EXIT POLLS & TURNOUT DATA - The Red Shift

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 573
  • Views: 16K
  • Politics 
It might have something to do with the realization that your proposed strategy is an objectively terrible idea.

The success rate of major party candidates from the same party as a non-term-limited incumbent remains zero.
Perhaps. But still better than the one that they went with, which you championed.
 
Perhaps. But still better than the one that they went with, which you championed.
How do you know if it's better? Speculation?

Here's what we need to do: rein in the primary system. It doesn't need to consume us for eighteen months before the general election even starts. That's ultimately why this happened. If Biden's decision to run could have been delayed until late 2023, gearing up for a primary campaign starting in early 2024 with the first contests in March, I bet things would have turned out differently. But by making the deadline, so to speak, the end of 2022, we put Biden in a no win situation.

A better approach would be not to elect senior citizens to the office. Well -- we had to win in 2020. We did what we needed to do.
 
I actually think the Republicans underperformed in House and Senate races. They had a small House majority and will havew about the same when all is in. they will gain 3-4 in Senate but Dems had 10 more seats at staks this cycle than Repbulbicans
Which leadsd to two thoughts:
1) people are still not ready to vote for a woman President
2) Harris was not the best candicate or did not run the right campaign strategy.

I believe in both the peacful transition of power amd no person is above the law #1 is happening, hopefully #2 will as well. If it does not, this will snowball into really bad scenarios IMO
 
I doubt if we've ever had a president more protected from criticism, especially from his side. I don't have a good feeling about Trump considering himself subject to the law and experience will have borne him out.
 
How do you know if it's better? Speculation?

Here's what we need to do: rein in the primary system. It doesn't need to consume us for eighteen months before the general election even starts. That's ultimately why this happened. If Biden's decision to run could have been delayed until late 2023, gearing up for a primary campaign starting in early 2024 with the first contests in March, I bet things would have turned out differently. But by making the deadline, so to speak, the end of 2022, we put Biden in a no win situation.

A better approach would be not to elect senior citizens to the office. Well -- we had to win in 2020. We did what we needed to do.
Isn't it obvious that it would have been better for us if Biden had of stepped aside earlier than he did? Kamala had no time to campaign, and we didn't have a chance to vote for who we wanted to run.

I get it, you think Biden was a hero for what he did. Many disagree.
 
Isn't it obvious that it would have been better for us if Biden had of stepped aside earlier than he did? Kamala had no time to campaign, and we didn't have a chance to vote for who we wanted to run.

I get it, you think Biden was a hero for what he did. Many disagree.
1. Hindsight is 20/20. As I said, the decision would have been made around 2022. Well, how did the 2022 elections go for us? We overperformed expectations, even with Joe.

There was no real reason to think at that point that Biden wouldn't be able to run again. His fastball was gone in 2020 and he won. Everything I have read and what I've seen is that Biden's decline really started to accelerate sometime in late 2023.

2. If you're not even going to bother to address the main point here, why are you responding? Non-incumbent candidates from the incumbent's party basically never win in the US. The last time it happened was 1988. The time before that was . . . Calvin Coolidge? I suppose maybe you could say Truman since he didn't actually win election in 44, but the track record is horrible. And in this election, we saw in real time why. The idea that Kamala should have run as a change agent is preposterous.

3. Primaries are so overrated as candidate selection processes. Primaries gave us Mondale, Dukakis and Kerry. They gave the GOP Dole and McCain. Hell, the primaries gave us Joe Biden in the first place.

Mainly what primaries do is give jobs to campaign professionals, consume a huge amount of money, drive TV news coverage and stoke bitter rivalries inside the party. I'm not saying we should necessarily go back to smoke filled back rooms, but we didn't lose for lack of a primary.
 
1. Hindsight is 20/20. As I said, the decision would have been made around 2022. Well, how did the 2022 elections go for us? We overperformed expectations, even with Joe.

There was no real reason to think at that point that Biden wouldn't be able to run again. His fastball was gone in 2020 and he won. Everything I have read and what I've seen is that Biden's decline really started to accelerate sometime in late 2023.

2. If you're not even going to bother to address the main point here, why are you responding? Non-incumbent candidates from the incumbent's party basically never win in the US. The last time it happened was 1988. The time before that was . . . Calvin Coolidge? I suppose maybe you could say Truman since he didn't actually win election in 44, but the track record is horrible. And in this election, we saw in real time why. The idea that Kamala should have run as a change agent is preposterous.

3. Primaries are so overrated as candidate selection processes. Primaries gave us Mondale, Dukakis and Kerry. They gave the GOP Dole and McCain. Hell, the primaries gave us Joe Biden in the first place.

Mainly what primaries do is give jobs to campaign professionals, consume a huge amount of money, drive TV news coverage and stoke bitter rivalries inside the party. I'm not saying we should necessarily go back to smoke filled back rooms, but we didn't lose for lack of a primary.
No one is saying that we lost because of not having a primary. Many are saying that the option/route we took was not as good as it would have been if Biden had of stepped aside earlier. What do you want me to address about your point? Sure, what you are saying happened. I'm not saying it didn't. However, past performance is no guarantee of future results. It was clear that Biden was sticking around for far too long, well before his horrible performance at the debate. We were pointing out as much, only to be chastised by folks, including you. Trying to hide his health, age, decline, etc., or ignore it was never a good option to take. (Just like saying "out economy is great right now" is no way to appeal to the many folks who are not experiencing a great economy.) Being up front and open goes a long ways, imo.

I appreciate your input and value your wisdom on our board, but you are not going to convince me that Biden hanging on for as long as he did didn't have a negative impact on this election. I'll let you have the last word, allowing you to spin it however you feel is important to you.
 
GbyzHYSXcAkhWqu?format=png&name=900x900.png

"millennial men were too busy quoting anchorman and figuring out new, innovative ways to sack tap each other to get radicalized by the far right and I love them for that." Samantha Ruddy in twitter post.
 
From an NBC News article I saw. Trump got 45% of Latino vote, which beat the Republican record of 44% set by Bush in 2004. If you want to blame anyone for putting Trump in office, the obvious answer is blame white voters, just like in 2016
 


“… Elsewhere, Anson County, N.C., which is 40% African American, voted GOP for only the second time since Reconstruction. And Bucks County, Pa., an upper-income suburb outside Philadelphia, went Republican for the first time in more than 35 years.

… Across the board, there’s been a rise in the share of paycheck-to-paycheck households since 2019, BofA said. One in four households fits the bill.

… That prompted voters to look for someone to upend the status quo, and they gravitated toward Trump for his tough talk and uncompromising attitude, regardless of how they felt about him personally, Luntz explained.…”

Disappointment is going to have a full dance card.
 
Need to stress populism entrepreneurship, fairness and equality of opportunity. Tax the wealthy a bit hjgher and give that back to middle and lower classes as child care credits. Same for large bushinesses. Tax them a bit more and set some common sense general regulartory rules and don't try the Lena Khan nanny state. What will happen now is that regulartion will swing way too far in the other direction adn we will have a financial or real estate system crash because people go crazy with exotic finanicial instruments, including leverage, bitcoin etc. Clinton inherited a savings and loan crisis from the Rs, Obama a complete financial system collapse from Rs, and Biden would have faced similar except the pandemic did the crashing.
 
No, I'm talking actual variety. Fewer fruits and spices. A smaller variety of restaurants. Literally everything.
When and where I grew up there were two grocery chains. There are at least 4 options now. Where I currently live I can be at any one of 6 different grocery chains in less than 10 minutes. Then there are the Latin, East Asian, Indian specialty grocers, a very comprehensive butcher/deli and a reliable fish/seafood market.
 
When and where I grew up there were two grocery chains. There are at least 4 options now. Where I currently live I can be at any one of 6 different grocery chains in less than 10 minutes. Then there are the Latin, East Asian, Indian specialty grocers, a very comprehensive butcher/deli and a reliable fish/seafood market.
Where I grew up there was a little country store that had the basics a mile from the house down a dirt road. I don't think there was what you would consider a grocery store within five miles. I was 16 before I saw a pizza, 18 before I saw a taco. There was one or two kinds of mustard, ketchup or mayonnaise. As late as the early 70s , there was only one single malt scotches, Glenfiddich and two kinds of rye, 80 proof Jim Beam and Wild Turkey 101. The list goes on and on. There are fruits and nut either available all year and a lot that we never even heard of.
 
No one is saying that we lost because of not having a primary. Many are saying that the option/route we took was not as good as it would have been if Biden had of stepped aside earlier. What do you want me to address about your point? Sure, what you are saying happened. I'm not saying it didn't. However, past performance is no guarantee of future results. It was clear that Biden was sticking around for far too long, well before his horrible performance at the debate. We were pointing out as much, only to be chastised by folks, including you. Trying to hide his health, age, decline, etc., or ignore it was never a good option to take. (Just like saying "out economy is great right now" is no way to appeal to the many folks who are not experiencing a great economy.) Being up front and open goes a long ways, imo.

I appreciate your input and value your wisdom on our board, but you are not going to convince me that Biden hanging on for as long as he did didn't have a negative impact on this election. I'll let you have the last word, allowing you to spin it however you feel is important to you.
1. That's what I want you to say. The track record of running against a same-party incumbent is terrible. And your very next sentence is a good rejoinder: past performance is no guarantee of future results.

I've said that I think Biden stepping aside in 2022 was a bad idea, but upon reflection, I think what I really mean is that it was a risky choice. Basically, "past performance is no guarantee" can be translated as "I don't really have a strong reason to think this will work, but the status quo seems bad." And when the status quo is a fast lane to a Trump presidency, I can understand the appeal. Personality-wise, I don't like doing things without good reason. Sometimes that's a good strategy in life, and sometimes it is not.

2. To build on this point, if we interpret my position retroactively as more of a concern about the riskiness of the choice, then my other point also requires a bit of change. It's not necessarily that Biden made the right decision, as much as I don't think he made a wrong one. Not all decisions that turn out poorly are bad. Sometimes things just don't work. The case for jettisoning him in 2022 was not strong. It was largely based on vibes and speculation. I don't think it's fair to fault a lot of people for failure to jump on board a highly unorthodox strategy that is based on speculation and feels. After all, we really don't know what would have happened if Biden had said he wouldn't run in 2022.

3. I don't remember all the details and the timing, but I think I was chastising folks who were talking about Biden's age after the time for a real primary process had passed. Once it was clear that Biden was going to win the primaries, the time for lamenting his age was over. If I was chastising people for talking about it in early 2022, then that was a mistake on my part.

4. Pelosi and others are talking about how we would have done better with a primary.

5. Generally, I'm a believer in not talking shit in public about your party. I didn't always used to be that way. 2000 and 2016 opened my eyes. Maybe I've taken it too far, but the overlap between "liberals talking shit about Dems" and "Dems losing elections" is quite high and we can add another item to that list now. In fairness, there's a chicken-and-egg issue. Maybe liberals start talking shit in elections when the elections are going badly for Dems on other grounds. I'm pretty sure that's not the case in 2000. 2016 is mixed. 2024 maybe the shit talking was reaction, not cause.
 
Where I grew up there was a little country store that had the basics a mile from the house down a dirt road. I don't think there was what you would consider a grocery store within five miles. I was 16 before I saw a pizza, 18 before I saw a taco. There was one or two kinds of mustard, ketchup or mayonnaise. As late as the early 70s , there was only one single malt scotches, Glenfiddich and two kinds of rye, 80 proof Jim Beam and Wild Turkey 101. The list goes on and on. There are fruits and nut either available all year and a lot that we never even heard of.
And beer. I remember when Lowenbrau was the good stuff. The availability of a variety of food has definitely never been better. I don’t remember any boxed foods for special/sensitive diets. Gluten free? lol
 
It is well known or discussed that globally incumbents are having problems, here are some specifics in this twitter thread (sorry anti-twitter folks)


"Three big lessons here IMHO - (1) voters have been punishing incumbents everywhere, regardless of political orientation, length in office etc (2) Voters have been switching to all kinds of opposition, regardless of political orientation but...(3) radical anti-system parties (of right and left) have done well in many places, again regardless of who's in govt"
 
Back
Top