Obama: Do the numbers add up?

orange roughy

Rising Star
Platinum Member
sorry, I forgot that there was a political forum. I started the same thread over on the main forum board.

I've been trying to do the math. Just from memory, about 100 million people vote in the general election most of the time. Of that, you'd need about 50 million plus one to win an outright majority (ignoring the Electoral College for now-- maybe to my great error).

In raw numbers, if there are 40 million blacks, and 20 million adult voters, 95% of which will go for Obama, then he probably has about 19 million votes from this constituency.

I presume, just a guts feeling , that he will get a majority of the young nonwhite votes, but since they have notorious low turnout rates, I think that won't amount to more than 5 million votes.

Intellectual white males, prolly another 3-4 million total.

Asians, mexicans, other hispanics probably would give him a slight majority of their votes, but I don't know how many have a legal vote. I'm just throwing in another 5 million votes from that camp. This might be low.

I count 32 million is a likely coalition of votes not counting white women. That's including a mobilized black voter base, which unfortunately is not always there in the numbers it needs to be.

That means he needs to pick up about 18 million votes from white women and stray white males.

This is just raw majority numbers, not looking at the electoral college.

Am I missing a voter block or does anybody have the real numbers?

One thing that is of note: I recall that WWII-era vets and population are dying off at the rate of something like 7,000 a day. Given that these folks are probably the majority of the old school white males and their mates, and I would bet that they are mostly republican, there will be several thousand less around for McCain on election day.

What do you think?

OR
 
The nationwide popular vote doesn't really matter, so if you're not analyzing by electoral college possibilities, why bother?

QueEx
 
The nationwide popular vote doesn't really matter, so if you're not analyzing by electoral college possibilities, why bother?

QueEx

I think there is a strong correlation between the popular vote and the electoral college. Obama obviously has strength in the states that have the highest populations. But a state like my own, Michigan, is suddenly in play when it has been strongly democratic since 1992.

I think the great lakes states, other than Illinois, are all in play, and I don't see Obama getting those white votes in those states. Clearly the South is probably in themix as well, so I guess the question is how do you get those votes?

OR
 
The nationwide popular vote doesn't really matter, so if you're not analyzing by electoral college possibilities, why bother?

QueEx

cosign. popular vote means absolutely nothing. That's a flaw in our system but, it's a fact nonetheless. end of thread.
 
cosign. popular vote means absolutely nothing. That's a flaw in our system but, it's a fact nonetheless. end of thread.


Well, I guess that's the second part of the point. If he does not have a popular majority, he certainly won't have an electoral majority.

George bush was the only person to have the electoral college majority without the popular majority in modern times. But even then it was a close call.

Similarly, Richard Nixon barely won in '68, and democrats who brought in new factors, such as Kennedy (irish ethnic) and Jimmy Carter (Southern baptist) each squeaked in as well.

Given that the South is probably a foregone loss to Obama, where does he pick up more votes? Given that the west is prodominantly White he has a chance if he can win the popular vote in each of those states, but they are relatively poor in electoral votes. Poor in raw numbers too. McCain gets one of the few populous states ARizona.

I guess it is hard for me to see that he has a chance using whatever system you want to analyze it with...

OR
 
According to some, the battleground states with
their current polling numbers, are:

Colorado 47.0 45.3 Obama +1.7
Virginia 47.3 46.3 Obama +1.0
Missouri 45.3 47.3 McCain +2.0
Michigan 46.3 42.0 Obama +4.3
Ohio 46.0 45.5 Obama +0.5
Florida 45.2 46.8 McCain +1

See, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/

Real Clear Politics updates the battleground states as well as the
national polls daily. Also, the site contains articles and op/ed
pieces from different points of view and includes a hypothetical
running total of the electoral vote.


Also, check out these threads:

Electoral College: Essential to the stability and sustainability of the Republic
http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=277677&highlight=electoral+college

Electoral college bypass approved by 2nd state
http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=227946&highlight=electoral+college




`
 
BETTER math: if half of your own party hates you, how are you going to pull thi soff

Just because people voted for Hillary does not mean they HATE Obama. The frame of reference you use to draw conclusions is kinda weak bruh. But I've peeped you and have a strong feeling you are not new to this and are setting yourself up for some general election trolling, I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

As far as the math, it's flawed off top. First off you are putting too much stock in overall popular vote, you win elections district by district, it's a lot more strategic than you are making it. Second thing is that you are making a bad assumption that the vast majority of whites are going to vote against their own best interests simply based upon Obama's race. There will be a large number of whites that will do just that, but it seems like you are assuming a HUGE majority will (it almost seems like you are assuming something like 80-90% of whites will vote for McCain regardless of personal interests or party affiliation simply due to racism).

I also think your voter turnout assumptions are off. This election is going to have a large voter turnout and that will benefit Obama (low voter turnout usually lends itself to an older, whiter electorate, which always benefits Republicans).
 
According to some, the battleground states with
their current polling numbers, are:

Colorado 47.0 45.3 Obama +1.7
Virginia 47.3 46.3 Obama +1.0
Missouri 45.3 47.3 McCain +2.0
Michigan 46.3 42.0 Obama +4.3
Ohio 46.0 45.5 Obama +0.5
Florida 45.2 46.8 McCain +1

See, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/

Real Clear Politics updates the battleground states as well as the
national polls daily. Also, the site contains articles and op/ed
pieces from different points of view and includes a hypothetical
running total of the electoral vote.


Also, check out these threads:

Electoral College: Essential to the stability and sustainability of the Republic
http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=277677&highlight=electoral+college

Electoral college bypass approved by 2nd state
http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=227946&highlight=electoral+college




`

thanks. I knew someone would have the science down. I am only observing, trying not to get my hopes up too high.

OR
 
Just because people voted for Hillary does not mean they HATE Obama. The frame of reference you use to draw conclusions is kinda weak bruh. But I've peeped you and have a strong feeling you are not new to this and are setting yourself up for some general election trolling, I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

As far as the math, it's flawed off top. First off you are putting too much stock in overall popular vote, you win elections district by district, it's a lot more strategic than you are making it. Second thing is that you are making a bad assumption that the vast majority of whites are going to vote against their own best interests simply based upon Obama's race. There will be a large number of whites that will do just that, but it seems like you are assuming a HUGE majority will (it almost seems like you are assuming something like 80-90% of whites will vote for McCain regardless of personal interests or party affiliation simply due to racism).

I also think your voter turnout assumptions are off. This election is going to have a large voter turnout and that will benefit Obama (low voter turnout usually lends itself to an older, whiter electorate, which always benefits Republicans).

Might be. I am basing my feelings on my personal observations of the Harold Washington race back in 1983 or so. I was in school in Chicago at the time. Harold won what was essentially the democratic primary, beating out the favored white female in the process. Teh opposition was a republican, jewish and little political capital. Harold barely won that race, and the city council was so divided that very little got done during his first term.

I extrapolate to America, and I think that race is such a significant factor, even against economic interests, that whites simply cannot overcome it. It really is a core issue.

I will be happily suprised if I am proven wrong on this matter. I think this election is a watershed for this kind of historical marker.

OR
 
I am basing my feelings on my personal observations of the Harold Washington race back in 1983 or so. I was in school in Chicago at the time.

<font size="3"><center>* * *</font size></center>

I extrapolate [that] to America . . .

I don't think that you can extrapolate Chicago politics to the rest of the nation. LOL

QueEx
 
What do you think distinguishes the two? Illinois has elected two of the only 3 black senators since reconstruction, and I would say they mirror America in many respects: rich and poor, white and black, financial center, distribution center, big population (and diverse. They might be actually more liberal than most of America.

Being from Detroit the racial polarization of Chicago seemed normal or actually better than Detroit, but I suspect that in the last 25 years that the economic gap in Chicago has grown, with more yuppies and such moving in.

Are you saying that America is more tolerant of black politicians or less?

OR


Also, just found this thread which discusses a similar effect of the "Bradley Effect". I am concerned about the closeness of this election.

http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?p=4568824#post4568824

OR




I don't think that you can extrapolate Chicago politics to the rest of the nation. LOL

QueEx
 
Obama is winning the electoral college in EVERY current simulation and it's not even close at this point. http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/


It is in the financial interest of the “media of mass distraction” to create the illusion that this is an extremely close election. Check General Electric (GE) –the owners of NBC/ MSNBC- last quarter earnings. The only division of the GE conglomerate that made significant money was NBC/ MSNBC, due to the vast infusion of cash they received from advertisers and candidates running TV ads during this nauseatingly too-long presidential campaign. Same thing at TIME WARNER; even with the injection of politico cash TIME WARNER – the owners of CNN – didn’t earn the $$$$ that was expected.

Team Obama in addition to fending off RepubliKlan slime attacks, which are the traditional wedge issue lies designed to provoke the low information voters “lizard brain” – must now cope with an insidious attack by the dead-enders from team Billary who are very concerned that Barack not only garners more votes than any presidential candidate in history, but that he crosses the 50% line in the popular vote, thereby wiping out the Bill Clinton electoral legacy. Remember both times Clinton won the presidency he never crossed the 50% marker.

Boots on the ground, enthusiasm, voter turn-out and most importantly GETTING YOUR VOTES COUNTED are what Team Barack is focused on like-a-laser-beam. With less than 93 days till election day, if you look at the Electoral College Map and not the daily tracking polls that the “media of mass distraction” keeps flogging , Barack is on course.





[PDF]http://mywebpage.netscape.com/camarilla10022/OBAMA.LEADS.pdf[/PDF]
 

It is in the financial interest of the “media of mass distraction” to create the illusion that this is an extremely close election. Check General Electric (GE) –the owners of NBC/ MSNBC- last quarter earnings. The only division of the GE conglomerate that made significant money was NBC/ MSNBC, due to the vast infusion of cash they received from advertisers and candidates running TV ads during this nauseatingly too-long presidential campaign. Same thing at TIME WARNER; even with the injection of politico cash TIME WARNER – the owners of CNN – didn’t earn the $$$$ that was expected.

Team Obama in addition to fending off RepubliKlan slime attacks, which are the traditional wedge issue lies designed to provoke the low information voters “lizard brain” – must now cope with an insidious attack by the dead-enders from team Billary who are very concerned that Barack not only garners more votes than any presidential candidate in history, but that he crosses the 50% line in the popular vote, thereby wiping out the Bill Clinton electoral legacy. Remember both times Clinton won the presidency he never crossed the 50% marker.

Boots on the ground, enthusiasm, voter turn-out and most importantly GETTING YOUR VOTES COUNTED are what Team Barack is focused on like-a-laser-beam. With less than 93 days till election day, if you look at the Electoral College Map and not the daily tracking polls that the “media of mass distraction” keeps flogging , Barack is on course.





[PDF]http://mywebpage.netscape.com/camarilla10022/OBAMA.LEADS.pdf[/PDF]

thanks Eewll and muckracker for the additional ammunition. I usually am a mere observer of this process, did not know the necessary source of the best information on this. I knew someone on the board would.

Muckracker, this information supports a quote I heard recently from one of the talking headz on tv: when asked if race was a factor, he stated that it was the only factor. Other than that, Obama would be blowing out McCain by a landslide. I knew that from my gut, but I was suspicious that the bradley effect was in effect( I can use that now that I have a name for it).

I agree with the point about grassroots: that literally was what got Harold Washington over in Chicago. They really mobilized folk there and then, and it made all the difference. One of the few Jesse Jackson contributions to the national politik.

We are kind of handicapped here in Michigan, with a natural (formerly) popular mobilizer like Kwame out of action, I just don't see the effort being put in here. Still, Obama's support is organic and plays well here in the City. I fear that the whites will adopt the attitude that Obama is Kwame and that the flaws of so many of our black politicians are shared. On the contrary, maybe it is a good contrast to have.

Thanks, guys again, I'm gonna dig into these numbers and keep an eye out!

OR;););)
 
you need to factor in age, party affiliation, income level and also the person's location; e.g. - if they are overseas/out of the country
 
Back
Top