look at the breakdown of the electorates from 1992 thru 2012:

White
1992 - 87%
1996 - 83%
2000 - 81%
2004 - 77%
2008 - 74%
2012 - 72%

African-American:
1992 - 8%
1996 - 10%
2000 - 10%
2004 - 11%
2008 - 13%
2012 - 13%

Hispanic:
1992 - 2%
1996 - 5%
2000 - 7%
2004 - 8%
2008 - 9%
2012 - 11%

Asian:
1992 - 1%
1996 - 1%
2000 - 2%
2004 - 2%
2008 - 2%
2012 - 3%

Demographics of How Groups Voted in the 1992 Presidential Election [1992 thru 2008 data]
Presidential Race - 2012 Election Center - Elections & Politics from CNN.com [2012 data]

Now let's analyze the twenty-year trend to project the 2016 electorate.

2016 projection:
White: 70%
African-American: 13%
Hispanic: 13%
Asian: 3%
Other: 1%

Estiamted 2016 turnout: 55.0%
[Turnout projection based on approximate average of 1992-2008 turnout and preliminary 2012 turnout estimates]
United States population in 2016: ~323,000,000
Approximately 74.3% of the United States populace is eligible to vote
Eligible electorate in 2016 will be approximately 240,000,000
55% turnout assumes 132,000,000 voters

2012 votes by race:
White: Romney 59%, Obama 39%
African-American: Obama 93%, Romney 6%
Hispanic: Obama 71%, Romney 27%
Asian: Obama 73%, Romney 26%
Other: Obama 58%, Romney 38%
Presidential Race - 2012 Election Center - Elections & Politics from CNN.com

Now, let's use the trending electoral breakdown to consider some 2016 outcomes.

Scenario #1 -- Demographic Repeat of 2012
White: R 59%, D 39% (R 54.5m, D 36.0m)
African-American: D 93%, R 6% (D 16.0m, R 1.0m)
Hispanic: D 71%, R 27% (12.2m, R 4.6m)
Asian: D 73%, R 26% (D 2.9m, R 1.0m)
Other: D 58%, R 38% (D 0.8m, R 0.5m)
TOTAL: Democratic nominee 67.9 million, Republican nominee 61.6 million

If the various demographic groups vote the same way, the Democratic candidate's margin will increase from President Obama's current 3.7 million vote lead to 6.3 million votes. That is simply if nothing else changes.

But will we likely get such a repeat? No. So let's look at some other possibilities.

Scenario #2 -- All Numbers Strong for the GOP
White: R 60%, D 38% (R 55.4m, D 35.1m)
African-American: D 88%, R 11% (D 15.1m, R 1.9m)
Hispanic: D 62%, R 35% (D 10.6m, R 6.0m)
Asian: D 63%, R 36% (D 2.5m, R 1.4m)
Other: D 55%, R 41% (D 0.7m, R 0.5m)
TOTAL: Republican nominee 65.2 million, Democratic nominee 64.0 million

In this case, I've assumed that everything will go well for Republicans. I've given them yet another point of the White vote, I've reverted the African-American vote to the Bush/Kerry numbers, I've reverted the Hispanic vote to the Bush/Gore numbers, I've clipped 10% off the Asian numbers and shifted them to the Republicans, and I've even given 3% of the 'Other" category to the GOP (this is a catch-all group that is probably fairly resistant to short-term movement).

This gets the GOP a narrow 1.2 million vote margin, that would have over an 80% change of translating into an Electoral College victory. But in order to get this narrow GOP victory, you have to assume pretty much every demographic trend goes the Republcans' way.

Scenario #3 -- Same as Scenario #2, but 2012 numbers for Whites
White: R 59%, D 39% (R 54.5m, D 36.0m)
African-American: D 88%, R 11% (D 15.1m, R 1.9m)
Hispanic: D 62%, R 35% (D 10.6m, R 6.0m)
Asian: D 63%, R 36% (D 2.5m, R 1.4m)
Other: D 55%, R 41% (D 0.7m, R 0.5m)
TOTAL: Democratic nominee 64.9 million , Republican nominee 64.3 million

This scenario assumes that the GOP has maxed out its share of the White vote. Not a bad assumption; it's hard to see Clinton or Cuomo or O'Malley, or whoever wins the 2016 Democratic nomination, doing any worse among Whites. The rest of the numbers are still very favorable to the GOP.

Still, the GOP loses the popular vote, with probably a 2/3rds chance of also losing the Electoral College.

Scenario #4 -- Same as #2 & #3, but 1% improvement on 2012 for Whites
White: R 58%, D 40% (R 53.6m, D 37.0m)
African-American: D% 88, R 11% (D 15.1m, R 1.9m)
Hispanic: D 62%, R 35% (D 10.6m, R 6.0m)
Asian: D 63%, R 36% (D 2.5m, R 1.4m)
Other: D 55%, R 41% (D 0.7m, R 0.5m)
TOTAL: Democratic nominee 65.9 million, Republican nominee 63.4 million.

These demographic numbers are still pretty good overall for the GOP. It would not be at all surprising to see someone like Clinton improve one percentage point for Democrats among Whites. And if that happens? It's all over, even assuming the GOP still manages to do considerably better with all other demographics. This is what is so important -- even demographic trends that are reasonably GOP-biased translate to a loss in 2016.

Scenario #5 -- Modest GOP gains on minority voting, Bush/Kerry numbers for Whites
White: R 58%, D 41% (R 53.6m, D 37.9m)
Black: D 90%, R 8% (D 15.4m, R 1.4m)
Hispanic: D 66%, R 32% (D 11.3m, R 5.5m)
Asian: D 68%, R 31% (D 2.7m, R 1.2m)
Other: D 55%, R 41% (D 0.7m, R 0.5m)
TOTAL: Democratic nominee 68.0 million, Republican nominee 62.2 million

This final number is what I consider more realistic. For all demographics, I've assumed a reasonable and modest rebound towards 50%. I've given the Bush/Kerry numbers to Whites, and assumed the GOP will peel a few percentages off the other groups. The result? A big Democratic victory.

And if the Democrats can manage to flip more than 1.5% of the White vote, it really becomes apocalyptic for the GOP.

Note that these projections are only for 2016. In 2020, it continues to get progressively worse for Republicans. By then, when the White vote is down to 67% or 68%, with Hispanics up to perhaps 15% and maybe Asians gaining 1%, even the rosiest scenario above for the GOP will result in a clear loss.

This is just some food for thought. I advocate nothing. I am just showing why the Republican Party, in order to win Presidential elections in the future, absolutely must find a way to get non-whites to vote for them in greater numbers. Much greater numbers.
Given these numbers Hillary (female vote), teaming with a Hispanic VP (Hispanic vote) from a swing state would be an impossible hill for the GOP to climb.

Blacks aren't going to vote for the GOP and neither will college educated urban dwellers.

When you include working urban women that is perhaps 60% of the Electoral College votes.

I don't see how the GOP can overcome these numbers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2014, 04:26 PM
 
5,879 posts, read 2,094,081 times
Reputation: 2926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mictlantecuhtli View Post
Demographics

First, a look at the breakdown of the electorates from 1992 thru 2012:

White
1992 - 87%
1996 - 83%
2000 - 81%
2004 - 77%
2008 - 74%
2012 - 72%

African-American:
1992 - 8%
1996 - 10%
2000 - 10%
2004 - 11%
2008 - 13%
2012 - 13%

Hispanic:
1992 - 2%
1996 - 5%
2000 - 7%
2004 - 8%
2008 - 9%
2012 - 11%

Asian:
1992 - 1%
1996 - 1%
2000 - 2%
2004 - 2%
2008 - 2%
2012 - 3%

Demographics of How Groups Voted in the 1992 Presidential Election [1992 thru 2008 data]
Presidential Race - 2012 Election Center - Elections & Politics from CNN.com [2012 data]

Now let's analyze the twenty-year trend to project the 2016 electorate.

2016 projection:
White: 70%
African-American: 13%
Hispanic: 13%
Asian: 3%
Other: 1%

Estiamted 2016 turnout: 55.0%
[Turnout projection based on approximate average of 1992-2008 turnout and preliminary 2012 turnout estimates]
United States population in 2016: ~323,000,000
Approximately 74.3% of the United States populace is eligible to vote
Eligible electorate in 2016 will be approximately 240,000,000
55% turnout assumes 132,000,000 voters

2012 votes by race:
White: Romney 59%, Obama 39%
African-American: Obama 93%, Romney 6%
Hispanic: Obama 71%, Romney 27%
Asian: Obama 73%, Romney 26%
Other: Obama 58%, Romney 38%
Presidential Race - 2012 Election Center - Elections & Politics from CNN.com

Now, let's use the trending electoral breakdown to consider some 2016 outcomes.

Scenario #1 -- Demographic Repeat of 2012
White: R 59%, D 39% (R 54.5m, D 36.0m)
African-American: D 93%, R 6% (D 16.0m, R 1.0m)
Hispanic: D 71%, R 27% (12.2m, R 4.6m)
Asian: D 73%, R 26% (D 2.9m, R 1.0m)
Other: D 58%, R 38% (D 0.8m, R 0.5m)
TOTAL: Democratic nominee 67.9 million, Republican nominee 61.6 million

If the various demographic groups vote the same way, the Democratic candidate's margin will increase from President Obama's current 3.7 million vote lead to 6.3 million votes. That is simply if nothing else changes.

But will we likely get such a repeat? No. So let's look at some other possibilities.

Scenario #2 -- All Numbers Strong for the GOP
White: R 60%, D 38% (R 55.4m, D 35.1m)
African-American: D 88%, R 11% (D 15.1m, R 1.9m)
Hispanic: D 62%, R 35% (D 10.6m, R 6.0m)
Asian: D 63%, R 36% (D 2.5m, R 1.4m)
Other: D 55%, R 41% (D 0.7m, R 0.5m)
TOTAL: Republican nominee 65.2 million, Democratic nominee 64.0 million

In this case, I've assumed that everything will go well for Republicans. I've given them yet another point of the White vote, I've reverted the African-American vote to the Bush/Kerry numbers, I've reverted the Hispanic vote to the Bush/Gore numbers, I've clipped 10% off the Asian numbers and shifted them to the Republicans, and I've even given 3% of the 'Other" category to the GOP (this is a catch-all group that is probably fairly resistant to short-term movement).

This gets the GOP a narrow 1.2 million vote margin, that would have over an 80% change of translating into an Electoral College victory. But in order to get this narrow GOP victory, you have to assume pretty much every demographic trend goes the Republcans' way.

Scenario #3 -- Same as Scenario #2, but 2012 numbers for Whites
White: R 59%, D 39% (R 54.5m, D 36.0m)
African-American: D 88%, R 11% (D 15.1m, R 1.9m)
Hispanic: D 62%, R 35% (D 10.6m, R 6.0m)
Asian: D 63%, R 36% (D 2.5m, R 1.4m)
Other: D 55%, R 41% (D 0.7m, R 0.5m)
TOTAL: Democratic nominee 64.9 million , Republican nominee 64.3 million

This scenario assumes that the GOP has maxed out its share of the White vote. Not a bad assumption; it's hard to see Clinton or Cuomo or O'Malley, or whoever wins the 2016 Democratic nomination, doing any worse among Whites. The rest of the numbers are still very favorable to the GOP.

Still, the GOP loses the popular vote, with probably a 2/3rds chance of also losing the Electoral College.

Scenario #4 -- Same as #2 & #3, but 1% improvement on 2012 for Whites
White: R 58%, D 40% (R 53.6m, D 37.0m)
African-American: D% 88, R 11% (D 15.1m, R 1.9m)
Hispanic: D 62%, R 35% (D 10.6m, R 6.0m)
Asian: D 63%, R 36% (D 2.5m, R 1.4m)
Other: D 55%, R 41% (D 0.7m, R 0.5m)
TOTAL: Democratic nominee 65.9 million, Republican nominee 63.4 million.

These demographic numbers are still pretty good overall for the GOP. It would not be at all surprising to see someone like Clinton improve one percentage point for Democrats among Whites. And if that happens? It's all over, even assuming the GOP still manages to do considerably better with all other demographics. This is what is so important -- even demographic trends that are reasonably GOP-biased translate to a loss in 2016.

Scenario #5 -- Modest GOP gains on minority voting, Bush/Kerry numbers for Whites
White: R 58%, D 41% (R 53.6m, D 37.9m)
Black: D 90%, R 8% (D 15.4m, R 1.4m)
Hispanic: D 66%, R 32% (D 11.3m, R 5.5m)
Asian: D 68%, R 31% (D 2.7m, R 1.2m)
Other: D 55%, R 41% (D 0.7m, R 0.5m)
TOTAL: Democratic nominee 68.0 million, Republican nominee 62.2 million

This final number is what I consider more realistic. For all demographics, I've assumed a reasonable and modest rebound towards 50%. I've given the Bush/Kerry numbers to Whites, and assumed the GOP will peel a few percentages off the other groups. The result? A big Democratic victory.

And if the Democrats can manage to flip more than 1.5% of the White vote, it really becomes apocalyptic for the GOP.

Note that these projections are only for 2016. In 2020, it continues to get progressively worse for Republicans. By then, when the White vote is down to 67% or 68%, with Hispanics up to perhaps 15% and maybe Asians gaining 1%, even the rosiest scenario above for the GOP will result in a clear loss.

This is just some food for thought. I advocate nothing. I am just showing why the Republican Party, in order to win Presidential elections in the future, absolutely must find a way to get non-whites to vote for them in greater numbers. Much greater numbers.
Another way to demonstrate the significance of the demographic change of the electorate is to look at past elections, leave the total vote the same, leave the percentages that the racial subgroups voted for a party the same, and just reduce the percentage of white votes cast and minority votes cast to reflect what is predicted to occur in 2016, and recalculate the numbers.

In 2004, based upon exit polls, George W. Bush received 58% of white votes, while John Kerry received 70% of the minority vote. In 2004, the vote was 77% white and Bush won by about 2.5% and 3 million votes. In 2016, the white vote is projected to be 70%, based upon the steady decline of the white vote over the last 20 years. Based on my back of the envelope math, which I freely admit could be wrong, replaying that election with the projected electorate would result in a narrow Kerry win in the popular vote of less than a million, which probably would have switched the election, since Kerry came within a little over 110,000 votes in Ohio of winning (meaning a switch of 50-60 thousand voters would have swung the election) without adjusting the mix to current day reality.

In 2000, Al Gore became the first candidate to win the popular vote and lose the election since the 1888 election of Grover Cleveland. In 2000, white voters comprised 81% of the national popular vote. Bush won
white voters 55-42, but Gore won black voters by 90-9 (10% of the total vote), Hispanics by 62-35 (7% of vote) and Asians 55-41 (2%). Bush lost the national popular vote by slightly over a half million votes, or by 0.51%, but lost the race in Florida, and the election by 537. If the electorate that year had been 70% white instead of 81% white, George W. Bush would never have been elected in the first place.

Another race that would be interesting to look at would be 1968. Nixon won the electoral college easily, but only won the popular vote by about a half million votes due to the third party candidacy of George Wallace. I haven't seen an exit poll from 1968, but the white vote was probably close to 90%. If you drop that to only 70% and couple that with a three way race for the white vote with Humphrey getting the lion's share of the minority vote it would have made a dramatic difference. The states that Nixon carried included California and Illinois, which with today's demographics he definitely wouldn't carry. The worst case scenario would have been that with an increased minority vote won Humphrey more states, but no one won a majority in the electoral college, allowing George Wallace and the Southern segregationists leverage in exacting political concessions in exchange for the support of the Wallace states when the election moved to the House of Representatives.

There may be other years where changing the mix of the voters would alter the outcome. The only one in recent history that I can think of that would definitely not change would be the Reagan re-election of 1984, where I've seen estimates that pegged his white support from somewhere between 63 to 66%. The margin would be greatly reduced, but the results would have been the same.

Alternative history usually bores me, but electoral what-ifs are the exception.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top