There is a general consensus, bolstered by the steadiness of President Trump’s approval numbers throughout his entire tenure in office, that the country is mostly locked in and entrenched, with few undecided voters. This might be true if we’re talking only about the red/blue divide, but it certainly hasn’t been true in the Democratic primaries.
The massive swing to Joe Biden after his victory in South Carolina and subsequent endorsements by Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar and Beto O’Rourke was stronger than even the most optimistic Biden partisan was willing to predict. In fact, the safest observation right now about the Democratic electorate is that they are uncertain about what they want and who they should support. On the fringes of the party, it’s hard to even be confident that they’re totally committed to voting against Trump or voting at all.
As for true independents, the Democratic Party establishment certainly believes that a lot can hinge on whether the nominee is Biden or Sanders. Particularly with respect to affluent suburbanites who have supported both Bush and Obama or both Romney and Clinton, there’s a belief that Biden will snatch them up while Sanders will drive them away. Likewise, among Sanders’ supporters, it’s an article of faith that the youth vote will not turn out for Biden and he’ll have trouble exciting the base.
I believe these are safer assumptions, on both sides, than the idea that the country is locked in an immutable partisan standoff. I truly believe that the November election is not only up for grabs but that the result could be decided by a late and possibly dramatic swing in either direction.
For this reason, I don’t put a lot of faith in polls. I probably wouldn’t anyway after witnessing Trump’s stunning and unpredicted victory in 2016, but it’s not the inherent unreliability of polls that informs me here, but rather the example of what we just witnessed with Biden prior to Super Tuesday.
Having said that, the Democrats look like they’re currently in a pretty good position. An example from today is provided by Public Policy Polling which just found the party leading in the Senate races in Arizona, Colorado, North Carolina, and Maine. They also found both Biden and Sanders ahead in Maine by 10 points, and Biden leading in Arizona by one, while Sanders trails by one.
For context, Arizona has 11 Electoral College votes while Wisconsin only has 10, so picking up Arizona could more than compensate for a second loss in the Badger State. Meanwhile, if the Democrats really do carry those four Senate races and capture the presidency, they’ll have 50-50 control of the Senate even if they lose Sen. Doug Jones’s Alabama seat. This is because the sitting vice-president breaks ties in the Senate.
Of course, one thing that’s notable about these PPP polls is that there’s virtually no difference in how Biden and Sanders perform against Trump. One can conjecture in two directions on this. Either it makes no difference who the Democrats’ nominate and this election will be a pure referendum on Trump, or Biden and Sanders will assemble vastly different coalitions that are somehow almost exactly equivalent in how many votes they can produce.
I have trouble subscribing to either of those theories, however, and I suspect that my initial theory is more accurate. I think this election will be more volatile than people expect, and that it has the potential to break hard in one direction or the other, possibly at the last moment.
You’ve got some editing to fix (repeating of paragraphs?).
Thoughts:
1. The primary itself was driven by earned media and I don’t think we have fully understood to what extent or breadth that the race itself was affected by it. The first sign of this, to me, was Kamala Harris’s sharp rise and fall. I think AOC’s endorsement of Bernie and the coverage thereafter locked in liberal/left voters and young voters, and rescued his campaign.
2. Despite these media driven events, we are still nonetheless where you predicted we would be in the first place, and demographics would tell almost all of the story.
3. Taken these things together, I think the primary electorate was less “volatile” so much as wanting to move on to the General Election with a candidate they felt could win.
So while I do think media will have tremendous ability to shape the election despite the president’s approval rating, I still believe and always have believed it would be a referendum on Trump. I’ll close with this benchmark and we can come back to it in November: The Great Convergence.
Latinos shifted hard from HRC to Bernie this year. I’m so proud of us, and it is certain that we kept his campaign alive this week too. My parents and I have had shouting matches over Bernie for half a decade but I’ll vote to fuck Trump this November. It wouldn’t surprise me if a lot of dems just dont care about more than that.
Well, Warren is out, and she hasn’t yet made an endorsement. But I just read a very good diary on why her supporters (and I am one) should get behind Sanders. https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/3/4/1923962/-Why-I-m-Switching-to-Bernie-Sanders?utm_campaign=trending
I am not certain she needs to hurry that endorsement along. But I did like that diary you linked.
I agree. No need to rush any endorsement. Let the primary work it self out and endorse in June.
It wouldn’t surprise me if she simply didn’t endorse at all to maximize her influence on personnel decisions (like she did with HRC) on both camps and then endorsed the nominee.
Wow.
Well back to work then. Nothing galvanizes the mind like the thrashing Trump will give Biden this fall.
I plead guilty–having donated to several of the Democrats running for president
I’m all in for Joe now. The most important thing is to get Trump out (and, also too, to retake the Senate.)
The Senate is increasingly of interest to me, partly because so much coverage has focused on the presidential race. Based on what little I’ve seen, it seems like the Senate could swing wildly: from Republicans expanding their majority slightly (e.g., retake AL; hold AZ, CO, ME, NC) to Republicans holding a narrower majority (e.g., retake AL; hold ME, NC; lose AZ, CO) to Democrats winning an outright majority (e.g., lose AL; win AZ, CO, ME, NC, GA-1, MT).
Also, understandably given we’re in the middle of the primary battle, but if the election swings towards the Democrats in November, then Democrats will be in the position of “just needing a president who can sign his name” to whatever bills a Democratic Congress passes.
1. I think this is Strongman Trump’s election to lose. I believe that all things being equal, he wins the Electoral College vote. So, anyone pointing at national polls should be laughed at and then ignored. It comes down to every single state’s EC votes. It doesn’t matter if every single Californian votes for Sanders.
2. I’ve been a strong supporter of both Sanders and Warren. Here and on the old blog I’ve commented many times about how I’d love a government made up of Sanders and Warren clones. Within 10-15 years progressivism would be centrism as it totally blows out the current system of oligarchical fascism-verging-on-aristocracy. But I digress.
3. I live in GA, and I haven’t voted yet. Biden doesn’t make my top 10 list, as neither did Clinton in 2016. That said, I’ll crawl over broken glass to vote for whomever is the (D) nominee. I voted for Sanders in my state’s primary in 2016, but this year I think I might still vote for Warren if she’s on the ballot, as: a) I’m fairly certain Biden is going to mop the floor in GA, and b) given the complete failure of young people to stop staring at Tik Toks during the primary season, I believe Sanders wouldn’t pick up nearly enough new voters to offset centrists who’d leave the top of the ticket blank in the General Election. Essentially, I want to show my support for the obviously best Presidential Candidate in 50 years, without telegraphing to Bernie Bros that they’re really the majority and that they should continue acting like Sanders or Bust is a legitimate tactic.
4. To reiterate 1., anyone pointing to favorability ratings or national polls should be laughed at and then ignored. I don’t care if Biden wins 70M votes, if he loses the EC. I hope the Democratic party has figured out that its the States, stupid, and not the favorability ratings.
Thanks for your comment. Just to build on Martin’s volatile electorate insight:
1) I agree with you: it’s Trump’s election to lose. The economy’s in decent shape; the wars are simmering on the back burner as they have been for years. He should win easily.
2) There’s an utterly plausible scenario where Trump holds onto MI, PA, and WI; wins AZ, FL, NC, and TX; and cruises to reelection with over 300 electoral votes even if he loses the popular vote (which, if the electorate swings his way in the final days may not happen).
3) There’s *also* a plausible scenario where Trump loses MI, PA, and WI; loses AZ, FL, NC, and TX; and Biden (presumably) piles up over 330 electoral votes (in which case the popular vote margin could be over 5 million).
4) On top of that is the volatility of the Senate races which could range from the Republicans slightly expanding their current majority to Democrats flipping as many as a half dozen seats.
For me, all of this just reinforces the idea that just as it took decades to build and institutionalize the reactionary Republican party/movement we know today, it will take decades of hard, patient, persistent and consistent work to dismantle it.
Re: It’s Trump’s election to lose —The coronavirus says hello.