There are a few odd but interesting things in Nate Cohn’s analysis of recent polls. For example, Joe Biden is now close to erasing the Republicans’ traditional advantage with white voters, but he’s underperforming Hillary Clinton with blacks and hispanics. While it’s been widely reported that Biden is winning with voters over 65, ordinarily the GOP’s strongest demographic, he actually hasn’t made any new ground with them since May. His recent gains are coming from improvement with younger voters.
This last point doesn’t surprise me and I predicted that young supporters of Bernie Sanders would get over their hurt feelings well before November. They still are more reluctant than older voters to give Biden positive favorable numbers, but that should also continue to improve. As for the over 65 crowd, it could be that Biden just maxxed out. If I have a possible explanation for why Biden isn’t doing as well with minorities, it might be that polls show they simply aren’t as engaged or “paying attention” at the same rate as whites. As Election Day nears, everyone will be engaged, and it’s likely that undecided blacks and hispanics will solidify behind the former vice-president.
What appears to be the most consequential change is Republicans’ dwindling advantage with whites. As Cohn points out, this could lead to previously unimaginable losses for the GOP in congressional and Senate races. It could turn states like Texas, Kansas and Alaska blue. But I also think it’s part of the reason we’re seeing a mood change on white supremacy in general. It helps explain why Confederate statues are coming down and Congress just passed a defense spending bill that mandates that Confederate names are removed from military bases and ships. It helps explain why police unions are suddenly on the defensive against demands for reform. And, I think, it is also behind the general feeling by a lot of folks that they’re being “canceled.”
David Brooks is whining in the New York Times that people like Andrew Sullivan are suddenly unemployable, but this isn’t an example of the left suddenly becoming intolerant of diverse viewpoints. That’s like arguing that police chokeholds are being banned because the left suddenly discovered that they kill people. What actually happened is that public opinion finally tipped in the left’s direction, and a practice that was formerly tolerated because whites supported it, is no longer tolerated because whites changed their mind. The same can be said for publishing people who argue for the inherent superiority of white people. The same can be said for naming your sports team the “Redskins” or having a racist mascot like the Cleveland Indians’ Chief Wahoo.
These things were “normal” and accepted only so long as whites accepted them in large numbers. Trump’s excesses have jolted enough whites to not only lose him support, but to lose support for many of the structurally racist things that have gone unexamined outside of leftist circles.
The change can manifest in simple ways, like people losing jobs they previously would have kept after saying or doing racist things. But the overall impact is complex and hard to predict. What we’re seeing is a lot of people who were previously safe and comfortable now getting called out for holding certain beliefs. It’s not a surprise that they howl like a scalded cat when they suddenly get burned.
This change in public opinion is going to change the country. The base and sports name changes are a precursor for the political realignment that’s coming in the election. Once political power resides on the left, we’ll see more transformation, and a lot more howling.
5
As a latino/hispanic guy…. I find Trader Jose’s to be funny and endearing.
Also one does not need to like a politician to approve of their policies or to vote for them and a lot of hispanics liked Bernie.
I don’t understand this comment.
Fair enough. 2 seperate thoughts. First is in reference to people feeling cancelled and more howling later. I was also thinking of one of your older posts about how things may change so much you have a notable divide between pre-2020 and post-2020 attitudes like the 60s.
Specifically in regards to the 17 year old white girl that started the push to get Trader Joe’s to stop using branding like Trader Jose’s and how I, as a latino guy, liked it. I am not the only one. A more well known example is how Speedy Gonzalez was fairly popular in Latin America. So if the people group being stereotyped approve, is it paternalistic or a sign of hubris to do something like what that girl did?
The other was in regards to how you think Biden’s positive numbers will improve. I was saying that wont necessarily happen and because Latinos were on my mind made a reference to how positively Bernie was recieved among Latinos in the SW. I was implying that they and voters like these inuding younger voters may never like Biden as opposed to your possible explanation of current disengagement or primary wounds healing. Notably Biden is clearly winning the support of those who dislike both him and Trump while Clinton lost it.
The Cosplay Marxists of Twitter rejoiced in Trump’s 2016 election because it would “heighten the contradictions” and finally bring about the revolution they have been waiting for since 1848. Turns out it will just bring about Joe Biden and Tom Hickenlooper.
*John* Hickenlooper.
I’d also like to correct the commenter to an extent, because as someone who is on the socialist left but not a fan of accelerationism, electing someone as terrible as Trump is the only thing that is going to make any sort of progressive governance possible. Biden wouldn’t be up 10 points facing someone else. And Biden having 55 senators who will scrap the filibuster is worth a lot more to me than Bernie having 51 senators who wouldn’t scrap it. Now I don’t think Biden is worth that much more than Bernie, but he did demonstrate 1-3 points better on a consistent basis. It could tilt some of these states. It’s always been Biden’s best argument.
Hillary Clinton would be getting destroyed right now because the Republicans would not have allowed any employment protections to pass. She’d have had to resort to extra-legal maneuvers and I’m not sure she’d be prepared to execute. As we can see right now, Mitch McConnell thought he could delay passing another package by waiting until the last minute, thinking he’s pocketing leverage when all he has done is shoot himself (and the unemployed, I’m afraid) in the dick. If they cannot even manage to HELP Trump’s prospects, they’d have done all they could to destroy hers.
Now, I voted for Clinton in a state Trump was going to win by overwhelming margins. I wanted her to win. And I didn’t care if my vote counted in the electoral college or not, I wanted to add to her vote total. And Trump wasn’t worth it. But we have the chance to permanently empower Democrats in the next Congress: add states, pass voter reforms, stop John Roberts’ assault on the right to vote, and rescue us from pandemic and climate hell. And it wouldn’t be possible unless Trump was president.
In fact starting to hear rumblings of 60 actually being possible if very unlikely. It’s like how you got massive blue waves after Bush drove the country into a ditch. This time we better not waste the chance.
Democrats would have to hold all seats and unseat (easiest to hardest)
McSally
Gardner
Tillis
Collins
Ernst
Daines
Loeffler
Perdue
And win Kansas to get to 56, which seems to be their upper limit based on current polling. To get to 60 they need to beat
Sullivan
McConnell
Graham
Cornyn
I could see beating Sullivan and maybe Cornyn of those four, but not McConnell or Graham.
4.5
5
You have been making a convincing case that public opinion is realigning, and turning against Trump and the GOP in general. So in a fair election that is not being tampered with, the data all indicate massive losses for the GOP in November.
But the same GOP is in fact engaged in multi-prong efforts to suppress Democratic voters. The hacking of election machines by the Russians in 2016 has gone completely unanswered: Unless I have missed something, absolutely no steps have been taken to secure voting hardware from hacking. The USPS itself is under attack, apparently with the intent of also suppressing mail-in ballots which are heavily favoring Democratic voting this season.
I’m curious about how you see these two forces interacting, come November. If Trump wins with 49% of the popular vote, how should we interpret that? If we conclude our election has been stolen, what plans should the Democratic Party have in place to react to this, or ideally prevent it?
5
5
5