"And if it improves by a modest amount — not unusual for incumbents with a strong economy — he could have a distinct chance to win re-election while losing the popular vote by more than he did in 2016, when he lost it by 2.1 percentage points. The president’s relative advantage in the Electoral College could grow even further in a high-turnout election, which could pad Democratic margins nationwide while doing little to help them in the Northern battleground states. It is even possible that Mr. Trump could win while losing the national vote by as much as five percentage points.... Many assume that the huge turnout expected in 2020 will benefit Democrats, but it’s not so straightforward. It could conceivably work to the advantage of either party, and either way, higher turnout could widen the gap between the Electoral College and the popular vote. That’s because the major Democratic opportunity — to mobilize nonwhite and young voters on the periphery of politics — would disproportionately help Democrats in diverse, often noncompetitive states. The major Republican opportunity — to mobilize less educated white voters, particularly those who voted in 2016 but sat out 2018 — would disproportionately help them in white, working-class areas overrepresented in the Northern battleground states...."
Writes Nate Cohn in "Trump’s Electoral College Edge Could Grow in 2020, Rewarding Polarizing Campaign/Re-election looks plausible even with a bigger loss in the national popular vote" (NYT).
That's all very interesting about the Electoral College, and if you read the whole article, you'll see a lot about polls about "approval" of Trump, which are used as a proxy for how people will vote. But in an election, you have to vote for one or another candidate (or abstain), and you might disapprove of all of them.
That is, withholding approval doesn't mean you won't vote for Trump. It's hard to approve of Trump. He's not exactly approval-seeking. You might like the results he's getting and still feel you want distance from him. You might vote for him because you want more of the same or because you think his opponent will take away some of the things you like and still be able to say that you "disapprove" of the person known as Trump.
A conscious sense of disapproval may even facilitate a vote for Trump. People who seek approval for themselves may find it expedient to express disapproval of Trump — to be free of the onus and stigma of approving of him — but when the time comes to answer the question whether they want 4 more years of his work, they might also find it expedient to say "yes."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
166 comments:
It's hard to approve of Trump. He's not exactly approval-seeking. You might like the results he's getting and still feel you want distance from him.
Which is why polls are useless.
It is a derivation of the Tom Bradley effect.
but when the time comes to answer the question whether they want 4 more years of his work, they might also find it expedient to say "yes."
I definitely want 4 more years of not destroying our economy with the Green New Deal and sundry other left wing insanities. 400 years would be better.
Missteps? Did I miss something?
Which is why phrasing of the poll question matters.
It’s not “ do you like Reagan”. It’s are you better off than you were 4 years ago?
Trump in 2016 was a wild card. He was the Un-Hillary.
Now, he's a known quantity, and has delivered on many of his promises, even if a big one (border control) still eludes him.
I really haven't run into buyer's remorse from folks who voted for Trump. The Conservatives Never-Trumpers may still not vote for him. The Lefties & Liberals certainly won't. But, the coalition that put him in there in 2016? I thinks it's even more solid than it was in 2016.
“Seemingly”
That might sum it up.
I like this “new normal.”
"It's hard to approve of Trump."
Why?
He has done better in office than any cynical conservative could have expected, he has appointed some excellent people, he has nominated fairly solid judges, he fights back in the culture war, he has faced and prevailed against an outrageous coup attempt, he has made love of country an issue in politics, and even though illegal immigration is still a major problem, he is also the only person in public life with a chance of addressing it.
I found it hard to approve of Trump in 2016. It is easy to approve of him now.
Yup, it's a binary choice. President Trump is a flawed vessel, but his heart is in the right place and his actions have helped the country more than any president in the last thirty years. Given a choice between Trump and any of the candidates from the party of AOC's Squad, I'll take Trump 11 times out of 10 (and no, that's not a typo).
Trump v. Socialism
Trump v. The Green New Deal
Trump v. Open Borders
Trump v. Medicare for all, including illegal aliens
Trump v. Willie Brown's babe
Trump v. Hillary back at State
Trump v. The Squad
Yeah, he wins.
to mobilize less educated white voters
Waste of time, Trump is never going to get the academic vote.
Ann trying everything of her bag of tricks to try an convince you that Trump, to use her favorite word is "weird".
I voted for Trump , agree with his policies and think he is a typical successful businessman with a domineering personality.
That scares the sh*t out of pampered leftist professors like Ann. They call it "weird" but it is pure fear of an alpha male. She probably never had a relationship with an alpha male.
Remember Ann couldn't cope with the private sector and thus became a professor.
Even her hero, Dylan ,is a small effete man.
Will the Democrat candidate, whoever xe is, be able to move credibly toward the center after winning the nomination? Will Trump continue to succeed (with the help of the MSM) in presenting the "squad" as the face of the Democratic party? Will people care whether "if you like your plan you CAN'T keep your plan"? Will people who are thinking about voting for Trump worry about being called "RACISTS!!!" or will they just say "F*ck it, I've got a job and my wages are up, and sticks and stones can break my bones . . . ."
Magic 8 Ball says "Answer Unclear".
Waste of time, Trump is never going to get the academic vote.
Communism is for stupid people.
The Democrats have yet to come up with a credible candidate. I'm still chuckling at the bumper sticker I saw last Sunday "Anybody else 2020."
Generic Democrat is not a human.
On the day he was elected, Trump’s “favorability” (the metric for non-office holders that’s used as a proxy for “approval”) stood at 37%.
"to mobilize less educated white voters"
This is a reason our "elites" still don't understand what happened in '16, and don't understand what is happening today. The idea that the decisive portion of Trump's electoral success comes from less educated white voters (i.e., the deplorables) is I think factually wrong, even though it's emotionally satisfying. (Who doesn't hate dumb white people?)
As someone pointed out here the other day, it's hard even to imagine anyone who voted for Trump last time who will vote against him this time. But finding folks who voted against him or sat it out, but might vote for him this time, is not difficult at all. He will do better this time than last time.
Hell, I'm sitting here in Chicago wondering if he might put Illinois in play!
The weird thing about these polls is there's a percentage of people who approve of Trump & his handling of the economy but choose Biden over him on a head-to-head.
The polls are not of much predictive value this far away from election date. But I hold with a a negative partisanship model of electoral behaviour. That means that which ever party is in the White House will be at a disadvantage with a segment of the electorate that surges or decreases in opposition to the party in power in swing states. So in Wisconsin, when a D is in the White House, Rs have a better chance; when a R is in the White House, Ds have a better chance.
This model says it's always opposite day in the swing states of Michigan and Wisconsin.
I was just going to comment that maybe they weren't "big missteps", but mockturtle got there first.
Now, giving $1.8B in cash to a country at war with the US, that's what I would call a "big misstep". But who would do a thing like that?
The illegals all have driver’s licenses and are encouraged to vote in the California and New York. That is what this guy is preparing us for. But the Electoral Votes still decide the contest. And if anyone does not like that they can go back where they came from.
Hell, I'm sitting here in Chicago wondering if he might put Illinois in play!
Nope. Too many suburbs. I guess I have a deterministic prediction model. I suppose that takes the fun out of it.
Hell, I'm sitting here in Chicago wondering if he might put Illinois in play!
No way.
Too much hate.
Imagine what his approval would be if the media worshiped like they did with Obama.
Imagine what Trump's approval rating would be if you only polled legal voters.
It’s anecdotal but the lefty women in my family will never vote for Trump and they are all leaning for not voting. Strangely, to me, they cite open borders, reparations and medical care for illegal aliens as the things that compel them to not vote for a Democrat.
"He's not exactly approval seeking" might be one of the most accurate and amusing descriptions I've read of President Trump. A rare statement where most ought to be able to agree, regardless of political leanings.
I wonder what Trump's poll numbers would be if he got caught selling guns to Mexican cartels who later used those guns to shoot US border patrol agents.
Oh wait now democrats are doing that while calling those same agent Nazi concentration camp guards.
We know what it takes to be popular with democrat voters.
It's hard to approve of Trump.
Not if you're intelligent and you also care about seeing the American economy work for small business and the working class and lower middle class (or even the mid-middle class) and if you want to see progress with North Korea and loopholes in our free trade agreements closed. Then it's easy to approve of Trump.
when we give cnn too much space in our skulls,
https://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/tuesday-cable-ratings-july-16-2019/
A conscious sense of disapproval may even facilitate a vote for Trump. People who seek approval for themselves may find it expedient to express disapproval of Trump — to be free of the onus and stigma of approving of him — but when the time comes to answer the question whether they want 4 more years of his work, they might also find it expedient to say "yes."
Occam's razor needs sharpening.
"The Conservatives Never-Trumpers may still not vote for him."
The "conservative" NeverTrumpers were never that conservative as they have demonstrated in spades in the last 3 years.
The "conservative" NeverTrumpers are nothing more than the democrats/leftists house-trained pets.
"That is, withholding approval doesn't mean you won't vote for Trump. It's hard to approve of Trump. He's not exactly approval-seeking. You might like the results he's getting and still feel you want distance from him. You might vote for him because you want more of the same or because you think his opponent will take away some of the things you like and still be able to say that you 'disapprove' of the person known as Trump."
Why, that describes me. I have found a political home! Thank you, Althouse.
Althouse>>"It's hard to approve of Trump."<
What? Says who? I, with great ease, heartily approve of Trump. As do millions of other Americans. (And for very good reason.)
I wonder what Trump's poll numbers would be if he got caught conspiring with 5 or 6 foreign governments, CIA, NSA, and State Department in a conspiracy to spy on his political opponents.
I have friends in Chicago who say they are Republicans, but when you get to it, the last Republicans they voted for (in IL) were Richard Ogilvie and Chuck Percy.
Some of you younger folks might want to look those fellows up.
That means that which ever party is in the White House will be at a disadvantage with a segment of the electorate that surges or decreases in opposition to the party in power in swing states.
What? Is that the explanation of why the vast majority incumbent Presidents win re-election?
I wonder what Trump's poll numbers would be if he got caught shipping pallets of cash to a country that is seizing Oil tankers in the straights of Hormuz and obviously trying to start a war.
"It's hard to approve of Trump."
On the other hand, I think he was referred to favorably in about 50 rap songs before he was elected president. Someone likes him.
"I have friends in Chicago who say they are Republicans"
There are many on the North Shore and northern burbs who would be liberal or moderate Republicans in an earlier era. But negative partisanship caused re-alignments that result in today's electorate.
Hey, Otto. Are you sure you have Althouse figured right? She doesn't seem to be afraid of much.
I seem to remember 2016 predictions that Trump would win the popular vote and Hillary the Electoral College. Am I misremembering?
A big factor in Hillary’s popular vote was the California Senate race between two Democrats. With no Senate race in 2020, I’m guessing the R margin will be a lot smaller.
In 2020:
1) Trump will be up against the Democrats and their MSM buddies who will lie, steal, cheat and kill to win
2) Meanwhile, Trump will have the worthless RINO Establishment on his side.
3) The election will hinge on Midwestern States and Pennsylvania that usually go D.
4) Most people are idiots
Trump may win but it will be a hell of a fight. His 2016 win was a miracle.
"I really haven't run into buyer's remorse from folks who voted for Trump."
Well, there's Chuck.
If the Democrat candidate wins by 1 vote each in California, New York, Illinois, wherever, she gets the same number of electoral votes as if she had won every single vote in the state.
Popular vote does not mean squat.
The idea is to get at least 50% (+1) of the votes in enough states to get a majority of the Electoral College,
Nothing else matters.
Nothing else has ever mattered in US Presidential elections.
A big factor in Hillary’s popular vote was the California Senate race between two Democrats. With no Senate race in 2020, I’m guessing the D margin will be a lot smaller.
"Missteps? Did I miss something?"
Jeff Sessions at AG was a misstep.
Trusting Paul Ryan and the NeverTrumpers was a misstep.
January 2018 Shutdown was a misstep.
That's it — 3 missteps, "seemingly big" but, as it turns out, barely memorable.
Trump is the Muhammad Ali of presidents — "The Greatest." History will regard him as one of the most significant and celebrated political figures of the 21st century. Like Ali, Trump overcame prejudice against his skin color, took inspiration from professional wrestler, George "Gorgeous George" Raymond Wagner, and was known as a "hard puncher" with footwork that was nearly flawless.
If Trump wins the EV in 2020 and loses the popular vote the MSM will tell us that the Electoral College is a blot on American Democracy that was created by Slaveholders.
If the D's wins the EV in 2020 and lose the popular vote the MSM will tell us that its the Bulwark of the Republic and kept from us from Mob Rule.
“Seemingly big missteps”
Are the missteps seemingly big or are the big steps seemingly missteps?
"January 2018 Shutdown was a misstep."
A baby misstep.
Well, there's Chuck. He's a liar. Nobody believes him.
Nobody with a brain.
there are surprises all over the place,
https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/19/kyrsten-sinema-deport-migrants/
we certainly wouldn't have got this with flake,
Just yesterday I received an unsolicited cell call from someone at CNN who questioned me about a brief street interview I did in 2016 on the Pres Election as it appeared in the Milwaukee paper and USA Today? In it, I said several times, that I was unhappy with Trump and unsure if I would vote for him. The caller asked whether I ultimately voted for Trump and I said yes. Next she asked me how I would grade his performance. I stated an 8 out of ten and brought up the economy. She then asked if I would vote for him again. I told her I would hear what the Dems candidate had to say, but that the current field is All sorts of crazy, especially with proposals like free health care for illegal aliens so a vote for Trump is likely. She said their local person might reach out to me. I’m sure they think many Trump voters won’t do it again. “WRONG” Current alternatives are worse than Hillary.....by FAR.
I voted for Trump more as a protest vote. When he won, I was apprehensive. I thought he might turn out to be Jesse Ventura but that has not happened. He sometimes says things that are over the top, but he has governed prudently. The over the top things that he says aren't a patch on what is said about him and his supporters by the media. They're really nasty. Trump's so called bullying is more like WWF trash talk.....There's probably a reverse Bradley effect with Trump. Trump is the love that dare not speak its name.
Because Los Angeles and San Francisco voting 99.9 percent for not-Trump should be determinative of the whole country.
I have first hand knowledge of many big words and finished college. I don't consider myself uneducated.
Tom Price at , what was it, HHS was also a misstep. He’s a cock@#$&*%
Trump supporters should start saying that there's something unnatural about the affection that Biden bears toward his children. That's probably what drove Hunter to drink.
Meade--I love the Ali comparison. He was the Greatest!
Watching Trump's impromptu press conferences on the way to the helicopter is like watching Ali with Howard Cosell. The press folks are just as pompous and provocative as Cosell, and Trump swaps 'em like Ali on the light bag, doing the Ali shuffle all the while. In honor of the moon landing, here's one of Ali's greatest hits:
Clay comes out to meet Liston and Liston starts to retreat,
if Liston goes back an inch farther he'll end up in a ringside seat.
Clay swings with his left, Clay swings with his right,
Look at young Cassius carry the fight
Liston keeps backing, but there's not enough room,
It's a matter of time till Clay lowers the boom.
Now Clay lands with a right, what a beautiful swing,
And the punch raises the Bear clean out of the ring.
Liston is still rising and the ref wears a frown,
For he can't start counting till Sonny goes down.
Now Liston is disappearing from view, the crowd is going frantic,
But radar stations have picked him up, somewhere over the Atlantic.
Who would have thought when they came to the fight?
That they'd witness the launching of a human satellite.
Yes the crowd did not dream, when they put up the money,
That they would see a total eclipse of the Sonny.
yes, he fell into the swamp, it's one of the bigger dissappointments,
"swats"
Cohn is full shit as usual. Trump won't win in 2020 if he doesn't improve or equal the popular vote from 2016. However, if the economy isn't in a recession between now and the election (a big if, by the way), then he will win the popular vote, too. If the economy is as it is now between now and then, Trump will win at least 49% of the vote, and that will quite enough to win- he might even get over 50% if the Democratic nominee is espousing free everything and open borders like they all are now. I think Trump will win all the state he won last time plus New Hampshire, Nevada, Virginia, and Colorado. I think he might well drop WI, MI, and PA, but his particular brand of politics still plays well with the voters there- he would have a chance in all three just by getting to 48% of the vote.
Sinema wants to get re-elected. I think she likes the job and is adjusting to the voters' wishes.
Mark Kelly, who is running for the other seat, is bragging about Mike Bloomberg and other gun grabbers' support.
Trump is funny.
When was the last time we had a president who was funny?
When was the last time we had a president who was funny?
Obama was funny. Not ha-ha funny, but funny, if you know what I mean.
Hell, I'm sitting here in Chicago wondering if he might put Illinois in play!
Nope. Too many suburbs.
Yeah, Rev Wright moved to that white suburb. That'll do it.
Trump won in 2016 largely because of who he wasn't, i.e. Hillary. Absent another Hillary, in 2020 he will have to win because of who he is, or what he has done. Good news for him that the Dems have a large supply of Hillaries.
he's tuned to the wrong frequency then, yes one has to get past the margin of fraud,
It's hard to approve of Trump. He's not exactly approval-seeking.
That does not describe the commenters here. They do appprove of Trump based on the things for which he sought approval.
"IT's for ME to approve of Trump." FIFY
THEOLDMAN
Trump's approval doesn't matter.
The elites and establishment and Dems falsely believe that they are the default. That people will just naturally vote for them so that all they need do is knock down the opposition. That may happen at some point -- and probably will given the indoctrination in education -- but we ain't there now.
It's not enough to show that Trump is a loud-mouth, obnoxious, bigoted asshole. Because people look at the alternative -- a group of people bent on the destruction of the country and society and family -- and will vote for him every time in order to stop them.
Jeff Sessions at AG was a misstep.
Trusting Paul Ryan and the NeverTrumpers was a misstep.
January 2018 Shutdown was a misstep.
There could be something with that Dem admin aidePakistani? who stole all that info and possibly has the goods on congresspeople.
I seem to remember 2016 predictions that Trump would win the popular vote and Hillary the Electoral College. Am I misremembering?
I think Insty had a link this week that there were about a million votes in Cali that weren’t kosher.
I can wait for the election.
Expended a lot of energy arguing in favor of Trump in 2016. Won’t do that again.
Not how I want to spend my time.
I’ll vote for Trump. He can figure out how to win without my help. And I think he will.
Althouse is a bad projector.
Bless her heart.
One of the comments here said, "Who doesn't hate dumb white people?"
I won't take a pot shot at the author of that statement. But the old saying is true, "God loves dumb people. He made so many of them."
I'm a retired lawyer; Order of the Coif, Law Review, Top ten law school; with a high school valedictorian sister, and a Phi Beta Kappa/MBA brother. I spent most of my legal career working with highly credentialed people. And I came across a lot of highly educated fools in my life. I've done some foolish things myself.
I also spent time as an enlisted man in the US Army where, it is true, I met some "dumb" people. Met some smart ones as well. You need to take people for what they are, and to accept them for what they can do.
"Approving Trump [or anyone else] as a person" has bupkis to do with approving what that person does. As long as we are separating fly specks from pepper, we should distinguish between approval for Trump the person, and approval for Trump's performance as President.
IF the NYT/MSM/talking heads and the rest of the vile Progs would stop their polarizing campaign....
More projection from the best and brightest.
It's not such a hard thing to positively like Trump as they're making it out to be.
>4) Most people are idiots
Most people who say most people are idiots, are idiots.
I should have said Trump is fun rather than funny.
Anyway, I do not at all find it hard to root for him.
Especially when I consider his opponents - in either party.
"I really haven't run into buyer's remorse from folks who voted for Trump."
Original Mike: "Well, there's Chuck."
There is no evidence LLR Chuck actually voted for Trump, or for any republican for that matter.
None.
There is just as much hard evidence that LLR Chuck voted for Trump as there is for Dick Durbin voting for Trump.
Keep that in mind.
“It’s anecdotal but the lefty women in my family will never vote for Trump and they are all leaning for not voting. Strangely, to me, they cite open borders, reparations and medical care for illegal aliens as the things that compel them to not vote for a Democrat.”
This is not believable. I know many Democrats and liberal women and NOT ONE will be sitting out this election and the only realistic thing about your comment is that we won’t be voting for Trump.
Or third party. Any Democratic candidate will get the Democratic Vote, no matter WHO it is.
You haven’t been out of the house to speak to another person in a week, Inga.
Quit try to fuck with us.
Go back to drinking.
Comanche Voter:
I was on law review at a third tier law school and I can tell you that Trump voters built this country. I’ve meet them in Iowa and Nebraska. They don’t like where the Ivy League elites like the Clintons and Obamas took this country. They have been screwed on trade policy, foreign policy and immigration policy. They know global warming is a total scam. Trump wins.
A little advice on how an old drunken coot like you can seem more credible, Inga.
Stop pretending there’s a chorus behind you.
It’s just you. Silly little, nasty, rotten little inga.
“You haven’t been out of the house to speak to another person in a week, Inga.”
Leave Nanny goat alone you perv.🐐
How’s the dog?
Still won’t go down because of the stench?
Get out of the robe and slippers every once in a while and take a showe.
You’re really hot for Prez Trump.
He doesn’t want to do an ugly old thing like you.
You might as well give up.
Thank God for the Midwest and South, they keep our country sane.
California is the best place on earth to live. Doing business with Mexicans and South Americans who are now American and not political is pretty cool. It's the crazies on the left that make life here suck. When Mexicans and South Americans become political, we are doomed.
We know he's not a warlock, not even a witch. His competitors are hunters, judges, diversitists, social justice mongers, redistributive change artists, abortionists, and politically congruent.
Nate Cohn has a keen grasp of the obvious.
1. Look at electoral map from 2016.
2. Note that Trump won 304 Electioral Votes. Review the votes in swing states
3. Note that, politically, Trump has solidified his standing in Ohio & Florida.
4. Do Math - ascertain Trump starts with 260 EV.
5. Note that Trump, therefore, needs only 10 EV to win.
Why won't the NYT hire me?
The comments here continue to be an uneducated cess pool and it is interesting to see that Althouse herself came in for a hit as a "liberal" academic elitist!?
It is tough being a country club Republican. I have more respect for many in her position who became Never Trumpers.
"The comments here continue to be an uneducated cess pool..."
"Cesspool" is one word.
#grammarFail
"The comments here continue to be an uneducated cess pool..."
Deep Plumber is still draining Water Closet.
"4. Do Math - ascertain Trump starts with 260 EV."
Yes, in terms of the map, Trump needs to hold either WI, MI and Penn, or else win a new state. That's assuming Trump wins Ohio (which will go R) and Florida (toss up, slight lean R). Florida is a interesting state for the very close state-wide elections.
Cohn has suggested that high turn out is no longer a predictor of a larger D vote. I agree. The population is realigning. More suburbans are trending D while non-college white men trend R. Suburbans vote more frequently so high turn out is no longer a D predictor.
Suburbs have been trending D for 10-15 years. Rurals and non-college white men have been trending R. Trump turbo-charged the realignment process. Now suburbs that have traditionally trended R are loosing their margin: Nashville, Houston, Dallas, Milwaukee, Des Moines, Phoenix. Meanwhile the margin for Rs in rurals are increasing upwards.
A lot does depend on the way the question is phrased. “ Do you approve or do you disapprove of that obnoxious, lying bastard Donald Trump?” I can see how that might affect the poll numbers.
If the National Vote Compact kicks in and Trump squeaks out a National Vote plurality, will California's electoral votes really be awarded to Trump?
If California's electoral votes are awarded to Trump and a majority of Californians vote for anyone but Trump, will this constitute abridging the votes of Californians and trigger the 14th Amendment.
If the 14th Amendment is triggered, how many seats in the House of Representatives will California be awarded in reapportionment since no citizens were counted in the Census?
I assume at least one.
suburbs have been turning D because they've less white. Used to be black inner-city and white suburbs. Now its black/brown inner-city and brown/white/Asian suburbs. BTW, Trump lost Cook county by 1 million votes and lost the state by almost the same amount. Have white people been moving out of Cook county over the last 20 years? Probably.
i don't see how the national compact can be constitutional. My state EV are supposed to represent ME and the people in MY state, not what OTHER people in other states voted.
hold either WI, MI and Penn,
That should be an OR not an AND. Trump needs to hold one of the three.
You know, people tend to live in own bubbles. Can men really understand or predict the behaviour of women? Can women understand and predict the behaviour of men? And, of course, it's never just "men" and "women" but subsets of people and families and communities. Can older men understand the perspective of younger mothers? Do suburban people understand people who live in ex-urbs or rural areas or small towns? We have a certain view of the world, but it's a narrow view. I find models useful to predict large systems, such as the voting behaviour of 150 million people.
BTW, don't be naive. If Trump or any R in 2024, loses the EV and wins the popular vote all these D states that voted for the "national compact" will suddenly decide that for 'Blah blah reason' it was all a mistake. Or some Federal Liberal judge and appeals judge will IMMEDIATELY say its unconstitutional.
“That's all very interesting about the Electoral College...”
The Electoral college is a brilliant device to come out of the Constitutional Convention and one of the most unique facets of the U.S. Constitution, if for no other reason that it inoculates the impact of nutty states changing their voter/voting laws. In that spirit, it’s a critical prophylactic to spare us state-to-state voting madness.
Wanna see the Electoral College go bye-bye? You’ll be VERY sorry in the long term. Trust me.
The United States of American is NOT a democracy. It is a constitutionally-limited federal republic.
Get with the program. Until the Constitution is overthrown, it’s the law of the land.
The “National Compact” is a pure, unmitigated disgrace. All thinking persons must oppose it with vigor.
"suburbs have been turning D because they've less white"
It's not just race. Des Moines, affluent burbs in Texas, WOW burbs of Wisconsin. The Rs are loosing margins in a way that is not fully explained by racial demographics. College educated whites are turning more D in northern and loosing margins even in burbs of southern states.
So, what's happening is that the suburbs of southern states are starting to vote more like the suburbs of Chicago. The rural areas of northern states are voting more like the rural areas of southern states. Non-college whites trending R. College educated whites trending D. It's a huge political realignment.
So, demographics of Northern Burbs of Chicago. They would've been Republican in the 80s.
Highland Park, IL: 91.05% white.
Or, Winnetka, Illinois, Cook County: 94.8% white.
"As of the census[8] of 2010, there were 12,187 people, 4,102 households, and 3,328 families residing in the village. The racial makeup of the village was 94.8% White, 0.3% African American, 0.1% Native American, 3.3% Asian, 0.3% from other races, and 1.2% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 2.2% of the population." Wikipedia.
I find models useful to predict large systems, such as the voting behaviour of 150 million people.
Trump seems to figure it out pretty well. It was your experts who predicted a 93% chance of a Hillary win.
Not to mention the global warming hoax based on models that just had to be right because the people who thought them up were smarter than everybody else.
They don’t like where the Ivy League elites like the Clintons and Obamas took this country.
Those are the people that 4w relies on to construct the models.
If AOC and the Squad continue to dominate, and the Dem nominee is associated with them and forced to defend them, then I don't see the country -- including many independents and sane Dem voters -- voting for the Dem.
And if the Dem nominee seeks to distance himself/herself from them or repudiates them, then the left will revolt.
AOC and the Squad are the 2000-lb millstone around the Dems' neck.
That's right, cesspool dwellers. Time to cater commentary to Gary's interests.
Trump seems to figure it out pretty well. It was your experts who predicted a 93% chance of a Hillary win.
No. Those aren't my experts. My poly sci expert predicted a win of the R party due to negative partisanship and based on the years the Ds had been in power.
There are models beyond probabilistic models. I know everyone is all YEA MONEYBALL! and loves them some polls. 538 has acquired a cult following. But probabilities are, quite frankly, useless this far out from an election.
Now, I find probabilities useful. In the right time and the right place. But this far out from an election I do not really look at them. And, if people had paid attention to what the poll probabilities actually said 2 weeks before the election, and looked at the % of undecided, they woulda been less surprised.
I think people loved the Moneyball movie. People love polls but many don't really get them and when they are useful/ not useful. And they don't recognize good polls vs. bad polls or bad pollsters.
Ann Selzer had a poll in Florida a few weeks before the election. She got it right. I saw that poll.
My suggestion for everyone. Look at Ann Selzer's polls for 2020. "Donald Trump has a 2 percentage point edge over Hillary Clinton in Florida, according to a new poll released Wednesday, as both presidential campaigns blanket the critical swing state in a full sprint to Election Day."
https://www.cnn.com/2016/10/26/politics/bloomberg-florida-poll-trump-clinton/index.html
But really the polls are not very useful this far out. Look at the percentage of D usual primary voters who cannot even recognize major candidates. It's a huge percentage.
Michael,
Someone asked about Cook County burbs and suggested race was the only controlling factor. Those are Cook County burbs that are largely white, yet they vote D.
Now I do not argue that the burbs of Chicago are going to act in a manner identical to WOW burbs or Des Moines. Chicago suburbs were a leading indicator in this trend. They are not representative of the voting patterns of Des Moines. But I underline a process that has been on-going for years and sped up under Trump.
You can do a county by county analysis for 2018 of various burbs in the North and the South to see the reduction of margin. It's not that they are all voting above 50% D. It the margin has shifted toward the D and decreased for the R. But, I do not argue this will that state for the D. The margin in rural counties are increasing for the Rs. So, it's a question of margins. We'll see how it plays out in 2020.
I am pointing to a realignment. This process has been on-going but Trump turbo-charged it.
It the margin has shifted toward the D and decreased for the R. But, I do not argue this will that state for the D.
Ugh apologize for the typos.
The margin has shifted towards the D and decreased for the Rs in these suburbs. But, I do NOT argue this will win that county or state for the D. It's a margin shift. The WOW burbs will probably vote R but the margin will be reduced. If it's a +5 vs. +15 that makes a difference. But that doesn't mean the suburban margin shifts will win the state. Because...the margin in rural counties will increase for Rs.
We'll see how it plays out on a county-by-county basis in 2020.
If his approval rating is stable then the things you call 'missteps' aren't.
"This is not believable. I know many Democrats and liberal women and NOT ONE will be sitting out this election and the only realistic thing about your comment is that we won’t be voting for Trump."
Whatever you say, Pauline.
One of the comments here said, "Who doesn't hate dumb white people?"
I believe it was in jest.
So, what's happening is that the suburbs of southern states are starting to vote more like the suburbs of Chicago. The rural areas of northern states are voting more like the rural areas of southern states. Non-college whites trending R. College educated whites trending D. It's a huge political realignment.
Right. The Dem coalition is now elite whites plus the racial minorities. The Republicans have the non-elite whites. In the long run, the country's politics are going to look like California politics today.
Peace and prosperity for the win.
The Constitution requires Congressional approval of compacts between states. Artticle 1, section 10, clause 3. Not sure how that would apply to a state's right to change the method of allocating electoral on condition that some other states do the same.
"They don’t like where the Ivy League elites like the Clintons and Obamas took this country."
Those are the people that 4w relies on to construct the models.
They conflated logical domains. They substituted model (i.e. hypothesis) for evidence. They claim an ensemble of [dependent] models improves the prophecy. They inferred from characterization in isolation to the wild. They indulged in liberal license (e.g. assumptions/assertions) to extrapolate to global proportions. They demonstrate no skill to forecast, let alone predict, or hindcast, which is similarly myopic. There is low confidence that the current conditions are anomalous, let alone a progressive condition. They can't even claim that atmospheric CO2 is harmful to the environment, flora, fauna, and people. Meanwhile, we experience sustained temperatures swings of 10, 20, 40, and 100 degrees annually. The Profits (sic) are wrong.
Despite the witch hunts and warlock trials, Trump has taken some positive steps to drain Water Closet, including remnants of clingers left behind, and diagnosing Obamacare's persistent progressive costs.
LOL - Despite those missteps, people approve...Hello Fox Butterfield? Are you there?
Cess /sɛs/ is a tax. It is usually known as tax on tax. The term is a shortened form of "assess". The spelling is due to a mistaken connection with census. It was the official term used in Ireland when it was part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, but has been superseded by "rate".
This is the meaning I learned in India.
Now I do not argue that the burbs of Chicago are going to act in a manner identical to WOW burbs or Des Moines. Chicago suburbs were a leading indicator in this trend. They are not representative of the voting patterns of Des Moines. But I underline a process that has been on-going for years and sped up under Trump.
$200 billion in debt and it seems millennials making over $100k/yr are leaving the state.
Chicago seems to be becoming more dangerous.
Chicago seems to be becoming more dangerous.
Some areas of Chi-town have been dangerous since the 1950s or earlier. Violence in certain areas of Chicago is not new. Anyways Cook County suburbs are safe like living in Geneva Switzerland. Highland Park and Winnetka are extremely safe.
People who seek approval for themselves may find it expedient to express disapproval of racist-Trump — to be free of the onus and stigma of approving of his racism — but when the time comes to answer the question whether they want 4 more years of his racist work, they might also find it expedient to say "yes."
What is WOW burb?
What is WOW burb?
"WOW counties refers to Waukesha, Ozaukee, and Washington Counties in Wisconsin in the United States. They lie to the west, north, and northwest of Milwaukee, and are part of its metropolitan area.[1] These counties are primarily white, and unusually so considering the trend of suburbs around cities in the Northern US becoming more racially diverse.[2]
Conservative politicians in Wisconsin try to increase the voter turnout in these three conservative counties.[3][4][5][6]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WOW_counties
Thank you, Known Unknown.
Anyways Cook County suburbs are safe like living in Geneva Switzerland. Highland Park and Winnetka are extremely safe.
Lolol
They should be with their money.
The shopping centers, however....even Northbrook Court.
Violence in certain areas of Chicago is not new.
Violence downtown, tho....Michigan Avenue, Lincoln Park, Oak Street aren’t normal.
Fun fact about the last election. Trump did better than Mitt Romney will all groups of minority voters. There is a very large group of "shy Trump voters". The question is: how large? And I believe it is larger among minority groups than among any other group.
A hidden minority vote linking with the open Trump supporters may swing the election for Trump into a popular vote landslide. And then Trump grand slams by getting all the anti-electoral college states as well.
This is not believable. I know many Democrats and liberal women and NOT ONE will be sitting out this election and the only realistic thing about your comment is that we won’t be voting for Trump.
Women scorned. 4 years of hatred and whining is exhausting.
Most of my friends are families with children in the burbs. My husband has some single male colleagues in tech who have moved to the city recently. I don't talk to them. He's told me they enjoy the city but I don't know their impression of safety or where they're living. Is there a uptick on N. Michigan Ave or Lincoln Park area? My family has lived in the burbs since 1865 on one branch and 1920 on the other. Good trains into the city. My family's motto: Burb livin' since 1865.
"Wilmette was ranked the third safest town in the state, with a violent crimes rate of just 0.15 per 1,000 people and a property crime rate of 12.81 per 1,000. Buffalo Grove (No. 6), Hawthorn Woods (No. 7) and Deerfield (No. 8) also cracked the top 10 on the 2019 list."
https://patch.com/illinois/wilmette/report-ranks-50-safest-towns-illinois-using-crime-survey-data
but I don't live there now so I don't know what's going on in Lincoln Park.
i don't see how the national compact can be constitutional. My state EV are supposed to represent ME and the people in MY state, not what OTHER people in other states voted.
No they're not. I know that's what many people think today, but the electors are under no obligation to represent anyone but themselves. Many states have placed restrictions on this, but I believe them to be unconstitutional.
Trump is aiming to flip the house, add to the gop in the senate, and get re-elected.
If elections were held today, he would win.
The challenge is the elections are in 16 months...
Black swans that could cause Trump to lose:
1. Iran war
2. Terrorist attack
3. Heart breaking something with child immigrants
4. Ebola
5. Economy
6. Black Hawk Down type
7. Mueller actually produces
Stuff that could help Trump
1. Antifa tied to Democrats
2. Rep. Omar immigration scandals allowed by house leadership to fester and gains more awareness by public
3. Barr actually declassifies Russia / Spygate stuff. People charged.
4. Democrats slime next Supreme Court nominee As done to Kavanaugh
5. Trump reduces illegal immigration
6. Treaty with NK
7. Trade war ends with China
8. Democratic bds support becomes more open.
9. Economy is good
10. Trump does huge minority outreach
Well, wwww, you basically told us why Highland Park (Lake County if memory serves), Wilmette, and Winnetka are safe. Didn't you?
Re: Chicago safety.
It varies by neighborhood with North and Northwest sides being very safe, as are Beverly and surrounding areas on the Southwest side (Madiganistan). There is more rowdiness and shoplifting on Michigan Avenue these days with occasional flash-mobs of a hundred or more kids showing up from the distant reaches of the city. Hyde Park and Kenwood are very safe, because the University of Chicago has a big private police force. Some of the neighborhoods on the South Side (Englewood, Auburn-Gresham) and West Side (Lawndale, Austin) are permeated with street gangs, and the bullets fly on warm summer nights. The challenge is to keep the city open and welcoming, and the police are taking a tougher approach to maintaining order this year. Last year, they let things go (probably didn't want another scandal before the mayoral election). This year, they are making arrests on Michigan Avenue.
The stats are all collected on a website called heyjackass.com. They are very revealing as to the relative participation of blacks, whites and hispanics as victims in the city crime scene. Chicago is roughly 1/3 each black, white, and hispanic. With respect to homicides whites are about 4% of the victims, hispanics 13%, and blacks 82%. The clearance rate on homicides is tiny.
An objective look at the crime stats shows that the black community is plagued with violence in a way that is unknown in the white neighborhoods, and is quite muted in the hispanic neighborhoods. For a variety of reasons, the police are not looked at as problem-solvers in the black neighborhoods.
On the day he was elected, Trump’s “favorability” (the metric for non-office holders that’s used as a proxy for “approval”) stood at 37%.
There’s the drop the mic statement at your next BBQ with obnoxious anti-Trumpers.
I know many Democrats and liberal women and NOT ONE will be sitting out this election and the only realistic thing about your comment is that we won’t be voting for Trump.
I know many Democrats and liberal women who don’t want you harping on them 24/7 so they tell you what you want to hear.
Automatic_Wing said...
"So, what's happening is that the suburbs of southern states are starting to vote more like the suburbs of Chicago. The rural areas of northern states are voting more like the rural areas of southern states. Non-college whites trending R. College educated whites trending D. It's a huge political realignment.
Right. The Dem coalition is now elite whites plus the racial minorities. The Republicans have the non-elite whites. In the long run, the country's politics are going to look like California politics today."
By the time that happens, our economy will be in shambles.
It’s anecdotal but the lefty women in my family will never vote for Trump and they are all leaning for not voting.
Perhaps, it's less than anecdotal. My two sisters have always identified as liberals and both are disgusted with the Dems. One sister changed her affiliation to Independent. They're both furious that New York wants to grant drivers' licenses to illegals.
Neither will vote for Trump [the grabbing comment, of course]; I suspect that neither will vote at all.
North and Northwest sides being very safe, as are Beverly
Aside from a few armed robberies a month or two. My sister lives there. She has not been stuck up but she walks the dog before dark.
Craig Howard: Neither will vote for Trump [the grabbing comment, of course]; I suspect that neither will vote at all.
I'm curious if liberal women taking offense at the "grabbing comment" is because:
A. They buy the msm interpretation that he's admitting to and bragging about sexual assault,
B. They understand what he said but reject what it's saying about women, and are offended that anyone believes that women are like that (and worse, says so),
C. Neither of the above, they just have very high standards about "civility" and "tone" and are revolted by vulgar language and behavior.
I doubt that "C" is ever really the case.
This far out, is it even likely that polls are anything other than "polls," aimed more at battlefield prep than at determining the unvarnished feelings of the electorate? It's not hard to elicit the response you want, using question design and sampling techniques.
And once you elicit that response, the aggregated answers are ammunition in creating an "everybody thinks" perception that *will* affect some voters. Seems to me that with the D field still so open, the only purpose to polling must be to get people to start thinking of Trump in even more negative terms. Such as by leading with "despite his missteps" instead of "perhaps on account of the extended uptick in the economy."
Oh, heck, I'm not a pollster. I just distrust the media across the board.
P.S. The "find all the buses" crap is incredibly difficult with 50-year-old eyes on a phone screen. If I zoom in to see all the fricking buses, half the time my phone thinks I have selected a bus-free square. Sigh.
Fen: You'll see a lot of polls about "approval" of Trump, which are used as a proxy for how people will vote. But in an election, you have to vote for one or another candidate (or abstain), and you might disapprove of all of them. That is, withholding approval doesn't mean you won't vote for Trump
Althouse: Good point, I'll think I'll use that.
Jamie, you don't have to do the CAPTCHA.
One thing I'm curious about for 2020 is if Trump will make any significant inroad among minorities - minority men, specifically. You hear a lot of anecdotes along those lines, but I have no idea if it will amount to anything more than Trump-supporter pipe-dreamin'.
Anecdotally, I do know non-white, immigrant men who, unlike their female relatives, think Trump is great - they believe their lyin' portfolios over the msm. But I also wonder if normal human males of whatever demographic are going to be more and more put off by the hysterical emo glop that has become the house style of the Dems.
I mean, I'm an old white lady, and I find those crazy nagging harridans (of both sexes) insufferable. It's hard to imagine that that stuff plays well with men.
"This far out, is it even likely that polls are anything other than "polls," aimed more at battlefield prep than at determining the unvarnished feelings of the electorate? It's not hard to elicit the response you want, using question design and sampling techniques. "
-- "Have you ever been surveyed?
I doubt that most people permit a distance between their personal preference and their vote, as Althouse suggests. It's a relatively small minority of people who inhabit the expance between their feelings and their thoughts. That's no country for most men.
Observe who is against Trump. It is mostly the people who have been wrong about most things for decades...our own far left MSM, America's academia, foreign leaders who haven't or can't win elections in their own country like Teresa May, Trudeau, Merkel, and Muslim extremists in places like Iran. And or course our own far left Dems like the 22 running for Prez, Michele Obama [and I'm sure dopey Barry Soetoro hates how Trump has shown Americans how to improve our economy]. So Trump is on the right track and will win over new voters IMO.
You don’t have to do the CAPTCHA?!
Holy shit! You don’t!
This has been a great comment thread, by the way.
I hope somebody somewhere is keeping a count of all the lemmings.
“Less educated white voters”. The democrat party Is still a bit ch of bigots.’ No wonder they sprang from the KKK
So Democrats should stop trying so hard to “run up the score” in coastal, urban blue states because it doesn’t help them in the Electoral College. No shit.
"The weird thing about these polls is there's a percentage of people who approve of Trump & his handling of the economy but choose Biden over him on a head-to-head."
"It's hard to approve of Trump."
Things that are stupid.
The Godfather wrote: "Will the Democrat candidate, whoever xe is, be able to move credibly toward the center after winning the nomination?"
The answer, of course, is hell no. No candidate ever did.
They merely lied to you to get your vote, then shaft you after the election.
As evidence, let me present the Republican Party, which promised every two years after Obamacare was rammed through that they would dump it if only you'd vote for them.
The day after they won the majority in the House, they pulled the football away.
"Move credibly toward the center" is NewsSpeak for "lying to the rubes in order to get their vote."
My criteria in November will be the same as it always is: which major candidate is the bigger statist? Looking over the Democratic Clown Car of Candidates, I think we can safely predict it won't be Trump.
Stuff that could help Trump
Trump diagnoses Obamacares and determines it is either an opportunistic disease or a placebo that sustains unaffordable medical care, then treats progressive prices, rather than shifting or sharing the costs, thereby progressing the need for a minimum wage hike, etc. Also, no more social justice mongering, no more Libyas, Kievs, etc., and Iran was politically congruent ("=") or profitable.
RCP Approval https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html Not big movement, but one does see movement.
Trump's "missteps" presumes a fact not in evidence, or perhaps this is an example of the Fox Butterfield Effect, an inverting cause and effect (google "Fox Butterfield, is that you?".
That the polls don't change indicates the events described aren't missteps, except in the mind of the author.
Post a Comment