“What Republican can win 270 electoral votes in 2016?”

[S.J.]

[quo
How much time did you spend on that post, dude? I would go through it and address each one of your ridiculous claims but frankly, I see no point in spending that much time arguing with an idiot. I'll just let you bask in your blissful ignorance.

Your abject surrender is duly noted.

Not hardly. History speaks for itself and it shows you to be an idiot. You're simply not worth the effort.

 

[JoeB131]

[quo
How much time did you spend on that post, dude? I would go through it and address each one of your ridiculous claims but frankly, I see no point in spending that much time arguing with an idiot. I'll just let you bask in your blissful ignorance.

Your abject surrender is duly noted.

Not hardly. History speaks for itself and it shows you to be an idiot. You're simply not worth the effort.

I think if you went into any major history department at any major university and blurted out "Reagan won the Cold War", you'd get laughed out of the room. if you had a kind-hearted professor, he might explain to you EXACTLY what I did- that the USSR collapsed due to internal pressures that had nothing to with Reagan. More likely, they'd treat you like some high-grade retard who believes in Talking Snakes.

 

[S.J.]

I think if you went into any major history department at any major university and blurted out "Reagan won the Cold War", you'd get laughed out of the room.

Gee, ya think? LOL Seeing as how they're all liberals, I would be shocked if they didn't.

 

[JoeB131]

I think if you went into any major history department at any major university and blurted out "Reagan won the Cold War", you'd get laughed out of the room.

Gee, ya think? LOL Seeing as how they're all liberals, I would be shocked if they didn't.

Yes, reality has a liberal bias.

 

[S.J.]

I think if you went into any major history department at any major university and blurted out "Reagan won the Cold War", you'd get laughed out of the room.

Gee, ya think? LOL Seeing as how they're all liberals, I would be shocked if they didn't.

Yes, reality has a liberal bias.

No, liberals just like to rewrite history.

 

[JoeB131]

Gee, ya think? LOL Seeing as how they're all liberals, I would be shocked if they didn't.

Yes, reality has a liberal bias.

No, liberals just like to rewrite history.

Guy, I lived through that time period. Frankly, most of the academic world saw that the USSR had the same problem the British Empire had- that the Russians were tired of having an empire and the ruled people were tired of being ruled.

It was not because Reagan gave a pretty speech in Berlin.

 

[AVG-JOE]

We in the GOP will change by reaching out to women, Hispanics and other minorities, and put away the social traditionalist agenda.

Simply this: there are far more votes to court successfully than what we lose with pissy older white far right conservatives.

Get over it, guys: it is happening now, and you will love Christie, regardless of what you think now.

It’s not so much a matter of ‘reaching out,’ but one of just stopping the ignorance and hate.

Once republicans stop opposing the equal protection rights of same-sex couples to marry, opposing a woman’s right to privacy with regard to contraception, and opposing the due process rights of immigrants, those voters will consider voting for republicans again.

Don't forget economic policy.

As long as Trickle-down reigns supreme as the republican economic model, there's no fucking way I'll ever vote republican again - no matter what they say about the fairness issues that you list above.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Today? Almost anyone. After three more years of obama world class fuck ups? Any republican would.

The democrat brand is just starting its disintegration. Give it awhile.

You didn't read the article, did you.

If you want to explore this new reality, check out 270towin.com. There you can play around with the interactive map and plot out your favorite candidate’s path to 270.

For instance, let’s look at Wisconsin, with its 10 electoral votes. Every four years the Republican mindset says Wisconsin will be a swing state. Then, a few months into the campaign the state loses it’s coveted “battleground” status as polls begin to show its “blue” reality. The truth is that not since 1984, when Reagan won in a landslide against Walter Mondale, has Wisconsin seen red.

Or take Pennsylvania, with 20 electoral votes, and New York, with 29—both have been blue since Bill Clinton won them in 1992, and blue they will remain.

Then there’s the mega-rich electoral state of California with its 55 votes that turned red for the last time in 1988 when George H.W. Bush won that “California guy” Reagan’s “third term.”

After totaling the electoral votes in all the terminally blue states, an inconvenient math emerges, providing even a below average Democrat presidential candidate a potential starting advantage of 246. Here are the states and their votes:

CA (55), NY (29), PA (20), IL (20), MI (16), NJ (14), WA (12), MA (11), MN (10), WI (10), MD (10), CT (7), OR (7), HI (4), ME (4), NH (4), RT (4), VT (3), DE (3), DC (3).

Let me repeat, if only for the shock value: 246 votes out of 270 is 91 percent. That means the Democrat candidate needs to win only 24 more votes out of the remaining 292. (There are a total of 538 electoral votes.)

So tell me: What is the 270 path that you've found, keeping in mind that we're already 91% of the way there as Democrats.

No question, you'll need to break the firewall in the upper midwest to win if you are in the GOP. PA, WI, MI all have GOP governors so its possible. The real difficulty for the GOP is going to be running a candidate in the General that has to sound crazy enough to win the GOP ghettos in the south during the primary while still appealing to the much less insane midwest conservatives. Not an easy thing to do.

Which is why a sane, serious GOP presidential candidate needs to have the courage to remain sensible and pragmatic in the Southern primaries, although he’ll lose most of those primaries, it will allow him to be perceived as sane and pragmatic during the General Election, and attract the democratic and independent votes he’ll need to win.

 

[AVG-JOE]

You didn't read the article, did you.



So tell me: What is the 270 path that you've found, keeping in mind that we're already 91% of the way there as Democrats.

No question, you'll need to break the firewall in the upper midwest to win if you are in the GOP. PA, WI, MI all have GOP governors so its possible. The real difficulty for the GOP is going to be running a candidate in the General that has to sound crazy enough to win the GOP ghettos in the south during the primary while still appealing to the much less insane midwest conservatives. Not an easy thing to do.

Which is why a sane, serious GOP presidential candidate needs to have the courage to remain sensible and pragmatic in the Southern primaries, although he’ll lose most of those primaries, it will allow him to be perceived as sane and pragmatic during the General Election, and attract the democratic and independent votes he’ll need to win.

It turns out that successful Gerrymandering has its costs down the road, eh?

Some districts got Gerrymandered so red that only an extremist has a chance of winning.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Yes, reality has a liberal bias.

No, liberals just like to rewrite history.

The victors usually do.

 

[Toro]

This is 2013

And in one of the primary debates, it took Newt Gingrich exactly one second into his opening speech to say "Ronald Reagan." I timed it.

 

[rightwinger]

Your abject surrender is duly noted.

Not hardly. History speaks for itself and it shows you to be an idiot. You're simply not worth the effort.

I think if you went into any major history department at any major university and blurted out "Reagan won the Cold War", you'd get laughed out of the room. if you had a kind-hearted professor, he might explain to you EXACTLY what I did- that the USSR collapsed due to internal pressures that had nothing to with Reagan. More likely, they'd treat you like some high-grade retard who believes in Talking Snakes.

Or is a FoxNews viewer

 

[Toro]

Today? Almost anyone. After three more years of obama world class fuck ups? Any republican would.

The democrat brand is just starting its disintegration. Give it awhile.

You didn't read the article, did you.

If you want to explore this new reality, check out 270towin.com. There you can play around with the interactive map and plot out your favorite candidate’s path to 270.

For instance, let’s look at Wisconsin, with its 10 electoral votes. Every four years the Republican mindset says Wisconsin will be a swing state. Then, a few months into the campaign the state loses it’s coveted “battleground” status as polls begin to show its “blue” reality. The truth is that not since 1984, when Reagan won in a landslide against Walter Mondale, has Wisconsin seen red.

Or take Pennsylvania, with 20 electoral votes, and New York, with 29—both have been blue since Bill Clinton won them in 1992, and blue they will remain.

Then there’s the mega-rich electoral state of California with its 55 votes that turned red for the last time in 1988 when George H.W. Bush won that “California guy” Reagan’s “third term.”

After totaling the electoral votes in all the terminally blue states, an inconvenient math emerges, providing even a below average Democrat presidential candidate a potential starting advantage of 246. Here are the states and their votes:

CA (55), NY (29), PA (20), IL (20), MI (16), NJ (14), WA (12), MA (11), MN (10), WI (10), MD (10), CT (7), OR (7), HI (4), ME (4), NH (4), RT (4), VT (3), DE (3), DC (3).

Let me repeat, if only for the shock value: 246 votes out of 270 is 91 percent. That means the Democrat candidate needs to win only 24 more votes out of the remaining 292. (There are a total of 538 electoral votes.)

So tell me: What is the 270 path that you've found, keeping in mind that we're already 91% of the way there as Democrats.

No question, you'll need to break the firewall in the upper midwest to win if you are in the GOP. PA, WI, MI all have GOP governors so its possible. The real difficulty for the GOP is going to be running a candidate in the General that has to sound crazy enough to win the GOP ghettos in the south during the primary while still appealing to the much less insane midwest conservatives. Not an easy thing to do.

The most likely states would probably be MN and WI. However, if you look at his list above, and you see the swing states Obama won - CO FL IA OH NM NV VA - the Republicans have to win all of them while the Democrats would only need to win FL.

If you look at some of the other blue states Republicans have thought they could win, the last time these states went red were

MI - 1988
MN - 1972
PA - 1988
WI - 1984

So there'd have to be a pretty seismic shift for those states to be put into play. Running Ted Cruz against Hillary Clinton certainly won't do it.

 

[rightwinger]

You didn't read the article, did you.



So tell me: What is the 270 path that you've found, keeping in mind that we're already 91% of the way there as Democrats.

No question, you'll need to break the firewall in the upper midwest to win if you are in the GOP. PA, WI, MI all have GOP governors so its possible. The real difficulty for the GOP is going to be running a candidate in the General that has to sound crazy enough to win the GOP ghettos in the south during the primary while still appealing to the much less insane midwest conservatives. Not an easy thing to do.

The most likely states would probably be MN and WI. However, if you look at his list above, and you see the swing states Obama won - CO FL IA OH NM NV VA - the Republicans have to win all of them while the Democrats would only need to win FL.

If you look at some of the other blue states Republicans have thought they could win, the last time these states went red were

MI - 1988
MN - 1972
PA - 1988
WI - 1984

So there'd have to be a pretty seismic shift for those states to be put into play. Running Ted Cruz against Hillary Clinton certainly won't do it.

Florida is looking decidedly blue. The state that put Bush in the White House looks like will not be voting Republican for a while. The Hispanic vote will be critical and Republicans are doing what they can to piss them off

 

[Sallow]

Can a Republican Win 270 Electoral Votes in 2016...or Ever? - The Daily Beast

Conservative Republicans uphold their conservative principles as a shiny badge of honor never to be tarnished. I, too, am a conservative Republican. However, I think like Ronald Reagan, who when trying to get legislation passed in 1983 said the following:

“I have always figured that a half a loaf is better than none, and I know that in the democratic process you’re not going to always get everything you want.”

Sadly, I also agree with former senator and 1996 GOP presidential nominee Bob Dole, who appeared this past May on Fox News Sunday to discuss the growing conservative tilt among Republican primary and base voters when he stated that “Reagan wouldn't have made it” in today’s Republican Party.

That might actually be true, for at my conservative event, as I listened to speeches from a host of elected leaders, only one mentioned the “C word”: compromise. Instead of “compromise,” all I heard was “we must battle and fight to uphold the principles of conservatism.”

Now, I also believe in fighting for conservative principles, but realizing that conservatives are an ever shrinking minority within the electorate, it is imperative that Republicans nominate a presidential candidate (and other leaders) who can attract moderate voters by stating that he or she, like Reagan, are willing to accept a “half loaf instead of a whole” in order to solve the difficult issues facing our nation.

Otherwise, the GOP will remain locked out of the White House and leave our nation stuck in neutral with a gridlocked government. There is danger ahead for conservatives when core conservative principles are used as roadblocks to any progress.

This is an excellent article. There are some hard home-truths that need to be faced and dealt with before Republicans can even think about taking back the White House. I am hoping that since there is a veritable shit-ton of Republicans who want their party back, they will find a way to make it happen. Because this "I'm more conservative!" "No, I'M more conservative!" game is doing nothing to win moderates, and you need the moderates. You cannot win without them.

Can he win?

 

[Katzndogz]

In 2016 it will be a mistake to rely on results from past elections. Wisconsin might not be so blue after the unions are thrown out. Colorado might not be so blue with democrat senators replace by republicans.

At this point in 2013, predictions of the next election in 2016, being like the last election in 2012 is premature. In 2012 there was still hope that democrat policies would be successful. In 2013 the results of those policies are starting to come in and a revolt is brewing across the country. Too many people have lost their jobs. Too many people have become part time employees. Too many people have lost their health care. Too many people are horrified or disappointed in obama's complete mishandling of Syria. Many more are chafing after the scandals that didn't exist in 2012. Too many people are disgusted with being told how wonderful the economy is when they can plainly see it's not.

It's not over yet. We have three more years before democrats can beg forgiveness and try to shift the conversation to gay rights and abortion. How long can democrats ride the gay rights and abortion horse when everything else is falling apart around the nation?

 

[rightwinger]

In 2016 it will be a mistake to rely on results from past elections. Wisconsin might not be so blue after the unions are thrown out. Colorado might not be so blue with democrat senators replace by republicans.

At this point in 2013, predictions of the next election in 2016, being like the last election in 2012 is premature. In 2012 there was still hope that democrat policies would be successful. In 2013 the results of those policies are starting to come in and a revolt is brewing across the country. Too many people have lost their jobs. Too many people have become part time employees. Too many people have lost their health care. Too many people are horrified or disappointed in obama's complete mishandling of Syria. Many more are chafing after the scandals that didn't exist in 2012. Too many people are disgusted with being told how wonderful the economy is when they can plainly see it's not.

It's not over yet. We have three more years before democrats can beg forgiveness and try to shift the conversation to gay rights and abortion. How long can democrats ride the gay rights and abortion horse when everything else is falling apart around the nation?

You know, sooner or later Republicans will have to give up their "We hope Democratic policies fail" and replace it with concrete initiatives where Republicans are actually helping average Americans

 

[LoneLaugher]

In 2016 it will be a mistake to rely on results from past elections. Wisconsin might not be so blue after the unions are thrown out. Colorado might not be so blue with democrat senators replace by republicans.

At this point in 2013, predictions of the next election in 2016, being like the last election in 2012 is premature. In 2012 there was still hope that democrat policies would be successful. In 2013 the results of those policies are starting to come in and a revolt is brewing across the country. Too many people have lost their jobs. Too many people have become part time employees. Too many people have lost their health care. Too many people are horrified or disappointed in obama's complete mishandling of Syria. Many more are chafing after the scandals that didn't exist in 2012. Too many people are disgusted with being told how wonderful the economy is when they can plainly see it's not.

It's not over yet. We have three more years before democrats can beg forgiveness and try to shift the conversation to gay rights and abortion. How long can democrats ride the gay rights and abortion horse when everything else is falling apart around the nation?

Do you discuss politics IRL with people? Or, is the Internet your only form of expression?

 

[Toro]

No question, you'll need to break the firewall in the upper midwest to win if you are in the GOP. PA, WI, MI all have GOP governors so its possible. The real difficulty for the GOP is going to be running a candidate in the General that has to sound crazy enough to win the GOP ghettos in the south during the primary while still appealing to the much less insane midwest conservatives. Not an easy thing to do.

The most likely states would probably be MN and WI. However, if you look at his list above, and you see the swing states Obama won - CO FL IA OH NM NV VA - the Republicans have to win all of them while the Democrats would only need to win FL.

If you look at some of the other blue states Republicans have thought they could win, the last time these states went red were

MI - 1988
MN - 1972
PA - 1988
WI - 1984

So there'd have to be a pretty seismic shift for those states to be put into play. Running Ted Cruz against Hillary Clinton certainly won't do it.

Florida is looking decidedly blue. The state that put Bush in the White House looks like will not be voting Republican for a while. The Hispanic vote will be critical and Republicans are doing what they can to piss them off

That assumption is a mistake. FL is a purple state. FL was a very winnable state in 12 for the GOP. The state Democrats are in a shambles with Republicans dominating all statewide political institutions.

 

[rightwinger]

The most likely states would probably be MN and WI. However, if you look at his list above, and you see the swing states Obama won - CO FL IA OH NM NV VA - the Republicans have to win all of them while the Democrats would only need to win FL.

If you look at some of the other blue states Republicans have thought they could win, the last time these states went red were

MI - 1988
MN - 1972
PA - 1988
WI - 1984

So there'd have to be a pretty seismic shift for those states to be put into play. Running Ted Cruz against Hillary Clinton certainly won't do it.

Florida is looking decidedly blue. The state that put Bush in the White House looks like will not be voting Republican for a while. The Hispanic vote will be critical and Republicans are doing what they can to piss them off

That assumption is a mistake. FL is a purple state. FL was a very winnable state in 12 for the GOP. The state Democrats are in a shambles with Republicans dominating all statewide political institutions.

Florida was purple and is on the verge of moving into the blue column in Presidential Elections

Republicans only hope is to run Bush or Rubio