GA a swing state in 2016? (2013, assess, safe)

[bryantm3]

Originally Posted by -thomass

No. Both Romney and Purdue won by 7-8%. No way GA is a swing state this time around.

perdue could not even match the same percentage in 2014 as romney did in 2012. this was in a midterm that heavily favoured the republicans. while i don't think georgia will go to the democrats next year, it will definitely be close, and closer than anyone thought was possible.

[-thomass]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

perdue could not even match the same percentage in 2014 as romney did in 2012. this was in a midterm that heavily favoured the republicans. while i don't think georgia will go to the democrats next year, it will definitely be close, and closer than anyone thought was possible.

I don't think so, but I could be wrong. I'd say the republican will win by at least 5%.

[Sandwoody]

Yes, liberals know that Hillary is a moderate. Liberals also know Kasich is a moderate Republican, and is the Republicans' only true chance of having someone half-normal. He would be their smartest choice for many reasons, so go ahead and count him out of the race.

The smartest person running is Bernie Sanders.

The best chance of winning is Hillary.

No one would have thought that the land of Jesse Helm would swing left, but they did. I can totally see Georgia swinging to the left, maybe not this election, but soon.

Anyone who even considers the possibility of Trump being viable to anything, but his own ego, shouldn't be participating in political discussions. jmo.

[Caleb Longstreet]

If Michelle Nunn's slaughter is any indication, it's doubtful. It was clear that unless Georgia has a real, real exciting Democrat, it won't happen. Don't forget, it has to swing traditional republicans. Hard to do here. Also, quite a few republicans are moving here and they are all not ITP bound?

I'd wager it stays 51-52% in 2020 and beyond. But, as one person weighed in, it's all about voter turnout and a strong, popular candidate. The last one was a real dud.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

perdue could not even match the same percentage in 2014 as romney did in 2012. this was in a midterm that heavily favoured the republicans. while i don't think georgia will go to the democrats next year, it will definitely be close, and closer than anyone thought was possible.

As I said, people vote parties more on presidential than on local. Massachusetts, New York and Maryland have had several Republican governors. When was the last time they voted for a Republican for president? 1972? Governor's races in Republican southern and western states are closer than presidential elections.

[Ant131531]

Georgia is 33% black. Black turnout was historically high in 2008 and 2012 because of Obama having the possibility of being the first black president. There are no black democratic candidates this year and blacks aren't that enthusiastic about Hilary or Bernie. That means that states like Georgia probably had their strongest years in Democratic voting during those two elections(along with Jimmy Carter). I suspect we'll see a more red state in 2016.

This is also why I think states like NC, Florida, and Virginia can all turn red in 2016 because the black voting base won't be as strong anymore and all three states have high black populations(relative to nationwide black voting percentages). I think people really need to understand this going forward. If the Democrats want to win, they must have a high turnout among minorities, particularly blacks in the close, battleground states in the East.

[atltechdude]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

Georgia is 33% black. Black turnout was historically high in 2008 and 2012 because of Obama having the possibility of being the first black president. There are no black democratic candidates this year and blacks aren't that enthusiastic about Hilary or Bernie. That means that states like Georgia probably had their strongest years in Democratic voting during those two elections(along with Jimmy Carter). I suspect we'll see a more red state in 2016.

This is also why I think states like NC, Florida, and Virginia can all turn red in 2016 because the black voting base won't be as strong anymore and all three states have high black populations(relative to nationwide black voting percentages). I think people really need to understand this going forward. If the Democrats want to win, they must have a high turnout among minorities, particularly blacks in the close, battleground states in the East.

Hillary sort of makes up for some of the lost black vote though by the fact that she does better with white working class people than Obama did.

[atltechdude]

Originally Posted by Caleb Longstreet

If Michelle Nunn's slaughter is any indication

It isn't. We are talking about a presidential year, which is a completely different electorate.

[Sandwoody]

There's a reason why Republicans fight so hard against immigration. Sure, illegal immigrants can't vote, but their children born here can, and they've really burned the bridge with that voting contingency. Georgia Republicans have no issues hiring illegal, Hispanic, day laborers though. The fight on immigration is mostly about votes, and that's both political sides.

[Cameron H]

Originally Posted by DawgPark

Wow! I almost spit out my drink when I read that.

This is either sarcasm or delusion.

Why's that? Hillary is certainly the most moderate candidate in the race, though the parties have become so polarized that it's a low bar. She has generally mainstream liberal views on social issues and policy, but her pro-business (progressives say "corporatist") and hawkish foreign-policy positions put her on the right end of the Democrat(ic) spectrum. In fact, if Hillary were anyone else, I think she'd lose the nomination to a candidate running to her left (again).

Anyway, Georgia won't be a swing state in 2016.