Do you LOVE maps?

[Land of Enchantment]

Check these out! I'm looking at them in terms of the General Election...

Hillary won the yellow areas, Bernie won the green areas.



Final results from the 2012 General Election:



Final results 2008 General Election:




Red State, Blue State, Purple State....Who will win the states that will will the General Election?

[thereismore]

1. What strikes me is the deep contrast between adjacent counties in TX and OK.

Also, the green spots in VA are a good sign.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. Barack Obama lost CA, FL, NY, OH, PA, IN and NJ in the 08 Primaries.

How did that work out?

[RoccoR5955]

22. Those states have yet to vote

in 2016. Let's see how things work out. Bernie could win many of the ones you mentioned.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. That still wouldn't invalidate my point

President Obama lost a bunch of states in the general election he won during the primary and won a bunch of states in the general election he lost during the primary. That suggests there is no correlation between primary success and failure and general election success and failure.

[merrily]

28. What IS your point? Many of the yellow states on that map will NOT go blue in the general.

That is the point of the OP. Do you agree or disagree?

[Major Hogwash]

38. Hillary must win in Ohio tomorrow to remain viable in the primary.

Ohio is "the" KEY state for Hillary.
If she wins, then she draws closer to the magic number.
If she loses, then Bernie will win out for the rest of the primary season.

Everything changed after Michigan.

[Garrett78]

39. So, if Clinton loses (no matter the margin) Ohio...

...she can't win the nomination? Mmmkay.

[Bonobo]

44. Obama energized and enthused young-ish voters.

I was one of them.

On the other hand, Hillary sucks the energy out of them.

And I think you know it.

[cyberpj]

3. You're right, she sure has used up almost all of her southern fans. Now for the rest of the US. nt

[NCTraveler]

4. I really like what I see there.

Please give us Trump. It will be a historic electoral landslide in Clintons favor.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. Let's see if anybody can refute my post./nt

[NCTraveler]

6. some have gotten so worked up that they believe...

Democrats won't vote for Clinton. The only way one can come to that conclusion is to ignore reality and facts. This reads like a pro Clinton post to me.

[Fawke Em]

8. Some will, yes, but our point is and has always been that left-leaning Independents and

Millennials won't.

It's hard to win an election if you're only getting 80 percent of 30 percent of the electorate.

[NCTraveler]

9. Can you point me to your evidence...

That Trump will beat Clinton. I find the narrative to be laughable with what is currently known.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. Middle class, non ideological Americans will come out in droves to vote against Trump.

He and the chaos that follows him will scare away anybody who is remotely vested in the system and doesn't want to see the country split in two and thrown into a "war of all against all."

The analogue is 1964.

[Cavallo]

11. I agree with it. Hopefully it will work for Bernie. And, I have a fear of when Barack leaves office.

If it is Bernie next, I believe we'll be fine. Anyone else and Barack will be an era that will probably be deeply missed for the rest of my life.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. The assertion embodied in the seminal poster's premise

The assertion embodied in the seminal poster's premise is that a candidate who loses a state during the primary will lose it in the general election. Barack Obama lost all the states during the primary that I cited and then won them in the general election. Ironically, many of the states Barack Obama won during the primary he lost during the general election, states like Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Georgia, Nebraska, Kansas, and Utah.

[Land of Enchantment]

14. As the seminal poster allow me

to state my premise because you have done a terrible job presuming what I intended by this thread.
I find these maps fascinating, especially how they illustrate both subtle and overt changes over time. The thread poses a question and is intended to provoke thought not derisiveness.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. I suspect we will see a map similar to 2008 and 2012.

We are probably a general election or two from putting AZ, TX, and GA in play.

[Land of Enchantment]

20. Here are some amazing maps I just found....

Check it out! Whoever found these and put this together is GOOD.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=97330.0

[merrily]

29. Let's see if anyone can refute the OP. Your post sure didn't.

[Garrett78]

37. See post #36

The maps in the OP are incredibly misleading and unrepresentative of reality. They remind me of the map Bush supporters were pushing after the Gore v Bush debacle.

[merrily]

46. Reply 36 does not do the trick re: the electoral vote--and I am

not a poster who has ever treated all counties identically.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12778561 (Countin' yer county.)

[Garrett78]

52. See post #51

But that's exactly what the maps in the OP do. They treat all counties as if they're equal and all margins of victory as if they're equal. Such maps don't even remotely represent what the US actually looks like politically.

[merrily]

53. Nonetheless, your posts 36 and 51 don't cut it.

[Garrett78]

54. Don't cut what exactly?

[SheilaT]

7. And here I was hoping this would be a thread

on the virtues of using real maps, rather than a GPS.

[NCTraveler]

10. As a true lover of maps.

[SheilaT]

15. Yes. I love maps. They are my Wish Book.

While I very much understand the value and virtues of a GPS, unless you're someone with a genuine deficit in the part of your brain that ought to be able to read maps (and those people exist, I know), you should take a gander at a map of where you're headed before programming in the GPS.

I was recently in communication with someone who not only cannot make sense of maps, but who gets lost very easily because of a genuine inability to recognize landmarks. It makes that person's life difficult and constrained, although they've learned to live with it, because it's been that way their entire life.

Meanwhile, I gleefully read maps and plot my route to somewhere.

[NCTraveler]

18. I collect maps.

I have a thing for many in the seventeenth and eighteenth century. The manner in which many were commissioned and the propaganda value at the time really interests me.

I can also read today's maps. Lol

[valerief]

17. I know it doesn't matter because of our fucked up electoral system, but it

would be interesting to see the Bernie/Hillary map shaded for population (darker means more people).

[Land of Enchantment]

21. Just found this link

and it has several interesting ones..maybe you can find it here:

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=97330.0

[link:http://

[valerief]

25. Yes, thanks. It was the first post! Well, except this is more percent of vote than count.

[Land of Enchantment]

27. Nice job valerief...thanks for the help!

I went all the way back to the early 1900's and it is amazing. I could look at this stuff all day.

[brooklynite]

19. Barack Obama won all those Southern States in the 2008 Primary...

...so, probably no chance to win, right?

[Kaleva]

24. Here is the 2008 primary map which you left out

[Land of Enchantment]

30. Thank you Kaleva, nice

I had trouble with some but will keep trying--I'm kinda old and this is kinda new to me.

[Kaleva]

35. I'm learning something new all the time myself!

If i really want to embarrass myself, I'll try and play Call of Duty with my adult step-sons and son-in-law.

[merrily]

47. Clinton is not Obama, any more than Sanders is Obama.

Clinton 2016 is not even Clinton 2008.

[So Far From Heaven]

26. What would be really interesting

would be a comparison of general election outcomes by democratic candidates who lost most of the general election blue states in the primaries. In other words, is there a causal link between winning or losing the general election based on winning percentage of blue state primaries?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

31. Please see Posts 2 and 23.

Thank you in advance.

[So Far From Heaven]

32. And your regression index came out to be what number again?

I'm talking real statistical work here, not casual bs.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. I am sure there is peer reviewed research out there...

I am sure there is peer reviewed research out there and I would wager it confirms my casual observation. On the other hand it is so obvious that there is a lack of correlation I wouldn't be surprised to see a dearth of research in that area.

[MuseRider]

33. Holy Cow look at Kansas! I knew he won here

by quite a lot but every single county? So Kansas Democrats, though small in numbers voted for the Democratic Socialist? OK, no more talk about the dopes here, yes there are lots of dopes and awful people but the Democrats are pretty solidly Democrats and our Independents are pretty liberal as well.

That said, I hear our Super Delegates are all going to vote for Hillary. There you have it, the people vs the party. I just hope the delegates here for Bernie are actually let through the door unlike what happened to the Kucinich delegates. Something tells me the state party is just going to have to swallow this as much as they do not want to. Again,

[Garrett78]

36. Here's what the US actually looks like, politically:

" target="_blank">

Here's the image Bush supporters loved to show off following the 2000 election: " target="_blank">

Rather misleading, don't you think?

As I shared in this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511460282

When you treat all counties as if they have the same number of people and you treat all margins of victory as the same, you really shouldn't be taken seriously.

[Land of Enchantment]

40. Thanks! Very helpful and I agree

I found this one later and though you would would appreciate it.

[Garrett78]

51. That's better than the standard blue-red map.

And it's certainly better than the county ones like those in the OP.

But it's still too black-and-white (er, blue-and-red) and doesn't truly represent what the US looks like politically (because it still has the problem of treating all margins of victory the same). Now, in the electoral college, margins of victory don't matter, but it's still good to know which areas may be on the verge of flipping. Plus, electoral college aside, it's good to know what the US actually looks like politically.

[Godhumor]

41. If red states don't matter because they're safely red, then blue states

Don't matter because they're safely blue. You can't claim one without the other.

[merrily]

43. Blue states will matter to Dems in the general. Red states will not.

Certain Democrats cite the lessons of the President elections of 1972 and 1980 so incorrectly. However, one of those lessons was that Democratic candidates who cannot generate enthusiasm among Democrats can lose supposed guarantied blue states, especially when the GOP candidate does generate excitement.

[Godhumor]

45. The idea is very simple

If red states in the GE don't matter now, because there is no hope for winning them in the GE, then the other side is also true (Who cares about the blue states in the primaries because they will vote for the Democratic nominee regardless of who it is.). Either people acknowledge that both red and blue state voters matter in selecting our nominee, or we negate 43 states and only give a shit about the 7 purple states--after all, they're going to decide the president. We should tailor our candidate to their wants before any other.

[merrily]

48. Um, thanks for the Hillarysplaining. My post was very simple, too.

I won't be offensive and purport to break down my simple post for you, though. I try not to condescend.

[Godhumor]

49. And my response was simple, as well

I just disagree with your assessment that Bernie somehow guarantees safe blue states while Hillary doesn't. But that Hillary dominating the South doesn't translate into flipping safe red states because they're safe.

Either both or true or neither is. To diminish the importance of one to prop up the other while altering the rules of the governing assumptions is farcical

And it is not Hillsplaining; it is just logic. On the other hand, the continued insistence of certain people that the South doesn't matter and should have a diminished role in our nomination process is something else entirely.

With all respect, of course.

[merrily]

50. You've now passed from condescending to something worse. Kindly quote my alleged assessment that

"Bernie somehow guarantees safe blue states."

Also, did you even read my post for comprehension and think about the Presidential elections of 1972, 1980 and 1984 before claiming my post to you was about guarantied "safe" blue states?

[ISUGRADIA]

42. Obama won Florida in 2012

The final results map for 2012 is incorrect, Obama won Florida .

[Land of Enchantment]

55. Just for Grins and Giggles...

1912 Democratic



1912 Republican



http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=97330.0

Wilson, Taft and Teddy Roosevelt...and we got Wilson....

[aikoaiko]

56. I see. HRC is winning primary states she'll likely lose in the GE.

Interesting....