POTUS/General Election Thread 2020 + Aftermath

[Montmorency]

So my understanding is that Lib Dem party take positions that make otherwise Labour voters vote for them, this causes Labour to lose more seats and doesn't really gain anything for the Lib Dems, as I said they have few seats but last election had 11.5% of total votes. This helped the Cons get more seats than they deserved per the popular vote.

In principle yes, though IIRC from my rough postmortem of the 2019 UK election the LibDems only 'took' a handful of seats from Labour, and in a couple constituencies you could make the reverse argument (that Labour undermined LibDems).

The LibDems have generally not been a major party for a century.

My analogy is that if the Democratic Progressive faction believes that the Democratic Party is not giving them the policies they want, cause centrism or cause the conservative Dems/Lincoln Republicans are influencing the party, there is a significant chance they would splinter off as a third party depending on how good the majority leader is at doing their job.

This hasn't happened yet, and it can't happen because:
The LibDems exist as a party in the UK, because they have both national and local infrastructure and can get at least some seats up and down the ballot across the country. In parliamentary systems it is typically easy for third parties or even new parties to make some inroads. Third parties in the US essentially have no existence in terms of infrastructure or political representation because the electoral system is inimical to them.

The Democratic party has been around in some form since almost the beginning. The Republicans since the 1850s. The LibDems in the UK are coeval with the Republicans. All spent generations as major parties starting from their inception. The Green and Libertarian parties have never been anything in the United States, unlike elsewhere. Even the Socialists have had a more significant presence in elected office.

In our history there have been Independent movements, but they were almost always centered around a single personality (e.g. Ross Perot, Teddy Roosevelt) or single issue (segregation, Prohibition, farmers' populism).

Aside from the aforementioned considerations, there isn't even a paper constituency for an American third party to coalesce around; most Progressives identify their interests with the Democratic Party, to say nothing of the fact that the party has been moving toward them. There isn't even a premise of the party aggressively opposing their faction, around which to conjecture schismatism. (Very Online personalities who have always hated the Democratic Party don't count as constituents, nor are they demographically-significant.)

The more realistic threat, if the Democrats fail to deliver some goods, is of young people deepening in discouragement and disengagement and failing to 'grow into' higher participation to match the Boomers.

If not, then disregard.

I can believe your earlier points to the extent that the party apparatus including Fox and the other propaganda arms did not work explicitly for Trump because they were skeptical of how he would rule. I don't believe that logic comes into play for average GOP voters, to clarify. Once he got in and they saw how well he would advance the agenda, they started working to get the base to rally around him. They don't seem to have a hard time convincing GOP voters of falsehoods, I mean they convinced that poor old woman that Obama was a Muslim before he was even elected and she was so confused in the video when McCain said "No ma'm he's not."

The postulate of the individual Republican voter's entire ideology falling out of elite Republican signalling remains unsupportable. The segment of the base that was suspicious of Trump in 2016 was always a minority anyway! And many of those defected from the party entirely (i.e. true Never-Trumpers). The elites were concerned about Trump's electability in their residual constraint around notions of public legitimacy and proper behavior. By now they've learned that they can throw all that to the winds and go wild - their ecosystem will reward them and to hell with the mainstream.

That is, something that used to hold Republican politicians back was a belief that they couldn't go too far without losing support from the mainstream media and even their base. They still had minimal buy-in to democratic principles and ideas of restraint and respectability. As soon as they saw they were no such constraints or consequences to their behavior that they went full fascist.

The elites and the base have an epistemic symbiosis, often the base drives the elites, and the elites themselves - the current generation - have been entirely educated within the same ecosystem that you might characterize as being a reserve for the rubes; they share a worldview now more than ever.

As a methodological nit pick, when these surveys go out asking what your priorities are, are they are blank lines to fill in or are they giving voters a pre-determined list of choices and they are checking off judges?

This is a very typical sort of question included in dozens of polls and surveys, almost always in the format of presenting a list of options and asking the respondent to select 1 or more top issues, or to rate/rank each issue by importance. For example:
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics...2020-election/

Let me flip it on you, if GOP voters responded to judges strongly wouldn't the better play for the election be to withhold the Barret nomination until after the election?

That's one possible strategic orientation, but it's just as easy to believe that they are impatient to seize the opportunity presented to them.

Part of it depends on what you think the short-term game is for Republicans. If you are Mitch McConnell and believe that Republicans are at serious risk of losing control of the government this year, or that a strong SCOTUS majority could help Republicans retain control, then it could make good, amoral, sense to ram through a justice.

Also, confirming Barrett triggers the libs.

Same situation, but one is still a true believer and the other has regrets. The only difference? Fox news.

Fox News is effective, but it can't work without a base. Fox News did not make the clay; it but molds it.

Fox News in the Age of Trump turns a bigot into a minion. But they had to be a bigot to begin with.

Your account does not accurately capture the history, and it's predictions would always seem to fail if applied retroactively or comparatively.

Tribal-identity is a very strong thing.

Except for the consistent and progressive realignment of voters between the parties over the past 60 years. Tribalism does not explain Republicanism in itself, and it cannot hope to. Look to the content, the value-system.

I disagree, I think the current iteration of the Republican party that started with Reagan came in off of stagflation, when the economy boomed under Clinton we had Bush tout 'compassionate' conservatism like you said, when 07 happened we started to see the conservative culture get crazy and now with Corona we are seeing absolutely degenerate behavior. I think there is a link.

John Birch Society. Affirmative action. Southern strategy. Political correctness. Forced busing. Pat Buchanan. Illegal immigrants. Welfare queens. Japanese ascendance. Iran-Contra. Contract with America. Watergate and the Chennault Affair. The War on Terror. Don't ignore the very long genealogy. The rot of violent oligarchic lawlessness has festered since before we were born. 2008 didn't start the fire.

The same people that helped cover up Iran-Contra were the ones Daddy Bush pardoned, to later end up in the Trump administration. The same people that helped Son Bush steal the 2000 election ended up in Trump's administration and - most critically - on his Supreme Court. And on that last point I'm referring to Barrett and Kavanaugh. Roberts too of course, but Son Bush rewarded him more promptly.

This is not a coincidence. History did not begin in 2008.

Because culturally we dignify people based on their labor and their wealth. You cannot separate the two so cleanly.

Then why don't other people with this unclassifiable sense of economic anxiety untethered to their real material conditions also respond by voting Republican? Why does Republican vote share among whites increase almost linearly across income quantiles? Why are there actually economically-precarious voters who vote Democratic? 85% or so of the Republican electorate is white. They are disproportionately religious and higher in income. There is something to all that.


One of the oddities of this exchange is, why would it surprise you that half of white people in the country are virulent bigots? The historical mean is much higher! A century ago it was nearly all of them. Elements of the Left have been persistently misled by this wishful thinking that reactionaries are potential socialists waiting in the wings. If true it would make the movement, so the impulse is understandable - but it is not true. There is not evidence for it. There just isn't. When you're putting together this story, you have to face down the concrete manifestation, right? It's not enough to stake a theory from ideology, the performance has to be measured. From a neutral perspective, how would someone generate the theory of economic anxiety, and how would they apply and measure it in our context? Once you try it falls apart. An alien anthropologist would not generate this theory. I haven't seen sound case for the idea that doesn't appeal to its convenience or optimism, and any that attempt to argue from data have been clearly refuted by now.

Like I said, its allure is obvious to me. In 2017-18 I was willing to give it a chance to bear fruit. In the end you have to reckon with all the evidence aligning against it. Best to scrap it along with the 2017 dismissal of calls to impeach Trump, on the grounds that Pence would be a worse or more dangerous president somehow.

The path of the Left cannot run through the Right but through absorbing and suborning the Center. Republicans believe they must retrieve "their" country from us. Your blandishments of social provision mean nothing to them, they can't possibly mean anything. It's a fundamental misunderstanding of the worldview and priorities.

When that Lebowski fella talked about the tenets of National Socialism being an ethos, I don't know what he was supposed to be communicating - but it probably wasn't his openness to supporting the National Socialist program.

We should pray that Florida goes to Biden quickly because Trump is planning on declaring victory if it looks like he is ahead on election night and then try to get the courts to stop the counting.

However, we should all take a deep breath and try not to panic:


Due to all this fuckery, I am far more bearish than most others when it comes to the election. Right now I think its a tossup whether or not Trump loses. As I said earlier, I think it was incredibly dumb for the Biden campaign to push mail-in voting when they knew this summer that the postal service was being messed with. Not to mention, the propensity for mail-in ballots to be messed up skyrockets due to dumb mistakes like forgetting to sign the envelope and Americans are morons.

On the other hand, Trump may have played himself by enflaming Democratic turnout, as seen in the hundred million early votes, while hemming the core of his own support in reserve until the last minute. Most absentee ballots have arrived, and the vast majority of outstanding ones are in blue states!

The way to stop a coup is by mass direct action in the event, to raise the political costs to the coupers and to persuade paralyzed or undecided observers that they should not comply with illegitimate authority or directives. Particularly if they occupy a place within the civil or security services.

If the courts tell us to stop counting votes anywhere we have some authority over the canvassing or administration, we should reject the unlawful rulings and dare them to stop us. Sara Nelson and many of the national unions have also been in serious interunion discussions toward organizing a general strike set on the trigger of an attempted coup. I think we are prepared.

At any rate, as my calculations show North Carolina and Florida will very likely be declared for Biden by midnight Nov. 4. If the ratfucking moves forward in Pennsylvania or elsewhere amid that, they're going to fail miserably on all fronts while even Dianne Feinstein is liable to be radicalized. If their Supreme Court participates in any such move, the Roberts 6 are guaranteed to be sitting beside fresh colleagues in a few months' time.

Democrats are in array.

[drone]

When that Lebowski fella talked about the tenets of National Socialism being an ethos, I don't know what he was supposed to be communicating - but it probably wasn't his openness to supporting the National Socialist program.

Correction, it was Walter, not the Dude, and it was a comparison between Nazis and nihilists, who believe in nothing...

[ReluctantSamurai]

If you haven't already seen this, it's a fun little game:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...biden-or-trump

I've played it in several different ways, being very generous to CoviDon. If Texas flips, which I don't think it will, the Fat Lady sings, because a likely 50/50 split in the "swing states" leads to a blowout for Biden. If N. Carolina and Florida turn blue, the Fat Lady sings. In any case, it's a bit of fun speculating.....

[Hooahguy]

Its eerily quiet in DC. The only ones out are the ones walking their dogs (like me) or getting supplies. Cars arent really out either. Its like the calm before the storm. Here we go boys, election day is upon us.

Edit: oh and there is an eerie wail outside. Probably just the wind... right?

[Montmorency]

In good news, most of the election cases before the courts at the end of October have not been imminently disastrous.

But I forgot to mention:

During the protests in Philadelphia a week ago (new police incident, don't ask), a swarm of police attacked a random vehicle passing through the area and removed and savaged the driver. That driver had her young child in the car, and the police used that moment to manufacture some ghoulishly villainous and deceitful copaganda. What an elevated specimen of the "stop hitting yourself" substrate.



https://twitter.com/RespectableLaw/s...71642201567233

It's hard to think of an apter description than "evil." #CopCrimesMatter


More on "warrior cop" training:
https://manualredeye.com/90096/news/...-presentation/

Student journalists uncovered some odd training materials used by Kentucky State Police.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Hmmm...

I like how they drop all pretense by the end.

The presentation also links to a Hitler page on Goodreads, a database of quotes and books.

In a statement emailed to RedEye reporters, KSP spokesperson Lieutenant Joshua Lawson wrote, “The quotes are used for their content and relevance to the topic addressed in the presentation. The presentation touches on several aspects of service, selflessness, and moral guidance. All of these topics go to the fundamentals of law enforcement such as treating everyone equally, service to the public, and being guided by the law.”

Also, on the first slide - isn't that a Europa Barbarorum model?! Goddamn screenwriters.

Plz deNazify the American government and society. 160 years of civil war is enough.

Correction, it was Walter, not the Dude, and it was a comparison between Nazis and nihilists, who believe in nothing...

Thems the breaks with pop culture osmosis.

[Crandar]

First elections results are in. Donald Trump is winning the TW district, but not greatly. Technically, there's a chance that Biden might cover the distance, but most pundits are skeptical. Greens have been evaporated, but Liberals got a considerable part of the vote, which suggests increased aggregation for the Democrats and centrifugal tendencies for the Republicans. Compared to the 2016 results of the same TW district, we notice a dramatic polarisation, in favour of the two major parties, of which however the Democrats benefited disproportionately.

So, Trump is winning the TW race, but how representative is that district of the entirety of the United States? Not much, experts argue. Although young, foreign-born citizens are overwhelmingly over-represented, a demographic traditionally associated with the Democrats, statisticians point out that the vast majority of them are white males of upper or middle class background.

As a personal note, I'd like to underline the unacceptable irregularity of the authorities failing to maintain the secrecy of the vote. Tsk, tsk, tsk...

[edyzmedieval]

Monty, you're not wrong - that's a Rome TW model.

I really really wish gaming would not turn political.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I just don't believe the idea that 40% of the country are inherently racist. People think they are getting screwed over and its an easy narrative to say "those people are screwing you over" than trying to explain how globalized markets work.

This is, ultimately, the factor that most empowers institutional racism. Few of those whose actions empower the system that is are racist in inclination or thought. They support the police and the concept of law and order (while often blind to the cultural mores of those police and the economic holdovers of overt racism that place so many of our 'minority' persons in positions where police confrontation is more frequent), they want their kids to go to good schools (while not really thinking about the fact that they have grouped themselves into enclaves of people who look and sound the same because of the psychological comfort thereof), etc.

The Aryan Nation types are very few and have publicly labeled themselves -- thanks for that as it makes them easier to keep track of -- and the vast bulk of those who support institutional racism (which includes, by the way, any number of those persons who are targeted by this implicit system of restraints and control) are not at all racist themselves. They are simply content with the system as it is and do not question that the system itself has enacted itself in a manner that is functionally racist.

We can spot the "Bull" Connors types readily enough, it is the vast mass of kindly people hidden by 'Foucault's mirror' who do not accurately see their own reflections in the images before their eyes.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Monty, you're not wrong - that's a Rome TW model.

I really really wish gaming would not turn political.

You never saw the implicit political tones of the economic systems modeled in the game? Or the authoritarian bent of the whole thing? How can that not be inherently political?

[a completely inoffensive name]

This is, ultimately, the factor that most empowers institutional racism. Few of those whose actions empower the system that is are racist in inclination or thought. They support the police and the concept of law and order (while often blind to the cultural mores of those police and the economic holdovers of overt racism that place so many of our 'minority' persons in positions where police confrontation is more frequent), they want their kids to go to good schools (while not really thinking about the fact that they have grouped themselves into enclaves of people who look and sound the same because of the psychological comfort thereof), etc.

The Aryan Nation types are very few and have publicly labeled themselves -- thanks for that as it makes them easier to keep track of -- and the vast bulk of those who support institutional racism (which includes, by the way, any number of those persons who are targeted by this implicit system of restraints and control) are not at all racist themselves. They are simply content with the system as it is and do not question that the system itself has enacted itself in a manner that is functionally racist.

We can spot the "Bull" Connors types readily enough, it is the vast mass of kindly people hidden by 'Foucault's mirror' who do not accurately see their own reflections in the images before their eyes.

I think we are in agreement. It is in a sense that notion from Socrates that people do not willingly go to the bad, but it is our ignorance that leads our decisions to the bad and it is ignorance that leads people to defend such bad actions.
It is telling that Q anon has sucked so many in under the guise of saving children, that to follow Trump is to save America, that to own the libs is to save their livelihood. They genuinely believe they are on the right side of history.

[a completely inoffensive name]

You never saw the implicit political tones of the economic systems modeled in the game? Or the authoritarian bent of the whole thing? How can that not be inherently political?

The entire premise of the game is to role-play as an authoritarian leader in a given time period. In hindsight, I am surprised at the relatively even split. I have hundreds of hours in Stellaris and I have never played as anything but egalitarian/xenophile.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Thems the breaks with pop culture osmosis.

Just watch the movie, it's worth the $2 on Amazon video.

[Montmorency]

This is, ultimately, the factor that most empowers institutional racism. Few of those whose actions empower the system that is are racist in inclination or thought. They support the police and the concept of law and order (while often blind to the cultural mores of those police and the economic holdovers of overt racism that place so many of our 'minority' persons in positions where police confrontation is more frequent), they want their kids to go to good schools (while not really thinking about the fact that they have grouped themselves into enclaves of people who look and sound the same because of the psychological comfort thereof), etc.

The Aryan Nation types are very few and have publicly labeled themselves -- thanks for that as it makes them easier to keep track of -- and the vast bulk of those who support institutional racism (which includes, by the way, any number of those persons who are targeted by this implicit system of restraints and control) are not at all racist themselves. They are simply content with the system as it is and do not question that the system itself has enacted itself in a manner that is functionally racist.

We can spot the "Bull" Connors types readily enough, it is the vast mass of kindly people hidden by 'Foucault's mirror' who do not accurately see their own reflections in the images before their eyes.

The complication is that almost no one self-identifies as "bad guy" or "racist." It takes a real worm-brained reactionary of the sort you can only find on the Internet - and who might be half-troll anyway - to outright declare to your face that "racialist" eugenics has been unjustly repressed by effete liberal bleeding-hearts.

Yet millions have much the same belief system and are willing to put those beliefs in practice with policies that obviously damage the welfare of targeted groups. They just think it's the right thing to do.

The pattern of available facts still makes them bad and leaves them as an obstacle to be stopped and overcome. This is pragmatism.

I think we are in agreement. It is in a sense that notion from Socrates that people do not willingly go to the bad, but it is our ignorance that leads our decisions to the bad and it is ignorance that leads people to defend such bad actions.
It is telling that Q anon has sucked so many in under the guise of saving children, that to follow Trump is to save America, that to own the libs is to save their livelihood. They genuinely believe they are on the right side of history.

An alternative theory is that issues like pedophilia and abortion reaching salience on the Right are really about moral laundering*, an eminence front to excuse themselves for adopting values and policies that contribute to actual harm for and against children (among others). I've even seen the argument that the whole anti-abortion zeitgeist arising among conservatives in the 1970s was camouflage for their increasing anti-welfarism and barely-submerged segregationism. Children and fetuses, particularly as pure abstractions, are a convenient - what's the opposite of a scapegoat? - to pin this game around in the guise of single-issue voting because there are no real commitments to make or consequences to yourself in claiming to care about children. There's nothing to do or sacrifice, unlike with advocating a particular vision of political economy, or demanding that the government disadvantage women in the labor market or whatever. ('We can't be wrong, we can't be bad, we think it's important to protect children after all!')

I wonder if the whole Satanic Panic of the 80s ties into this as well...

*Virtue signalling, avant la lettre

You never saw the implicit political tones of the economic systems modeled in the game? Or the authoritarian bent of the whole thing? How can that not be inherently political?

Not sure if being ironic, but this isn't wrong. The philosophical implications of character action and interdynamics in videogames, such as in the common unlimited violence across genres, was possibly the first philosophical question surrounding gaming that reached my consciousness way back when.

S'cool though.

The entire premise of the game is to role-play as an authoritarian leader in a given time period. In hindsight, I am surprised at the relatively even split. I have hundreds of hours in Stellaris and I have never played as anything but egalitarian/xenophile.

I read a media criticism essay once that pointed out that in RPGs players don't often make choices that are philosophically dissonant for themselves. I wonder what that says about the 'kill everything that can be killed' demographic.

[Shaka_Khan]

CHINA WANTS BIDEN.

I remember when the People's Republic of China wanted Trump to win during the 2016 election. While it's true that the Obama administration originally wanted to build a closer relationship with China, they changed their minds after China refused to change to a free market economy, did cyberespionage, stole industrial secrets, continued to abuse human rights, attempted to take territories, treated Obama badly when he visited there, etc. Hillary Clinton was the one who led the policy change to pivot towards the United States' Asian allies to prevent China's attempts in expansionism. Obviously, the mainland Chinese I met hated Clinton. I told them that Trump mentioned China once on unfair trade, but they ignored it. They relied on the state-controlled news media from China. They said that Trump was good for Chinese businesses because he's a Republican. At that time, Trump was much more vocal against America's allies, mostly against South Korea, Japan and Germany. And he made it almost seem like he'd withdraw the American military away from South Korea and Japan. This made the PRC love Trump even more. The American Trump supporters treated those Chinese Trump supporters as enlightened friends.

Fast forward to Trump placing tariffs on Chinese imports- I bet the people who advised Xi Jinping that Trump would be on his side got fired. Some of the Chinese who wanted Trump to win became the most anti-Trump posters in a chat room that I'm in. When it comes to diplomacy, I think things will continue, maybe escalate or repeat in similar patterns no matter who becomes the next president.

What I found interesting was that a university student from China told me that he became worried about Xi. This student was originally a supporter of Xi, saying that he was arresting numerous corrupt officials. After he changed his mind about Xi, he told me that Xi wanted to change China back to the time when China was the most powerful civilization in the world, and that Xi turned out to be an expansionist. He said that it was more dangerous because of Trump, and he believed that the two countries might someday go against each other. He said this 3 years ago.

[Hooahguy]

So a bit of election night commentary- Im not particularly surprised by some of the results tonight, especially since Florida is what it is. Sad that Lindsey Graham wasnt kicked out, but that was to be expected in deep red South Carolina. Fox just called Arizona for Biden which makes things a bit easier going forward I think for him. Definitely going to be a close election, which is also a very very sad indictment on Americans as a whole.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Definitely going to be a close election, which is also a very very sad indictment on Americans as a whole.

It's also an indictment of the Democratic Party. Talking softly, and not carrying any kind of a big stick, is obviously not working. With all the eff-ups that CoviDon has made just this year alone, should have made this election a slam dunk. It also looks like the Dems won't gain control of the Senate, making a Biden win problematic as it will be very difficult to get anything done.

But you are absolutely right about Americans as a whole. That CoviDon is a blatant racist, a misogynist, a criminal, is actively working to revoke millions of Americans health care, is actively destroying the environment, actively subverting democracy, and all those other things....and yet people vote for him by the millions, shows just how far democracy has fallen here. It's why I will be leaving as soon as I can.

[Montmorency]

What a horrifying set of results to wake up to. This is just about the worst imaginable outcome within the range of possibilities.

Looking at some of these returns, I'm sincerely shocked to report - and suspect subsequent analysis will elucidate - that Biden's expected advantage among early votes has in most (battleground) states proved minimal. That's genuinely shocking because it implies polling got Independents massively wrong. I'm eager to read about what the heck happened with early votes, because it may have just determined the course of the election. If my assumptions - in the preceding posts - about how Independents break for Biden had been correct he should have won these states.

Biden has improved Dems' performance in Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, Ohio, and Texas, but only by low-single digits: not enough. Another factor in the election, perhaps related to the above, is that Trump's margins in these state imply that he basically vacuumed up almost the entire third party vote from 2016 - at least the vote for conservative third parties. Thus could both parties improve their margins (third parties are as expected at less than 2% nationally).

Wild to me that Texas, Ohio, Georgia, Florida, and North Carolina could all have such similar margins, with bare majorities for the Republican.

Arizona and Nevada are leaning Dem for now and should more or less have a decisive count by the end of today. If Biden loses these he almost certainly loses the Electoral College.

Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania will probably decide the election again. The former two are currently near-ties, with a narrow Biden lead in Wisconsin and a narrow Trump lead in Michigan, but Trump leads heavily in Pennsylvania. The hope is that the early votes - which have not really begun to be counted in those states, except Michigan - will deliver them to Biden. But given the stunning closeness of early votes in other states, the uncertainty is high.

If Trump wins 2020 with an even narrower EC margin and wider popular vote loss, especially given that Biden looks set to win a majority of votes, that alone would be injurious to the social fabric. That it's Trump - well, we can see the trends plainly.

It's also an indictment of the Democratic Party. Talking softly, and not carrying any kind of a big stick, is obviously not working. With all the eff-ups that CoviDon has made just this year alone, should have made this election a slam dunk. It also looks like the Dems won't gain control of the Senate, making a Biden win problematic as it will be very difficult to get anything done.

But you are absolutely right about Americans as a whole. That CoviDon is a blatant racist, a misogynist, a criminal, is actively working to revoke millions of Americans health care, is actively destroying the environment, actively subverting democracy, and all those other things....and yet people vote for him by the millions, shows just how far democracy has fallen here. It's why I will be leaving as soon as I can.

I understand, but we'll miss you. If Trump sneaks by there will be no evading the Long Collapse of the modern world anywhere on it.

[Crandar]

In Florida, Biden performed better among whites, but Trump also improved his performance among Latinos. Predictions were again quite off, but I don't think Trump has any real chances anymore. He'll probably win in Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Georgia, but that's not still enough. Trend and stats indicate that Biden's lead will increase in Wisconsin, Nevada and Michigan. The cult will probably put its last hopes behind rogue electors, but that's not a feasible scenario. Still, quite embarrassing that Donald performed so well, what these elections guarantee is that the narrative of the liberal establishment of scientists and intellectuals sabotaging conservatives will continue at least until 2024. My only fear is the possibility that a mentally unstable fan of the 45th president reacts violently to the news.

As for possible explanations, in 2016, pollsters underestimated those with no college degree, but I wonder if ''shy Republicans'' played a role in the present elections. I know quite a few fans of Trump, who have been defending him since 2015 and who genuinely believe that the Democrats are Bolsheviks in disguise that still pretend that they would vote for the Libertarians and not the Republicans. Of course, that's just anecdotal experience.

[Montmorency]

What no one on the left/liberal/center has figured out--how to get voters to connect policy to candidates. (cont)

When Florida passes a $15 minimum wage and votes for Donald Trump and South Dakota votes for legal weed while being a wipeout for Trump shows people like policy but don't make any connections between that and who they vote for.

To be honest, probably the only real answer is frankly that we need more politics. In other words, we need politics to be seen as part of all of our lives all the time. That requires tons of organizing, talking among friends, etc. Maybe it works. Maybe not. But it's all I got.

There's something deep going on, because Democratic candidates are underperforming nationally, in the House and Senate. Biden actually appears to be outperforming his downballot. He's outperformed Clinton in most Florida counties. But Miami fell through for him and the majority in the House is liable to disappear entirely. Final results for the House probably 215-225 for Dems as of now (218 is majority). So Biden likely did about as well as he could have.

In Florida, Biden performed better among whites, but Trump also improved his performance among Latinos. Predictions were again quite off, but I don't think Trump has any real chances anymore. He'll probably win in Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Georgia, but that's not still enough. Trend and stats indicate that Biden's lead will increase in Wisconsin, Nevada and Michigan. The cult will probably put its last hopes behind rogue electors, but that's not a feasible scenario. Still, quite embarrassing that Donald performed so well, what these elections guarantee is that the narrative of the liberal establishment of scientists and intellectuals sabotaging conservatives will continue at least until 2024. My only fear is the possibility that a mentally unstable fan of the 45th president reacts violently to the news.

As for possible explanations, in 2016, pollsters underestimated those with no college degree, but I wonder if ''shy Republicans'' played a role in the present elections. I know quite a few fans of Trump, who have been defending him since 2015 and who genuinely believe that the Democrats are Bolsheviks in disguise that still pretend that they would vote for the Libertarians and not the Republicans. Of course, that's just anecdotal experience.

If you think polling was very off, I would be extremely wary about relying on preliminary exit polling when the votes aren't all tallied and the majority of the vote was early voting (i.e. exit pollers couldn't wait at the polls to interview people).

3 points up with Latinos wouldn't be nearly enough to explain this result. As I said above, Democrats are underperforming almost everywhere and Biden is overperforming other Democrats.

But yeah, Biden probably ekes out a narrow EC win if all the count proceeds.

The fact that a candidate can win anywhere from 5 to 10 million votes over their rival and still barely win is a wasting disease on the body politic.

[ReluctantSamurai]

If Trump wins 2020 with an even narrower EC margin and wider popular vote loss, especially given that Biden looks set to win a majority of votes, that alone would be injurious to the social fabric. That it's Trump - well, we can see the trends plainly.

Any kind of marginal Biden win signifies that the people of America have not rejected "Trumpism" outright as a danger to our democracy. That Dems under performed in under ticket races and will likely not gain control of the Senate means we get another four years of The Man With the Perpetual Scowl blocking much of what Biden will attempt to do, just like he did with Obama. That that QAnon twit in Georgia won a seat in the House also doesn't bode well for the future of US politics.

Looking at some of these returns, I'm sincerely shocked to report - and suspect subsequent analysis will elucidate - that Biden's expected advantage among early votes has in most (battleground) states proved minimal. That's genuinely shocking because it implies polling got Independents massively wrong. I'm eager to read about what the heck happened with early votes, because it may have just determined the course of the election. If my assumptions - in the preceding posts - about how Independents break for Biden had been correct he should have won these states.

The folks who do polling are one of the clear losers in this election. This is the second national election in a row where they failed to even come close in predicting results.

I understand, but we'll miss you. If Trump sneaks by there will be no evading the Long Collapse of the modern world anywhere on it.

My decision to find another country to call home was hatched long before the pandemic and before the madness and mayhem of 2020. Current events have just solidified my resolve. I'm not so naive to believe there's a paradise out there somewhere where its' all peaches and cream. The Org wouldn't be rid of me that easily, in any case....

[Montmorency]

[a completely inoffensive name]

Not going to lie, my faith in Democracy is shattered. It's a failure of the American people to simultaneously vote for policies in the abstract and yet vote for politicians that would deny them those policies. If America had said we want conservatism full stop, I would accept that at least as a coherent will of the people against liberalism. But $15/hr Florida with a Trump win? legalized marijuana in multiple states with house seats flipping Red?

Even the right wing posters on here can't defend this discrepancy. It all comes down to image and personality. Republican culture seems tough, Trump is a strong individual, the Dems look weak, they appear socialist.

Even a close Biden win the midwest, which is looking more likely than not means nothing to me. It should have been more and the fact it wasn't means politics is no longer politics, its just psychology now.

[Hooahguy]

At the time of this post I am pretty confident that Biden will win the EC barring some crazy legal shenanigans. From what I am seeing, Biden is slowly expanding the margins in Michigan and Wisconsin as the mail-in ballots are counted. While the Senate is probably still under GOP control, there is still a lot of good that Biden can do with the DOJ, EPA, CDC, etc. Legislatively probably not much though, Mitch is going to go back to his old ways of blocking everything that happens.

So this is definitely a bittersweet moment. Yes, Trump will likely be gone in November. But the partisan gridlock will remain and COVID recovery will be stalled as well as Mitch has signaled he wants to swing to austerity (of course). If Peters pulls through in Michigan, which I think he will, that would give Dems an opening in 2022 to retake the Senate, but it will be an uphill battle. No idea whats happening with Maine right now, though I think Collins might somehow survive (wtf Maine). Georgia will probably be a final battle in January as that is when the runoff will be. And who knows what will happen there. But if Dems can get to 49 that would make 2022 much easier.

But there is still a lot up in the air, but the biggest takeaway is that Dems need to do more outreach to Hispanics, and also come to grips that Hispanics differ from regions and value different things, its not just about immigration issues for them. For example, the Hispanics from Central America did seem to break for Biden and helped with Arizona. But those from Cuba and Venezuela, well, the socialist accusation worked even though it held no merit. One Dem in Miami blamed BLM protests and going back and forth on them as a potential reason why Biden lost in Florida, especially with Hispanics. Though whatever Trump did, it worked in Florida. Understanding this electorate better will be key to winning in the future. No more broad brushes. Same goes for African Americans.

Another big issue was mail-in voting. A shockingly huge number of ballots were never delivered and the USPS refused to comply with an order to deliver them. I've said it before but I will say it again: the Biden campaign should have never emphasized mail-in ballots the second it was clear that the USPS was fucking with the ballot delivery and that Trump would try to invalidate those ballots. It will definitely go down as a "shooting yourself in the foot" moment.

Also can we agree that this election is likely the thing that does away with polling as a serious profession? I said that this election would be a tossup despite the rosy polls, and if it wasnt for Covid-19 then Trump would have won easily.

My own demographic (Jews) increased its support of Biden by 11 points so I guess thats a small consolation.

[Montmorency]

At the time of this post I am pretty confident that Biden will win the EC barring some crazy legal shenanigans. From what I am seeing, Biden is slowly expanding the margins in Michigan and Wisconsin as the mail-in ballots are counted. While the Senate is probably still under GOP control, there is still a lot of good that Biden can do with the DOJ, EPA, CDC, etc. Legislatively probably not much though, Mitch is going to go back to his old ways of blocking everything that happens.

So this is definitely a bittersweet moment. Yes, Trump will likely be gone in November. But the partisan gridlock will remain and COVID recovery will be stalled as well as Mitch has signaled he wants to swing to austerity (of course). If Peters pulls through in Michigan, which I think he will, that would give Dems an opening in 2022 to retake the Senate, but it will be an uphill battle. No idea whats happening with Maine right now, though I think Collins might somehow survive (wtf Maine). Georgia will probably be a final battle in January as that is when the runoff will be. And who knows what will happen there. But if Dems can get to 49 that would make 2022 much easier.

But there is still a lot up in the air, but the biggest takeaway is that Dems need to do more outreach to Hispanics, and also come to grips that Hispanics differ from regions and value different things, its not just about immigration issues for them. For example, the Hispanics from Central America did seem to break for Biden and helped with Arizona. But those from Cuba and Venezuela, well, the socialist accusation worked even though it held no merit. One Dem in Miami blamed BLM protests and going back and forth on them as a potential reason why Biden lost in Florida, especially with Hispanics. Though whatever Trump did, it worked in Florida. Understanding this electorate better will be key to winning in the future. No more broad brushes. Same goes for African Americans.

Another big issue was mail-in voting. A shockingly huge number of ballots were never delivered and the USPS refused to comply with an order to deliver them. I've said it before but I will say it again: the Biden campaign should have never emphasized mail-in ballots the second it was clear that the USPS was fucking with the ballot delivery and that Trump would try to invalidate those ballots. It will definitely go down as a "shooting yourself in the foot" moment.

Also can we agree that this election is likely the thing that does away with polling as a serious profession? I said that this election would be a tossup despite the rosy polls, and if it wasnt for Covid-19 then Trump would have won easily.

My own demographic (Jews) increased its support of Biden by 11 points so I guess thats a small consolation.

Trump's campaign initially invested millions in mail balloting itself.

I don't think this turnout is indicative of submerged Dem mail votes, other than on the margins in some places (which does matter, but it shouldn't).

If you think there's a problem with the polling here, why are you relying on that poll for Jewish voting behavior? Especially when the exit polls right now are expected to be error-prone, since the canvassing isn't finished and most of the polling is being done with unfamiliar methods on populations that weren't interviewed at the polls.

There's something else at work here IMO, and I'm not even talking about fraud. The polls in 2018 were very accurate, and they continue to be accurate in other countries.

If at all possible I wonder if we can analyze the timecourse of early votes for how the margins developed, pre-election day. The polls did narrow slightly in the final stretch, but there was no indication of major momentum.

And clearly there has been significant ballot-splitting somehow, with Biden benefiting. It's going to take months to hash all the data out.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Republican culture seems tough, Trump is a strong individual, the Dems look weak, they appear socialist.

The problems with the Democratic Party extend well before this election. Dems are not willing to get down in the mud and fight for the people they represent, when that becomes necessary. Not saying they should adopt the nasty tactics that the GOP regularly engages in, but sometimes you've just got to win to get what you want. The Republicans understand this, the Democrats do not.

The media has a large part in all of this. If a Democrat were to go on CNN, ABC, etc. with strong rhetoric, they likely wouldn't get invited back. So many times in the last eight months I've watched commentators ask questions of White House officials, and leading GOP politicians, get a BS reply, and not follow up by questioning the validity of statements. A few do, but Republicans have gotten away with so much mis-information and outright lies without sufficient challenge, all in the name of "being fair" to both sides of the aisle. I'm thoroughly disgusted with the state of journalism and media in this country.

The Democrats are going to have to find a leader that is dynamic and who has the ability to control the narrative. If they don't and Biden manages to win this, the Democrats will not be long in the White House. In looking back at this campaign, if the Democrats had had a candidate with the charisma of a Bill Clinton, or a Barack Obama, we'd not be having this conversation. The 'aw shucks let's have a beer and talk about this' mentality of Biden, and appealing to disenfranchised Republicans, obviously didn't work. Trump controlled the narrative from beginning to end, and the Dems were always playing defense. If it wasn't for COVID-19, this election wouldn't have even been close for CoviDon.

[Crandar]

The narrative has already begun: Blue vertical lines in the graphs indicate the injection of hundreds of thousands of Biden votes.

This is beautiful, though. The look of Lee's eyes, as the blacks are approaching dangerously close to the janitor's keys:

[Hooahguy]

If you think there's a problem with the polling here, why are you relying on that poll for Jewish voting behavior? Especially when the exit polls right now are expected to be error-prone, since the canvassing isn't finished and most of the polling is being done with unfamiliar methods on populations that weren't interviewed at the polls.

Ha, I didnt even recognize my own hypocrisy here, thanks for pointing that out! You are right, we should wait until more data comes available.

There's something else at work here IMO, and I'm not even talking about fraud. The polls in 2018 were very accurate, and they continue to be accurate in other countries.

If at all possible I wonder if we can analyze the timecourse of early votes for how the margins developed, pre-election day. The polls did narrow slightly in the final stretch, but there was no indication of major momentum.

And clearly there has been significant ballot-splitting somehow, with Biden benefiting. It's going to take months to hash all the data out.

You are right here as well, and I think this election will be studied for many years because the returns are so puzzling.

Another thing this election has shown is that the "money buys elections" line doesnt seem to hold as much weight as it used to. I mean Dems at all levels raised a buttload of money and it didnt seem to help. But also in the primaries with Bloomberg and Bernie. Does money help? Of course. But not as much as maybe we once thought.

Quick point to be made by a Latino Dem congressman about how to reach Latino voters, responding to a question on how to better reach Hispanics:

First start by not using the term Latinx. Second we have to be in front of them year round not just election years. That is what we did in AZ.

Same goes for the Black community too.

[a completely inoffensive name]

A few more optimistic thoughts now that I have had some time to digest everything that has happened.

1. This election became a battle of turnout with multiple states all within 0.5-1 point difference. Can we say with Trump's re-election on the line that this was the maximum output GOP can muster? 100% enthusiasm, crazy turnout and the dem's still has them narrowly beat (so far).

2. As a follow up, if there is no more Trump in office, who will energize the party? Trump potentially could from the outside, but he will be battling not just state courts over past transgressions but he will be 78 if he decides to run in 2024. Is this the last big hurrah for the GOP coalition?

3. If we take the optimistic view of both above, can Democrats shore up the latino vote to cut off the GOP from expanding their coalition and staying the game? Florida shows us what happens when they fail to do so, Arizona shows us what can happen when we do.

4. In 2024, Biden will be gone. Pelosi will be gone. Schumer will likely win again in 2022. But the democratic field will be increasingly dominated by fresh faces with less baggage. Will this make a difference given the strong evidence we have now that among many voters the feels and personality drive votes not the policy?

[Montmorency]

A series of articles for Biden's D1 agenda, apparently engineered on the assumption that he would not have the Senate.
https://prospect.org/day-one-agenda

Let me relate to you an encounter I had with an older Asian immigrant colleague. She remarked to me that she was worried about the riots - which had no connection to her - and that while she had no problems with White or Asian people, she (and here she hesitated) feels uncomfortable with Blacks and Latinos around. She apparently also counter-protested a BLM protest wearing a Blue Lives Matter hat and complained that they were "hostile" to her. @ Seamus

So that's a pretty modal Trump supporter, someone who has an exaggerated sense of (nonexistent) threat to herself, but no consideration for how intuitively-disfavored groups might feel about concrete threats to themselves. She's also worried about COVID and probably thinks Trump is handing out masks and doing his best. Engagement is untenable, but evidently unavoidable.


Meanwhile, the barbarians are already at the gates.

\

A few more optimistic thoughts now that I have had some time to digest everything that has happened.

1. This election became a battle of turnout with multiple states all within 0.5-1 point difference. Can we say with Trump's re-election on the line that this was the maximum output GOP can muster? 100% enthusiasm, crazy turnout and the dem's still has them narrowly beat (so far).

2. As a follow up, if there is no more Trump in office, who will energize the party? Trump potentially could from the outside, but he will be battling not just state courts over past transgressions but he will be 78 if he decides to run in 2024. Is this the last big hurrah for the GOP coalition?

3. If we take the optimistic view of both above, can Democrats shore up the latino vote to cut off the GOP from expanding their coalition and staying the game? Florida shows us what happens when they fail to do so, Arizona shows us what can happen when we do.

4. In 2024, Biden will be gone. Pelosi will be gone. Schumer will likely win again in 2022. But the democratic field will be increasingly dominated by fresh faces with less baggage. Will this make a difference given the strong evidence we have now that among many voters the feels and personality drive votes not the policy?

Oh wait. Shit. I forgot that if Trump is available to run in 2024 he will be eligible and will therefore absolutely do so. Trump-Biden 2024. What a nightmare world.

You can't "shore up" the Latino vote that way because Cubans and Venezuelans - mostly white petite bourgeois remnants themselves - are as lost a cause as rural Evangelicals. If you want to talk about shoring up the ethnic vote, look to the Puerto Ricans and Guatemalans in our coalition.

The problems with the Democratic Party extend well before this election. Dems are not willing to get down in the mud and fight for the people they represent, when that becomes necessary. Not saying they should adopt the nasty tactics that the GOP regularly engages in, but sometimes you've just got to win to get what you want. The Republicans understand this, the Democrats do not.

The media has a large part in all of this. If a Democrat were to go on CNN, ABC, etc. with strong rhetoric, they likely wouldn't get invited back. So many times in the last eight months I've watched commentators ask questions of White House officials, and leading GOP politicians, get a BS reply, and not follow up by questioning the validity of statements. A few do, but Republicans have gotten away with so much mis-information and outright lies without sufficient challenge, all in the name of "being fair" to both sides of the aisle. I'm thoroughly disgusted with the state of journalism and media in this country.

The Democrats are going to have to find a leader that is dynamic and who has the ability to control the narrative. If they don't and Biden manages to win this, the Democrats will not be long in the White House. In looking back at this campaign, if the Democrats had had a candidate with the charisma of a Bill Clinton, or a Barack Obama, we'd not be having this conversation. The 'aw shucks let's have a beer and talk about this' mentality of Biden, and appealing to disenfranchised Republicans, obviously didn't work. Trump controlled the narrative from beginning to end, and the Dems were always playing defense. If it wasn't for COVID-19, this election wouldn't have even been close for CoviDon.

The damnable question is, whatever strong narrative you could conceive of - does it matter? Does it make a difference? Will the media react? Will the public react? Or is it all baked in at the national level (with local progression and regression here and there)?

Let's say Biden were rhetorically like Sanders, as in relentlessly injecting a particular narrative (doesn't have to be Sanders own). I have no idea if it accomplishes anything. The information ecosystems are too divergent.

One thing I would say, because I'm willing to believe there at least won't be any downside, is that Dems should really make clear, at all times they're in front of the media, collectively as a messaging token, that if people expect them to legislate and get things done they need to vote Democrats into office. Educate about House and Senate, even simplistically, in sound bites.

Heck, I don't even care if you mislead the public and suggest that a specific threshold of electeds will result in a specific accomplishment.

[Pannonian]

What's the argument for stopping the vote count before the counters are finished? I saw some comments in the video about how "they have a right to see the process". What's that referring to?