APP - Trump's path to 270 Electoral Votes

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is a very plausible path to 270 for President Trump. He has a much more favorable Electoral College map than Buyden. It all comes down to Pennsylvania. Ohio is out of reach for Buyden. Florida is getting out of reach. If Trump wins Pennsylvania, then Buyden can't win the Presidency. Period. Last nights admission that he is going to end fossil fuels is not going to do Buyden any favors in Pennsylvania. His campaign was immediately trying to do damage control because they knew it was a huge mistake. Even the moderator was perplexed and asked "why would you do that?"

I think this is actually a very conservative map right now for Trump. He could easily have the same Electoral College victory he had in 2016 or even greater. But, this is my conservative view as it stands today. It can and will probably change.


nGPXD.png
 
Jarod said:
I would not agree that he has 233 in the bank.

Yes all of your paths require one or more of the great lakes states, and I don’t think they are in play.
Click to expand...


Is it still your assessment that not one of the Rust Belt states are in play? Michigan? Minnesota? Wisconsin? Pennsylvania?
 
This is my most optimistic map. Not sure how probable it is, but it is possible. Before election day, I will put out my final map


DdN3k.png


I know certain people won't be able to resist themselves and try to claim this is an "official" prediction. Just to be clear. This is not an official prediction as it stands today. Just a very optimistic view of the race. And yes I am ignoring the polls. I think they are wrong. We will find out in a week if I am right.
 
Beijing Buyden said:
Is it still your assessment that not one of the Rust Belt states are in play? Michigan? Minnesota? Wisconsin? Pennsylvania?
Click to expand...

It does not look likely to me, based on current data, that Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, or Pennsylvania will go to Trump. All have a small chance of doing so.
 
Jarod said:
It does not look likely to me, based on current data, that Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, or Pennsylvania will go to Trump. All have a small chance of doing so.
Click to expand...

I didn't ask you if you thought Trump would win, I asked you if you thought they were in play.

Clearly Biden thinks PA is in play or he wouldn't be sending Obama to Philly
 
Beijing Buyden said:
I didn't ask you if you thought Trump would win, I asked you if you thought they were in play.

Clearly Biden thinks PA is in play or he wouldn't be sending Obama to Philly
Click to expand...

I did not say if I thought Trump would win. Now what do you mean by "in play"?

Is it possible Trump could win, yes, in all 50 states its possible. Is it reasonably likely, no.
 
Beijing Buyden said:
This is my most optimistic map. Not sure how probable it is, but it is possible. Before election day, I will put out my final map


DdN3k.png


I know certain people won't be able to resist themselves and try to claim this is an "official" prediction. Just to be clear. This is not an official prediction as it stands today. Just a very optimistic view of the race. And yes I am ignoring the polls. I think they are wrong. We will find out in a week if I am right.
Click to expand...

This is possible. The Sun might also rise in the West tomorrow.
 
Beijing Buyden said:
This is a very plausible path to 270 for President Trump. He has a much more favorable Electoral College map than Buyden. It all comes down to Pennsylvania. Ohio is out of reach for Buyden. Florida is getting out of reach. If Trump wins Pennsylvania, then Buyden can't win the Presidency. Period. Last nights admission that he is going to end fossil fuels is not going to do Buyden any favors in Pennsylvania. His campaign was immediately trying to do damage control because they knew it was a huge mistake. Even the moderator was perplexed and asked "why would you do that?"

I think this is actually a very conservative map right now for Trump. He could easily have the same Electoral College victory he had in 2016 or even greater. But, this is my conservative view as it stands today. It can and will probably change.


nGPXD.png
Click to expand...

This, I think is his best shot, but he does not need both Maine and New Hampshire.
 
Jarod said:
I did not say if I thought Trump would win. Now what do you mean by "in play"?

Is it possible Trump could win, yes, in all 50 states its possible. Is it reasonably likely, no.
Click to expand...

In play means is it possible he could win those states.

Don't be silly. California, Vermont and Oregon are not in play. Pennsylvania is in play.
 
Jarod said:
Do you have any data suggesting his fracking comments hurt him?
Click to expand...

what kind of data? polling data? I already told you I don't really trust the polling data.

The data I would provide is the thousands of jobs fracking has created in NE Pennsylvania not to mention the money that has changed peoples lives where they are drilling. But hey, if you think someone who is getting anywhere from $10-50,000 a month in royalties from fracking on their land is going to be OK with Beijing Buyden shutting that down then so be it.

I know that this is the same game you played in 2016. You are clinging to these polls as if it isn't in a poll then it doesn't count. You think crowd sizes or spontaneous car parades don't matter. Only the polls matter.

Well next Tuesday we get to find out who is right
 
Beijing Buyden said:
In play means is it possible he could win those states.

Don't be silly. California, Vermont and Oregon are not in play. Pennsylvania is in play.
Click to expand...

It's always possible. I reject your concept of "in play."

I think Texas is more "in play" (possible) than Pennsylvania.
 
Beijing Buyden said:
what kind of data? polling data? I already told you I don't really trust the polling data.

The data I would provide is the thousands of jobs fracking has created in NE Pennsylvania not to mention the money that has changed peoples lives where they are drilling. But hey, if you think someone who is getting anywhere from $10-50,000 a month in royalties from fracking on their land is going to be OK with Beijing Buyden shutting that down then so be it.

I know that this is the same game you played in 2016. You are clinging to these polls as if it isn't in a poll then it doesn't count. You think crowd sizes or spontaneous car parades don't matter. Only the polls matter.

Well next Tuesday we get to find out who is right
Click to expand...

I do not care what type of data, just data. You would have to show a correlation between the number of Fracking jobs to the number of Biden votes lost to make the data about the number of fracking jobs related to Biden votes, I don't think there is any data on that.
 
Jarod said:
It's always possible. I reject your concept of "in play."

I think Texas is more "in play" (possible) than Pennsylvania.
Click to expand...

so you think Buyden has a shot of winning Texas?

I think Trump has a 70% chance of winning PA. Do you think the same about Texas and Buyden?
 
Beijing Buyden said:
so you think Buyden has a shot of winning Texas?

I think Trump has a 70% chance of winning PA. Do you think the same about Texas and Buyden?
Click to expand...

I don’t think Trump has a 70% chance of winning PA. Maybe 15%. I think Biden has about a 35% chance at Texas.
 
Jarod said:
I do not care what type of data, just data. You would have to show a correlation between the number of Fracking jobs to the number of Biden votes lost to make the data about the number of fracking jobs related to Biden votes, I don't think there is any data on that.
Click to expand...

so lets review

you are asking for data that you claim doesn't exist?

OK
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top