2024 Elections Thread

[spork]

No one ever went bankrupt underestimating the intelligence of the American people.

That's probably a paraphrase of something said by a person like P.T. Barnum.

[marshwiggle]

I'm kind of curious to hear someone explain how voters that were intelligent and insightful enough to vote for Biden in 2020 became bigoted trolls by 2024. Especially the black and Latino ones, and women. (This is based on the suggestion from many that only horrible human beings would vote for Trump, and that any other reasons given are just a smokescreen.)

Short memories?

That would make sense if they all voted for Biden in 2020 because they disliked Trump. It's more likely that at least some of them liked what Biden was offering better than what Trump was offering, but by 2024 felt that Biden didn't deliver.

[ciao_yall]

I'm kind of curious to hear someone explain how voters that were intelligent and insightful enough to vote for Biden in 2020 became bigoted trolls by 2024. Especially the black and Latino ones, and women. (This is based on the suggestion from many that only horrible human beings would vote for Trump, and that any other reasons given are just a smokescreen.)

Short memories?

That would make sense if they all voted for Biden in 2020 because they disliked Trump. It's more likely that at least some of them liked what Biden was offering better than what Trump was offering, but by 2024 felt that Biden didn't deliver.

I'm sure someone out there has done research on this. How many new voters who didn't vote in 2016or 2020,how many switched and why...

[ciao_yall]

I'm kind of curious to hear someone explain how voters that were intelligent and insightful enough to vote for Biden in 2020 became bigoted trolls by 2024. Especially the black and Latino ones, and women. (This is based on the suggestion from many that only horrible human beings would vote for Trump, and that any other reasons given are just a smokescreen.)

Short memories?

That would make sense if they all voted for Biden in 2020 because they disliked Trump. It's more likely that at least some of them liked what Biden was offering better than what Trump was offering, but by 2024 felt that Biden didn't deliver.

I'm sure someone out there has done research on this. How many new voters who didn't vote in 2016or 2020,how many switched and why...

Happened to come across this in The New York Times. TLDR Democrats turned out in fewer numbers. They didn't switch.

[ciao_yall]

Let's try this again.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/11/us/politics/democrats-trump-harris-turnout.html

[marshwiggle]

Let's try this again.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/11/us/politics/democrats-trump-harris-turnout.html

Fascinating.

In Pennsylvania, the biggest electoral prize on the battleground map, Mr. Trump's victory received an outsize boost from an unlikely place — the five counties with the highest percentage of registered Democrats: Allegheny, Delaware, Lackawanna, Montgomery and Philadelphia.

Ms. Harris won these counties, but not by the margins needed to overcome Republican-heavy areas of the state. Total turnout was down from 2020 in all five Democratic strongholds, which could partly explain how Ms. Harris received 78,000 fewer votes than Mr. Biden. Mr. Trump added 24,000 votes to his total in these same counties.

So why did so many Democrat voters stay home? Racism? Misogyny?

[Sun_Worshiper]

I don't know that anyone is saying that everyone who voted for Trump or who didn't vote for Kamala is racist or sexist. But surely some are. And certainly Trump's very open racism and sexism wasn't a deal breaker for his voters, even if they themselves are not prejudiced. It should also be noted that it is perfectly possible for women or minorities to be racist or sexist, so the fact that Trump did relatively well with these groups (at least according to exit polls, which we should all be cautious about overinterpreting) does not inherently mean that he didn't benefit from their prejudices.

Were racism and misogyny the things that pushed him across the finish line? I don't think so. I think that people are unhappy with the state of the country - cost of living and inflation in particular - and they decided not to support the Democrats in sufficient numbers. But let's not act like racism and sexism have not been contributing factors to the Trump phenomenon.

Btw, Rs should be careful in interpreting their election win as a mandate. If this is really about throwing the bums out, which is the most likely interpretation imo, then it was more Dems losing than Rs winning.

[marshwiggle]

I don't know that anyone is saying that everyone who voted for Trump or who didn't vote for Kamala is racist or sexist. But surely some are. And certainly Trump's very open racism and sexism wasn't a deal breaker for his voters, even if they themselves are not prejudiced. It should also be noted that it is perfectly possible for women or minorities to be racist or sexist, so the fact that Trump did relatively well with these groups (at least according to exit polls, which we should all be cautious about overinterpreting) does not inherently mean that he didn't benefit from their prejudices.

Were racism and misogyny the things that pushed him across the finish line? I don't think so. I think that people are unhappy with the state of the country - cost of living and inflation in particular - and they decided not to support the Democrats in sufficient numbers. But let's not act like racism and sexism have not been contributing factors to the Trump phenomenon.

Btw, Rs should be careful in interpreting their election win as a mandate. If this is really about throwing the bums out, which is the most likely interpretation imo, then it was more Dems losing than Rs winning.

So in 2020, was the only reason Trump lost because of the voters "throwing the bums out"? Was it really a case of the R's losing rather than the D's winning?

[Kron3007]

Let's try this again.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/11/us/politics/democrats-trump-harris-turnout.html

Fascinating.

In Pennsylvania, the biggest electoral prize on the battleground map, Mr. Trump's victory received an outsize boost from an unlikely place — the five counties with the highest percentage of registered Democrats: Allegheny, Delaware, Lackawanna, Montgomery and Philadelphia.

Ms. Harris won these counties, but not by the margins needed to overcome Republican-heavy areas of the state. Total turnout was down from 2020 in all five Democratic strongholds, which could partly explain how Ms. Harris received 78,000 fewer votes than Mr. Biden. Mr. Trump added 24,000 votes to his total in these same counties.

So why did so many Democrat voters stay home? Racism? Misogyny?

Apathy?

[ciao_yall]

Let's try this again.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/11/us/politics/democrats-trump-harris-turnout.html

Fascinating.

In Pennsylvania, the biggest electoral prize on the battleground map, Mr. Trump's victory received an outsize boost from an unlikely place — the five counties with the highest percentage of registered Democrats: Allegheny, Delaware, Lackawanna, Montgomery and Philadelphia.

Ms. Harris won these counties, but not by the margins needed to overcome Republican-heavy areas of the state. Total turnout was down from 2020 in all five Democratic strongholds, which could partly explain how Ms. Harris received 78,000 fewer votes than Mr. Biden. Mr. Trump added 24,000 votes to his total in these same counties.

So why did so many Democrat voters stay home? Racism? Misogyny?

Apathy?

The war in Palestine made many Arab-Americans wary of both parties. So they could vote for the party funding Israel, married to a Jewish guy, and not having much to say about Gaza. Or, they could vote for the Muslim ban guy who at least is buddies with Saudi Arabia.

Or they could do what they did, which was not bother with either candidate.

[Sun_Worshiper]

I don't know that anyone is saying that everyone who voted for Trump or who didn't vote for Kamala is racist or sexist. But surely some are. And certainly Trump's very open racism and sexism wasn't a deal breaker for his voters, even if they themselves are not prejudiced. It should also be noted that it is perfectly possible for women or minorities to be racist or sexist, so the fact that Trump did relatively well with these groups (at least according to exit polls, which we should all be cautious about overinterpreting) does not inherently mean that he didn't benefit from their prejudices.

Were racism and misogyny the things that pushed him across the finish line? I don't think so. I think that people are unhappy with the state of the country - cost of living and inflation in particular - and they decided not to support the Democrats in sufficient numbers. But let's not act like racism and sexism have not been contributing factors to the Trump phenomenon.

Btw, Rs should be careful in interpreting their election win as a mandate. If this is really about throwing the bums out, which is the most likely interpretation imo, then it was more Dems losing than Rs winning.

So in 2020, was the only reason Trump lost because of the voters "throwing the bums out"? Was it really a case of the R's losing rather than the D's winning?

I wouldn't say "the only reason," but it was a big contributing factor: Trump handled the pandemic poorly - or at least that was public perception - and enough people in swing states wanted somebody less volatile and more competent in office. He was also incredibly toxic and annoying, which probably helped Biden, but given the margin of the election it sure seems like he would have been coasting to a second term if not for the pandemic and his (mis)handling of it. And this was pretty much how most people interpreted it at the time --> people were voting against Trump more than they were voting for Biden. To the extent that Dems interpreted that as a mandate for them to implement their most extreme policies, that was a misinterpretation of voters' desires.

In this case, public dissatisfaction was again not "the only reason" that Trump won, but it was probably the biggest factor. People are unhappy with the economy and they want to punish the Dems and bring back Trump, who they don't like (according to polls) but nevertheless think will do better than Biden/Kamala. Lots of other factors contributed to the feeling that Dems were not up to the job, but if you look at the data we have from pre-election polls and exit polls, dissatisfaction with the economy was probably the key to Trump's win.

[ciao_yall]

Who on earth would think deporting 7% of the workforce and raising prices on imports 20-60% would be good for the economy?

[Parasaurolophus]

Who on earth would think deporting 7% of the workforce and raising prices on imports 20-60% would be good for the economy?

I imagine the idea is that the 7% mostly does not, in fact, work, they just live large on the "social" "safety" "net".

As for the tariffs, I think that's straightforward: the idea is that other countries will be paying those. It's an entirely externalized cost.


Sigh.

[marshwiggle]

I don't know that anyone is saying that everyone who voted for Trump or who didn't vote for Kamala is racist or sexist. But surely some are. And certainly Trump's very open racism and sexism wasn't a deal breaker for his voters, even if they themselves are not prejudiced. It should also be noted that it is perfectly possible for women or minorities to be racist or sexist, so the fact that Trump did relatively well with these groups (at least according to exit polls, which we should all be cautious about overinterpreting) does not inherently mean that he didn't benefit from their prejudices.

Were racism and misogyny the things that pushed him across the finish line? I don't think so. I think that people are unhappy with the state of the country - cost of living and inflation in particular - and they decided not to support the Democrats in sufficient numbers. But let's not act like racism and sexism have not been contributing factors to the Trump phenomenon.

Btw, Rs should be careful in interpreting their election win as a mandate. If this is really about throwing the bums out, which is the most likely interpretation imo, then it was more Dems losing than Rs winning.

So in 2020, was the only reason Trump lost because of the voters "throwing the bums out"? Was it really a case of the R's losing rather than the D's winning?

I wouldn't say "the only reason," but it was a big contributing factor: Trump handled the pandemic poorly - or at least that was public perception - and enough people in swing states wanted somebody less volatile and more competent in office. He was also incredibly toxic and annoying, which probably helped Biden, but given the margin of the election it sure seems like he would have been coasting to a second term if not for the pandemic and his (mis)handling of it. And this was pretty much how most people interpreted it at the time --> people were voting against Trump more than they were voting for Biden. To the extent that Dems interpreted that as a mandate for them to implement their most extreme policies, that was a misinterpretation of voters' desires.

What were those most extreme policies? This is something people on the left seem loathe to discuss.

[kaysixteen]

Hmmm..."So why did so many Democrat voters stay home? Racism? Misogyny?".... there's your Bradley effect.

I confess I am having a very hard time... depression is not my problem, anger is-- I have long been dealing with anger in my life, though 8  years now of CBT has helped greatly-- and I am, well, angry.  No matter how many more Latinos, Blacks, etc., Trump successfully wooed this year, the fact absolutely remains that he would never have come within a light-year of returning to the WH were it not for the enormous and ever-increasing support of my fellow White evangelicals.  And being as I am an evangelical by choice, converting at 19, this pisses me off even more centrally.  How can they do this?  They have toileted all their supposed principles to give us, well...  Church yesterday was much more pleasant than I had feared, since my pastor kept (more or less) his promise of the prior weekend that neither one of us would gloat over our candidate's victory-- it does of course beg the question of the proper border between 'gloating', which he mentioned from the pulpit yesterday that he would not do, and 'rejoicing', which he emphasized with great fulsomeness.  Ah well... I do not know how long I can endure there...