Some progress, but still a long way towards recognizing epic fails, Mr. Neuberger.
I wrote in your previous election thread that Harris was failing in all of the above categories plus some: Black men, Hispanics, working class, union, Catholics, etc etc.
I wrote also that Harris' appeal and lack of messaging was so bad that the 18-24, the Hispanic women, the college educated women, etc etc would simply not turn out.
I wrote that Trump was likely to win the popular vote (check), that Trump would win at least 300 electoral votes (check), that Trump was most likely win 312 electoral votes (check check), that Trump would sweep the Sun Belt swing states (check), and that one candidate would win all 3 Rust Belt swing states (check) and that it was likely to be Trump given all of the above (check).
None of this was accomplished reading chicken entrails - it was obvious from the polling data.
Let's also delve into the epic fails from the "left leaning" polls: Marist, Ipsos, Morning Consult, Forbes/HarrisX - every single one of them had final polls showing Harris +2 or more - meaning they were outside their own professed margin of error.
As for Bernie - whatever. The dude sold out and I DGAF what he says. That the Democrat power structure DGAF what he says should surprise no one given that he's already rolled over for said power structure not once, but continuously since his 2016 beginning.
To me - this validation for the notion that Bernie was never more than a "Price is Right" game theorist - whatever the Democrat party does, he will simply proclaim a little to the left because he has no actual principles he would fight for.
Lastly, there is no mention of the 50% fall in mail-in ballots across the country.
While I was of the opinion that 2020 was stolen legally via bureaucratic nonsense typical of the professional/managerial/bureaucract class, I am now much more heavily in the "fraud" camp. While some states changed back mail-in ballot access, many did not - primarily the True Blue states.
Yet the falloff is the same there as elsewhere...worse if anything. So unless literally half the country moved in the last 4 years into another state, something else is going on or has stopped going on.
And that something is very possibly mass ballot harvesting. Going through apartment complexes full of young people who don't vote, taking their ballots, fraudulently completing them and sending them in.
I should note further that this anomalously high turnout of low propensity Democrat voters in 2020 was not across the board. It was curiously precinct limited - as in precincts with the same lean and in the same state would have radically different turnout. I was waiting for this election to see if the same anomalous turnout would be a trend or not, but it is now clearly a one-off - which is why my "fraud" lean is much more pronounced.
Fraud has to be proven - but now any investigation can focus on these anomalous precincts and ballots/demographics and have a real chance of finding out once and for all, either way.
i’ve been thinking lately that it’s weird how the only ppl i see taking about being ‘centrist’ or ‘moderate’ are Trump voters. aughties-style centrism discourse (critiquing Ds) has disappeared. Dems call themselves “The Left” (which, they’re not). Repubs call Dems “far left” which is just lunacy.
regardless of my discomfort with nomenclature, there is a real kernel here: “left” refers to what some call “woke” politics (ID pol). a potential problem with those exit polls identifying The Economy as a vote driver, is 1) we don’t know what other options respondents were given, and 2) it’s simply not possible to separate “woke” from The Economy b/c “woke” is the bait-and-switch tactic intended to fool the rubes so they shut-up about money issues that would inconvenience the Donor Class.
Neuberger is wrong about the "Democracy at stake" vote.
A lot of the bleed from the "4 year college educated" and higher is precisely because of "Democracy at stake" - but it is that the Democrat party is now the party of war, of censorship/anti-free speech, of the Deep State/intel agencies/FBI. of banana republic style lawfare by state and federal agencies, etc etc.
The economy has not been bad for these groups so they are not motivated by the price of eggs.
“Dem at Stake” is another way the polls are confounded. DaS vote can’t be separated from free speech votes (but the exit polling appears to do that).
1A voters voted specifically on that issue and i don’t need polling to know that b/c i know the demo well enough. it’s confounded b/c the conceptual frameworks that ppl use are so vastly different. plus, a lot of Trump voters could actually say that they’re the true “Democracy” voters b/c of the lawfare, Russiagate, and election fraud concerns. additionally, Kamala’s “nomination” itself was undemocratic. they basically coup’d Biden, threw out the primaries, and announced their coronation.
on young voters: the anti-genocide/anti-war voter stands in a category all their own. i doubt any exit polling even asked about war. youth vote split btwn Jill Stein and non-voting. i think the ones who broke for DT are older, millennials or genx.
I agree with everything you wrote except "youth vote split between Jill Stein and non-voting".
Stein, and all 3rd party candidates, period, had a calamitous collapse in support in the last few days before, and including, the election.
So "split" in an absolute sense is correct but "split" as in anything approaching 50/50 - absolutely not. It was probably 90/10 not vote/3rd party candidate vote or worse - because the Stein hopeful were pushing for 5% representation when Stein achieved achieved all of 0.4% of the national vote.
Stein barely beat out RFK Jr, for crying out loud - noting that RFK Jr. was only on the ballot in non-swing states and has further joined the Trump ticket.
From Kamala’s public opinion research group (Blueprint): “The top reasons voters gave for not supporting Harris were that inflation was too high (+24), too many immigrants crossed the border (+23), and that Harris was too focused on cultural issues rather than helping the middle class (+17).”
i believe these issues aren’t separate for voters. it’s all part of the Dem brand.
Great collection of charts I'll keep a link to now that I've been kicked off Twitter again (same old same old, legacy browser can't get past the challenge—no clue what my offense was).
Some progress, but still a long way towards recognizing epic fails, Mr. Neuberger.
I wrote in your previous election thread that Harris was failing in all of the above categories plus some: Black men, Hispanics, working class, union, Catholics, etc etc.
I wrote also that Harris' appeal and lack of messaging was so bad that the 18-24, the Hispanic women, the college educated women, etc etc would simply not turn out.
I wrote that Trump was likely to win the popular vote (check), that Trump would win at least 300 electoral votes (check), that Trump was most likely win 312 electoral votes (check check), that Trump would sweep the Sun Belt swing states (check), and that one candidate would win all 3 Rust Belt swing states (check) and that it was likely to be Trump given all of the above (check).
None of this was accomplished reading chicken entrails - it was obvious from the polling data.
Let's also delve into the epic fails from the "left leaning" polls: Marist, Ipsos, Morning Consult, Forbes/HarrisX - every single one of them had final polls showing Harris +2 or more - meaning they were outside their own professed margin of error.
As for Bernie - whatever. The dude sold out and I DGAF what he says. That the Democrat power structure DGAF what he says should surprise no one given that he's already rolled over for said power structure not once, but continuously since his 2016 beginning.
To me - this validation for the notion that Bernie was never more than a "Price is Right" game theorist - whatever the Democrat party does, he will simply proclaim a little to the left because he has no actual principles he would fight for.
Lastly, there is no mention of the 50% fall in mail-in ballots across the country.
While I was of the opinion that 2020 was stolen legally via bureaucratic nonsense typical of the professional/managerial/bureaucract class, I am now much more heavily in the "fraud" camp. While some states changed back mail-in ballot access, many did not - primarily the True Blue states.
Yet the falloff is the same there as elsewhere...worse if anything. So unless literally half the country moved in the last 4 years into another state, something else is going on or has stopped going on.
And that something is very possibly mass ballot harvesting. Going through apartment complexes full of young people who don't vote, taking their ballots, fraudulently completing them and sending them in.
This graph from ZeroHedge says it all: https://www.moonofalabama.org/19i/wokedems2.jpg
I should note further that this anomalously high turnout of low propensity Democrat voters in 2020 was not across the board. It was curiously precinct limited - as in precincts with the same lean and in the same state would have radically different turnout. I was waiting for this election to see if the same anomalous turnout would be a trend or not, but it is now clearly a one-off - which is why my "fraud" lean is much more pronounced.
Fraud has to be proven - but now any investigation can focus on these anomalous precincts and ballots/demographics and have a real chance of finding out once and for all, either way.
i’ve been thinking lately that it’s weird how the only ppl i see taking about being ‘centrist’ or ‘moderate’ are Trump voters. aughties-style centrism discourse (critiquing Ds) has disappeared. Dems call themselves “The Left” (which, they’re not). Repubs call Dems “far left” which is just lunacy.
regardless of my discomfort with nomenclature, there is a real kernel here: “left” refers to what some call “woke” politics (ID pol). a potential problem with those exit polls identifying The Economy as a vote driver, is 1) we don’t know what other options respondents were given, and 2) it’s simply not possible to separate “woke” from The Economy b/c “woke” is the bait-and-switch tactic intended to fool the rubes so they shut-up about money issues that would inconvenience the Donor Class.
Neuberger is wrong about the "Democracy at stake" vote.
A lot of the bleed from the "4 year college educated" and higher is precisely because of "Democracy at stake" - but it is that the Democrat party is now the party of war, of censorship/anti-free speech, of the Deep State/intel agencies/FBI. of banana republic style lawfare by state and federal agencies, etc etc.
The economy has not been bad for these groups so they are not motivated by the price of eggs.
“Dem at Stake” is another way the polls are confounded. DaS vote can’t be separated from free speech votes (but the exit polling appears to do that).
1A voters voted specifically on that issue and i don’t need polling to know that b/c i know the demo well enough. it’s confounded b/c the conceptual frameworks that ppl use are so vastly different. plus, a lot of Trump voters could actually say that they’re the true “Democracy” voters b/c of the lawfare, Russiagate, and election fraud concerns. additionally, Kamala’s “nomination” itself was undemocratic. they basically coup’d Biden, threw out the primaries, and announced their coronation.
on young voters: the anti-genocide/anti-war voter stands in a category all their own. i doubt any exit polling even asked about war. youth vote split btwn Jill Stein and non-voting. i think the ones who broke for DT are older, millennials or genx.
I agree with everything you wrote except "youth vote split between Jill Stein and non-voting".
Stein, and all 3rd party candidates, period, had a calamitous collapse in support in the last few days before, and including, the election.
So "split" in an absolute sense is correct but "split" as in anything approaching 50/50 - absolutely not. It was probably 90/10 not vote/3rd party candidate vote or worse - because the Stein hopeful were pushing for 5% representation when Stein achieved achieved all of 0.4% of the national vote.
Stein barely beat out RFK Jr, for crying out loud - noting that RFK Jr. was only on the ballot in non-swing states and has further joined the Trump ticket.
From Kamala’s public opinion research group (Blueprint): “The top reasons voters gave for not supporting Harris were that inflation was too high (+24), too many immigrants crossed the border (+23), and that Harris was too focused on cultural issues rather than helping the middle class (+17).”
i believe these issues aren’t separate for voters. it’s all part of the Dem brand.
Great collection of charts I'll keep a link to now that I've been kicked off Twitter again (same old same old, legacy browser can't get past the challenge—no clue what my offense was).
Cribbed from this morning's Naked Capitalism, I found History Unfolding's take on the cycles of American politics to be especially informative: https://historyunfolding.blogspot.com/2024/11/the-fourth-great-crisis-in-us-political.html