Which datapoint/state result is being most criminally underreported by pundits?

[Matty]

Which result do you think is getting a surprising low amount of attention, focus, and analysis on?

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

In the presidential race, Arizona, no question. Second place is Nevada. For Senate races, Paul v. Gray.

[Arbitrage1980]

At the presidential election, there are so many to list given how fascinating and utterly insane this election was. But here are some of my favorites:

1. Trump coming fairly close in MN and ME.
2. The suburban Atlanta counties of Cobb and Gwinnett going for a Democrat for the first time since 1976.
3. Trump's 8% margin in Ohio is the largest since HW Bush's in 1988.
4. Trump's 9.4% margin in Iowa is larger than his margin in Texas and is even larger than Reagan's margin in that state in 1984.
5. Trump's raw vote total in Manhattan (roughly 55,000) is on par with Rutherford B. Hayes' total in the borough in 1876.
6. Trump's raw vote margin in Texas is less than his raw vote margin of defeat in Massachusetts.

[Arbitrage1980]

Georgia. All the evidence is pointing out that the state was close despite the fact that black turnout was horrifically down in the southern, black belt part of the state, almost exclusively in rural areas. If Hillary had matched Obama's numbers in these counties outside metro Atlanta, she probably would've come within 1-2 points of actually winning the state. This supports my theory that in 2020, Booker would be best positioned to flip the state if he can gin up Obama-level enthusiasm among minorities (and I have no reason to doubt he would) while holding onto and expanding Hillary's insane numbers in metro Atlanta (which I see no good reason why he wouldn't)

It really depends on Trump's performance during his first term, state of the economy, and how Booker positions himself. Cobb and Gwinnett are not liberal counties (I grew up in Gwinnett); Trump was just anathema to college educated whites and minorities who usually vote GOP. No doubt that Rubio, Cruz, Walker, Kasich, etc. would have won those counties.

As for Booker, if he runs as a moderate democrat, basically a black Bill Clinton, and if Trump does a lousy job, then he will probably win GA. But it looks like he's positioning himself as a Sanders/Warren Democrat, which doesn't fly well in Georgia outside of the black belt and Atlanta.

[Arbitrage1980]

Georgia. All the evidence is pointing out that the state was close despite the fact that black turnout was horrifically down in the southern, black belt part of the state, almost exclusively in rural areas. If Hillary had matched Obama's numbers in these counties outside metro Atlanta, she probably would've come within 1-2 points of actually winning the state. This supports my theory that in 2020, Booker would be best positioned to flip the state if he can gin up Obama-level enthusiasm among minorities (and I have no reason to doubt he would) while holding onto and expanding Hillary's insane numbers in metro Atlanta (which I see no good reason why he wouldn't)

It really depends on Trump's performance during his first term, state of the economy, and how Booker positions himself. Cobb and Gwinnett are not liberal counties (I grew up in Gwinnett); Trump was just anathema to college educated whites and minorities who usually vote GOP. No doubt that Rubio, Cruz, Walker, Kasich, etc. would have won those counties.

As for Booker, if he runs as a moderate democrat, basically a black Bill Clinton, and if Trump does a lousy job, then he will probably win GA. But it looks like he's positioning himself as a Sanders/Warren Democrat, which doesn't fly well in Georgia outside of the black belt and Atlanta.

Booker is arguably the most moderate potential Democrat in the 2020 field, and I see no reason he wouldn't hold up HRC's numbers in Gwinnett and maybe Cobb (for reasons I'll explain in a few sentences). He has basically HRC's positions without the baggage and with charisma and likeability. Also, I think a big part of Trump's collapse in metro Atlanta was more due to the explosive minority growth there, as was mentioned in the other thread (where it was indicated that college educated whites didn't swing nearly as D in northern Atlanta as people had thought). Gwinnett recently became minority-majority, and Cobb is only a few years away from reaching that level. I could see Cobb flipping back to the GOP if Warren or another economic populist got the nomination, but I think Booker seems like a good fit for the changing demos there. I wouldn't be at all surprised though if Gwinnett is gone for good for the GOP on the presidential level.

The fact that Booker is the most moderate of the 2020 contenders shows how far left the Democratic Party has become under Obama.

Romney won Cobb and Gwinnett by 12.5% and 9.3%. He also crushed it in the affluent neighborhoods in Atlanta and north Fulton which are mostly college educated whites (buckhead, sandy springs, johns creek, Tom Price's congressional district) while Trump lost them. Demographics is a part of it, but also Trump was just unacceptable to college whites who almost always vote GOP. If Trump does a good job, they'll come back.

[Klartext89]

Georgia. All the evidence is pointing out that the state was close despite the fact that black turnout was horrifically down in the southern, black belt part of the state, almost exclusively in rural areas. If Hillary had matched Obama's numbers in these counties outside metro Atlanta, she probably would've come within 1-2 points of actually winning the state. This supports my theory that in 2020, Booker would be best positioned to flip the state if he can gin up Obama-level enthusiasm among minorities (and I have no reason to doubt he would) while holding onto and expanding Hillary's insane numbers in metro Atlanta (which I see no good reason why he wouldn't)

The GOP leaning college educated Atlanta Suburbs will swing back in 2020 but keep on your phantasy.

[Klartext89]

Georgia. All the evidence is pointing out that the state was close despite the fact that black turnout was horrifically down in the southern, black belt part of the state, almost exclusively in rural areas. If Hillary had matched Obama's numbers in these counties outside metro Atlanta, she probably would've come within 1-2 points of actually winning the state. This supports my theory that in 2020, Booker would be best positioned to flip the state if he can gin up Obama-level enthusiasm among minorities (and I have no reason to doubt he would) while holding onto and expanding Hillary's insane numbers in metro Atlanta (which I see no good reason why he wouldn't)

It really depends on Trump's performance during his first term, state of the economy, and how Booker positions himself. Cobb and Gwinnett are not liberal counties (I grew up in Gwinnett); Trump was just anathema to college educated whites and minorities who usually vote GOP. No doubt that Rubio, Cruz, Walker, Kasich, etc. would have won those counties.

As for Booker, if he runs as a moderate democrat, basically a black Bill Clinton, and if Trump does a lousy job, then he will probably win GA. But it looks like he's positioning himself as a Sanders/Warren Democrat, which doesn't fly well in Georgia outside of the black belt and Atlanta.

Booker is arguably the most moderate potential Democrat in the 2020 field, and I see no reason he wouldn't hold up HRC's numbers in Gwinnett and maybe Cobb (for reasons I'll explain in a few sentences). He has basically HRC's positions without the baggage and with charisma and likeability. Also, I think a big part of Trump's collapse in metro Atlanta was more due to the explosive minority growth there, as was mentioned in the other thread (where it was indicated that college educated whites didn't swing nearly as D in northern Atlanta as people had thought). Gwinnett recently became minority-majority, and Cobb is only a few years away from reaching that level. I could see Cobb flipping back to the GOP if Warren or another economic populist got the nomination, but I think Booker seems like a good fit for the changing demos there. I wouldn't be at all surprised though if Gwinnett is gone for good for the GOP on the presidential level.

Booker? The race-baiting guy who made a fool out of himself of praising Sessions for his work on civil rights legislation and race relations before testifying against him and telling the opposite, is a "moderate" to you? No more questions. Unbelieveable.

[Arbitrage1980]

Georgia. All the evidence is pointing out that the state was close despite the fact that black turnout was horrifically down in the southern, black belt part of the state, almost exclusively in rural areas. If Hillary had matched Obama's numbers in these counties outside metro Atlanta, she probably would've come within 1-2 points of actually winning the state. This supports my theory that in 2020, Booker would be best positioned to flip the state if he can gin up Obama-level enthusiasm among minorities (and I have no reason to doubt he would) while holding onto and expanding Hillary's insane numbers in metro Atlanta (which I see no good reason why he wouldn't)

It really depends on Trump's performance during his first term, state of the economy, and how Booker positions himself. Cobb and Gwinnett are not liberal counties (I grew up in Gwinnett); Trump was just anathema to college educated whites and minorities who usually vote GOP. No doubt that Rubio, Cruz, Walker, Kasich, etc. would have won those counties.

As for Booker, if he runs as a moderate democrat, basically a black Bill Clinton, and if Trump does a lousy job, then he will probably win GA. But it looks like he's positioning himself as a Sanders/Warren Democrat, which doesn't fly well in Georgia outside of the black belt and Atlanta.

Booker is arguably the most moderate potential Democrat in the 2020 field, and I see no reason he wouldn't hold up HRC's numbers in Gwinnett and maybe Cobb (for reasons I'll explain in a few sentences). He has basically HRC's positions without the baggage and with charisma and likeability. Also, I think a big part of Trump's collapse in metro Atlanta was more due to the explosive minority growth there, as was mentioned in the other thread (where it was indicated that college educated whites didn't swing nearly as D in northern Atlanta as people had thought). Gwinnett recently became minority-majority, and Cobb is only a few years away from reaching that level. I could see Cobb flipping back to the GOP if Warren or another economic populist got the nomination, but I think Booker seems like a good fit for the changing demos there. I wouldn't be at all surprised though if Gwinnett is gone for good for the GOP on the presidential level.

Booker? The race-baiting guy who made a fool out of himself of praising Sessions for his work on civil rights legislation and race relations before testifying against him and telling the opposite, is a "moderate" to you? No more questions. Unbelieveable.

Booker's testimony was disgraceful. The Democrats are now a quasi-socialist race baiting party of the far left.

[nicholas.slaydon]

When you go into vote totals in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan, Trump barely did any better than Romney in 2012. Trump only won those states because Hillary hemorrhaged 200,000 votes in Minnesota, 250,000 votes in Wisconsin and 200,000 votes in Michigan. Trump didn't win over hundreds of thousands of Obama voters in these states, Hillary lost hundreds of thousands of Obama voters.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

-He got over 150K more votes than Romney in MI. In Wisconsin, GOP bastions Waukesha, Ozuakee, and Washington counties, as well as the Dem bastions of Milwaukee and Dane counties, all swung left. It's a miracle Trump got nearly as many votes as Mitt Romney in Wisconsin, and he got them from a base substantially altered from Romney's.

[Wiz in Wis]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

-He got over 150K more votes than Romney in MI. In Wisconsin, GOP bastions Waukesha, Ozuakee, and Washington counties, as well as the Dem bastions of Milwaukee and Dane counties, all swung left. It's a miracle Trump got nearly as many votes as Mitt Romney in Wisconsin, and he got them from a base substantially altered from Romney's.

Yes, the base vote between the GOP/Dems shifted a bit, but 53% of WI voted against Trump. A better positioned Dem will win back the votes Trump took, while igniting the Dem base and indies. Honestly, if Clinton had run a half-decent campaign in WI should would have prevailed.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

-True. Same for Feingold (who was wiped out in the Waukesha/Ozuakee/Washington GOP suburbs Trump notoriously underperformed in).

[Virginiá]

I have a particular fondness for these 2, both of which I don't think are talked about at all among 'pundits,' besides the usual data-oriented people.

-

Trump's performance here is just a continuation of the GOP's implosion in California. It would be hard to argue, imo, that Trump was "just a bad fit," as Republicans in general have been slipping there for a decade now. Look at the numbers among 18-24.. 18% support? The overall 18-29 numbers are not much better (23% to Clinton's 66%)

This is probably what it looks like for a party to go extinct in a state. Pretty bad for the GOP considering this is the most populated state in the union, with a huge economy. It's not like the GOP has no stake at all there. There at least 4 - 5 House seats that could be highly competitive in 2018, if not worse, and if this keeps up, probably more to come in the future.




Clinton scored large margins among the younger, growing parts of the electorate, and bigger margins than the GOP did among their top age groups. Further, Trump did worse than Romney among 30-44 year olds, which fits the trend of worse and worse GOP performance in the 30-44 bloc as more liberal Millennials/young genx voters continue to age into it and push out the older, more conservative genx'ers

Most people probably don't give a hoot about this, but those voters haven't really been trending Republican much, so I continue to ask what will happen when Millennials are all grown up and constitute the most powerful political force in America by 2024. Years of alienation and neglect by Republicans will not be easily forgotten. By 2020 we should see where at least part of GenZ (youngest generation) stands, and my guess is it won't be substantially different from Millennials.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

The demographic that was heaviest for George McGovern was also George W. Bush's best in 2000.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_CuQpmJkw5MC&pg=PA164&dq=sean+trende+mcgovern+bush&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjVi6Sph77RAhVi2oMKHcF0DOgQ6AEIIjAB#v=onepage&q=sean%20trende%20mcgovern%20bush&f=false

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

The demographic that was heaviest for George McGovern was also George W. Bush's best in 2000.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_CuQpmJkw5MC&pg=PA164&dq=sean+trende+mcgovern+bush&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjVi6Sph77RAhVi2oMKHcF0DOgQ6AEIIjAB#v=onepage&q=sean%20trende%20mcgovern%20bush&f=false

The question is why? Perhaps its partially due to how far the democrats trended left socially?

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

I think it's just that older people are more naturally conservative, younger people more radical.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

-Dunno; I haven't looked too much into this.

[Klartext89]

Georgia. All the evidence is pointing out that the state was close despite the fact that black turnout was horrifically down in the southern, black belt part of the state, almost exclusively in rural areas. If Hillary had matched Obama's numbers in these counties outside metro Atlanta, she probably would've come within 1-2 points of actually winning the state. This supports my theory that in 2020, Booker would be best positioned to flip the state if he can gin up Obama-level enthusiasm among minorities (and I have no reason to doubt he would) while holding onto and expanding Hillary's insane numbers in metro Atlanta (which I see no good reason why he wouldn't)

The GOP leaning college educated Atlanta Suburbs will swing back in 2020 but keep on your phantasy.

Lol. With the way things seem to be heading now, good luck retaining the suburbanites you have.

With the things seem to be heading now (Jobs coming back, enthusiasm in the economy), the Rust Belt will be gone for Democrats and college-educated Whites will not only back Congress GOP, they will also back Trump. But Keep on dreaming, always delightful to see Liberals being shocked on election night.^^

[Klartext89]

Georgia. All the evidence is pointing out that the state was close despite the fact that black turnout was horrifically down in the southern, black belt part of the state, almost exclusively in rural areas. If Hillary had matched Obama's numbers in these counties outside metro Atlanta, she probably would've come within 1-2 points of actually winning the state. This supports my theory that in 2020, Booker would be best positioned to flip the state if he can gin up Obama-level enthusiasm among minorities (and I have no reason to doubt he would) while holding onto and expanding Hillary's insane numbers in metro Atlanta (which I see no good reason why he wouldn't)

The GOP leaning college educated Atlanta Suburbs will swing back in 2020 but keep on your phantasy.

Lol. With the way things seem to be heading now, good luck retaining the suburbanites you have.

With the things seem to be heading now (Jobs coming back, enthusiasm in the economy), the Rust Belt will be gone for Democrats and college-educated Whites will not only back Congress GOP, they will also back Trump. But Keep on dreaming, always delightful to see Liberals being shocked on election night.^^

Is there a way to bookmark this? This is actually pretty funny.

Will be aired November 6th 2018 and repeated November 3th 2020 and yes, will be very funny. I hope the Atlas Server won't Crash again ;-)

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Georgia. All the evidence is pointing out that the state was close despite the fact that black turnout was horrifically down in the southern, black belt part of the state, almost exclusively in rural areas. If Hillary had matched Obama's numbers in these counties outside metro Atlanta, she probably would've come within 1-2 points of actually winning the state. This supports my theory that in 2020, Booker would be best positioned to flip the state if he can gin up Obama-level enthusiasm among minorities (and I have no reason to doubt he would) while holding onto and expanding Hillary's insane numbers in metro Atlanta (which I see no good reason why he wouldn't)

The GOP leaning college educated Atlanta Suburbs will swing back in 2020 but keep on your phantasy.

Lol. With the way things seem to be heading now, good luck retaining the suburbanites you have.

With the things seem to be heading now (Jobs coming back, enthusiasm in the economy), the Rust Belt will be gone for Democrats and college-educated Whites will not only back Congress GOP, they will also back Trump. But Keep on dreaming, always delightful to see Liberals being shocked on election night.^^

Is there a way to bookmark this? This is actually pretty funny.

Will be aired November 6th 2018 and repeated November 3th 2020 and yes, will be very funny. I hope the Atlas Server won't Crash again ;-)

I mean, you're not wrong.

[Arbitrage1980]

Georgia. All the evidence is pointing out that the state was close despite the fact that black turnout was horrifically down in the southern, black belt part of the state, almost exclusively in rural areas. If Hillary had matched Obama's numbers in these counties outside metro Atlanta, she probably would've come within 1-2 points of actually winning the state. This supports my theory that in 2020, Booker would be best positioned to flip the state if he can gin up Obama-level enthusiasm among minorities (and I have no reason to doubt he would) while holding onto and expanding Hillary's insane numbers in metro Atlanta (which I see no good reason why he wouldn't)

The GOP leaning college educated Atlanta Suburbs will swing back in 2020 but keep on your phantasy.

Lol. With the way things seem to be heading now, good luck retaining the suburbanites you have.

With the things seem to be heading now (Jobs coming back, enthusiasm in the economy), the Rust Belt will be gone for Democrats and college-educated Whites will not only back Congress GOP, they will also back Trump. But Keep on dreaming, always delightful to see Liberals being shocked on election night.^^

Way too early to even begin talking about what will happen on election night 2020. I was at the Trump election night party in NYC, and it was easily one of the most surreal amazing experience of my life. I woke up that morning sick to my stomach, even thinking about a Hillary presidency and a Democratic Senate transforming our country into socialist Europe. The reversal of fortune was simply staggering. I firmly believe that 2016 will go down as the most consequential election since Reagan's victory in 1980; maybe even FDR 1932.

Back to Georgia. Cobb and Gwinnett are NOT fairfax, wake, mecklenburg. The latter are heavily populated by northern and midwestern transplants working in high paying white collar fields. Cobb and Gwinnett are not that affluent and are significantly more southern than the aforementioned counties. I think fairfax and mecklenburg are pretty inelsatic; I don't see a republican winning them anytime soon. Cobb and Gwinnett are totally up in the air, and if Trump does a relatively decent job, he will win them back.