View RSS Feed

Perotista

PEROTISTA’S 2016 SENATE, HOUSE and PRESIDENTIAL FORECAST June 2016

Rate this Entry
PEROTISTA’S 2016 SENATE, HOUSE and PRESIDENTIAL FORECAST June 2016

Currently there are 54 Republicans and 46 Democrats in the Current Senate.

Safe Democratic seats 8: California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Washington. The Democrats have two at risks seats this election cycle, Colorado and Nevada.

Safe Republican seats (16): Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah. The Republicans have eight at risks seats this election cycle, Arizona, Florida, Illinois, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Arizona McCain R – McCain leads Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick by 6, but with 23% of the voters still undecided, I will call Arizona a lean McCain state. Lean means the race is very competitive, but Republicans still slightly outnumber Democrats in this state. Republican hold 54-46.

Colorado Bennet D – The Republican Primary takes place on June 28th. There are 5 Republicans fighting to challenge incumbent Bennet. Until we know which one will be the nominee, Colorado remains a Democratic Hold 54 R 46 D

Florida Rubio R – Both Republican and Democratic Primaries are not until August. So we don’t know who the nominees will be. On the Republican side the choice is between Jolly, DeSantis and Lopez-Cantera. On the Democratic side, the choice is between Grayson and Murphy. When matched up Republican candidate vs. Democratic candidate, the duo of Grayson and Murphy continue to lead the Republican trio by an average of 3 points. Democratic gain. 53 R 47 D

Illinois Kirk R – Democrat Tammy Duckworth continues to lead the incumbent Kirk by just 3 points. This is much closer than I expected. Still I think Duckworth will win fairly handily in November. Democratic gain 52 R 48 D

Nevada Reid D – With the Nevada primaries scheduled for June 14th, Republican Joe Heck seems like a cinch to defeat Sharon Angle. He has a 67-11 lead. Heck will face off against Democrat Catherine Cortez Masto in November. This race is neck and neck, but the Democrats do have a slight advantage in Nevada’s PVI. Nevada is a lean Cortez Masto state. Democratic hold 52 R 48 D

New Hampshire Ayotte R – Democrat Hassan now leads incumbent Ayotte by 2 points. I am placing this seat in the lean Hassan, Democratic column. Democratic gain 51 R 49 D

North Carolina Burr R – Burr continues to lead Democrat Deborah Ross by 3 points average. But with 18% of the vote undecided and Libertarian Candidate Haugh garnering 8% of the vote, North Carolina is in the lean Burr, Republican column. Republican hold 51 R 49 D.

Ohio Portman R – This race is a dead heat between the incumbent Portman and the Democratic challenger Ted Strickland. But since Clinton leads Trump in Ohio by 5.5 points, I think she will have enough coat tails to give Strickland the win. Ohio leans Strickland. Democratic gain 50 R 50 D

Pennsylvania Toomey R – Incumbent Toomey lead Democrat Katie McGinty by 3 points in a June 5th poll. That same poll shows Clinton and Trump tied in Pennsylvania. So history and PVI comes into play. Both point to a McGinty and Clinton win. Democratic gain 49 R 51 D

Wisconsin Johnson R – Democrat Russ Feingold leads by double digits over Republican incumbent Johnson. Democratic gain 48 R 52 D

No changes this month. The Democrats will control the senate by a 52-48 margin.


House of Representatives

Currently the House of Representative consists of 247 Republicans and 188 Democrats. For 2016 the Republicans now have 33 seats at risk to 7 for the Democrats which is the same as last month. The Democrats need to gain 30 seats to take over control of the House. That isn’t going to happen. The Democrats will pick up 19 of the GOP’s 33 at risk seats while losing one of their own. That is a net gain of 18 seats which is 3 less than last month. The new House will have 229 Republicans to 206 Democrats.

Presidential Election

I use party affiliation/identification figures along with favorable/unfavorable ratings and polls between Clinton and Trump, the two major parties nominees. I also added Libertarian Candidate Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein to my models. Here are this month’s results.


In my addendum for May the vote totals were Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote with 47.1%, Trump at 45.2%, Johnson 6.1%, Stein 1.5%. This month I ran two models, the 45% low voter turnout and the 55% normal or high voter turnout model. I was certainly surprised by the difference between the two. For June in the 45% voter turnout model Clinton wins with 40.8% to Trump’ 37.9%. Libertarian Gary Johnson had a more than expected 14.7% and Jill Stein the Green Party candidate had 4.6%. My conclusion on the huge drop in Clinton’s and Trump’s numbers from last month along with the rise in Johnson’s and Stein’s is that the dissatisfied voters which identify or affiliate with the two major parties, their dislike of their own nominee will stay home and not vote rather than to vote for the opposition candidate or for a third party candidate. Whereas those independents who disliked both Trump and Clinton have no problem going to the polls to register their discontent with Trump and Clinton by voting third party.

That brings me to the 55% normal or high voter turnout model. In this one Clinton wins with 45.0% of the vote, Trump came in with 40.9%, Johnson at 9.8% and Stein with 2.3%. The results of the 55% voter turnout model seem to reinforce my conclusion as to why the huge drop for Trump and Clinton in my 45% voter turnout model. Both Clinton’s and Trump’s vote percentage rises around 7 points using the higher voter turnout model. But regardless of the model, high or low voter turnout, Clinton wins. By 3 points in one and 4 in the other. The question in my mind now is those independents who dislike both Trump and Clinton, will they vote their third party choices in November or will they hold their nose once in the voting booth and vote for the lesser of two evils or the least worst major party candidate.




On the Electoral College side, 270 electoral votes needed to win. In states where either Trump or Clinton have at least a 6-point lead or more, they add up to Clinton 227, Trump 154, same as last month. Adding the states where one or the other candidate leads by three to five points, the count goes to Clinton 245, Trump 181. Clinton adds Ohio where she leads by 5.5 point and Trump add Arizona and Georgia where he leads by 4 points. Of the Remaining States, Trump leads in Florida by 1, Missouri by 2 and North Carolina by 1. Clinton leads in New Hampshire by 1 and in Virginia by 2. Pennsylvania is tied while Colorado, Iowa and Nevada have not been polled. These states fall into the too close to call or tossup column. Given the voting history, party strength and the PVI, Partisan Voting Index of each of these states, I forecast Clinton will win New Hampshire, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Iowa and Nevada. Trump takes Florida, Missouri and North Carolina. June’s final electoral count is Clinton 303, Trump 235. The only change is Florida goes to Trump whereas Florida went to Clinton last month.

2016 Electoral Vote Tabulation Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump
January Electoral vote R 244 D 294
February Electoral vote R 244 D 294
March Electoral vote R 200 D 338
April Electoral vote R 200 D 338
May Electoral vote R 206 D 332
June Electoral vote R 235 D 303
Categories
Member Blog

Comments

  1. polgara's Avatar
    Thanks for the update, Pero. It seems that a lot depends on whether the followers of both Trump and Sanders actually vote in November - and if they do or don't, will it actually make a difference? Both have lots of followers who are unhappy with the status quo, but time will tell how serious they are, I guess.
  2. Perotista's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by polgara
    Thanks for the update, Pero. It seems that a lot depends on whether the followers of both Trump and Sanders actually vote in November - and if they do or don't, will it actually make a difference? Both have lots of followers who are unhappy with the status quo, but time will tell how serious they are, I guess.
    Exactly Pol. What will the Never Trump Republicans do? Will the young very dedicated to Sanders the man, not necessary Democrats and anti-Hillary, will they show up at the polls in November in sufficient numbers? Perhaps the question is with these very young avid Sanders supporters, are they more anti-Trump than anti-Clinton or will they just say to heck with it in November and stay home?

    So many questions and as of yet no answers. I do expect the support for Johnson and Stein to drop as we get closer to the election as the two major party’s propaganda machine convinces these very anti-Trump and anti-Clinton voters, they hate both candidates, that their vote is a wasted one since neither Johnson or Stein can win. But will they vote for the least hated candidate in Trump/Clinton match up or stay home?

    So does it matter if things hold as are whether Clinton wins the popular 47-42 if the dissatisfied with their nominee votes or 42-37 if they don’t? I think not. But in reality it is the electoral college that matters. In that there is really no change in either the 45% or 55% model. Just a couple of surprise states. Trump being tied in Pennsylvania with Clinton and Clinton getting close to a commanding lead in Ohio. Convention wisdom states those two states should be just the opposite. Clinton is doing exceptional well in Missouri, Arizona and Georgia. States one would think Trump should win easily. But those three states are very competitive for Clinton. Then there is Virginia where Trump is doing far better than he should along with Pennsylvania. But I think in the end, Missouri, Arizona and Georgia end up in the Trump column and Pennsylvania and Virginia go to Clinton. Very early yet, but in those 5 states if more Never Trump Republicans stay home and do not vote, Arizona, Missouri and Georgia may go to Clinton by a point or two. The same with Virginia and Pennsylvania, Trump may win them if a lot of Sanders supporters do not support Hillary.

    This is one crazy election.
  3. Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista
    Exactly Pol. What will the Never Trump Republicans do? Will the young very dedicated to Sanders the man, not necessary Democrats and anti-Hillary, will they show up at the polls in November in sufficient numbers? Perhaps the question is with these very young avid Sanders supporters, are they more anti-Trump than anti-Clinton or will they just say to heck with it in November and stay home?

    So many questions and as of yet no answers. I do expect the support for Johnson and Stein to drop as we get closer to the election as the two major party’s propaganda machine convinces these very anti-Trump and anti-Clinton voters, they hate both candidates, that their vote is a wasted one since neither Johnson or Stein can win. But will they vote for the least hated candidate in Trump/Clinton match up or stay home?

    So does it matter if things hold as are whether Clinton wins the popular 47-42 if the dissatisfied with their nominee votes or 42-37 if they don’t? I think not. But in reality it is the electoral college that matters. In that there is really no change in either the 45% or 55% model. Just a couple of surprise states. Trump being tied in Pennsylvania with Clinton and Clinton getting close to a commanding lead in Ohio. Convention wisdom states those two states should be just the opposite. Clinton is doing exceptional well in Missouri, Arizona and Georgia. States one would think Trump should win easily. But those three states are very competitive for Clinton. Then there is Virginia where Trump is doing far better than he should along with Pennsylvania. But I think in the end, Missouri, Arizona and Georgia end up in the Trump column and Pennsylvania and Virginia go to Clinton. Very early yet, but in those 5 states if more Never Trump Republicans stay home and do not vote, Arizona, Missouri and Georgia may go to Clinton by a point or two. The same with Virginia and Pennsylvania, Trump may win them if a lot of Sanders supporters do not support Hillary.

    This is one crazy election.
    Has the Iowa or Missouri senate elections been rendered non competitive?
  4. polgara's Avatar
    This entire year has been crazy, including the weather. We had snow in early June, Pero - granted it didn't stick, but it snowed like crazy for a while! Then the politicians in DC act like it's their first day on the job, so they shouldn't be held responsible for anything at all; then companies are laying people off by the thousands because of new government rules and regulations - when we already have nearly 50 million people on food stamps so they don't starve; then we have seven out of 10 jobs paying less than $30,000 a year,l so those families are probably already living paycheck to paycheck; then add the oddity of this election coming up, with two outsiders giving the usual combatants a solid run for their money, which has a lot of people shaking their heads in perplexion; and finally when lying and dishonesty become the "soup de jour" from both parties, and few care any more --- all this and we still have six months left to go in 2016? WTH has happened to this country!
  5. Perotista's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13
    Has the Iowa or Missouri senate elections been rendered non competitive?

    I’ve seen no polls on the Iowa senate race. I know Judge won the nominate over Hogg 48-39 last week. So she is the Democratic nominee. Cook, the Daily Kos, Sabato all rate that race as likely Republican and Roll Call and Rothenberg as safe Republican. Likely means the race isn’t competitive, but could become so at a later date.

    In Missouri, their primary isn’t until August 8th. But there were two polls done in March pitting Blunt against Kander and Blunt has an average lead of 12 points over him. Definitely not competitive yet. Missouri is another one that is rated likely Republican. So until either of these races do become competitive, no need to list them.
  6. Perotista's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by polgara
    This entire year has been crazy, including the weather. We had snow in early June, Pero - granted it didn't stick, but it snowed like crazy for a while! Then the politicians in DC act like it's their first day on the job, so they shouldn't be held responsible for anything at all; then companies are laying people off by the thousands because of new government rules and regulations - when we already have nearly 50 million people on food stamps so they don't starve; then we have seven out of 10 jobs paying less than $30,000 a year,l so those families are probably already living paycheck to paycheck; then add the oddity of this election coming up, with two outsiders giving the usual combatants a solid run for their money, which has a lot of people shaking their heads in perplexion; and finally when lying and dishonesty become the "soup de jour" from both parties, and few care any more --- all this and we still have six months left to go in 2016? WTH has happened to this country!

    Crazy yes, I am still trying to figure out how two candidates with approval or favorable ratings in the low 30’s could be nominated by their respective parties. But I suppose the way things have been going, crazy what you say falls right into it. I watch and play with the numbers and turn off all the rhetoric. The Rhetoric of both parties and candidates are sickening. So we are supposed to choose between a liar and someone who had no qualms in putting our classified national security information at risk and a 5th grade schoolyard bully who only knows how to call someone else names. He may end up convicted of fraud and the other for mishandling of classified information. This is idiocy more so than craziness.

    There are times I feel this nation is in its last days, much like the last days of the Roman Empire. Times are crazy, perhaps because we all have become sort of crazy. We keep electing these fools and put up with sending all the jobs overseas and worst, we let our government choose which laws they will enforce and which ones they ignore. We put up with letting government workers, officials break the law for partisan reasons and get away with it. I have pretty much given up hope
  7. katzgar's Avatar
    Given the unhappiness on both sides with their candidates. I figure whichever side stays home more will give it to the other side. How do you calculate that?
  8. Perotista's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by katzgar
    Given the unhappiness on both sides with their candidates. I figure whichever side stays home more will give it to the other side. How do you calculate that?
    Sounds good to me. A lot of the party base for both parties are very unhappy with their party’s nominee or presumptive nominee. That is no secret. It is so bad, the unhappiness that pollsters for the first time I can remember include “Will not Vote,” as a response when asked whether you plan on voting for Trump or Clinton. We have never had a presidential election where both major party nominees were viewed negatively or unfavorable by 60% or more of the entire electorate.

    Roughly 10-15% of those polled respond to the “Will not vote,” option depending on the poll. Then you also have on average 10-12% stating they will vote for “Other.” Meaning third party and they state other not having the faintest idea who or whom other is. All they know it isn’t Clinton or Trump. That says a lot for the two major party’s choices when people are will to vote for someone not knowing anything about him or her or having any idea who what they stand for as long as it isn't Trump or Clinton.

    So yes, which or how many of the party faithful whether it is the never-Trump Republicans or the I am for Sanders only Democrats stay home and not vote will have a huge impact. Let’s not forget the number of independents who usually vote for the lesser of two evils or the least worst candidate who have decided to give this election a pass. They refuse to choose between Clinton and Trump.

    So my question is, what in the world were the two major parties thinking when they nominated or will nominate Clinton and Trump as their standard bearers? One other thing from your friendly numbers guy, there was a poll out 2-3 months ago which stated 61% of all Americans wanted the Republicans to nominate someone else other than Trump, that 54% of all Americans wanted the Democrats to nominate someone else besides Clinton. So did our two major parties listen to America? No, they did what they always do, they told America to stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.
  9. katzgar's Avatar
    i figure the calculation is now complicated by the RINO republicans and Bernie/warren democrat supporters saying they wont support the presumptive candidates but I would expect those dynamics to change election day. Talk is cheap. I think the vagaries of the human condition makes a real scratch crotch guess pretty much impossible.
  10. Perotista's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by katzgar
    i figure the calculation is now complicated by the RINO republicans and Bernie/warren democrat supporters saying they wont support the presumptive candidates but I would expect those dynamics to change election day. Talk is cheap. I think the vagaries of the human condition makes a real scratch crotch guess pretty much impossible.

    Sounds reasonable. I agree on your assessment. But I do have a question for you, the term RINO. Now I have heard that term placed on a lot of Republican Senators and Representatives that stances on some issues were the exact same as Trump’s. Most of the elected officials I speak of have been lifelong Republicans, not just a Republican for the last 3 or 4 years and never switched back and forth between parties depending on one’s political whims.

    I would think Trump would be the RINO based on the above. An elected Republican who said, “Planned Parenthood is important and does a lot for woman’s health.” They would have been roasted a RINO. A Republican who stated, “Gay marriage is the law, live with it.” Again would have been called a RINO. Someone who was pro-choice before announcing his run for the presidency as a Republican, certainly would have been labeled a RINO. What about being for cutting the defense budget, being pro affirmative action, willing to dump Israel. Someone who wants to impeach George Bush for the Iraq war, now there is something I seen almost all of Trump supporters make many posts defending Bush over the Iraq War. Now I suppose Bush is a RINO.

    I could go on and on, but every one of those positions Trump holds today was labeled RINO in the Pre-Trump days. So I assume it isn’t positions on issues or maybe even voting records that matter or make one a RINO. So what does?
  11. polgara's Avatar
    Hi Pero. Since the term "RINO" is used as a semi-derogatory slap, IMO, look at who is using the term in order to ascertain their motive. You will rarely hear someone new to politics use it, as an example.
  12. katzgar's Avatar
    that gets a little complicated and I expect many "RINOS" like Ryan will hold their noses and get behind trump. Rinos are usually the Paul Ryan types and have mostly tried to stay below the radar. Ryan is saying he is behind Trump but objects to everything Trump says. Thats the kind of politics people are pissed about. People are looking at the sausage being made and repulsed by it. I would suppose the tea party types are confused as Trump has been as much a democrat as a republican. Trump has brought in a lot of working class uneducated types which perhaps are also the tea party types. there is alot unprecedented going on. I counted Hilary out when she voted for war in Iraq.
  13. Perotista's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by polgara
    Hi Pero. Since the term "RINO" is used as a semi-derogatory slap, IMO, look at who is using the term in order to ascertain their motive. You will rarely hear someone new to politics use it, as an example.

    Yeah Pol, it is very confusing to me. Derogatory I understand. But I have come to the conclusion it is not issue orientated. If it was Trump would be the RINO. He broke with Republicans on a lot of issues, issues that those Republicans who were against were labeled RINO’s and here is Trump opposing those same issues, but he is not the RINO. The Republicans who support the issues are now the RINO’s.

    I suppose one uses the term RINO against those Republicans you do not support regardless of where they stand on the issues. Trump was the most progressive, the most liberal candidate out of the 17 running outside of perhaps Pataki and yet others are RINO’s and not him. It makes no sense to me. But when is politics supposed to make sense?
  14. Perotista's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by katzgar
    that gets a little complicated and I expect many "RINOS" like Ryan will hold their noses and get behind trump. Rinos are usually the Paul Ryan types and have mostly tried to stay below the radar. Ryan is saying he is behind Trump but objects to everything Trump says. Thats the kind of politics people are pissed about. People are looking at the sausage being made and repulsed by it. I would suppose the tea party types are confused as Trump has been as much a democrat as a republican. Trump has brought in a lot of working class uneducated types which perhaps are also the tea party types. there is alot unprecedented going on. I counted Hilary out when she voted for war in Iraq.
    Exactly, complicated it is. I remember when Ryan was the darling and others were labeled RINO’s because they didn’t agree with Ryan. Now Ryan is the RINO. I can tell you a lot of Republicans and those independents that lean Republican do not support Trump. As you say, Trump has been as much a Democrat as a Republican. Asking a lot of the faithful, the lifelong Republicans who have seen many a political battle to support a half-Democrat/half-Republican is a little too much for them. Not that any of them will vote for Clinton, they won’t. But some will stay home and not vote and other will vote to support the down ticket, but vote third party at the presidential level.

    I agree the tea party and the evangelicals are confused. Trump stands for a lot that those two factions are against. Then throw in the very conservative faction, the faction that supported Cruz over Trump, that is a lot of unifying he has to do. But even now Trump continues with the name calling and his anti-Republican establishment rhetoric. The Republican establishment has the infrastructure Trump needs to get out the vote, to line up donors, to get pacs and super pacs to support him. One gets the idea Trump wants to go it alone. I doubt if that will work. Already very loyal Republican mega donors state they won’t donate to his campaign or create super pacs to support him. They will concentrate on keeping the senate.

    As I told Pol, it now seems to me a RINO is nothing more than a Republican you do not support or disagree with. If that name was issue based, if that name was one who supports progressive ideas, who had supported numerous democrats in the past, that person would be the RINO. Now I belong to the Reform Party now, very small from its heyday with Perot. But we’re still active in a few states.

    I consider Barry Goldwater as my political mentor, throw in some Perot and you have my political ideology. I usually lean Republican, but not with Trump. I will be voting for Gary Johnson. I could have supported any of the other 16 GOP candidates against Clinton, but not Trump. I think the folks you are talking about are like me.
  15. katzgar's Avatar
    I am in the stay at home election night and get drunk crowd. I went door to door for Nixon in college but left the GOP when the evangelicals took over. I am an anti war, social liberal and fiscal conservative so not sure what that makes me.
  16. Perotista's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by katzgar
    I am in the stay at home election night and get drunk crowd. I went door to door for Nixon in college but left the GOP when the evangelicals took over. I am an anti war, social liberal and fiscal conservative so not sure what that makes me.
    I assume that was 1968. I was beginning High School in 1960, but worked for Nixon against JFK. I also was too young to vote in 1964 having to be 21 then. But did all I could for Goldwater. I think the religious right really began to get organized in the 1970’s, a direct result of Roe v Wade. They really didn’t exist prior to that. They apex was during Reagan and then slowly their power began to wane. It was this group, most polls classified them as born again evangelicals that supported Cruz over Trump.

    I think they only make up about a quarter of the GOP base now while back 25 years ago they probably made up close to half. During Reagan anyway. As for what you are, fiscal conservative, social liberal, anti-war, most Americans probably fall into that group. I too am a fiscal responsible guy, social liberal probably as I believe abortion is solely a woman’s decision and I haven’t a problem with gay marriage. In fact, I believe government should stay completely out of marriage. Government should have no say in who or can’t get married. With war, I fully believe congress should declare war, no bypassing it as in the case of Libya or just a resolution with is nothing more than an opinion of congress, not a declaration. I also believe if we do go to war, we use whatever means necessary to win that dang thing as quickly as possible and then bring our boys home. Desert Storm is a prime example. I also do not believe in nation building or what is termed nation building. From what I have seen of nation building, it is just another word for us to force our form of government on another country even if they do not want it.
  17. katzgar's Avatar
    RE: abortion. I think killing should be illegal. you pick a start date, anything before that date is legal and post that date is illegal. the best date I can figure is end of first trimester, a bit arbtrary I admit but does allow abortions due to rape
  18. Perotista's Avatar
    I heard so much arguments over abortion, I really don't know when a good cut off date is. Most states I think have the cut off date at the end of the second trimester. A couple I heard now are trying to get the cut off date to when the baby is viable outside the womb. I really do not know.

    This is something I haven't researched. Being that is the case I would just as soon leave it to each state to decide.
  19. katzgar's Avatar
    but not southern states because they usually get things wrong. LOL.
  20. Perotista's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13
    Has the Iowa or Missouri senate elections been rendered non competitive?
    Grassley is up 46-39 in the first Iowa Senate poll.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/doc..._June_2016.pdf

    As for Missouri, the latest polls were in March, one had Blunt up by seven points and the other had Blunt up by 14.

Trackbacks

Total Trackbacks 0
Trackback URL: