Nov.07

electoral-vote.com

Dem 50

   

GOP 50

"Where Are We a Week Before the Election?": Readers Who Think We Were Right

Last Monday, we had an item where we proposed that the country, as a whole, has moved to the right since 2008 while the Democrats have been moving to the left. If true, that would explain some of the blue team's high-profile failures in the past decade or so.

We got a lot of response to that item. Today, we will run six responses from folks who generally agree with our assessment. Later in the week, we will run six responses from readers who disagree, and then six responses from readers who have other theories/thoughts. For now, the "we agree" responses:

• J.D.M. in Cottonwood Shores, TX: I think your multi-point explanation of the electoral shift to the right in U.S. politics is a decent beginning. Backlash to the election of a Black president? You betcha. Backlash to recent moves in society to the left? Yes, but I think those moves have been cultural more than political and they have been more global than national. I would refer you to this excellent Ezra Klein podcast. Of course, it is the Republicans' super-power that they can turn these cultural changes into political issues.
  
  I would offer some additional ideas for your readers' consideration.
  
  First, I must take your staff statistician to task for a horrendous take on Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-VT) popularity with American voters. I will do so with this simple example: The spring game for the UCLA football team was attended by "several hundred fans."" Let's be generous and say it was 515 persons. The Princeton home game against Havard was attended by 10,033 fans. So the Bruins, by your methodology, are only 5.13% as popular as the Tigers. We will never know how Bernie would have done in the regular election, but using his vote totals from the primary (where Hillary Clinton only got 16 million votes of her own) is statistical malpractice. Apparently, Trump pollsters thought he would have had a better chance to win than Hillary.
  
  What is a better way to measure the popularity of what Bernie is selling? Well, it is no secret that he is selling Medicare-For-All (69% approval), a $15/hour minimum wage (62% approval), and the Green New Deal (60% approval). All of this support has increased since he started campaigning based on his program to return a fair share of our prosperity to the working and middle class.
  
  So here is where I would offer some additional ideas to explain our current political predicament. As you yourselves noted, John Fetterman seems to be doing well with more liberal policy positions since he is mixing that with authentic concern for the working/middle classes. I would posit that the problem for Democrats is not too much liberal policy, but rather, not enough support for the working masses. Biden didn't win because he was more moderate than Clinton (he wasn't), but because he cultivated the aura of his working class roots. With the stench of NAFTA clinging to her, Hillary supported the TPP until she was forced to change her position late in the campaign. Trump scored big points in their debates on this issue.
  
  The second idea is a question, really. How do you increase the turnout of your supporters? I think that the elusive moderate independent voter may not actually exist in very large numbers. So, would a campaign that excites young voters enough to go to the trouble to vote work better? It seemed to work for Obama, but then his campaign excited a lot of voters. And in addition to a long history of poor turnout by younger voters, new voter ID laws have made it a lot harder for college students to vote. Do you really want to change your driver's license every time you change dorms?
  
  Then there is the problem that a stunning percentage of our voters are very poorly informed. When you are the party of ideas and policies, it is hard to sell yourself to people who aren't paying attention.
  
  And finally, as always, it is the messaging. I cannot think of a worse slogan in all of my fifty years of political activism than "defund the police."" The policy idea is not so radical: Let's have trained social workers be the first responders when the problem is someone having a mental health episode instead of armed police officers who are (rightfully) trained to be alert to threats to their lives. But, OMG, the slogan...
  
  
• D.R. in Massapequa Park, NY : I was thinking a lot about what you wrote: "Young Democrats who are disappointed that Biden didn't carry out the program of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) often go off and sulk and don't vote." I have been very vocal for years that this attitude will catch up to them and the Dobbs decision is just the tip of the iceberg. Gay rights, transgender rights, birth control, freedom of any religion (besides a Handmaid's Tale version of Christianity) are all on the chopping block. Do you really think you're "sending a message" by refusing to vote for the Democrat who "uses the wrong pronouns"? Wait till the GOP rams through legislation to strip the LGBTQ+ community of all rights and possibly humanity You think you're "sending a message' by not voting for a democrats who don't back 100% forgiveness of your student loans? Wait till the GOP lets banks charge interest rates that would make the Gambino family a better option to borrow money from. While you are too pure to vote for anything half a step to the right of Bernie the GOP will gladly make things worse for you all in the name of your purity. It's a marathon not a sprint; the GOP bided its time for 50 years to overturn Roe. You on the far left might need to learn from their patience.
  
  
• D.R. in Kensington, MD: My original reaction to your post about the country moving to the right was that the Electoral College moved to the right. And the gerrymandered House also moved to the right.
  
  But then I looked at the Senate, starting in January 2009. These states had two Democrats:
  
  
  • Arkansas
  • Montana
  • North Dakota
  • West Virginia
  
  Democrats also had at least one senator from:
  
  
  • Alaska
  • Iowa
  • Florida
  • Louisiana
  • Missouri
  • Nebraska
  • South Dakota
  
  So I think you're right, something has changed, something has shifted—Democrats used to win in states where they probably can't break 40% anymore. But I seriously struggle to see how voting for Obama (they had to know he was Black as a candidate), and then voting for Obama again (really, they must have known he was Black by then) would cause someone to vote for Trump because (shock!) Obama was Black.
  
  
• P. K. W. in Chicago, IL: I have long said that Obama winning the presidency was the equivalent of shoving a fire hose down a rat hole; it forced the rats into the light.
  
  
• S.P. in Harrisburg, PA: I agree with your comments that the Democrats have gone too far to the left. Joe Biden won in 2020 partly by running as a centrist, and partly by a negative reaction to Donald Trump's mean, late night tweets.
  
  One other point, though, is that no other administration in a generation has had such a negative impact on people's standard of living in such a short amount of time. With inflation hovering at about 8 percent, gas prices way up, and groceries up about 13 percent in the last year, increases in people's expenses are far exceeding their increases in salaries. Wait until heating season really starts and see how much more people need to spend on heating their homes. During this administration, people's quality of life is worse than under Trump, from a purely economic standpoint. Under Trump, the economy was great up until COVID. People voted against Trump because they did not like his demeanor, his personal style. But if you turn off the TV and stop following his tweets, it absolutely does not affect you.
  
  You assert that the Republicans have no platform to run on, but I would claim that they do not need one in this election—they just need to say they will stop this administration. I predict a huge red wave.
  
  
• P.L. in Denver, CO: I think you are spot on with your analysis. I should tell you I am an urban westerner but I grew up in the mills and mines culture near Pittsburgh, PA. So, I am familiar with blue-collar points of view.
  
  I know some very smart people from there that have bought the MAGA line. It baffles me to some extent, but I know of a few themes that go into their thinking. First, it is a 100% gun culture. Second, they hate political correctness and love the tough-guy image. Third, the increasing diversity of our population bothers them. Fourth, while the city of Pittsburgh and some of the surrounding areas have prospered, the area is also littered with run-down dying towns. This certainly breeds anger.
  
  Now for a bit of a weird observation.
  
  I just returned from a 12-day trip to Uzbekistan that included a day trip into Tajikistan. We were a group of four ladies (two in their sixties and two in their seventies). We had a private tour. We found the people to be super friendly and helpful. Our guide in Tajikistan was a very nice 36-year-old man. When we took a lunch break, we were chatting with him. Somehow we wandered into the subject of Trump where we had a friendly exchange. Here are some highlights from that conversation:
  
  
  • He asked us if we liked Trump. The four of us (retired, professional ladies) immediately said "NO!."
  • He asked why. We peppered him with a few things.
  • He brought up that Biden seemed to be too old and was out of it.
  • Then he told us he liked Trump! We asked why?
  • He then tells us that Trump takes no grief, trashes the media, he was a tough guy.
  • We asked him where he gets his news. He said they get only Russian TV there. But, he watches YouTube!
  
  Later on, we were talking about sports. He did not care for soccer, but he loved boxing, judo, and karate (martial arts are a big thing in Central Asia).
  
  My friends and I were discussing this later. It occurred to me that our guide probably shared some of the characteristics of the MAGA-loving guys in the U.S. They take no offense to Trump's nasty and inappropriate behavior. And they like that he will put people in their place and be tough.
  
  Incidentally, we were also told that 50,000 Russians had gone into Uzbekistan to run from the war. They indicated that the government and people were supportive of this, but the influx has caused some problems and also housing prices have gone up. I met an American girl teaching English in Tblisi, Georgia. She had similar comments about the influx of Russians, which I believe is much higher in Georgia.

Thanks to the six of you! The plan is to run the "you are wrong" set on Wednesday. We have something else planned for tomorrow that is very timely. (V & Z)