The modern left’s strategy for doing class politics was put to the test in the 2020 primary. It failed. https://t.co/X36Z7qhR4z
— Zack Beauchamp (on paternity leave) (@zackbeauchamp) April 10, 2020
Hindsight:
If lots of non-college and rural whites support Trump, why would you expect their peers who might not to have completely different priorities? Like, "your three best friends want THE WALL, but I can tell that you're interested in hearing a detailed account of what people get wrong about socialism and how its policies can actually work in America!"
Attacking a party "establishment" is not a good way to get members of that party to vote for you - and ESPECIALLY so with Southern black Democrats.
I read the whole thing and I think not getting to establishment blacks really hurt him more than anything. Also with the attitude of fighting the Democratic establishment. I think he could have gotten his message across without attacking what people associated with Obama's legacy. Also they probably had misplaced confidence that crazy anti-Hillary vote in 2016 that made them think they could be so anti establishment
I think perceived electability was a pretty big primary issue that wasn't addressed in the article.
I read the whole thing and I think not getting to establishment blacks really hurt him more than anything. Also with the attitude of fighting the Democratic establishment. I think he could have gotten his message across without attacking what people associated with Obama's legacy. Also they probably had misplaced confidence that crazy anti-Hillary vote in 2016 that made them think they could be so anti establishment
that's more or less the space warren tried to run in. progressive party-loyalist.
I think perceived electability was a pretty big primary issue that wasn't addressed in the article.
it's definitely way up on the list of people's priorities. but i think decision-making usually flows in the opposite direction - people decide who they want to vote for and then ascribe to that person the trait of electability.
I thought the wine cave and anti-PAC stuff was pretty aggressive anti-establishment messaging even if she didn't explicitly say she was up against the Democratic establishment.
I think perceived electability was a pretty big primary issue that wasn't addressed in the article.
it's definitely way up on the list of people's priorities. but i think decision-making usually flows in the opposite direction - people decide who they want to vote for and then ascribe to that person the trait of electability.
I thought the article did a nice job of highlighting his traditional view of class and describing how it doesn't really have an audience right now.
But don't you think there was more to it than that this year? More value than usual on winning because the opponent is more hated than usual?
But don't you think there was more to it than that this year? More value than usual on winning because the opponent is more hated than usual?
yeah, i think voters valued it more than normal, but i think when people try to determine who is electable they mostly do so by projecting their own preferences onto the electorate.
that's not to say they aren't sincere in the effort or desire.
I thought the wine cave and anti-PAC stuff was pretty aggressive anti-establishment messaging even if she didn't explicitly say she was up against the Democratic establishment.
normie dems don't consider the democratic party to be synonymous with pacs or fundraising. that's a progressive viewpoint.
I thought the wine cave and anti-PAC stuff was pretty aggressive anti-establishment messaging even if she didn't explicitly say she was up against the Democratic establishment.
normie dems don't consider the democratic party to be synonymous with pacs or fundraising. that's a progressive viewpoint.
If that's the case, I guess I don't understand what specific attacks Normie Dems took issue with from Bernie. Just the fact that he said he was going up against the establishment?
If that's the case, I guess I don't understand what specific attacks Normie Dems took issue with from Bernie. Just the fact that he said he was going up against the establishment?
I've talked to TOO MANY black Southern voters this week (and during my life) I wanna stop and explain the concept of "the establishment" to some people and why a lot of black Southern voters will NEVER vote for Bernie.
— michaelharriot (@michaelharriot) March 6, 2020
This analysis by @DavidOAtkins is very good. The failure of Bernie to win doesn't show that a progressive candidate/agenda can't win, it shows that you can't win a Democratic primary by running against the party https://t.co/hRr6Rx0gOP
— Scott Lemieux (@LemieuxLGM) April 13, 2020
Many people believe that causes associated with the Democratic Party and its leaders have done a lot of good things for a lot of people. Many volunteer their time or money on behalf of these causes. When Sanders talks about leading a revolution against the Democratic establishment, he's dismissing these people. They are part of the Democratic establishment. They have an affinity for it. They've made an investment in it.That makes sense
another discussion of the left's place in the democratic party as illuminated by sanders 2020.I agreed with a lot of the points but I think progressives should absolutely use presidential primary campaigns to test progressive debates. It helped push the entire party left over the past couple of elections IMOThis analysis by @DavidOAtkins is very good. The failure of Bernie to win doesn't show that a progressive candidate/agenda can't win, it shows that you can't win a Democratic primary by running against the party https://t.co/hRr6Rx0gOP
— Scott Lemieux (@LemieuxLGM) April 13, 2020
I talked with @MikeGrunwald about why the future of the Democratic Party is progressive and why the left needs to build power downballot and think about policy implementation. https://t.co/C3BXOLf9M9
— sean (@SeanMcElwee) April 17, 2020
It was smart of AOC to identify as a Democrat, because most Democrats do believe the things that progressives believe.
I’d propose a focus on paid family leave and childcare; ambitious climate action and clean energy; and lowering drug prices.
Main finding: there is a disconnect between the donors and voters in each party, but it varies by party. Republican donors are fairly aligned with Republican voters on social issues, but *way* to their right on economic issues. pic.twitter.com/ZvuFC2D3pE
— David Broockman (@dbroockman) April 28, 2020
— Jane Coaston (@cjane87) May 1, 2020
President Trump is seeing support slide among the demographic most vulnerable to Covid-19: America’s seniors.
— Michael C. Bender (@MichaelCBender) May 1, 2020
New reporting here w/ @KThomasDC: https://t.co/GTwP0XZPrz via @WSJ
It looks like the erosion in Trump's hard-core base is very real.
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) May 1, 2020
His favorability has dropped 11 points among white evangelicals, from 77% in March to 66% now.
It's dropped 12 points among noncollege whites, from 66% to 54% now.
New @PRRIpoll:https://t.co/H6hSKd7PaR pic.twitter.com/wL6Rdm9GVg
President Trump is seeing support slide among the demographic most vulnerable to Covid-19: America’s seniors.
— Michael C. Bender (@MichaelCBender) May 1, 2020
New reporting here w/ @KThomasDC: https://t.co/GTwP0XZPrz via @WSJ
Here's a quick pass of my positive and negative surprises from the last five years. I think on net I'm a little more optimistic about the future than I was in 2015 but not by very much. pic.twitter.com/Zp9gbv9x8V
— (((David Shor))) (@davidshor) May 8, 2020
In a nutshell, she finds that financial wellbeing had little impact on candidate preference. Instead, she writes, their votes were related to positions “on issues related to American global dominance and the rise of a majority-minority America.”
While racial status threat and global status threat are different issues, they can clearly be intertwined in the minds of whites who feel they are the prototypical Americans and therefore have the most to lose if their country is no longer dominant. Mutz makes clear that whites’ protecting their dominant status isn’t an act of old-fashioned racism that assumed minorities were morally and intellectually inferior. Indeed, in this case, whites are seeing threats coming from nonwhite domestic groups and foreign nations sufficiently capable of displacing them.
This brilliant essay by Gregory Rodriguez, one of the nation’s premier thinkers on race and ethnicity, provides a new and uncomfortable perspective on what’s really driving Trumpism, and the despair and outrage of white voters. https://t.co/lp8YoIaS0r
— Mike Madrid (@madrid_mike) May 11, 2020
Invalid Tweet ID
i have a couple of beto related thoughts on this:
1. this is one of a couple reasons i became convinced, posthoc, that beto would not have been as good of a general election candidate as i thought i year ago, and part of why biden is a better general election candidate than i thought a year ago.
2. a lot of people make a big deal about beto's outspoken rhetoric on guns being politically damaging to him, and i'm fairly convinced they're mostly wrong. but almost no one talks about his emphasis on race, which i think is a good bit more damaging (and conceivably may have cost him the senate race in 2018).
This brilliant essay by Gregory Rodriguez, one of the nation’s premier thinkers on race and ethnicity, provides a new and uncomfortable perspective on what’s really driving Trumpism, and the despair and outrage of white voters. https://t.co/lp8YoIaS0r
— Mike Madrid (@madrid_mike) May 11, 2020
Mutz makes clear that whites’ protecting their dominant status isn’t an act of old-fashioned racism that assumed minorities were morally and intellectually inferior. Indeed, in this case, whites are seeing threats coming from nonwhite domestic groups and foreign nations sufficiently capable of displacing them.
Demographic change explains roughly only 0.9% of the district level change in Democratic vote share from 2012 to 2018.
— (((David Shor))) (@davidshor) May 16, 2020
Changes in Democratic support *within* racial group explain literally 90X more of the variance of partisan shifts than changes in composition *between* groups. https://t.co/Qr7w1ELNor pic.twitter.com/72iQ1BuDK5
Controlling for age, income, education, and nativity, coefficients for 2016 presidential turnout in the CPS relative to Whites:
— (((David Shor))) (@davidshor) April 5, 2020
Black: 2.9%
Hispanic: -3.4%
Asian: -12.7%
Native American: -10.1%
Age effects were non-linear but very large, state effects exist but are not very big pic.twitter.com/YU4AtThJPZ
Signals have to be costly to be useful as signals. Floating an unpopular slogan does more to suss out which leaders are devoted to your cause. Anyone can repeat a popular slogan. https://t.co/YYig6tKePj
— Josh Barro (@jbarro) June 7, 2020
The root issue is that activists incorrectly think that the ideological beliefs of center-left politicians are the primary obstacle preventing their preferred policies from being implemented, which leads them to want costly signals to filter out the perceived closet sell-outs.
— (((David Shor))) (@davidshor) June 7, 2020
Vox.com: DC statehood is closer now than it has ever been.
https://www.vox.com/2020/6/22/21293168/dc-statehood-vote-filibuster-supreme-court-joe-biden
Trump's margins in average of June 2020 Monmouth, Quinnipiac, NYT/Siena, NPR/Marist, Fox and CNN national polls vs. 2016 vote margins ('16 CCES):
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) July 8, 2020
Non-college whites: +21 (+24)
Whites w/ college degrees: -22 (-9)
African-Americans: -78 (-80)
Latinos: -31 (-40)
Very true, there is nothing conservatives love more than complaining about imaginary persecution
shor is one of the more interesting people i've encountered on twitter and this is an interesting tweet.Here's a quick pass of my positive and negative surprises from the last five years. I think on net I'm a little more optimistic about the future than I was in 2015 but not by very much. pic.twitter.com/Zp9gbv9x8V
— (((David Shor))) (@davidshor) May 8, 2020
David Shor on Democrats’ modest erosion of support among non-college educated nonwhite voters, which is being obscured by the huge gains among white voters. https://t.co/XZpAXqlDjg pic.twitter.com/BzZrgECo5Q
— Josh Barro (@jbarro) July 17, 2020
lots of implications for '22 and beyond. probably the most interesting thing in american politics from a hobbyist perspective is how republicans will react to repudiation in 2020.Trump's margins in average of June 2020 Monmouth, Quinnipiac, NYT/Siena, NPR/Marist, Fox and CNN national polls vs. 2016 vote margins ('16 CCES):
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) July 8, 2020
Non-college whites: +21 (+24)
Whites w/ college degrees: -22 (-9)
African-Americans: -78 (-80)
Latinos: -31 (-40)
If they are smart, they'll return to being the party of a small, non-interventionist government... Leave the social issues alone, they really aren't the federal government's place anyway. Focus on spending and the deficit. 2020 could be a huge opportunity for the Republicans by ditching Trumpism, which didn't start with Trump. The Democratic Party is a mess and the 2020 election has the potential make it worse, even if they do win the Senate.
I talked with @Oren_Cass about his fight to change how the right thinks about economics, why he Republicans need to take a no-new-tax-policy pledge, how economic policy shapes culture, why GDP misses what matters, how power shapes policy, and more: https://t.co/Nic8Kmsgvh
— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) July 17, 2020
Is HR1 going to be priority number one if Democrats take the executive and legislative branches?Yes, in the sense that many viable vaccines will be emerging.
This is why I'm not convinced the "Trump's attacks on mail voting will backfire/depress GOP turnout" narrative is accurate.
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) July 26, 2020
Trump is currently creating a massive partisan divide between in-person (R) and absentee (D) votes. And absentees are rejected at much higher rates.
Americans' ideological bent has shifted in the first half of 2020 with fewer people self-identifying as politically conservative in May and June than at the start of the year. There has been a corresponding increase in self-described liberals while the percentage moderate has been fairly steady.
conservatism is being discredited by the incompetence of conservatives.Yes
lol at this exchange b/t @ConorLambPA and @faiz
— Alex Thompson (@AlxThomp) August 18, 2020
w/ @hollyotterbein https://t.co/SogkmgeC14 pic.twitter.com/3xUU2FOd4q
In practice the most popular governors are Republicans in blue states who don't do anything and the least popular governors are a mix of scandals and governors with ambitious legislative agendas. pic.twitter.com/zNw21t4Ri9
— (((David Shor))) (@davidshor) August 21, 2020
Last month, Biden signaled an openness to ending the 60-vote filibuster rule, a practice President Barack Obama recently called a “Jim Crow relic.”
“The filibuster is gone,” said Harry Reid, the influential former Senate majority leader and a friend of Biden. “It’s not a question of if, it’s a question of when it’s going to go … Next year at this time, it will be gone.”
With Election Day just a few months away, I was genuinely surprised, in the course of recent conversations with a great many Republicans, at their inability to articulate a purpose, a designation, a raison d'être for their party.
“Trump’s party...represents no detailed vision for governing. Filling the vacuum is a lazy, identity-based populism.. ‘Owning the libs and pissing off the media,’ shrugs Brendan Buck, a longtime senior congressional aide. ‘That’s what we believe in now.’”
— Steve Inskeep (@NPRinskeep) August 24, 2020
https://t.co/3ntDnETE4Q
“Trump’s party...represents no detailed vision for governing. Filling the vacuum is a lazy, identity-based populism. ‘Owning the libs and pissing off the media,’ shrugs Brendan Buck, a longtime senior congressional aide. ‘That’s what we believe in now.’”
I talked with @Oren_Cass about his fight to change how the right thinks about economics, why he Republicans need to take a no-new-tax-policy pledge, how economic policy shapes culture, why GDP misses what matters, how power shapes policy, and more: https://t.co/Nic8Kmsgvh
— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) July 17, 2020
One of the policies he proposes is a wage subsidy for low-income workers—hardly standard Republican fare. The idea is that the government would provide a supplementary payment for each hour worked by a low-wage employee, based on a target hourly wage. The wage subsidy is, in a way, the opposite of a payroll tax.
Fact: when Trump took office in 2017, Republicans controlled 41 of the 100 most college-educated House districts in the country.
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) September 9, 2020
Today they control just 18, and eight of those are currently in @CookPolitical's Toss Up column or worse.
It is remarkable how thoroughly "repeal and replace Obamacare" has been exposed as a policy mirage, after hundreds of millions of dollars poured into an assault that shaped countless elections and helped define U.S. politics in the 2010s.
— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) September 12, 2020
¯\_(ツ)_/¯https://t.co/MnMZodJEhP
I count 15 higher-quality state polls since the weekend, including WI, MN, NH, ME, NC, NV, AZ, FL, SC, KY. Biden leads Trump w/college educated whites in all of them except SC & even there, he's crossed 40%. Rs can deny it, but the cost of Trump's stamp in suburbia is real & big.
— Ronald Brownstein (@RonBrownstein) September 17, 2020
Never have we seen such an extreme divergence between money/ads vs. in-person contact as we're seeing in 2020.
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) September 22, 2020
.@sidney_b and I did a deep look at black voters. Most interesting dynamic is the generational differences. Older black voters are more partisan--they both like and trust the Democratic Party and dislike the GOP much more than younger black voters. https://t.co/zij8D72ndf pic.twitter.com/CSUxusY8WI
— Perry Bacon Jr. (@perrybaconjr) September 23, 2020
The majority of Hispanics..."preferred to see Hispanics as a group integrating into the American mainstream, one not overly bound by racial constraints, but instead able to get ahead through hard work."
— Wesley Yang (@wesyang) September 23, 2020
The data bear this out. https://t.co/7jt71W5ILw pic.twitter.com/d9N39bmcPZ
Inequality does not lead the public to favor policies that reduce it. It makes racially biased citizens less egalitarian & more supportive of Republicans.
— Matt Grossmann (@MattGrossmann) September 25, 2020
More Republican control in Congress increases inequality, which in turn increases Republican control. pic.twitter.com/q9UmpHlaVY
unfortunate response.Inequality does not lead the public to favor policies that reduce it. It makes racially biased citizens less egalitarian & more supportive of Republicans.
— Matt Grossmann (@MattGrossmann) September 25, 2020
More Republican control in Congress increases inequality, which in turn increases Republican control. pic.twitter.com/q9UmpHlaVY
You surprised?
Republicans might have a 64–36 Senate majority now. Democrats would be locked out for a generation, and in Trump’s absence, the Senate would be sounding the loudest alarm bells in Dem HQ.
— Nathaniel Rakich (@baseballot) September 29, 2020
House Democratic leaders Steny Hoyer and Jim Clyburn call for bringing back earmarks next year, saying a de facto prohibition on “congressionally directed spending” gives too much power to the executive branch https://t.co/u5S69TxtIm
— Roll Call (@rollcall) October 1, 2020
Voter power index by state pic.twitter.com/sIVIvgiCFU
— Craig Schwerin (@craig_schwerin) October 6, 2020
WOOOW. A Canadian research project gave homeless people $7,500 each — the results were 'beautifully surprising'.
— Rutger Bregman (@rcbregman) October 8, 2020
Turns out: basic income for the homeless pays for itself. It's free money, because 'the project saved the shelter system $8,100 per person'.
'https://t.co/mgaS0TIF4O
WOOOW. A Canadian research project gave homeless people $7,500 each — the results were 'beautifully surprising'.
— Rutger Bregman (@rcbregman) October 8, 2020
Turns out: basic income for the homeless pays for itself. It's free money, because 'the project saved the shelter system $8,100 per person'.
'https://t.co/mgaS0TIF4O
Hasn't study after study shown straight cash to be the most effective anti-poverty measure?WOOOW. A Canadian research project gave homeless people $7,500 each — the results were 'beautifully surprising'.
— Rutger Bregman (@rcbregman) October 8, 2020
Turns out: basic income for the homeless pays for itself. It's free money, because 'the project saved the shelter system $8,100 per person'.
'https://t.co/mgaS0TIF4O
All 115 participants, ranging in age between 19 and 64, had been homeless for at least six months and were not struggling with serious substance use or mental health issues.
So are you changing your opinion of UBI or am I misunderstanding your view? You lost your crap at Markey proposing a handout for a fraction of that amount.
Hasn't study after study shown straight cash to be the most effective anti-poverty measure?
That's not exactly rare, depending on the source. Tons of homeless are just people that can't afford housing. And of course homelessness can make a minor mental health issue way more serious.QuoteAll 115 participants, ranging in age between 19 and 64, had been homeless for at least six months and were not struggling with serious substance use or mental health issues.
Hasn't study after study shown straight cash to be the most effective anti-poverty measure?WOOOW. A Canadian research project gave homeless people $7,500 each — the results were 'beautifully surprising'.
— Rutger Bregman (@rcbregman) October 8, 2020
Turns out: basic income for the homeless pays for itself. It's free money, because 'the project saved the shelter system $8,100 per person'.
'https://t.co/mgaS0TIF4O
QuoteAll 115 participants, ranging in age between 19 and 64, had been homeless for at least six months and were not struggling with serious substance use or mental health issues.
That's not exactly rare, depending on the source. Tons of homeless are just people that can't afford housing. And of course homelessness can make a minor mental health issue way more serious.QuoteAll 115 participants, ranging in age between 19 and 64, had been homeless for at least six months and were not struggling with serious substance use or mental health issues.
That's not exactly rare, depending on the source. Tons of homeless are just people that can't afford housing. And of course homelessness can make a minor mental health issue way more serious.QuoteAll 115 participants, ranging in age between 19 and 64, had been homeless for at least six months and were not struggling with serious substance use or mental health issues.
I should probs read the article before I comment, but I was wondering what the housing situation was there (I assume they had access to affordable housing if the results were really good).
That's not exactly rare, depending on the source. Tons of homeless are just people that can't afford housing. And of course homelessness can make a minor mental health issue way more serious.QuoteAll 115 participants, ranging in age between 19 and 64, had been homeless for at least six months and were not struggling with serious substance use or mental health issues.
That's not exactly rare, depending on the source. Tons of homeless are just people that can't afford housing. And of course homelessness can make a minor mental health issue way more serious.QuoteAll 115 participants, ranging in age between 19 and 64, had been homeless for at least six months and were not struggling with serious substance use or mental health issues.
Sure, and for that type of homeless, this cash injection worked well. I'm not surprised. Now, on to addressing the more difficult problem.
Kumar: I think that in Florida it’s going to be neck and neck, but I think Biden is leading with the Latino community. In Texas, Houston has been flooding, and there are droughts all over. These are things that are very aligned with the progressive agenda. And I can share with you that Beto O’Rourke is about to release some numbers: He and four other organizations have collectively registered 145,000 folks. Voto Latino by itself has registered over 201,000 folks in Texas. [In 2018,] O’Rourke lost by less than 210,000 votes. And collectively, we will have registered more than 340,000 new voters. Together, we have exceeded his margin of loss. The Texas state House itself is very close to flipping this year. And if it flips—with the implications for redistricting—Texas would no longer be an artificially red state.
Biden: "If elected, what I will do is I’ll put together a national commission – a bipartisan commission...and I will ask them to, over 180 days, come back to me with recommendations as to how to reform the court system...it’s not about court packing."
— Geoff Bennett (@GeoffRBennett) October 22, 2020
Listen to his full answer: https://t.co/LojrftvOXW
Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said Thursday morning that he didn’t know “anything about it.” Informed of the parameters, he said: “There’s no reason to oppose it.”
“I’m sure that there are those that say, ‘We don’t need a commission, we know what to do.’ He’s a thoughtful person, he’s served as the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee,” Durbin said of Biden. “He’s trying to find a reasonable way to get people to talk to [one] another.”
Fantastic review by @EricLevitz of one of the most important and not-well-understood phenomena in American politics: the gender gap, which didn't technically exist before 1980 and will be higher than ever in 2020https://t.co/T3j3vFCY0G pic.twitter.com/gsbtvkW4Sl
— Derek Thompson (@DKThomp) October 22, 2020
What @EricLevitz points out, which I just didn't know, is that the gender gap is a transatlantic phenomenon. Women are moving left all over Western Europe, too.
— Derek Thompson (@DKThomp) October 22, 2020
Which raises the striking possibility that, for once, this is something we cannot blame on Ronald Reagan. pic.twitter.com/iO99BbdrYZ
the shift from 'pub to dem of well educated voters gets more attention, but this is probably more important.Fantastic review by @EricLevitz of one of the most important and not-well-understood phenomena in American politics: the gender gap, which didn't technically exist before 1980 and will be higher than ever in 2020https://t.co/T3j3vFCY0G pic.twitter.com/gsbtvkW4Sl
— Derek Thompson (@DKThomp) October 22, 2020
I'd be willing to bet that black and Latino males are trending more conservative as black women and Latinas are trending more liberally.
“While I have no problem with providing cash to people who need money, the solution to homelessness is housing,” Bloch told me. “Especially in a city like Vancouver where housing supply is low and rents are astronomical, it will be very hard to sustain a homelessness intervention without offering long-term affordable housing. I would not want to see these findings used to take pressure off the critical need to provide both long-term affordable housing and long-term income security.”
Lending further evidence to the point that women are the smarter members of the species as a whole.the shift from 'pub to dem of well educated voters gets more attention, but this is probably more important.Fantastic review by @EricLevitz of one of the most important and not-well-understood phenomena in American politics: the gender gap, which didn't technically exist before 1980 and will be higher than ever in 2020https://t.co/T3j3vFCY0G pic.twitter.com/gsbtvkW4Sl
— Derek Thompson (@DKThomp) October 22, 2020
I'd be willing to bet that black and Latino males are trending more conservative as black women and Latinas are trending more liberally. I obviously don't have data that shows this but colloquially it seems black men are becoming more conservative the more the patriarchy has collapsed.
If you look at *state polling averages* and compare to the 2016-replay estimates, here's how polls suggest each state has changed in terms of partisan lean.
— Will Jordan (@williamjordann) November 1, 2020
FL ⟶R+4
PA →R+1
NC →R+<1
GA ←D+<1
AZ ←D+<1
IA ←D+1
TX ←D+1
OH ←D+1
MI ⟵D+2
WI⟵D+3
Last night was an utter catastrophe for stopping GOP gerrymandering next year. GOP is poised to draw 4-5 times as many congressional districts as Dems, likely closer to the latter number. That's similar to the GOP's 5:1 advantage after 2010. AZ, MI, PA legislatures still uncalled https://t.co/zoyjP2IogZ pic.twitter.com/xij2w0IAqd
— Stephen Wolf (@PoliticsWolf) November 4, 2020
In Doral, home to the largest Venezuelan community in the United States as well as Trump’s golf resort, the swing in numbers was big.
— Ana Ceballos (@anaceballos_) November 6, 2020
Trump turned a 40% loss in 2016 into a 1.4% win, a 41.4% pro-Trump shift.https://t.co/ORwAioaQbA @alextdaugherty@NewsbySmiley @BiancaJoanie
biden should have had like entire ads running in florida just talking about how much he admired guaido.In Doral, home to the largest Venezuelan community in the United States as well as Trump’s golf resort, the swing in numbers was big.
— Ana Ceballos (@anaceballos_) November 6, 2020
Trump turned a 40% loss in 2016 into a 1.4% win, a 41.4% pro-Trump shift.https://t.co/ORwAioaQbA @alextdaugherty@NewsbySmiley @BiancaJoanie
With a lot of talk about Native voting in Arizona. I thought I would share 2 maps. The left is a map showcasing all 22 tribes in the state. The right an updated 2020 voting results maps by precinct. This give you an idea of how Indigenous communities voted in the 2020 election. pic.twitter.com/scrWENDVO2
— Shondiin Silversmith⁷ (@DiinSilversmith) November 6, 2020
The black share of the electorate is probably going to be a bit lower than it was in 2016 and as a group black voters trended toward Republicans. We’re winning Georgia because a bunch of affluent white people in the Atlanta suburbs switched from Trump to Biden.
— (((David Shor))) (@davidshor) November 6, 2020
this is a cool map. the other three blue splotches on the border are yuma, nogales and douglas, heavily mexican-american.With a lot of talk about Native voting in Arizona. I thought I would share 2 maps. The left is a map showcasing all 22 tribes in the state. The right an updated 2020 voting results maps by precinct. This give you an idea of how Indigenous communities voted in the 2020 election. pic.twitter.com/scrWENDVO2
— Shondiin Silversmith⁷ (@DiinSilversmith) November 6, 2020
shor is really going for a 2nd cancellation today.The black share of the electorate is probably going to be a bit lower than it was in 2016 and as a group black voters trended toward Republicans. We’re winning Georgia because a bunch of affluent white people in the Atlanta suburbs switched from Trump to Biden.
— (((David Shor))) (@davidshor) November 6, 2020
also is this really cancel worthy?
Do you know how AZ Latinos are different culturally from RGV Latinos?
Do you know how AZ Latinos are different culturally from RGV Latinos?
i haven't spent much time in the rgv, but my impressions are that rgv would be longer generations in the us (many since pre-1848), more with a familial origin in ne mexico compared to more diverse regional origin in az, az more urban, probably just slightly younger. rgv pretty much 100% mexican, az maybe 10% central american or so too.
my guess is that generations in the us and/or ruralness are probably the most important differences.
More stunning: Dems will have all eight Senate seats from AZ/CO/NV/NM for 1st time since 1941. And if Biden holds NV/AZ, as seems likely now, they will hold all 8 Senate seats & win all 4 for president for 1st time since 1936. https://t.co/o9kYaH3g1S
— Ronald Brownstein (@RonBrownstein) November 6, 2020
guaido is a joke so it doesn't even make any sense (I think you were joking).
florida latinos are a pretty distinct group from the rest of the mainly mexican latino population throughout the rest of the country. I don't think catering to the florida weirdos is worth it at this point, just offer them material benefits and let the chips fall.
the southwest and midwest are worth way more, and just objectively guaido is a joke so it doesn't even make any sense (I think you were joking). But in general I don't think trying to appeal to the south american contras and capitalist carribbean types instead of the much larger population of working and middle class mexicans is worth it anyway.
Like, only 227 of Biden’s electoral votes are gonna come from states that voted to the left of the country.
— Ethan C7 (@ECaliberSeven) November 7, 2020
He had to win at least four states that were to the right of the country (some substantially) in order to win the electoral college: MI, NV, PA, WI/AZ
So it looks like the gap between Biden’s national popular vote margin and the electoral college tipping-point state is going to be about 4-5 percentage points once all the votes are counted. That will be the biggest partisan bias for the electoral college ever.
— G. Elliott Morris (@gelliottmorris) November 7, 2020
still a lot of votes to be counted, so the exact margin isn't written in stone, but the electoral college disadvantage for dems increased again this year.Like, only 227 of Biden’s electoral votes are gonna come from states that voted to the left of the country.
— Ethan C7 (@ECaliberSeven) November 7, 2020
He had to win at least four states that were to the right of the country (some substantially) in order to win the electoral college: MI, NV, PA, WI/AZ
Looking forward to reading profiles of Biden voters in large urban areas and hearing discussions for the next four years about how Republicans can change their messaging to reach those Biden voters after performing so poorly with them in this election.
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) November 7, 2020
Would it cost less to relocate millions ofprogressivesmoderates than spend money on campaigns? :D
Almost entirely non-response from what I can tell.
— (((David Shor))) (@davidshor) November 8, 2020
Yeah. Turnout seems like it was pretty uniformly up by party. The tell is comparing the early vote results with the already voted crosstabs in polls, they were pretty uniformly too low.
— (((David Shor))) (@davidshor) November 8, 2020
If we saw the head of the ruling regime, and his party, react to the election results this way in any other country, we'd know exactly what we are looking at.
— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) November 9, 2020
And I'd say here, too, it's time to be honest and say we know exactly what we are looking at. https://t.co/aLQetMNmjR
We know that politically engaged voters are more likely to respond to surveys. And so it may be that as the Trump Presidency has totally energized the Democratic base, it has also led those same kinds of voters to increase their propensity to respond to political surveys.
“And I would say that it has not been a central theme of this Presidency, and it was certainly not a central theme of the 2020 campaign.”
— Adrian Carrasquillo (@Carrasquillo) November 10, 2020
They get into this but I disagree. Immigration was a theme of his presidency, not the campaign tho.https://t.co/jMLwJMT1BO via @NewYorker
As figure 1 illustrates, 45% of Republicans with degrees, compared to 23% of Democrats with degrees, said they feared that their careers could be at risk if their views became known.
...
According to a Pew survey on October 9, Trump was leading Biden by 21 points among white non-graduates but trailing him by 26 points among white graduates. Likewise, a Politico/ABC poll on October 11 found that ‘Trump leads by 26 points among white voters without four-year college degrees, but Biden holds a 31-point lead with white college graduates.’
The exit polls, however, show that Trump ran even among white college graduates 49-49, and even had an edge among white female graduates of 50-49! This puts pre-election surveys out by a whopping 26-31 points among white graduates. By contrast, among whites without degrees, the actual tilt in the election was 64-35, a 29-point gap, which the polls basically got right.
While President Donald Trump managed to pull in more support from his core constituency—rural, non-college-educated voters—than he had four years earlier in some key swing states, he lost his re-election bid because urban, college-educated voters swung toward Joe Biden in overwhelming numbers. And in a country that is steadily becoming more diverse, urban and better educated, the data sends a clear warning to a Republican party that seems unlikely to separate itself from Trump and his populist brand of politics anytime soon.
David Shor - I mean, I’m not a robot.
https://unherd.com/2020/11/meet-the-shy-trumpers/QuoteAs figure 1 illustrates, 45% of Republicans with degrees, compared to 23% of Democrats with degrees, said they feared that their careers could be at risk if their views became known.
QuoteDavid Shor - I mean, I’m not a robot.
Lol
Vox.com: Election results: Why the polls got it wrong.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/10/21551766/election-polls-results-wrong-david-shor
The crossfire between the Democratic Party’s left and moderate wings, each blaming the other for the party’s flaccid performance in congressional races, has been diverting enough that it has obscured a striking point of commonality.
Both sides have similar descriptions of Democratic leadership on Capitol Hill — arrogant, bereft of creativity, generationally obsolete.
Ultimately, in this hyperpolarized world, what national media outlets choose to talk about is going to be much more important in determining whether [Democratic Congressman] Collin Peterson survives in Minnesota’s 7th district than anything he does. That’s just the reality. [This month, Peterson lost his bid for reelection.]
Shor is getting around more these days or do I just recognize him now?QuoteUltimately, in this hyperpolarized world, what national media outlets choose to talk about is going to be much more important in determining whether [Democratic Congressman] Collin Peterson survives in Minnesota’s 7th district than anything he does. That’s just the reality. [This month, Peterson lost his bid for reelection.]
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/12/2020-election-analysis-democrats-future-david-shor-interview-436334
Shor is getting around more these days or do I just recognize him now?QuoteUltimately, in this hyperpolarized world, what national media outlets choose to talk about is going to be much more important in determining whether [Democratic Congressman] Collin Peterson survives in Minnesota’s 7th district than anything he does. That’s just the reality. [This month, Peterson lost his bid for reelection.]
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/12/2020-election-analysis-democrats-future-david-shor-interview-436334
The average voter in a general election is something like 50 years old — in a midterm or primary, it’s higher. They don’t have a college degree. They watch about six hours of TV a day — that’s the average; there are people who watch more.
I almost wimped out of publishing this, since it touches on the hot-button issue of contemporary politics that I typically avoid like COVID.
— Antonio García Martínez (@antoniogm) November 12, 2020
But...it's topical and touches culturally (or even geographically) too close to home to ignore, so here we go.https://t.co/cuwXnvRFKw
I’ve been wanting for some time to reclaim what I had in my blog days as an independent voice, and a great opportunity has arisen for me to do that on Substack where today I’m launching a new site that you can find and read all about here:https://t.co/hwxPOtHsHm
— Matthew Yglesias 🍦 (@mattyglesias) November 13, 2020
Quick favor: could you update the billing receipt to contain ONLYFANS so I'm less embarrassed when my wife asks about the credit card statement?
I had a long chat with personal socialist, professional DNC shill @davidshor about the 2020 election.
— Eric Levitz (@EricLevitz) November 13, 2020
Among his takes: Democrats won through persuasion not base mobilization, and it's important not to pretend otherwise.https://t.co/IRb9oeU1Cr pic.twitter.com/h3hyRzYU4x
Have ranked choice voting instead of first pass (winner take all) and interesting idea on House representation as well for proportional representation. Would take thoYeah that all sounds great. Would like to hear the counter argument
https://www.vox.com/2020/1/23/21075960/polarization-parties-ranked-choice-voting-proportional-representation
he thinks it's a waste of time and money for high profile elections (persuasion or gotv, either way).Does he clarify where he draws the line of "high profile"?
he thinks it's a waste of time and money for high profile elections (persuasion or gotv, either way).
The tweet is gone so I don't know who he is but I do agree with thishe thinks it's a waste of time and money for high profile elections (persuasion or gotv, either way).