Joe Biden Should Seek To Win Strongly “Red” States, To Promote Democratic Strength, And Humiliate Donald Trump!

There is a growing feeling of a Democratic “Tsunami” on the way on November 3, 2020, when the Presidential and Congressional Elections take place across the nation.

Indications are that Joe Biden is working hardest on convincing voters to support him in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, the three “swing” states that Hillary Clinton lost by small margins.

If those three states switched from Donald Trump to Joe Biden, then the former Vice President would win the Electoral College.

But since there is no guarantee, it is important for Biden to work hard to win Florida, North Carolina, and Arizona as well, to allow for any slippage in the three states lost by Clinton by small numbers. So a lot of effort is going into winning those three states listed, as Biden is now comfortably ahead in all three, along with the other three.

If Joe Biden wins Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, as well as Florida, North Carolina, and Arizona it will be a massive victory, which is almost certain to insure that the Senate would go Democratic by more than the three minimum victories needed. And the House of Representatives would add to the Democratic margin gained in the midterm elections of 2018.

But the argument is why not also go for states that seem long shots–Texas, Georgia, Ohio, and Iowa, all of which would make Joe Biden a landslide winner by far?

And even further, why not try to win Kansas and Montana?

So if things go well, the Democrats could have the most massive victory for the Presidency since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964, and could be a sign of a Democratic majority that would be long lasting!

The total humiliation of Donald Trump would be a wonderful event to witness!

3 comments on “Joe Biden Should Seek To Win Strongly “Red” States, To Promote Democratic Strength, And Humiliate Donald Trump!

  1. D July 14, 2020 7:58 am

    “Real Clear Politics” reports the average for “2020 Generic Congressional Vote” (Generic Ballot), from May 28–July 7, is Democratic +11.0.

    “Real Clear Politics” also reports, in the race for U.S. President, the average from polls, from June 25–July 7, is Democratic +9.0. I will adjust that. “The Hill”/Harris X continues to report polls suggesting Democratic +4 while others are around Democratic +10. (That is a difference of at least five pickup states.) Yet, “Real Clear Politics” keeps folding “The Hill”/Harris X into its reported averages. So, I will drop “The Hill”/Harrix X, if I am correct that its polls do and will not jibe with the reality of this election, and the new, adjusted average is the margin Democratic +9.83.

    So, this is looking like a race that is: U.S. President—Democratic +10 and U.S. House—Democratic +11. Since 2000, the party which won the U.S. Popular Vote, for U.S. House, also won the race for U.S. President. And the averages in margins spread, between both, was 2.06.

    A Democratic win in the U.S. Popular Vote of +9.xx or +10 suggests carriage between 30 to 32 states. Here are the states (* for 2016 Republican pickup), which would be 2020 Democratic pickups, which would reach 30: * Michigan, * Pennsylvania, * Wisconsin (tipping-point state from 2016), * Florida, [Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District], Arizona, North Carolina, Georgia, * Ohio, Texas, * Iowa, and [* Maine’s 2nd Congressional District]. That was their order, for best-performed states, for the 2016 Democrats.

    To go beyond 30 carried states, I will note the 2016 Democrats’s Nos. 31 and 32 were South Carolina and Alaska. But, not every state comes in at the same slot number in subsequent elections. I suspect Montana, the 2016 Democrats’ No. 38, would shoot up to No. 31. In 2004, Montana was also the Democrats’ No. 38. In the 2008 Democratic presidential pickup year for Barack Obama, who carried 28 states, Montana shot up to No. 30. So, for any of those polls suggesting a U.S. Popular Vote margin that reaches Democratic +13 or +14, and with that would be an estimating carriage of around 35 states, I suggest looking to those three states plus Kansas and Utah. I would also look to Nebraska’s 1st Congressional District. And any incorrect estimation may be with an underestimation of Missouri and Indiana, the 2016 Democrats’ Nos. 35 and 36 best states (with their margins spread, from each other, a mere 0.50). At this rate, you may want to root for a 40-state outcome so that all of them come in—which would require a U.S. Popular Vote margin of Democratic +18—and you can have fun guessing what would come in at Nos. 38, 39, and 40.

  2. D July 14, 2020 9:42 am

    Ronald writes, “And the House of Representatives would add to the Democratic margin gained in the midterm elections of 2018.”

    The 2018 midterm elections, in which the Democrats flipped control of the United States House of Representatives, was a U.S. Popular Vote margin of +8.56. (Result: Republican 44.85% vs. Democratic 53.41%.)

    The “Real Clear Politics” report, from May 28–July 7, is an average Democratic +11.0.

    If this turns out to be the result, come Election Day, that will be a 2018-to-2020 national shift of Democratic +2.44.

    In 2006, during the presidency of Republican George W. Bush, the Democrats flipped the U.S. House with a U.S. Popular Vote margin of +8.01. (Result: Republican 44.28% vs. Democratic 52.29%.)

    In 2008, a Democratic pickup of the presidency to Barack Obama, the Democrats won the U.S. Popular Vote for U.S. House by +10.60.

    The 2006-to-2008 national shift was Democratic +2.59.

    The 2008 U.S. House Democrats won a net gain of +21 seats. So, they averaged a net gain of +8.10 seats with each percentage point nationally shifted in their direction.

    Election 2016 was a Republican pickup of the presidency to Donald Trump. He flipped +6 states, four of which rank among the nation’s Top 10 populous.

    The 2014 Republicans won the U.S. House, already in their column, by a U.S. Popular Vote margin of +5.70. (Result: Republican 51.23% vs. Democratic 45.53%.)

    The 2016 Republicans, with their pickup of the presidency and a U.S. Popular Vote margin of –2.09, won the U.S. House by the lower +1.08.

    The 2014-to-2016 national shift, for U.S. House, was Democratic +4.62.

    The 2016 U.S. House Democrats won a net gain of +6 seats. So, they averaged a net gain of +1.29 seats with each percentage point nationally shifted in their direction.

    It is far more common the U.S. House switches party control in midterm elections—and does so to the party opposite the one which holds the White House. Average number of net gains in seats, with each percentage point nationally shifted, tends to be more predictably an estimated +4.

    In U.S. Presidential elections, it is rarer the U.S. House switches party control. If it does, it goes to the party which also won for U.S. President—and it did so in 1948 and 1952.

    The only thing that is easier to predict is with the margins. If the incumbent U.S. House party decreases its margin, it will likely experience net losses. If the incumbent U.S. House party increases its margin, it will likely experience net gains.

    It also depends on conditions. And, when timed with presidential elections which switch the White House Party, I think it also depends on where. The 2006-to-2008 Democrats won where it made enough differences in those consecutive cycles. They may experience that again when we see the outcomes of 2018-to-2020.

    It will be very difficult for a 2020 Democratic presidential pickup winner to win the U.S. Popular Vote by, say, +10, and flip seven Top 10 populous states (after the party carried in three in 2016), and not win likewise pickups of U.S. House seats in such applicable states.

    I am anticipating, more than any other state, Texas. It is estimated Texas #23 (Republican incumbent is retiring Will Hurd) is estimated as being gone (from Republican to Democratic pickup). But, to sufficiently shift that state’s +800k raw-vote margin, from 2016, it would reap Democratic pickups in a number of the state’s congressional districts. With a current state delegation of Republican 22 vs. Democratic 13 (one vacant Republican district), look for pickups among these Republican-held seats: Texas #22 (retiring Pete Olson) and Texas #24 (retiring Kenny Marchant). They would change the state delegation to Republican 20 vs. Democratic 16. Depending on the margin, with a Democratic presidential pickup of Texas, the levels of shift through the state, you can give consideration to the following (for more potential pickups): Texas #02 (Daniel Crenshaw), Texas #03 (Van Taylor), Texas #06 (Ron Wright), Texas #10 (Michael McCaul), Texas #21 (Chip Roy), and Texas #31 (John Carter). The more likely positive result for a new delegation would be either: Even or Republican 19 vs. Democratic 17. This would be made possible with the Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington to Greater Houston areas and to traveling southwest to areas in or around San Antonio and, for regarding Texas #23, near the border.

    I would also watch out for the following (with listed states, which would count as 2020 Democratic presidential pickups, in accordance to their population rank):
    • Florida (state delegation Republican 14 vs. Democratic 13): Florida #15 (Ross Spano); less chance with Florida #16 (Vern Buchanan)
    • Pennsylvania (Republican 9 vs. Democratic 9): Pennsylvania #10 (Scott Perry); less chance with Pennsylvania #01 (Brian Fitzpatrick)
    • Ohio (Republican 12 vs. Democratic 4): Ohio #01 (Steve Chabot) and Ohio #12 (Troy Balderson); less chance with Ohio #10 (Mike Turner)
    • Georgia (Republican 9 vs. Democratic 5): Georgia #07 (retiring Rob Woodall); less chance with Georgia #01 (Buddy Carter) and Georgia #12 (Rick Allen)
    • North Carolina (Republican 9/10, with a vacancy, vs. Democratic 3): North Carolina #02 (retiring George Holding) and North Carolina #06 (retiring Mark Walker) are already rated as likely Democratic pickups; less chance with North Carolina #08 (Richard Hudson) is also vulnerable for a Democratic pickup.
    • Michigan (Republican 6, with Justin Amash a former Republican-turned-Libertarian, vs. Democratic 7): This state came closest to matching the U.S. Popular Vote for U.S. House in both 2016 and 2018. Democratic pickups are less likely but are feasible with Michigan #03 (retiring Justin Amash) and Michigan #06 (Fred Upton).

    My guess is this: In a 2020 United States election that is a Democratic wave, U.S. President and U.S. Senate flip Democratic. U.S. House, already in the Democrats’ column, will be in sync with the pickup states (and I would look to Nebraska #02 as a pickup for U.S. President and U.S. House). The net gain, for the 2020 Democrats, will probably be around +10.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.