Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In NC, sure. In PA, maybe notWhich comes back to the circular argument that you want the right voter turnout to be high.
But I am simply saying as an aggregate matter, without distinguish which group is which, it is not helpful to have high turnout today.
That's maybe true. Like I said, there can be multiple non-linearities in the function. If you divide the electorate into five groups based on likelihood to vote, there's no reason a party can't be strong with groups 1 and 4.Which comes back to the circular argument that you want the right voter turnout to be high.
But I am simply saying as an aggregate matter, without distinguish which group is which, it is not helpful to have high turnout today.
Where did you get that statistic? Is that today or from early voting?If women are outvoting men by 13% in PA and 11% in NC then there is no fuggin way a higher voter turnout is not good.
From a tweet on the last page here.Where did you get that statistic? Is that today or from early voting?
You’re talking about a pre-Dobbs landscape. Things have changed. The higher the turnout today, the better.But I am simply saying as an aggregate matter, without distinguish which group is which, it is not helpful to have high turnout today.
Least engaged voters are Rogan Bros. And I am praying they stay home.That's maybe true. Like I said, there can be multiple non-linearities in the function. If you divide the electorate into five groups based on likelihood to vote, there's no reason a party can't be strong with groups 1 and 4.
I suspect that Kamala does best with highly engaged voters; trump does better with less engaged voters; and Kamala again best with the least engaged voters.
Do you mean more total, or more as a percentage of the total electorate? The former is pretty much guaranteed, but I'm not sure the latter is.If more women dont vote this year than 2020, I think everyone would be FLOORED
WutI’ve posted this to you before, but I think high turnout favors Trump more than Harris. I’ve been rooting for a low turnout day.
Would have hoped for abortion to be higher. But - probably not too bad over all? Probably depends on how many of the "democracy" folks voted for Trump vs how many of the "economy" folks voted for Harris.Exit poll in swing states, top issue
State of democracy 35
Economy 31
Abortion 14
Immigration 11
Foreign policy 4
That is a fucking outstanding cross-tab if true.Exit poll in swing states, top issue
State of democracy 35
Economy 31
Abortion 14
Immigration 11
Foreign policy 4
Nobody voting for Trump has democracy as their #1 issue. Or at least hardly anyone. And there will be plenty of people voting for Kamala based on the economy.Would have hoped for abortion to be higher. But - probably not too bad over all? Probably depends on how many of the "democracy" folks voted for Trump vs how many of the "economy" folks voted for Harris.
I had the same reaction.That is a fucking outstanding cross-tab if true.
If you had told me yesterday that, on issues, democracy + abortion = economy + immigration + 7, I'd have been thrilled.
Wut wut?
I dunno. It wouldn't surprise me for 15% of the "Democracy" people to be Trump supporters. Musk et al are really pushing that Harris will kill free speech, make us a one-party state, etc. Complete hogwash, but they're messaging it hard.Nobody voting for Trump has democracy as their #1 issue. Or at least hardly anyone. And there will be plenty of people voting for Kamala based on the economy.
In my amateur but informed view, this is "Kamala wins easily" territory. If true. Exit polls aren't great at predictions.
He's assuming the "economy" voters are mostly or all Trump voters (which is probably the correct assumption)Sure about that? 47+% of the nation has been convinced this is a shit economy.