... with Nevada and Arizona lingering, endlessly unreported.
But Real Clear Politics shows all the states decided, with a final score of 312 to 226. We know where Nevada and Arizona are going — into the big landslide.
So I just want to declare my victory as the one who predicted the final score on December 14, 2023: "Predicted Electoral College vote: 312 Trump, 226 Biden."
I mean, the word "Biden" is wrong, but 312 to 226 was right on the nose.
I gave some good advice then too: "The demonization of Trump has not worked for Democrats.... My advice, not that I think Democrats would or even could follow it: Fight Trump on the substantive merits of the issues. Show us that you deserve the power you seek."
That advice is still good advice. Especially now that it's a landslide.
Posts
95 comments:
Utah? Do you mean Arizona?
I mean, the word "Biden" is wrong, but 312 to 226 was right on the nose.
Vegas isn't going to pay that one off, Nostradamus...
Did you predict the correct state wins? Or a different combination with the same electoral total?
Gray Lady Down!
"Utah? Do you mean Arizona?"
Yes. Thanks. Sorry. Fixed. Don't know what I was thinking.
Terrible to get something glaringly wrong just when I'm bragging about getting something gloriously right.
It is unacceptable that these states cannot count votes. The only thing we are lead to believe- is that the democrats are up to no good.
Congratulations on the fine prediction! Re: Arizona, now I'm thinking "And all you can do is laugh at her, doesn't anybody know how to pray, hey hey hey hey....AriZONA"
Ann - that is really incredible. You need a job as a pollster. All the others are pure hot garbage.
The second most populous state - Florida can have all their votes counted in about an hour. But Nevada and Arizona are still counting? And how is Nevada able to still accept ballots until saturday? The election is OVER. I see the Dems are still trying to cheat the house and senate.
312 to notnearlyenuf. America has spoken.
They couldn't win on the substantive merits of the issues. That is why the focus was on the tired Hitler/fascism/end of democracy strategy. The only issue they thought they had was abortion. No matter what argument was made, the majority of Americans realized:
1) Open borders are not a good thing
2) Their purchasing power is lower than it was 4 years ago (ergo their standard of living)
That is why we see this idiotic post-mortem based on demographics. It's sexist black males or white women who defeated Harris. No, it was the issues that became more important that voting because of your demographic. Are dems going to criticize Jews because Trump over-performed among Jews, or will they realize that being the pro-Hamas party actually means something.
I agree with the others - there is no way that this should be taking so long to count these votes. It just leads us all to assume that there is cheating.
I want RCP to show me someone voted for those unopposed candidates in the house…
Final numbers not posted at the NYT is because as of yet no staff writers have volunteered write the “Landslide” headline and article.
That and they’re still figuring out which sized type to use.
congrats on excellent prediction!
The map has not been updated because either NY Times is still in denial, or the relevant employee is on vacation.
Nice call, Ann. But I wonder, did you also suspect the broad support across all demographics- Hispanics, Blacks, Jews, Women, Men- all age groups? This was a complete restructuring being offered to the right...if they are smart enough to grab onto it. That's a topic for another time, but did you suspect the deep pull that Trump got from formerly solid Democratic voting blocs?
When I checked late Wednesday (I think, maybe it was yesterday) there was a note on that page indicating there would no further updates.
The “Raising Arizona” factor!
California, Oregon, and Washington are still counting as well but because they are one-party Democrat states everybody knows which way they will vote, and nobody cares that its a disgrace to a first world democracy. California is only about 60% complete four days after the polls closed.
I believe the note was at the bottom of their swing state section…
The Nevada state supreme court had ruled that un-postmaked mail-in ballots received up to three days after election day must be counted. Arizona had a similar court decision. So that's why they're still counting. Republicans had appealed that ruling and had been turned down.
By no means did President Trump overperform among Jews. In fact, blacks and Hispanics likely had weaker support for Kamala.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/79-of-us-jews-voted-for-harris-according-to-largest-preliminary-exit-poll/
Perhaps the NY Post is right about Jess in New York: perhaps not. But the Jewish vote was in no way decisive, while the Muslim vote in Michigan clearly was.
Great job with your EV tally! The pollsters should check in with you next time….;)
“This whole dream, was it wishful thinking? Was I just fleeing reality like I know I'm liable to do? But me and Ed, we can be good too. And it seemed real. It seemed like us and it seemed like, well, our home. If not Arizona, then a land not too far away. Where all parents are strong and wise and capable and all children are happy and beloved. I don't know. Maybe it was Utah.”
And the gap in the popular vote is holding so far, in spite of California's apparently assigning preschoolers to do their counting (only 59% reporting, guys? Really?).
I guess I can hope that all the demographic posturing is only posturing, face-saving, and that behind the scenes Democrat influencers realize that they have a problem with their left-est wing - in short, its iron grip on the whole party.
Trump. Musk. Gabbard. RFKJ. All former Democrats. This was not a demography problem.
I consider myself a conservative now, but I would've been very comfortable as a Kennedy Democrat, and I know I'm not alone in that. I want a rational challenge to conservative policies - if we aren't challenged, how will we know whether we're actually right? How will we meet future challenges by forces that don't share our commitment to this country? We need a left wing - but we need it to make effing sense.
Or on strike. The first Google result I found was 21 hours old, but it said the Times' "tech workers" were "still on strike". Probably still are, as I hope.
Yeah - we can all trust the corporate whore media when they tell us Jews didn't Vote for Trump.
Sure as hell many did.
"I gave some good advice then too: "The demonization of Trump has not worked for Democrats.... My advice, not that I think Democrats would or even could follow it: Fight Trump on the substantive merits of the issues. Show us that you deserve the power you seek.""
Too bad your little buddy Ben Wikler didn't take it.
I mean, the class and policy realignment has taken us, what, four election cycles to recognize and embrace? Five? And by "us" I mean Republican leadership - I think Republicans on the ground recognized it by not voting for McCain or Romney "as they should have" and by voting for Trump in the primaries"as they shouldn't have."
The question I have now is, how comfortable are all the college-degree Republicans going to be with our new bedfellows? I guess I'm fortunate to have two families full of working class people (one more than the other, but still quite a few in the more college-y one), so I'm feeling good about it - the non-degreed people come in a range just like the college ones, and you don't have to like everybody in your political group - you just have to have some critical shared values.
I keep hearing democrats/"Their Media "™ say the reason they lost (one of many, anyway) is they haven't been effective in communicating their message/policies. That's pure bs. They communicate exceptionally well. The told more than half of the population that they hate them, and those people heard them load and clear and voted accordingly.
America is a land of Red with pockets of Blue, aka cities where embedded lefties can more efficiently concentrate power.
In the Pennsylvania Senate race, the AP declared Dave McCormick the winner over Bob Casey, Jr yesterday, by 31,688 votes. But Casey refuses to concede.
There are still approximately 100,000 uncounted votes in Cambria County, Montour County, and Philadelphia County.
Ann, as opposed to all the other pollsters, isn't trying to influence the outcome. She was actually trying to get it right.
That's the difference.
Almost ALL the pollsters had Trump's support off by 5 percentage points. It was always going to be a landslide, primarily because every drop box in the nation had a camera and some guns pointed at it, so 13 million fake ballots never got delivered.
From the post:
"I gave some good advice then too: "The demonization of Trump has not worked for Democrats.... My advice, not that I think Democrats would or even could follow it: Fight Trump on the substantive merits of the issues. Show us that you deserve the power you seek."
That advice is still good advice. Especially now that it's a landslide. "
It won't happen until the Democratic Party leadership kicks out the radical leftists. Otherwise, they may make a show of a return to sanity, but it won't be sincere. It'll be more like Harris' "My values have not changed."
>>There are still approximately 100,000 uncounted votes in Cambria County, Montour County, and Philadelphia County.
And more arriving ever hour! :)
The shame of this election is the way the dems sought to weaponize America's mental health crisis. They deliberately tried to take people (especially young women) who were already struggling with serious psychological issues and make them sick with fear and anxiety over the prospect of electing a new Hitler who would toss them and their friends into concentration camps. Now that this failed, those same cynical and destructive dem leaders will go back to living their comfortable lives without any concern for the well-being of the people they terrorized with their lies about Trump and the republicans.
Harris was in a box:
1) She couldn't promise to do anything because, god damn why ain't she done it already? She could do it NOW. The hell is she waiting for?
2) She couldn't say America needs a change ... well, because she's in charge. 70% of those exit-polled said America was on the wrong track and only Chris Wallace said the obvious: No (Vice) President can get re-elected on that number.
3) She couldn't rail about any of the bad things happening because they're all the Democrats fault: the economy, border, education failures, crime, shoplifters walking free, etc. etc. All Democrats fault.
She was in a box from which there was simply no avenue of escape.
That's because there is cheating. Bob Casey is REFUSING to concede in the Pennsylvania Senate race. He's looking to force a recount so they can print up 40,000 more ballots for him.
Chris Cuomo said that his network had access to all of the same data as everybody else, and it was a short night. It's just that none of the networks wanted to admit it for partisan reasons.
"Arizona, take off your rainbow shades" Brilliant.
The Nevada Supreme Court ruled recently that mailed in ballots up to 3 days AFTER the election could be counted.
Even if they didn't have a postmark. Meaning they hadn't been mailed.
There's only one possible reason they would do that, and that is so that they know how many fake ballots they need to produce and it takes time to print them up.
Because the Mexican drug cartels run Nevada.
I hope the R's didn't pull away. The left will cheat! cheating liars who lie are very capable of cheating.
"Landslide"
That is an incredible prediction, Professor Althouse. You never cease to amaze.
Maybe it's not the Presidential race they're dithering about in AZ and NV. Maybe it's the Senate vote they're jiggering with. It's very close in both states. I don't think Lake or Brown has conceded yet. I'm very suspicious and cynical now. They made me that way.
Jamie said...
“Trump. Musk. Gabbard. RFKJ. All former Democrats. This was not a demography problem.”
Don’t forget Reagan. And Reagan Democrats. I think we are seeing a similar shift today.
Seems to happen to me a lot.
Link
@althouse - Were you part of the landslide?
Show us that you deserve the power you seek."
The Problem Was: they did NOT deserve the power they sought
they did NOT deserve the power to chop off little boys weenies
they did NOT deserve the power to chop off little girls boobies
they did NOT deserve the power to import the world's Huns and Vandals into the USA
But fighting Trump on the merits of the issues would have “normalized” him. Trump is not normal… or something.
Did you notice that only one state bucked the rightward shift, and it wasn't Vermont, it wasn't California, it was, wait for it, the state where the passwords to all of the voting machines was leaked prior to the election. That would be Colorado.
I mean, the word "Biden" is wrong, but 312 to 226 was right on the nose.
@Althouse, with all due respect, “Biden” is a name, not a “word.” I have not liked the man since his underhanded efforts to derail the Clarence Thomas nomination — an early manifestation of “all black people are owned by the Democrats and that any black person who isn’t owned by the Democrats deserves to be crushed.” Yet still Joe Biden is a human being.
And also with all due respect, had Biden remained the candidate it’s quite possible he could have pulled out Neveda and probably another state. I mean, consider him as a peacemaker — Muslims and Jews alike hate his guts.
"every governing party facing election in a developed country this year lost vote share, the first time this has ever happened!" I think it was Shrub Soros who was shocked at this. Wow has their war in Ukraine proven popular with the electorates!
But the funny thing is that no matter who these "democracies" voted for, the policies simply did not change. Only the lies they tell their voters change. Fingers crossed that that is not what happens here, but I am not holding my breath.
Obama got Biden wrong.
312 - 226 is not a landslide; not even close. And, though I understand and definitely share the exuberance, people should stop calling it that. This is most certainly a wonderful broad-based mandate, but a landslide...no.
Landslides are generally considered to be around 375-400+ out of the (approx) 538 total electoral votes'
Here are some famous ones:
1984: Ronald Reagan (R) vs. Walter Mondale (D)
Electoral votes: 525-13
1980: Ronald Reagan (R) vs. Jimmy Carter (D)
Electoral votes: 489-49
1972: Richard Nixon (R) vs. George McGovern (D)
Electoral votes: 520-17
1964: Lyndon B. Johnson (D) vs. Barry Goldwater (R)
Electoral votes: 486-52
1956: Dwight D. Eisenhower (R) vs. Adlai Stevenson (D)
Electoral votes: 457-73
Althouse gives good advice. Will it be taken? No. Look for the Democrats to use lawfare and shout "nazi, nazi, nazi" while obstructing Trump. They aren't going to give a Goddamn inch on controlling the border, reducing crime, enforcing the immigration laws, or supporting foreign wars. Or helping the American workers through Tariffs or new trade deals.
Who did Althouse vote for?
congrats on your victory!
I agree with Ice Nine. Trump not getting even 60% of the electoral college does not seem to me to be a landslide. I would say 65% of popular or 70% of electoral college should be the requirement.
However, there is god news! Trump should be getting 521 Electoral votes to Kamala's 17. THAT is a landslide!
How's that you say? It's because 17 states have actual laws on the books that say their EC votes will go to the popular vote winner (Remember all that folderal from a few years back?). And I think all 17 states went for Kamala, but Trump won the popular vote.
https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation
Notice how no one in the media is bringing that up?
"California is only about 60% complete four days after the polls closed."
If they want faster/more competent vote counting, they'll need to import better educated illegal aliens. Of course, to get them, they'll have to offer more freebies. It's always something.
"make them sick with fear and anxiety over the prospect of electing a new Hitler"
Not just that- there's the prospect of the earth burning up, too.
Fight Trump on the substantive merits of the issues. Show us that you deserve the power you seek.
I partially agree with you. Instead of concentrating on Trump's danger to democracy (which I think you are going to discover much to your dismay is all too real), we should have ridiculed his policies. How is he going to deport 12 million people (minimum), impose stiff tariffs on all imports (even apparently ignoring the trade agreement he negotiated with Canada and Mexico), and keep inflation low? How can he still only have a concept of a plan to replace the ACA, when he has been complaining about it and promising to replace it with something "cheaper but better" for almost ten years now? But the problem with this option is that he has not explained how he is actually going to implement any of those plans.
He also has apparently forgotten his pledge that he would eliminate the deficit by the end of his second term. He has also stopped claiming he will get the GDP rates that he promised, but never delivered, in his first term.
Agree. This is a convincing win, especially if Trump's popular vote margin holds up, but it ain't Reagen 1984.
I think her prediction included NC, MI, PA, GA, NV, AZ, and WI- so, yeah, the right states.
I'll be a bit pedantic but NPV Compact includes a provision that it doesn't go into effect unless the states that pass it control 270 or more EVs, and they are still short of that number. I do agree it's good to twig them on it, though.
"Danger to Democracy" = Danger to the corrupt Modern Democrat Party.
They have also not called Senate races in Arizona and Nevada where D candidates are ahead.
The problem with Althouse's advice to Democrats is that on the substance of most issues--DEI, Crime, Open Borders, EV mandates--the majority of Americans hate their policies. Yet, given the stranglehold that the college-educated upper income class has on the Democratic Party, challenging those policies is a death knell for any candidate in the primaries and with the funders.
So, the Democratic Party is on an endless quest for the new Obama, the smooth talking cool guy whose personality renders substance irrelevant.
Americans learned after 4 years of Biden -that the Modern Democrat Party does not care about ordinary Americans. The democrat party cares about its own power for powers sake, toxic MSNBC Media controlled lies and propaganda for the party - corruption, lies, fraud, and an open southern border that brought in millions of tax payer funded illegals, drugs, sex trafficking. etc..
They tried but I don't think it worked, except for the people who already drank their J6 kool-aid (see Freder posting in this thread)
I happened to follow a link to the RCP polling averages from another site when researching a comment on David Plouffe's now deleted claim that Harris had to 'climb out of a deep hole' (she didn't), and noticed something interesting.
Harris was on a rocket ride after being anointed to replace Biden clear up until 23 October, the day that Mark Kelly's Trump-Hitler fable dropped in the Atlantic and Harris did her 3 minute no questions 'Trump is Hitler' presser. She immediately started dropping in the RCP average, got hammered by Trump's MSG rally, and never recovered after Trump's brilliant trolling of Biden's "garbage" comment.
Inflation is brought on by government spending and dept. Both parties spend too much money.
since my comments keep vanishing.
Americans learned after 4 years of Biden -that the Modern Democrat Party does not care about ordinary Americans. The democrat party cares about its own power for powers sake, toxic MSNBC Media controlled lies and propaganda for the party - corruption, lies, fraud, and an open southern border that brought in millions of tax payer funded illegals, drugs, sex trafficking. etc..
"Althouse gives good advice. Will it be taken?"
Probably an outsider would need to take over the party or somebody relatively unknown. They'd need to do what Trump did to the Republicans. Maybe somebody who's an old school liberal, not a Progressive, could turn things around. Are there any left? Did they all die out and go extinct?
And even if there is such a person, is there a base of support for such a candidate among Dem voters?
Trump recognized there was a base of support for an America first agenda and candidate, not just in the Republican base, but in the country generally.
Is there a significant base of support for an old school liberal Democrat leader who could reform the party and get it back on track? Could someone garner enough support to send Obama and Pelosi and Schumer et al. out to pasture? I hope so. That faction has done a helluva lot of damage to their brand, our institutions and the nation in their deluded, hubristic quest for single party power.
There's an ick factor to those people now, in the clear light of day, after a stunning defeat. And they're old. Maybe they'll go quietly. Will the people who replace them be crazier than ever or...
I'm still mystified as to just what Kamala''s position was on the issues that matter to me. She was, is and always will be a captive of the Obamaite Posse.
Chris ... Trump was simply MASTERFUL in ensuring that he controlled every news cycle. Each day, he was trolling Democrats with newsy stuff while on the other hand the media was trying to hide Kamala Harris and her little high-school gym rallies in case she said something stupid ... which she never said anything even comprehensible, much less stupid.
But Trump's team was ready when opportunities rose to epically troll Harris and the idiot Democrats.
She didn't. Meade voted Trump. So as not to cancel his vote, she declined.
I think we've moved the goalposts for what is considered a "landslide". In my own thought, it would be at least 55% of the popular vote and a little more of the EC (330? 340?).
I will remind Althouse that she said she would bet the “over” on 312 to 226. Trump didn’t cover the point spread.
What counts as a landslide in U.S. Presidential elections? Wikipedia says the 1998 was the last landslide, which was 416 to 111. But maybe that shouldn’t count as the Republican Party lost the House and Senate elections.
If we say that a landslide means the President has to win a majority of both the popular vote and electoral college and the same party has to win both houses of Congress, then this is the first landslide since 2008. That was a big landslide due to gaining a 60 vote majority in the Senate.
So I’ll let Althouse slide on calling 2024 a landslide even though Donald Trump didn’t cover the spread and Barack Obama’s landslide was bigger.
Even if the NPV Compact came into effect, the states in it would immediately declare it null and void the second after a Republican won the popular vote- declare it null and void for exactly that election alone.
I was thinking about how bad the polls have been and what can be done to fix them. I don't know if they are off because people don't trust poll takers or because many people will not answer unknown numbers.
I don't answer unknown numbers because it's often a scammer in a foreign country claiming to be from Microsoft and that I need to give them access to my computer. (I still have to answer my work landline.) It would be great if politicians figured out a way to stop, or greatly reduce, these calls in order to bring back trust so people will answer the phone and eventually we could get more accurate polls.
Constituents getting scammed out of thousands of dollars hasn't motivated politicians, but maybe the need for better polls will.
Ice Nine said...
312 - 226 is not a landslide; not even close.
More like soil creep. It's less dramatic, but it can still bring down a hillside - eventually.
It’s a variant of Murphry’s Law.
Out: Koch Brothers. In: Threat To Democracy. (Apologies to Spy Magazine)
A big landslide the size of a small landslide.
They most likely had been dumped in bundles with the USPS. Which is, of course, illegal in most states. Certainly in AZ.
Impressive prognostication. Think how many pixels Nate Silver could have saved.
Pollsters were off by 5% on average. Why would that be? One possibility is that they are crooked and wanted the public to think Harris was going to win so Trump supporters would stay home. Maybe true. But the more interesting possibility is that they were seeing what was going on, but knowing that there are so many fudge factors -- i.e., trying to deduce turnout by groups -- that they didn't want to be an outlier, certainly not in the direction that said Hitler was going to win. That is why everyone, even the NY Post, was so excited about the Iowa poll, even though a Rasmussen poll was saying the opposite. It was an outlier that fit with their hopes, didn't promote Hitler, and could even be correct. Rasmussen's poll was by a pollster with a well-known GOP "bias", so it could be dismissed. But once you see that bias creeping in for fairly innocuous reasons, you start to realize that the same things occur in, shall we say, climate science, and damn near every other "truth seeking" enterprise. It is scary that the whole damn structure is built on such flimsy evidence with little corrective mechanisms to divert one away from the going along with the crowd.
But that is the point, Professor:
The democrats CANNOT win on the substantive policy merits when their policy is:
1) KILL ALL JEWS!
2) MOLEST ALL CHILDREN!
3) WAAAAAA! GIVE US NOW AWW OWR MIWK AND KOOKIES! YOU FACIST!
Field Marshall Freder: "I partially agree with you. Instead of concentrating on Trump's danger to democracy (which I think you are going to discover much to your dismay is all too real),..."
Offered without evidence. Again.
Post a Comment