NationStates Jolt Archive


Head To Head: Who Would Take New York?

Steel Butterfly
26-02-2007, 03:52
Consider this for the sake of argument: If Hilary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani were to be the ones nominated, for the Democrats and Republicans respectfully, in the 2008 election, which candidate would carry New York, a very important state electoral college -wise?

Hilary’s got the whole “being a Democrat” going for her, since an overwhelming majority of New York voters live in the NYC metropolitan area. Since urban people vote Democrat in ridiculous percentages, and since NYC is so populated, the city basically carries the state. However, many New Yorkers see Ms. Clinton as a carpetbagger, not to mention the bad taste she leaves in many people’s mouths.

In contrast, Rudy is a Republican, which doesn’t go well with the state, but he’s already been elected to a position in NYC, and he’s not the most conservative Republican as far as Republicans go. He’s also somewhat of a local hero for New York, keeping the hope alive during 9/11.

If Rudy pulled enough NYC votes from Hilary thanks to who he is and his more moderate stances, while maintaining the typically Republican votes from the rest of the state, would Hilary even win her own state? Losing New York, a typically “blue state,” would be somewhat of a huge blow to the Democratic Party, would it not?

I’m not going to make this a poll, because I frankly don’t care to see how many Democrat supporters there are or how many Republican supporters there are either. I’m more interested in “why?” not “yes” or “no.”
Minaris
26-02-2007, 03:55
Consider this for the sake of argument: If Hilary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani were to be the ones nominated, for the Democrats and Republicans respectfully, in the 2008 election, which candidate would carry New York, a very important state electoral college -wise?

Hilary’s got the whole “being a Democrat” going for her, since an overwhelming majority of New York voters live in the NYC metropolitan area. Since urban people vote Democrat in ridiculous percentages, and since NYC is so populated, the city basically carries the state. However, many New Yorkers see Ms. Clinton as a carpetbagger, not to mention the bad taste she leaves in many people’s mouths.

In contrast, Rudy is a Republican, which doesn’t go well with the state, but he’s already been elected to a position in NYC, and he’s not the most conservative Republican as far as Republicans go. He’s also somewhat of a local hero for New York, keeping the hope alive during 9/11.

If Rudy pulled enough NYC votes from Hilary thanks to who he is and his more moderate stances, while maintaining the typically Republican votes from the rest of the state, would Hilary even win her own state? Losing New York, a typically “blue state,” would be somewhat of a huge blow to the Democratic Party, would it not?

I’m not going to make this a poll, because I frankly don’t care to see how many Democrat supporters there are or how many Republican supporters there are either. I’m more interested in “why?” not “yes” or “no.”

Well, this situation will never occur because even democrats hate Hillary.

obama/edwards 2008!
Relyc
26-02-2007, 04:00
Well, this situation will never occur because even democrats hate Hillary.

obama/edwards 2008!

We can only hope. Though I'd rather see Edwards/Clark or Clark/Obama.
Steel Butterfly
26-02-2007, 04:01
Well, this situation will never occur because even democrats hate Hillary.

obama/edwards 2008!

...It's theoretical. This thread's not about who you think should run, it's about who you think would win New York between these two.
CthulhuFhtagn
26-02-2007, 04:02
From polling conducted, it'd be Hillary by a ridiculous margin.
Steel Butterfly
26-02-2007, 04:02
Giuliani

But why?
Zavistan
26-02-2007, 04:03
...It's theoretical. This thread's not about who you think should run, it's about who you think would win New York between these two.

I think it would go to Hillary. Despite the bad feeling people get from her, I think they'd vote for her over Giuliani just over party differences. I think that the people of NYC will stay Democrat, and the bad feeling won't lose too many votes. They voted her to be Senator, so obviously they don't feel too bad.
Allegheny County 2
26-02-2007, 04:04
Giuliani

I have to agree.
Deus Malum
26-02-2007, 04:04
Giuliani
Novus-America
26-02-2007, 04:06
Well, this situation will never occur because even democrats hate Hillary.

obama/edwards 2008!

Then why did NYC, Albany, Buffalo, and Rochester reelected her?
The Nazz
26-02-2007, 04:09
From polling conducted, it'd be Hillary by a ridiculous margin.

Exactly. Most people don't remember that prior to 9/11, Rudy's personal popularity numbers in New York City were in the low 40s, if not the 30s, and those were the people who elected him. He might make a race slightly interesting for a month or two, but that's it.
Allegheny County 2
26-02-2007, 04:09
I think it would go to Hillary. Despite the bad feeling people get from her, I think they'd vote for her over Giuliani just over party differences. I think that the people of NYC will stay Democrat, and the bad feeling won't lose too many votes. They voted her to be Senator, so obviously they don't feel too bad.

The Republican Candidate ran an ineffective campaign with a primary opponet whereas Clinton ran pretty much unopposed against token usurpers.

The Presidential Race is far more different than an Senatorial Race. Rudy is popular in the state and it would make the race for the state of NY more interesting but I think between the voters of NYC and Upstate NY, Rudy would take the state.
Allegheny County 2
26-02-2007, 04:10
Then why did NYC, Albany, Buffalo, and Rochester reelected her?

Because they are cities and everyone knows that cities vote democrats?
Minaris
26-02-2007, 04:11
Then why did NYC, Albany, Buffalo, and Rochester reelected her?

Incumbency works like this:

Unless you shot/raped someone or did illegal drugs, you're pretty much in.
Allegheny County 2
26-02-2007, 04:12
Incumbency works like this:

Unless you shot/raped someone or did illegal drugs, you're pretty much in.

And even if you do all of those things, one could still get in. :D
Allegheny County 2
26-02-2007, 04:13
:rolleyes:

And what is the eye rolly for? It is a known fact in case you forgotten.

Edit:

TIMEWARP!!!!!!
The Nazz
26-02-2007, 04:14
Because they are cities and everyone knows that cities vote democrats?

:rolleyes:
Dishonorable Scum
26-02-2007, 04:16
Giuliani, because, while he's Republican, he's only "conservative" in NYC. He's able to reach across party lines and appeal to a significant number of Democrats. Hillary, on the other hand, irritates people across party lines, and there is a significant portion of the right wing that absolutely loathes her beyond description. Giulani doesn't provoke that kind of opposition from Democrats. He also impressed a lot of people of both parties in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 as somebody who could handle a disaster competently, which, in the post-Katrina world, is even more of an issue than it was in the post-9/11 world.

He has two major problems: First, he comes across as quite arrogant. Second, he has some well-known personal baggage. However, in a contest with Hillary, these two problems aren't as big a deal, because Hillary has even bigger problems in those same two areas.
Steel Butterfly
26-02-2007, 04:19
:rolleyes:

I'm pretty sure, as AC2 pointed out, that it's a known fact that urban areas vote Democrat. Look at a map of America with red and blue counties and not states. The entire country is red. The only "blue" areas are all of the big cities across the nation. The balancing act is that more people live there, which gives us our split-party system.
CthulhuFhtagn
26-02-2007, 04:19
Giuliani, because, while he's Republican, he's only "conservative" in NYC. He's able to reach across party lines and appeal to a significant number of Democrats. Hillary, on the other hand, irritates people across party lines, and there is a significant portion of the right wing that absolutely loathes her beyond description. Giulani doesn't provoke that kind of opposition from Democrats. He also impressed a lot of people of both parties in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 as somebody who could handle a disaster competently, which, in the post-Katrina world, is even more of an issue than it was in the post-9/11 world.

He has two major problems: First, he comes across as quite arrogant. Second, he has some well-known personal baggage. However, in a contest with Hillary, these two problems aren't as big a deal, because Hillary has even bigger problems in those same two areas.

Which is why all polls done give Hillary at 20 to 30 percentage lead on him in New York.
Allegheny County 2
26-02-2007, 04:20
I'm pretty sure, as AC2 pointed out, that it's a known fact that urban areas vote Democrat. Look at a map of America with red and blue counties and not states. The entire country is red. The only "blue" areas are all of the big cities across the nation. The balancing act is that more people live there, which gives us our split-party system.

Thank you :)
Andaluciae
26-02-2007, 04:24
Clearly I, Dick Cheney, will take New York in my coming electoral campaign. It will be a surprise for everyone, as even though I didn't campaign, I won every single vote in the electoral college.

*cackles*
The Nazz
26-02-2007, 04:27
I'm pretty sure, as AC2 pointed out, that it's a known fact that urban areas vote Democrat. Look at a map of America with red and blue counties and not states. The entire country is red. The only "blue" areas are all of the big cities across the nation. The balancing act is that more people live there, which gives us our split-party system.

It's not a known fact--it is more often the case that urban areas support Democrats, but it's by no means a known fact. The fact that there are several major metropolitan cities which have elected Republicans as mayors is testament to that. It would be equally ludicrous to suggest that all rural areas are conservative/Republican. Tell that to the hippies living in northern California.
The Nazz
26-02-2007, 04:28
Which is why all polls done give Hillary at 20 to 30 percentage lead on him in New York.

Don't you know? Polls have a liberal bias, and that helps Hillary even though she's not a liberal.
Steel Butterfly
26-02-2007, 04:28
It's not a known fact--it is more often the case that urban areas support Democrats, but it's by no means a known fact. The fact that there are several major metropolitan cities which have elected Republicans as mayors is testament to that. It would be equally ludicrous to suggest that all rural areas are conservative/Republican. Tell that to the hippies living in northern California.

Just because there are exceptions to a rule does not make it any less valid. Nothing is definate. When something happens an overwhelming majority of the time, it's taken as fact.

As for America:

http://www.aurorawdc.com/ci/red_vs_blue_county_2004.jpg
County Map of the 2004 Election
Allegheny County 2
26-02-2007, 04:29
It's not a known fact--it is more often the case that urban areas support Democrats, but it's by no means a known fact.

Oh bull fucking shit!!!!!! Pittsburgh goes democrat in every presidential election. Philadelphia goes Democrat in every PResidential election. Same goes for NYC, Miami, Cleveland, Chicago, Kansas City, Saint Louis, San Francisco, and Los Angelas. Get off the fact that it is not a known fact for it is a known fact.

Grow the hell up Nazz.

The fact that there are several major metropolitan cities which have elected Republicans as mayors is testament to that.

And we are talking Presidential elections. Thanks for playing however.
Allegheny County 2
26-02-2007, 04:30
Just because there are exceptions to a rule does not make it any less valid. Nothing is definate. When something happens an overwhelming majority of the time, it's taken as fact.

As for America:

http://www.aurorawdc.com/ci/red_vs_blue_county_2004.jpg
County Map of the 2004 Election

Looks most of Northern Cal is red whle the coast line is blue. Hmmmm....
The Nazz
26-02-2007, 04:41
Oh bull fucking shit!!!!!! Pittsburgh goes democrat in every presidential election. Philadelphia goes Democrat in every PResidential election. Same goes for NYC, Miami, Cleveland, Chicago, Kansas City, Saint Louis, San Francisco, and Los Angelas. Get off the fact that it is not a known fact for it is a known fact.

Grow the hell up Nazz.
Listen child--you got one of your cities wrong. Miami went Republican, because of its conservative Cuban population. So did Dallas and Houston, both major cities, and that's just what I can dig up off the top of my head.

Edit: Add to that list Orlando, Tallahassee and Gainesville FL. I'd be willing to bet that the major cities in the Carolinas were at least competitive for Bush, as well as Salt Lake City, Nashville, Little Rock, and Baton Rouge.


And we are talking Presidential elections. Thanks for playing however.
Presidential elections are exactly what I'm talking about. Now, before you come up with some other spastic outbreak, read carefully. My eye-rolling was at the absoluteness of your statement. Cities do, generally, vote Democratic, as I noted in my later reply to Steel Butterfly. But they are not always Democratic strongholds.

Don't you ever get tired of being pwned by me, Corny?
Steel Butterfly
26-02-2007, 04:41
Grow the hell up Nazz.

Don't you ever get tired of being pwned by me, Corny?

Hey now...lets knock it off, k?

Besides...everyone knows how often I report things in Moderation. ;)
Marrakech II
26-02-2007, 04:46
And even if you do all of those things, one could still get in. :D

Thinking of Marion Barry?
Andaluciae
26-02-2007, 04:46
Play nice kids. Anger only leads to raised blood-pressure, and that's no good for anyone.

Except for this one dude I know who's got a bp that's so low the doctors always take it three times...but he's an exception!
Andaluciae
26-02-2007, 04:49
Like I'm one to talk, though... :rolleyes:
Allegheny County 2
26-02-2007, 04:49
Listen child--you got one of your cities wrong. Miami went Republican, because of its conservative Cuban population. So did Dallas and Houston, both major cities, and that's just what I can dig up off the top of my head.

And I did not mention Dallas or Houston did I? No! Why? Because you are right that they did. As Steel Butterfly stated, there are exceptions however, it is a known fact that the urban areas do indeed vote primarily for democrats when it comes to national races.
Allegheny County 2
26-02-2007, 04:50
Thinking of Marion Barry?

Actually, yes I am :D
The Nazz
26-02-2007, 04:54
And I did not mention Dallas or Houston did I? No! Why? Because you are right that they did. As Steel Butterfly stated, there are exceptions however, it is a known fact that the urban areas do indeed vote primarily for democrats when it comes to national races.
See that qualifier there? had you used a qualifier like that, you wouldn't have gotten the rolled eyes smiley in the first place. It's your absolutism, which is habitual for you Corny, that gets you slapped down time and time again.

I'll give you this though--you've recognized the error, which is unusual for you. Well done.
Kiryu-shi
26-02-2007, 05:52
My parents still have a Giulliani sucks bumper sticker around somewhere. *plots*

From what I hear, in NYC, there is more support for Clinton. I personally dislike them both, for varying reasons, but I think that Clinton would edge out our former mayor.
Infinite Revolution
26-02-2007, 05:53
kong
Zilam
26-02-2007, 06:43
Hey now...lets knock it off, k?

Besides...everyone knows how often I report things in Moderation. ;)

And everyone knows why too...Something about you thinking there are not enough mods, and you want to be one...So i guess like ass kissing or something, right?
Steel Butterfly
26-02-2007, 08:04
And everyone knows why too...Something about you thinking there are not enough mods, and you want to be one...So i guess like ass kissing or something, right?

Right? Wrong. And I'm not going to report this bullshit just to prove a point.

There was a potentially bad situation that thankfully went nowhere. Nazz and AC2 are chill, and I just said chill out bascially while poking fun at myself. Why that called for you assuming that you have some ability to know why I report things, that there is one overbearing reason why, that you think I believe there aren't enough mods, or that you think I want to be one is beyond me. As for ass kissing, ask GMC or Scolo how much "mod ass kissing" I do or how much they "love" me. I'm sure they'd be happy to give you their answers.

Want to flame? Do it somewhere else. There are plenty of places around the internet to be immature.
Zilam
26-02-2007, 08:23
Right? Wrong. And I'm not going to report this bullshit just to prove a point.

There was a potentially bad situation that thankfully went nowhere. Nazz and AC2 are chill, and I just said chill out bascially while poking fun at myself. Why that called for you assuming that you have some ability to know why I report things, that there is one overbearing reason why, that you think I believe there aren't enough mods, or that you think I want to be one is beyond me. As for ass kissing, ask GMC or Scolo how much "mod ass kissing" I do or how much they "love" me. I'm sure they'd be happy to give you their answers.

Want to flame? Do it somewhere else. There are plenty of places around the internet to be immature.

Where did I flame you in that post? If I flamed you, I'd report it myself, just to save you from the trouble. ;) I wouldn't want you to have the entire spot light, now would I?
Steel Butterfly
26-02-2007, 08:25
Where did I flame you in that post? If I flamed you, I'd report it myself, just to save you from the trouble. ;) I wouldn't want you to have the entire spot light, now would I?

Implying that I'm a wannabe mod and an ass kisser. I'm neither, and therefor don't enjoy being called such.
Zilam
26-02-2007, 08:26
Implying that I'm a wannabe mod and an ass kisser. I'm neither, and therefor don't enjoy being called such.

Well, I could go on about this, but that'd be hijacking the thread. So, we can just drop it, k? :)