2024 Elections Thread

[Sun_Worshiper]

Welp we're sure living in interesting times. Hopefully a few Rs in the Senate and House (assuming Rs clinch majority) will act as checks, but clearly we are in for Trump unchained for better or worse (worse, I suspect).

Harris ran a good campaign given her weaknesses and the short timeline. I thought she would win, although I didn't have much confidence in that prediction. Most Americans are unhappy with the state of the economy and the direction of the country and it is hard to be an incumbent in that sort of environment.

Obviously Dems will be in disarray for the near term. Hopefully they can come up with a better candidate and a better message in 2028.

[Sun_Worshiper]

Polls did not distinguish themselves this time round, no.  I am thinking about a question, and wonder (political scientists here, etc., please do comment)-- how can we assess how much of Harris's defeat can properly be laid on the Bradley Effect?  Were studies to this effect made, and when might the results be published?   There obviously are a lot of other reasons for her defeat, most importantly perhaps the ahistorical cult of personality her opponent has constructed, but, well... she is black, and she is a she....

We'll see how the popular vote works out once all the votes are counted, but at this point it seems like the polls were pretty accurate this time around.

[Ruralguy]

I don't think very many people have considered the Bradley effect in the last decade or more.

In any case, these polls seem to have been about as accurate as they can be. Certainly, the overall sense of the Battlegrounds was that they'd go to Trump if the polls were correct.

The last several elections have had the total national vote differential mis-estimated by several points, so from
a 1 ahead to a 1 behind that was sort of precited for Harris, you might guess that it would turn out to really be a couple behind loss.

At least I don't need to refresh my screen all day for 5 days.

Oh well.

[Myword]

I agree with secondum.  So often Americans are wrongheaded about presidents and political leaders. Uninformed and shallow opinions
Even worse is the moral social message that dishonesty criminal acts and erratic personality and less intelligence will be rewarded. and road to success here. Trump is the sociopathic moral standard to emulate for others
    Some voted for Trump to stop Harris and vice versa. No one mentions that. Harris is not as popular as it appears nor is Trump

[evil_physics_witchcraft]

Well, we're fucked.

[kaysixteen]

The Bradley effect has receded into the background of academic attention, yes, because Obama did not appreciably suffer from it (plenty of studies showed that, even in 2012), but that does not mean it still does not exist, has not potentially caused two female prez candidates to lose, etc.   But since no one (or virtually no one ) will acknowledge that they would have voted for Kamala Harris had she been a white dude with essentially exactly the same resume, how to analyze exactly how much she did suffer from Bradleying (and remember she is black, Indian, and female)?

[Sun_Worshiper]

The Bradley effect has receded into the background of academic attention, yes, because Obama did not appreciably suffer from it (plenty of studies showed that, even in 2012), but that does not mean it still does not exist, has not potentially caused two female prez candidates to lose, etc.  But since no one (or virtually no one ) will acknowledge that they would have voted for Kamala Harris had she been a white dude with essentially exactly the same resume, how to analyze exactly how much she did suffer from Bradleying (and remember she is black, Indian, and female)?

An actual political scientist should check in, if we have any in our community, but it seems to me that it would be all but impossible to answer this question convincingly with data from the election (polling is too messy). Maybe you could get at something similar with an experimental design, although it wouldn't really tell us much about Harris specifically.

[kaysixteen]

I would hope that some political scientists and sociologists had already designed such a research plan, and put it into effect yesterday.   I would eagerly await the results of any such studies.

[kaysixteen]

Now one more question, an esp valid one in a forum full of educators: how would you go about (or how *are you going about*) explaining to students/ answering their questions, etc., wrt how it came to pass that Trump just overcame everything he did and said, his uniquely corrupt, incompetent, and overtly criminal resume, etc, and pulled this off, and did so not as the squeaker win-the-electoral-whilst-losing-the-popular, election, but rather with this decisive and perhaps outright popular vote majority win?  What do you say, and how would you run a seminar discussion on this topic?

[Sun_Worshiper]

I'm not teaching at the moment, but I'd probably put it in the international context of incumbents being booted across countries. It could also be interesting to talk about realignment of the electorate, but we don't really know what that looks like yet since exit polls aren't always accurate.

[Kron3007]

Now one more question, an esp valid one in a forum full of educators: how would you go about (or how *are you going about*) explaining to students/ answering their questions, etc., wrt how it came to pass that Trump just overcame everything he did and said, his uniquely corrupt, incompetent, and overtly criminal resume, etc, and pulled this off, and did so not as the squeaker win-the-electoral-whilst-losing-the-popular, election, but rather with this decisive and perhaps outright popular vote majority win?  What do you say, and how would you run a seminar discussion on this topic?

I would probably start with a look at the history of cults and cult leaders.

Of course, I am in STEM and not qualified to run anything of the sort.