Total Posts:3|Showing Posts:1-3
Jump to topic:

Theoretical third party map

TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2016 7:49:51 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Want to get some thoughts on this. I think a third party will happen at some point - whether it works or not (probably not) is another question. But if it did, how could it affect the election? I've come up with a map where nobody gets a majority of the vote. The hypothetical third party in this case would nominate a moderate - a respected statesman with high favorability, ideally who is beloved among Republicans and liked among the public. An example might be someone like Condoleeza Rice.Although this figure would draw votes from Republicans, their moderate appeal could encourage renegade Democrats to jump ship.

In 2012, Obama won 332-206 in the electoral college; you need 270 to win.

In 1992, there were X states where no candidate got more than 40% of the vote: Maine, Alaska, Kansas, Nevada, Montana, Wyoming, Arizona, and New Hampshire. Eight states gave Perot 25% of the vote: Maine (where he finished second to Clinton, Alaska, Utah (where he finished second to Bush), Idaho, Kansas Nevada, Montana, and Wyoming. In none of these states was he more than 16% behind the leader. These mostly go into two categories: strongly Republican states (Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Kansas, and Montana) and independent-spirited states (Nevada, Maine, New Hampshire, Alaska).

Among these, Utah (Romney won 73-25), Wyoming (Romney won 69-28) and Idaho (Romney won 64-32) would be the easiest targets - they have small, extremely conservative populations with a strong Mormon presence (60% in Utah, 25% in Idaho and 10% in Wyoming). However, they only have 13 electoral votes between them. If those three flip, it's now 332-193-13.

From there, a third party could target the trickier red states. Alaska only favored Romney 55-41 in 2012, but has a strong independent streak - it gave Perot his second-best share of the vote in 1992, is the only state where Nader topped 10% in 2000, and has elected multiple third-party and independent governors. Kansas favored Romney 60-38, but also has a ton of moderate Republicans and Democrats who could jump ship. Montana (the least conservative mountain west state) favored Romney 55-41, but was almost won by Obama in 2008, showing degree of swinginess. By winning these states, it is now 332-181-25.

Then, we move to the renegade states - New Hampshire, Maine, and Nevada. Maine would be the easiest to flip - it's extremely moderate, very friendly to independents, and gave Perot his best share in 1992 (only eight points behind Clinton). New Hampshire is extraordinarily swingy and, like Maine, is moderate. Nevada is a wild card, with a ton of libertarians who would be unhappy with either option. By winning these, it is now 318-181-39.

Here comes the fun part. The presence of a moderate could swing other states, without winning them. Trump's blue-collar appeal grants him a huge floor in Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. He can't win them alone, but by drawing off the suburban voters and moderates who might be uncomfortable with Clinton, it becomes feasible Trump could carry them.

This leaves us with 264 Clinton (20 states plus DC), 235 Trump (21 states), and 39 for the TP (9 states). The map looks like this:

http://postimg.org...

At this point, the election is thrown to the House. The House doesn't vote by members, but by state - Republicans have a majority in 33 states, Democrats have a majority in 14 states, and three states (New Jersey, New Hampshire, and Maine) are tied. You need a majority in 26 delegations to win. The Democrats, realizing Clinton can't win, all vote for the TP. Additionally, because Trump has no real Congressional foothold, many Republican delegations decide to vote for him. And that's how the third party gets elected.

Will it happen? Probably not. But it could. This election is nuts.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2016 9:27:30 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
There won't be a strong 3rd party candidate; no Ross Perot this year.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2016 10:56:15 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/18/2016 9:27:30 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
There won't be a strong 3rd party candidate; no Ross Perot this year.

The public seems to want it... and even Gary Johnson got 10% in that poll. He's actually creeping towards double digits in many polls.