Alternate Electoral Maps II
- Thread starter Aaaaasima
- Start date
- Status
Here's my alternate US 1992 presidential election. I transferred half of Perot's votes into Bush's column.
This map shows the majority in each state in '88 and in my '92 election.
Here's a map that shows the swing between '88 and my '92 election.
Credit to @Thande for the bottom two maps.
This map shows the majority in each state in '88 and in my '92 election.
Here's a map that shows the swing between '88 and my '92 election.
Credit to @Thande for the bottom two maps.
Last edited:
Dukakis definitely wins the election here. From the surface of it, it looks like Maryland, Missouri, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and California all flip to him, as well as the two Dakotas (possibly), Montana, Michigan, Vermont, Connecticut, Tennessee, and Kentucky. It also looks like he comes pretty close in Texas, Colorado, and a few other states. What would the electoral map look like?
10% swing = 10% up for Dukakis and 10% down for Bush, right? So that means that any state that Bush won by 20% or less goes to Dukakis.
That leaves (and easier to list those still for Bush than those that flip) Bush with: (in order of how much Bush won by) Utah, Idaho, Alaska, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada, Wyoming, Florida, Arizona, Mississippi, Nebraska, Virginia, Georgia and Indiana (he won Indiana by 20.16 margin) for a total of 107 Electoral votes. Given that the state that Dukakis would have won by least (Alabama, which went to Bush by 19.3%) has 9 EV, this is as close as you can get to reversing the EV simply with a swing...
Select any section of the post (the title or beginning might be useful) and you should get little quote/reply buttons at the end of the selection.
No, this is a 10% swing. Taking 5% away from Bush and giving 5% to Dukakis. He very narrowly wins the electoral college here.
Ohio and Louisiana are decided by less than 1%, Texas is decided by roughly 2.5%. North Dakota narrowly goes R while South Dakota goes D fairly decisively. Tennessee goes R by about 5.5%, Montana goes D by about 4%, Vermont and Michigan go D and so does Connecticut. Kentucky goes R by less than 2%.
Here's the map:
280-258
@MoralisticCommunist are you still accepting requests? If so then could I please request Mississippi
Justin Fairfax
VA AG 2018-2026
VA Gov 2026-2031
VA Senator 2031-Present
Nanette Barragán
CA-44 Rep 2017-2021
CA Senator 2022-Present
Election 2032
Fairfax-Barragán
54.86%
458 ECV
Baker-Kasich
25.21%
80 ECV
McDaniel-Cotton
19.92%
D+29.65%/L+9.72%
378+ECV
2024 Election
Charlie Baker-Kim Reynolds
47.86%
277 ECV
Karmala Harris -Kristen Gilibrand
48.46%
261 ECV
D + 0.6%
R+16/+6 ECV
2020 Election
Joe Biden-Karmala Harris
50.12%
338 ECV
Mike Pence-Terry Branstad
47.04%
200 ECV
D+3.06%
MoralisticCommunist
Banned
Yep, I was naturally a bit biased in making this state so socialist, but I want to make sure that there was at least one far left state in the US, and given the Russian heritage and oil money Alaska was the perfect state to make into a socialist "utopia." But to counteract that a bit, I made sure to show off the sectarian nature of the state's many parties, some of which are overly idealistic, and some of which only care about getting as many earmarks as possible.
Yeah, and there are implied to be countless smaller splinters of various parties who are way too small to ever hope of gaining a single seat. But I think having 25 total parties in Alaska at the very least gives you a good snapshot of what the state's politics are typically like.
Sure! I've already started work on another state but Mississippi is definitely a state I've been wanting to make for awhile now so I can do it afterwards.
This is for an election I posted a wiki box on, For some more context, I have made a thread on it that I plan on expanding.
Yea the electoral college would definetly change a fair bit, likely less votes for the Midwest and more for the midlantic and south east. I simply created this map for fun out of boredom.
Or you could say that under Merkley they passed a Law freezing the electoral college because that would be a sensible thing and would totally be a logical and popular move
Well, it's not without precedent: Congress didn't reapportion seats after the 1920 Census, and didn't until the 1930 Census.
That's a 5% swing.
From Wikipedia - "If Party One's vote rises by 4 points and Party Two's vote falls 5 points, the swing is 4.5 points (Party 2 to Party 1)."
From the Swingometer section of the BBC's Election 2010 website -
"HOW SWING WORKS
Swing is a shorthand way for showing the change in the share of the vote, usually between two parties over two separate elections. The calculation is simple.
Step 1. Add the rise in one party's share in the vote to the fall in the second party's share of the vote.
Step 2. Divide your figure by two. The resulting figure is the swing."
- Status