Projected Voter turnout 2016---Bad News for GOP

I guess that makes it official. Democrats are keeping our borders open in order to cultivate a new plantation of government dependent poverty pimps while Black voters are becoming more independent (and smarter).
 
LOL!
The Democrats have one candidate, a rich old white woman. The GOP has the most diverse slate of candidates any party has offered.
Democrats have blacks in the back pocket. But they wont show up to vote for Hillary. Obama won in 2012 only because of unpredicted black voter turnout (and fraud). That wont happen again. And the GOP will pocket the Hispanic vote as Hispanics are naturally GOP voters.

Question: If someone offered to make a $30 bet with you whether in the next election at least 65% of Hispanic vote (as measured by exit polls) will for for the Republican Presidential candidate, would you take that bet? If not, why not?
That's a clown question, bro

No. It is a very serious one. One of the better ways of telling if people are serious or are just bullshitting is whether they are willing to stake money on something. Heck, I'd be willing to bet far more than $30 on this if you wanted to. So why not do it? Because internally you know it isn't going to happen?
You're a dumbshit. Get lost.

I've noted your prediction about the Hispanic vote down here PredictionBook In the 2016 election a majority of Hispanic voters as determined by exit polls will vote for the Republican candidate. using the presumed weaker level of just a majority. I'll be curious after the election if you decide to update any of your actual or verbalized models of reality after the election.
 
LOL!
The Democrats have one candidate, a rich old white woman. The GOP has the most diverse slate of candidates any party has offered.
Democrats have blacks in the back pocket. But they wont show up to vote for Hillary. Obama won in 2012 only because of unpredicted black voter turnout (and fraud). That wont happen again. And the GOP will pocket the Hispanic vote as Hispanics are naturally GOP voters.

Question: If someone offered to make a $30 bet with you whether in the next election at least 65% of Hispanic vote (as measured by exit polls) will for for the Republican Presidential candidate, would you take that bet? If not, why not?
That's a clown question, bro

No. It is a very serious one. One of the better ways of telling if people are serious or are just bullshitting is whether they are willing to stake money on something. Heck, I'd be willing to bet far more than $30 on this if you wanted to. So why not do it? Because internally you know it isn't going to happen?
You're a dumbshit. Get lost.

I've noted your prediction about the Hispanic vote down here PredictionBook In the 2016 election a majority of Hispanic voters as determined by exit polls will vote for the Republican candidate. using the presumed weaker level of just a majority. I'll be curious after the election if you decide to update any of your actual or verbalized models of reality after the election.
Sure thing, boss.
 
Regardless of who will win the primaries later this year, the demographics entailed in the population growth of our country will constitute the main factor in determining who will sit in the oval office....
It is a stark reality that the US white, evangelical and republican-leaning population is dwindling, while the Hispanic/Latino and Asian segment is fast and steadily growing.
These latter segments have been ill-courted by the GOP and tend to heavily favor democrats' policies........The US House will likely remain in republican hands, but the Senate might experience a shift toward democrats (if not a majority) and the WH with guarded surety will remain "blue."
_____________________________________

Republicans have two major problems when it comes to winning presidential elections: demograpics and the Electoral College. And as the 2016 election gets off the ground, both of these problems are getting worse.

On the Electoral College front, Democrats quite simply have more electoral votes "in the bank" (i.e. safe blue states) and need to win fewer swing states than Republicans do. And demographically, the Democrats' gains among Hispanic voters in particular pose a real long-term problem for Republicans, given this population is growing extremely fast and the white population is, well, not.

The GOP s major 2016 problem in 3 maps - The Washington Post

Its too bad that rdean is on My ignore list as I'd like to see his head explode but that is just the way it goes.

I want you to consider something very carefully.

When Jindal, Fiorina, and Carson announce their candidacy, the GOP will have an African-American, a women, an American Inidan, a Cuban, and two white guys.

Now contrast that to the Democrat party which has ONE UBER RICH WHITE WOMAN who is a corporatist.

So, you go ahead with your idyll speculation on racial blocks and how they vote, ignore that second coat of shellack that was administered last year, and stick with the Dems have the white house locked up, meme. Everyone needs a fantasy.


Sure, but the repubs you listed are nut jobs. Not a viable candidate in the bunch.
Each one is a viable candidate, sane, and more experienced than the current occupant. I might add, they're smarter than Clinton too.


Jindal doubles down on every dumb statement he has ever made. His statements about "No Go Zones" made him a laughing stock not only here, but world wide, and no candidate who is so anti gay marriage as him will stand even a tiny chance in a country that has already made that decision and moved on. Jindal is one of the few who will not accept the reality of that.

The right thinks the only reason Hillary is so popular is because she is a woman, so any woman is a valid opponent. They made the same mistake when they chose sarah.

Carson is a notable surgeon. He will never be a viable political representative for anyone.
 
Isn't that what was said in 10 & again in 14?

Yea...hang on to that

It may be too much for your half-brain to handle, but 2016 is a PRESIDENTIAL election cycle...not a midterm one.....Take off your shoes, get your toes to help you count off the 4 years' presidential election cycles.
Name the last three-term party in the executive branch



Name one presidential election since 1928 where repubs won without a bush or Nixon on the ticket.
This Republican Party came into existence in the middle 60's when conservatives fled the Democratic Party because so many blacks had joined. Somehow these idiot right wingers want to believe Lincoln was a confederate. But clearly, he wasn't.


They have to tell themselves a lot of crazy stuff to maintain their rhetoric. None of it is true, but they don't care.
 
Question: If someone offered to make a $30 bet with you whether in the next election at least 65% of Hispanic vote (as measured by exit polls) will for for the Republican Presidential candidate, would you take that bet? If not, why not?
That's a clown question, bro

No. It is a very serious one. One of the better ways of telling if people are serious or are just bullshitting is whether they are willing to stake money on something. Heck, I'd be willing to bet far more than $30 on this if you wanted to. So why not do it? Because internally you know it isn't going to happen?
You're a dumbshit. Get lost.

I've noted your prediction about the Hispanic vote down here PredictionBook In the 2016 election a majority of Hispanic voters as determined by exit polls will vote for the Republican candidate. using the presumed weaker level of just a majority. I'll be curious after the election if you decide to update any of your actual or verbalized models of reality after the election.
Sure thing, boss.

Great. Hopefully I'll see you here in 2016 and we'll discuss this then. Of course, if you are right, you'll presumably regret not making such a bet. And if you do think I'm a terrible "dumbshit" then I would think you'd be interested in me losing money where you can then use it bet.

Honestly, from your user name, I was expecting your objection to be that it was not ok to gamble, and was ready to then move to a bet where the loser instead pays to a charity of the winner's choice, since there's no halachic problem with that sort of thing, so I'm surprised we didn't even have to get to that stage.
 
That's a clown question, bro

No. It is a very serious one. One of the better ways of telling if people are serious or are just bullshitting is whether they are willing to stake money on something. Heck, I'd be willing to bet far more than $30 on this if you wanted to. So why not do it? Because internally you know it isn't going to happen?
You're a dumbshit. Get lost.

I've noted your prediction about the Hispanic vote down here PredictionBook In the 2016 election a majority of Hispanic voters as determined by exit polls will vote for the Republican candidate. using the presumed weaker level of just a majority. I'll be curious after the election if you decide to update any of your actual or verbalized models of reality after the election.
Sure thing, boss.

Great. Hopefully I'll see you here in 2016 and we'll discuss this then. Of course, if you are right, you'll presumably regret not making such a bet. And if you do think I'm a terrible "dumbshit" then I would think you'd be interested in me losing money where you can then use it bet.

Honestly, from your user name, I was expecting your objection to be that it was not ok to gamble, and was ready to then move to a bet where the loser instead pays to a charity of the winner's choice, since there's no halachic problem with that sort of thing, so I'm surprised we didn't even have to get to that stage.
I think you're a dumbshit. No one is going to bet on an event 18 months from now. I wouldnt bet on who the nominees will be.
Now go run along like a good little troll and troll elsewhere.
 
I guess that makes it official. Democrats are keeping our borders open in order to cultivate a new plantation of government dependent poverty pimps while Black voters are becoming more independent (and smarter).


Even for you, that is a LAME attempt at "sarcasm"........(BTW, does the above apply to Canadians also?)

Keeping the "border open"????....What ever happened to one of your heroes, Perry and the state guard at the TX border? Of the 4 states bordering Mexico, 3 are under republican governors.....

Besides, if a Mexican or Central American is here LEGALLY, would you deny that individual the right to vote? Do you want your party to do the same thing to these people as you once did to blacks?
 
I think you're a dumbshit. No one is going to bet on an event 18 months from now. I wouldnt bet on who the nominees will be.
Now go run along like a good little troll and troll elsewhere.

Well, yes, you've made clear your opinion of me, already, but it is worth noting that your second sentence is false. For example, I have listed here two bets with people who are Rand Paul fans. One of them is $25 to the winner while the other bet is for $25 to either the Paul campaign (if Paul wins the nomination) or to a charity of my choice if he loses. I'd have to check, but I think currently the longest out I have a bet going on anything with a concrete deadline is 2035. So yes, people do make long-term bets. There's also an excellent set of services designed for long-term bets. Longbets is as its name suggests one of them. They've had some very serious people make long-term bets for serious amounts of money. For example, their flagship open bet right now is one Warren Buffett made for a million dollars.

It is very easy to decide other people are trolling when you don't like what they have to say, but you aren't ever going to learn anything that way.
 
Regardless of who will win the primaries later this year, the demographics entailed in the population growth of our country will constitute the main factor in determining who will sit in the oval office....
It is a stark reality that the US white, evangelical and republican-leaning population is dwindling, while the Hispanic/Latino and Asian segment is fast and steadily growing.
These latter segments have been ill-courted by the GOP and tend to heavily favor democrats' policies........The US House will likely remain in republican hands, but the Senate might experience a shift toward democrats (if not a majority) and the WH with guarded surety will remain "blue."
_____________________________________

Republicans have two major problems when it comes to winning presidential elections: demograpics and the Electoral College. And as the 2016 election gets off the ground, both of these problems are getting worse.

On the Electoral College front, Democrats quite simply have more electoral votes "in the bank" (i.e. safe blue states) and need to win fewer swing states than Republicans do. And demographically, the Democrats' gains among Hispanic voters in particular pose a real long-term problem for Republicans, given this population is growing extremely fast and the white population is, well, not.

The GOP s major 2016 problem in 3 maps - The Washington Post

Its too bad that rdean is on My ignore list as I'd like to see his head explode but that is just the way it goes.

I want you to consider something very carefully.

When Jindal, Fiorina, and Carson announce their candidacy, the GOP will have an African-American, a women, an American Inidan, a Cuban, and two white guys.

Now contrast that to the Democrat party which has ONE UBER RICH WHITE WOMAN who is a corporatist.

So, you go ahead with your idyll speculation on racial blocks and how they vote, ignore that second coat of shellack that was administered last year, and stick with the Dems have the white house locked up, meme. Everyone needs a fantasy.


Sure, but the repubs you listed are nut jobs. Not a viable candidate in the bunch.
Each one is a viable candidate, sane, and more experienced than the current occupant. I might add, they're smarter than Clinton too.


Jindal doubles down on every dumb statement he has ever made. His statements about "No Go Zones" made him a laughing stock not only here, but world wide, and no candidate who is so anti gay marriage as him will stand even a tiny chance in a country that has already made that decision and moved on. Jindal is one of the few who will not accept the reality of that.

The right thinks the only reason Hillary is so popular is because she is a woman, so any woman is a valid opponent. They made the same mistake when they chose sarah.

Carson is a notable surgeon. He will never be a viable political representative for anyone.
You people wear a lot of blinders.

Simply because you disagree does not make it wrong, or the person wrong. I simply laugh at how easily you people apply your own intent to an entire populace.
 
Of course even these data will be rejected by right wingers....nonetheless......

2014 midterm election turnout lowest in 70 years
...................
Lowest turnout since WW2: Turnout of the voting-eligible population was just 36.4 percent, according to the projection from the United States Elections Project, run by Dr. Michael McDonald at the University of Florida.

That’s down from the 41 percent that turned out in 2010.

2014 midterm election turnout lowest in 70 years
 

Forum List

Back
Top