The Blue Wall: What the GOP is up against in 2016

Not a pretty picture for Republicans. This article was written by a hardcore dyed-in-the-wool Republican so no bias here...

 

lolol.

The Blue Wall!

Has there been a funnier, dumber expression in my lifetime? Not that I can think of.

The Blue Wall.

lolol.

Clue: You Lost! Your Blue Wall crumbled.

 

Sorry to burst you bubble, but facts are fact regardless of your fantasy. Keep responding as it bumps up this thread and everyone should see this butt kicking map. Thanks.

 

Happy to help bump.

Clue: The Red Sea crashed your silly blue wall. The Blue Wall of Shame. The Blue Wall of Stupid.

That's FACT!

lolol.

 

Fact and work are two four-letter words, perhaps the only four-letter words, that the Democrats don't understand. Democrats are busy "freeing people from the drudgery of work."

The Blue Wall is why the Democrats just whupped ass in the 2014 election.

And with two years of Barack Obama's narcissistic temper tantrums and only this most demented liberals will still be Democrats. He's already started by announcing he's listening to the 2/3 of Americans who didn't vote. The man is really quite mad.

 

These are the same ignorant posters who've spent the last four years proclaiming the republicans were already dead and would never win another election. Instead of recognizing the fact they just got tromped they simply look forward into the future and re proclaim the same erroneous bile they have been spewing.
Call it denial or karma fart. It's still ignorant.

 

The blue wall you speak of I call trustworthy states. It exists. But I would put the numbers at 256 Democratic vs. 191 for the Republicans. West Virginia, Georgia, Arizona, Missouri are not toss up states, but solid Republican states. Nevada is a swing state, not blue. As of today the swing states are New Hampshire, Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Florida, Iowa, Colorado and Nevada.

But I stated as of today, things change. If as I suspect Obama fatigue has begun to set in among the populace we could, not will, could see a repeat of 2008 in 2016. President Obama has two years left to get out of the public funk and I am sure the Republican congress will give him every opportunity. If you remember Bush fatigue started in 2006 which lead to the Democrats capturing congress, his approval rating was at 37%, not much below the present 41% for President Obama. President Bush wasn’t able to improve that during his last two years, so the question is can President Obama?

Look at what has happened since the President’s re-election:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/presidential-approval-center.aspx

2013……………….Jan…...May….Sep....Dec
18-29 year olds.......64%...60%...51%...42%
30-49 year olds.......52%...50%...44%...44%
50-64 year olds.......50%...47%...44%...41%
65 plus...................44%...42%...38%...38%
Independents..........47%...45%...38%...35%
Moderates...............61%...56%...49%...45%
National average…..…53%...49%...45%...40%

2014…………………...May…..Today
18-29 year olds………..51%.....47%
30-49 year olds.........44%.....40%
50-64 year olds.........45%.....42%
65 plus.....................38%.....35%
Independents............38%.....35%
Moderates.................51%.....47%
National average….…..44%.....41%

If this continues I would look for your wall or my trustworthy states to begin to move into the swing column. If a state like Pennsylvania suddenly becomes competitive that cuts the Democrats down from 256 to 227 and a state like North Carolina might join the Republican trustworthy states and then the Democrats would enter 2016 with a 227-206 advantage. Then candidates matter, A Kasich/Rubio ticket might take Ohio and Florida from the swing state list. Hillary is pretty much tied to the states already in the Democratic column. Quite a lot of what ifs. But as of today a 256-191 advantage is still there. Will it last? That may depend on whether or not I am right about Obama fatigue.

 

dems DELIBERATELY delayed that enforcement until after this past election, so as to give them a CHANCE of surviving it. That chance is gone, dudes. Now you're going to reap the whirlwind that you so richly deserve.

 

political maps shift, just look at what happened in N Carolina and damn near happened in VA this month. Democrats are destroying themselves by going too far to the left.

 

I disagree. Democrats could win every election for the next thirty years if they went further to the left. A truly radical candidate would draw out youths by the millions.

 

there's far more of us old codgers, so eff your commie kids.

 

Really? You're citing a "user-generated map"? That map isn't realistic. First the 2016 map depends on who is running. Hillary doesn't do as well in the West as Obama did - so that will tilt NV, CO, AZ, NM a little red, though she does well in Appalachia - so she does put VA, NC, and possibly even WV into play (though WV is very unlikely to go blue ). And what if the GOP runs a libertarian candidate like Paul? They do better in the West, and nominating them would make the western states more red friendly. What if it was Jeb Bush, who does well with Hispanics - gaining votes particularly in the southwest, making AZ a sure bet, and possibly putting NM into play but, most importantly, gaining an edge in FL. What if Rob Portman runs? Oh, funny thing about Portman - OH isn't the same toss up it was in 2012. Portman is extremely popular there, Obamacare isn't. OH leans red, but with Portman (who is considering a run) it could be a pretty certain red win.

A genuine 2016 map, if we're going blind, doesn't reflect the map you've shared - a user generated map at 270. GA isn't going to be in play, NC probably isn't going to be in play, AZ won't be in play, WI isn't a certain Dem win. MO and IA are trending red, and historically red. You can't use 2008 as your baseline, that's just silly. IA very much leans red, as does MO.

And CO? Yes, it's a toss up, but it's a toss up that is a reddish purple. Obamacare approval there is very low.

 

Well this guy has a very good argument of how this map represents the electorate pretty accurately..

 

You really don't have zero concept of demographics do you? You probably also think meat is born wrapped in plastic in the supermarket refrigerator section. Look at the upside, no one will ever accuse you of racking your brain with critical thinking.

 

There was record low voter turnout and that is a fact. There was also that shameful distancing of the candidates from the POTUS...even GOP strategists agree that that was a huge mistake and I agree and I also am not sorry that they lost. I like candidates that don't forfeit their ideals for the sake of pandering and groveling. Let's not forget that it was the Progressive ideals that did win big on election day. Not enough people are acknowledging that fact and it's a big deal....

Progressive Victories
Across the nation, voters passed measures against fracking and abortion restrictions, and for the minimum wage, paid sick leave, public safety and gun reform

http://prospect.org/article/progres...-didnt-hear-about-and-some-could-still-happen

 

Honey................I was raised on a farm. I know more about real life than you'll ever imagine.

And..........your first sentence is hilarious: You really don't have zero concept of demographics do you?
I doubt you even know what you said.

/ignore

 

There are no absolutes in politics.

 

That blue wall of 2014 sure worked out well for the lefties.

 

They tried this in the 1980's and the result was 2 of the biggest landslide election losses in history.

I sense that you're not an American, so I'll forgive your ignorance of history.

 

Wait, you're not calling Michael Dukakis a radical, are you?

Please keep accusations of "ignorance," name-calling, etc. out of this. If you can't speak like an adult, don't speak at all.

 

I'm sure he's not as "radical" (socialist) as you would like him to be, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who could honestly say that the Democrat Party was not running comparitively left-wing candidates during the 1980's as they did in the 90's when Bill Clinton was elected. Using your logic, they should have done better in the 80's with more left-wing candidates, yet they did much, much worse. Some of the worst losses in US history, in fact.

 

You know, it always boggles my mind that somebody would take a statement made in 2014, and then decide that for it to be valid, it must also be valid thirty years ago.

I mean let's just ignore the end of the Cold War, 9/11, the War on Terror, the largest economic crash since the Great Depression, the utterly massive demographic changes, etc.

 

The left has always had a socialist stronghold in the teen/ goofy-20-something demographic. Kids who didn't want their mommy-and-daddy free ride to end in early adulthood. I doubt that ratio has changed by a lot in the last 30 years.

 

That is a curious perspective. Are you a Boomer by any chance?

 

I'm 31, and happy to not share your ideology or fit into your stupid stereotype of what young people believe.