Republicans won't win Minnesota until they get organized here. The Party is a freaking mess. The DFL shouldn't be able to cakewalk to statewide wins like they have lately. Even in 2014, which in other swing-ish states, would have resulted in losses in statewide elections, the entire DFL slate won pretty comfortably. As an additional example, the Republicans should probably win CD-8 if they had a proper ground game but Nolan will probably sneak by again like 2014 because the DFL is just so much more organized. Granted a presidential race can build its own field campaign but you still need a local base to build off of and the Republicans just don't have it at the moment. The Iron Range's slow shift to voting Republican will help Republicans (and probably give them CD-8 in the long run) but I'm not sure it'll offset the growth in the Twin Cities.
Why "lol"? I disregard plenty of conservative and liberal sources alike, but realclearpolitics and fivethirtyeight ar eby far the most neutral and take ALL polls into account.
He tweeted 4 days ago that he had no idea who would win. That's what happened. He dumped all credibility out the window.
Party ID does not equal party registration. Amazing to see how many folks can't seem to grasp that simple concept.
Ok well yesterday he said if one state flips from his map then Trump wins. These polls are based off 2012 numbers. Not 2016. Sorry but these aren't accurate and Silver has mentioned this.
Especially in the South. use Louisiana as an example. According to party registration, there are over 20% more Democrats than Republicans. We all know that is nonsense and is a relic from the days when the South voted Democratic by default. The same goes for North Carolina, West Virginia, Kentucky, and yes to a lesser extent Florida (particularly in the panhandle). Also when party registration shifts from year to year, a reasonable amount of that is tied to Republicans finally deciding to re-register as Republicans. In fact, there have been over 55,000 voters in early voting that have switched from Democratic to Republican. Those are Republican voters who finally decided to take the time to re-identify.
Nate Silver is currently giving Clinton 68.5% chance of winning. Given this chance, you would likely be certain that Clinton would win. Nate Silver not so much.
Yup. It's also especially true this year given the extreme GOP infighting. If you call a lot of these Trump voters and ask them "do you identify as a Democrat, Republican or independent?", they're going to say independent, given their distaste for the prominent Republican Party hierarchy (Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, etc.) at the moment, based on how they've handled Trump this year. But long-term, the vast majority of them were already voting GOP candidates in primaries, voted for Romney in 2012, etc. So when you look at the early voting data, they go in the GOP pile of votes, even if they claim to pollsters that they're independent. It's not hard to find the demographics of the actual NPAs (no party affiliated) in places like Florida, and they tend to skew younger, less white and more Hispanic. From there, deciphering the trend line is pretty easy.
Dont be surprised about Michigan going red folks...Trump/Pence has had lots of stops in this state. I think Nevada goes Hillary, and Michigan goes Trump. This is my bold prediction... And yes, Trump must win Florida to have a chance. Think NC is also right there for Hillary, but Trump may edge out. PA will be close, but think Hillary edges out. We shall see.. Spoiler <div align="center"><a href="http://www.270towin.com/maps/EX43o"><img src="http://www.270towin.com/presidential_map_new/maps/EX43o.png" width="800"></a><br><small><img style="vertical-align: middle;" src="http://www.270towin.com/uploads/3rd_party_270_30px.png" alt="" /> Click the map to create your own at <a href="http://www.270towin.com/maps/EX43o">270toWin.com</a></small></div>
