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)
 
Old 01-03-2015, 08:29 PM
 
Location: NJ
18,677 posts, read 17,080,289 times
Reputation: 7282

Advertisements

Florida is not a automatic southern state, a ton of transplants alter its outlook. Va POTUS will stay blue now, as NOVA has transformed Va, for good, and when 55-60% turn out, it does not mirror off year 35-40% electorate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-03-2015, 08:31 PM
 
3,378 posts, read 3,244,151 times
Reputation: 709
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn View Post
Florida is not a automatic southern state, a ton of transplants alter its outlook. Va POTUS will stay blue now, as NOVA has transformed Va, for good, and when 55-60% turn out, it does not mirror off year 35-40% electorate.
We shall see!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2015, 08:33 PM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
23,325 posts, read 11,554,281 times
Reputation: 4319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1 View Post
I guess you have never met the people in NARAL or some in NOW then. While it might not be the norm, there are radicals that feel that way. Still they will not turn an election one way or the other.
Nor will the overall election be turned on the abortion issues.
Sure Hillary will try to make it a womens issue type of campaign since the (D's) have become the party of divisiveness, but most informed intelligent women will see through it. The question remains, who many of the women who vote are going to turn out.
1. Thank you for proving my point. The person i responded to claimed it was the stance of the Democratic Party, it is not.

2. NARAL does not support unrestricted abortions, they oppose laws that shut down clinics, there is a gigantic difference between the 2.

3. It shouldnt be divisive to say the supreme court already decided Roe vs Wade.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2015, 08:41 PM
 
3,378 posts, read 3,244,151 times
Reputation: 709
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
1. Thank you for proving my point. The person i responded to claimed it was the stance of the Democratic Party, it is not.

2. NARAL does not support unrestricted abortions, they oppose laws that shut down clinics, there is a gigantic difference between the 2.

3. It shouldnt be divisive to say the supreme court already decided Roe vs Wade.
Is anyone out there supporting adoptive services? If so, which groups or political parties? Its great to say that you are "pro-choice", but I have never seen a pro choice person be anything other than "pro abortion" Big difference
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2015, 08:56 PM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
23,325 posts, read 11,554,281 times
Reputation: 4319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guamanians View Post
Yes there are changes, but you are missing some key points. You say that McCain & Romney won the south, but thats not entirely true. I think they lost Florida and maybe NC. Those states are big! Also, look out for Virginia... Warner was supposed to win in a landslide but he barely squeaked by. The states with GOP governors & senators will have an influence as to who wins those states in 2016. I would consider it a home field advantage scenario.
North Carolina(15)+Virginia(13)+ Florida(29) = 57 electoral college votes

332-42(he lost North Carolina in 2012)= 290

Barack Obama could have lost all 3 states and still won the Presidential election.

Also, none of your other key points pan out.

Florida and Virginia had Republican governor in 2012, neither went to the Republican, and Virginia will have Democratic Governor this time around, negating that point all together.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2015, 09:02 PM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
23,325 posts, read 11,554,281 times
Reputation: 4319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guamanians View Post
Is anyone out there supporting adoptive services? If so, which groups or political parties? Its great to say that you are "pro-choice", but I have never seen a pro choice person be anything other than "pro abortion" Big difference
Your comment seems to be drenched in mockery, but i will respond seriously.

Yes, pro choice people are pro adoption, but the term pro choice or even pro life are both specifically about the abortion issue, not what happens after that, so with in context, of course you wouldnt hear about their views on adoption, but i have never met anyone who was anti adoption either.

And no, being pro choice is not the same as being pro abortion, i am pro choice and i believe abortion is wrong, but i believe you have a right to have one. I also have a problem with people who drink, doesnt mean i want to make it illegal.

You can have a personal view with out it also being your stance of public governance, its not that hard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2015, 10:29 PM
 
Location: MPLS
752 posts, read 449,580 times
Reputation: 458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trace21230 View Post
That's not the position the Democrat Party takes in its extremist platform.
Sure, and Republicans want to ban abortion outright -- also an extreme position. So American voters are stuck in the middle, and the issue loses its potency among the persuadable electorate (i.e., non-conservative Christians, non-single women).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2015, 10:40 PM
 
Location: MPLS
752 posts, read 449,580 times
Reputation: 458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trace21230 View Post
Scott isn't running in 2016 so you can have as many ignorant voters turnout as you want, but he'll still be governor.
Ouch! Why do I care? Do you imagine I'm pulling my hair out because lizard-person won? I live halfway around the country, so Florida's dysfunction is of little consequence to me (save 2000, obviously).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2015, 12:46 AM
 
Location: San Antonio Texas
11,435 posts, read 16,481,100 times
Reputation: 5224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guamanians View Post
You are cherry picking statistics. As you know, dems threw EVERYTHING at Rick Scott and they still lost Florida. Now, you say that the south doesn't matter?? But how would Hillary match up vs Jeb? Can Hillary win Arkansas? Remember, Gore lost Tennessee
Also, if the democratic candidate can't win ANY southern state then they must win Ohio and many other midwestern states. Those illegals-turned legal will need to move to Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, etc. Do you really see that happening? Think of this scenario... A Jeb Bush/Marco Rubio Ticket.
Now, there is a lot that will happen between now and then, but that would be a problem for your party. Jeb was considered a good governor, and Rubio is also from Florida... and he is hispanic. Also, Bush's wife is hispanic, so good luck trying to play the anti-hispanic game.
You guys are looking way too much at polls and stats instead of todays reality.
BTW, 42.7% of all statistics are just made up on the spot
Jeb Bush is more "Hispanic" than Rubio is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2015, 04:48 AM
 
1,721 posts, read 1,008,109 times
Reputation: 1117
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn View Post
Guamanians, The South held for McCain and Romney, and both lost the EC count by a combined 697-379! Ohio is no longer a must state for the Dems, since Virginia and NM are both blue due to the new pops in each.

The GOP literally must walk a tightrope just to squeak to 270, winning just about every swing state. That is a longshot possibility, at best. This goes beyond any issue over any individual nominee. Its a systemic issue, tied to a nation with significant demographic changes at work.
A highly prescient book, The Emerging Democratic Majority, largely foresaw this trend. It was originally published in 2002, and I believe one writer is Democratic, one is Republican. Accurately predicting demographic and voting trends several years into the future is extremely difficult, and these two nailed it almost perfectly:
The Emerging Democratic Majority: John B. Judis, Ruy Teixeira: 9780743254786: Amazon.com: Books
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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