Post-Election Results Analysis (2 Viewers)

[superchuck500]

The election data is always very interesting. Let's have a thread to discuss it so that it doesn't get washed away in the gameday thread.

We always suspected that a portion of the Trump vote in 2016 will leave him based on overall distaste with his conduct as president. There appears to be some evidence of that emerging . . . here's some from Wisconsin.

 

[wardorican]

just to piggyback off this

I'll push back a bit. Now, first, she may be dead on. I think she knows more about this than I do, for sure.

However....

As all groups, Democrats are definitely not a monolith. Her main point about a strong ground game gives the candidate a chance to actually hear from people. Now, if the fact of the matter is that the public in any given district all agree with Medicare for All.. well, then she's right and those politicians should support what the public wants. But, absent of that information, it's a gross over simplification of the matter.

The key for any candidate is simple. Listen to people, then use your own good judgement to fill in the details.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

Speaking of Georgia, both Sens. Perdue and Loeffler have asked the Republican Georgia Sec. of State to resign, per CNN TV report. Can't make this mess up.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

I'll push back a bit. Now, first, she may be dead on. I think she knows more about this than I do, for sure.

However....

As all groups, Democrats are definitely not a monolith. Her main point about a strong ground game gives the candidate a chance to actually hear from people. Now, if the fact of the matter is that the public in any given district all agree with Medicare for All.. well, then she's right and those politicians should support what the public wants. But, absent of that information, it's a gross over simplification of the matter.

The key for any candidate is simple. Listen to people, then use your own good judgement to fill in the details.

As someone who is not completely sold on AOC yet, I agree with this completely and what she recently posted. If you're losing because the people are hearing a different message, you either aren't listening to them or need to speak louder.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

All the more reason the DNC needs Stacey Abrams.

 

[zztop]

Speaking of Georgia, both Sens. Perdue and Loeffler have asked the Republican Georgia Sec. of State to resign, per CNN TV report. Can't make this mess up.

I came here just to post about that nonsense. These people are really bottom feeders

Republican Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue of Georgia called on the state’s GOP secretary of state to resign on Monday, citing “failures” in the election process but not providing any specific evidence to support their claims.

“There have been too many failures in Georgia elections this year and the most recent election has shined a national light on the problems,” Loeffler and Perdue said in a joint statement. “The Secretary of State has failed to deliver honest and transparent elections. He has failed the people of Georgia, and he should step down immediately."

 

[DaveXA]

I came here just to post about that nonsense. These people are really bottom feeders

Republican Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue of Georgia called on the state’s GOP secretary of state to resign on Monday, citing “failures” in the election process but not providing any specific evidence to support their claims.

“There have been too many failures in Georgia elections this year and the most recent election has shined a national light on the problems,” Loeffler and Perdue said in a joint statement. “The Secretary of State has failed to deliver honest and transparent elections. He has failed the people of Georgia, and he should step down immediately."

Yeah, I'm not sure what they're trying to accomplish doing this. A head scratcher for sure.

 

[J-DONK]

a national strategy just doesn't work for Dems - it should be a broad coalition that allows for multiple voices where the DNC acts as ref rather than try to set national agenda

I agree with this to some extent. I feel they need to strategize better. If they by some miracle take the senate. I would immediately get rid of the filibuster, make PR/DC states, and pass a Wyoming type rule for the house. What do you get? Four more liberal senators, a bunch of extra house seats in places like California, New York, and your newly statehooded lands. This would also mean more electors in the EC. I'll be honest they are so bad at this, I question if it's not intentional.

 

[DaveXA]

I agree with this to some extent. I feel they need to strategize better. If they by some miracle take the senate. I would immediately get rid of the filibuster, make PR/DC states, and pass a Wyoming type rule for the house. What do you get? Four more liberal senators, a bunch of extra house seats in places like California, New York, and your newly statehooded lands. This would also mean more electors in the EC. I'll be honest they are so bad at this, I question if it's not intentional.

Maybe Manchin could be talking outta his arse, but in an interview tonight, he stated in no uncertain terms that if he was the 50th Democrat, he would absolutely not vote for the elimination of the filibuster or expand the court. And I suspect he would be adamantly against tinkering with the EC. Rather I suspect he would advocate for states to adopt RCV and/or split delegates.

 

[LivefromDC]

I came here just to post about that nonsense. These people are really bottom feeders

Republican Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue of Georgia called on the state’s GOP secretary of state to resign on Monday, citing “failures” in the election process but not providing any specific evidence to support their claims.

“There have been too many failures in Georgia elections this year and the most recent election has shined a national light on the problems,” Loeffler and Perdue said in a joint statement. “The Secretary of State has failed to deliver honest and transparent elections. He has failed the people of Georgia, and he should step down immediately."

You know what? I don't feel sorry for the state's GOP Secretary of State. The SoS knows that the process was honest and transparent but did nothing to quell the party's lies. Now the lies are on Brad Raffensperger's doorstep.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/09/loe...ation-of-georgia-gop-secretary-of-state-.html

affensperger is popular among Republicans in the state, and in 2018 President Donald Trump endorsed his campaign, tweeting that Raffensperger “will be a fantastic secretary of state for Georgia.”

But that was before this past week, when Trump watched his early lead over President-elect Joe Biden in Georgia gradually evaporate as more and more votes were counted.

As of Monday afternoon, Biden led Trump by around 11,500 votes in the traditionally red state, and Georgia Republicans were looking for someone to blame.

In a blistering response Monday, Raffensperger said his resignation “is not going to happen.” He called the senators’ complaint that vote counting was not transparent, “laughable,” and strongly implied that the motive behind their demand for his resignation is that Trump is on track to lose the state.

It's laughable now because it's at his door. He was fine with the Trump lies until it impacted him.

 

[J-DONK]

Maybe Manchin could be talking outta his arse, but in an interview tonight, he stated in no uncertain terms that if he was the 50th Democrat, he would absolutely not vote for the elimination of the filibuster or expand the court. And I suspect he would be adamantly against tinkering with the EC. Rather I suspect he would advocate for states to adopt RCV and/or split delegates.

I wouldn't be surprised. I'm as progressive as they come, but I don't talk down about Manchin. He is about the most progressive senator you could hope for out of WV. There are other reasons to have a majority in the senate, but no legislation will get passed. You are also probably looking at loses in 2022 election cycle as well. That's usually how midterms work with the party out of power picking up gains.

 

[Nebaghead]

I wouldn't be surprised. I'm as progressive as they come, but I don't talk down about Manchin. He is about the most progressive senator you could hope for out of WV. There are other reasons to have a majority in the senate, but no legislation will get passed. You are also probably looking at loses in 2022 election cycle as well. That's usually how midterms work with the party out of power picking up gains.

Actually, a lot of the senators up for re-election were on the coat tails of Trump. I think they have a lot seats to defend.

 

[J-DONK]

Actually, a lot of the senators up for re-election were on the coat tails of Trump. I think they have a lot seats to defend.

They do, and maybe it will be a repeat of 2018 in which the party in power picked up senate seats on a very favorable map. I honestly haven't looked at the map yet to which seats are up. I believe Republicans picked up 2 seats that year? It makes picking up 1 of the 2 GA seats a very big deal.

 

[DaveXA]

Actually, a lot of the senators up for re-election were on the coat tails of Trump. I think they have a lot seats to defend.

I hope they lose. I don't want any Trumpers in Congress.

 

[JimEverett]

I think the success Republicans saw with Hispanics and blacks are going to push many in the party to embrace a path to something like a new New Deal Coalition.
You get 2/3 of the working-class white vote along with 40% Hispanic and 15% black you are going to win a lot of elections. They would give the Democrats the big business/country club types that make up the neoconservatives/Lincoln Project-types and go populist.
Not sure what the party would look like if it fully embraced this view, but we will find out soon.

 

[JimEverett]

Regarding the Presidential race itself, which I think has less meaning for the future, but still interesting:
While there were some exceptions, it seems to me Trump lost support - with many states showing a drop of somewhere between 2-4%.
Now - was that due to actual loss of support or was it due to Trump's election strategy of not pushing mail-in voting.
I think there is a good argument to be made that had the Trump campaign used ground game resources to solicit mail-in votes Trump would have won - give that it seems almost certain he left a lot of votes out there while the Biden campaign did not.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

Regarding the Presidential race itself, which I think has less meaning for the future, but still interesting:
While there were some exceptions, it seems to me Trump lost support - with many states showing a drop of somewhere between 2-4%.
Now - was that due to actual loss of support or was it due to Trump's election strategy of not pushing mail-in voting.
I think there is a good argument to be made that had the Trump campaign used ground game resources to solicit mail-in votes Trump would have won - give that it seems almost certain he left a lot of votes out there while the Biden campaign did not.

When I look at the turnout and look at the county by country results, I’m not sure. He increased his support in rural America by as much as 5 pts., but lost the cities by margins as high as 10 pts more. That was really the difference. The greater Democrat turnout in the cities, driven by mail in voting, overwhelmed the greater turnout in rural America.

I think turnout was so high it’s hard to blame any type of get out the vote effort, be it in person or mail in.

 

[superchuck500]

I think the success Republicans saw with Hispanics and blacks are going to push many in the party to embrace a path to something like a new New Deal Coalition.
You get 2/3 of the working-class white vote along with 40% Hispanic and 15% black you are going to win a lot of elections. They would give the Democrats the big business/country club types that make up the neoconservatives/Lincoln Project-types and go populist.
Not sure what the party would look like if it fully embraced this view, but we will find out soon.

It's a sensible strategy, but I think the problem is that after two decades of strong rhetoric against illegal immigration (mostly aimed at central and south America), the base and many of the pols themselves are going to find it challenging to embrace the Latino electorate, who will likely continue to be suspicious that many Republicans continue to be anti-Latino in general because they're just not very good at telling the difference.

For example, one of the worst immigration policies Republicans ever embraced was the idea of "self-deportation" - the idea was that if members of the public at key access points (public libraries, grocery stores, school registrars, etc.) became de-facto immigration officers and demanded to see documentation or proof of citizenship, illegals will get so discouraged at life in America that they will elect to return to their home country. The problem was that those members of the public de-facto immigration officers don't have "illegal detectors" and it just became a program of profiling and discrimination against all brown people, no matter if they were citizens just like the person demanding to see their documents.

That kind of fairly recent history which, in many ways, continues to the present makes it hard to get to something like 40% without some real PR work - but that would take genuine outreach and change in views among the base and the lower level party members that come from the base. I just don't see that happening to any meaningful degree.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

I think the success Republicans saw with Hispanics and blacks are going to push many in the party to embrace a path to something like a new New Deal Coalition.
You get 2/3 of the working-class white vote along with 40% Hispanic and 15% black you are going to win a lot of elections. They would give the Democrats the big business/country club types that make up the neoconservatives/Lincoln Project-types and go populist.
Not sure what the party would look like if it fully embraced this view, but we will find out soon.

There are some interesting trend lines with the Republicans embracing a more populist approach, and Democrats embracing a more elitist approach.

There's a significant portion of the population that is economically liberal and socially conservative, and I think that makes up a lot of the Trump base, and would have a lot of appeal with a large portion of the minority population. If they fully embraced criminal justice reform and made a more explicit effort to reject any and all white nationalists (ie, publicly state that our goal is to become a more racially diverse country and anyone who wants to have a white nation state should leave the party), it would be a pretty formidable voting bloc.

But there are some major issues preventing that from happening. A significant portion of the Republican party has been built on fighting socialism, which makes embracing certain policy positions problematic.