After all this time, Wisconsin

[MillennialModerate]

Remember after the 2016 election we were convinced 2020 would come down to Wisconsin. Convinced PA and Michigan were flukes but Wisconsin could be a trend. There was even a thread that asked “Can a canidate lose Wisconsin and win the election?” and most of us doubted that

Somewhere along the line in 2019 and 2020 - due in large part to Wisconsin’s performance in the midterms - everyone seemed to start to think it was PA that would be the tossup of the blue wall states.

... and it turns out: Wisconsin was by far the closest: Michigan was 3%, PA will finish over 1% and Wisconsin will be 0.62%

[Catalyst138]

I wouldn’t say Wisconsin is “by far” the closest. It edged out PA by a few tenths of a point. Michigan is the odd one out.

[Alben Barkley]

[cwh2018]

Michigan always looked like the odd one of the three that the dems would almost certainly win back.  The conventional wisdom of dems needed to really focus on Wisconsin to win the election, the senate being a tough lift and keeping the house were pretty much what happened.

[Non Swing Voter]

demographics truly are destiny

[Progressive Pessimist]

Yep. The conventional wisdom of how the election would most likely turn out as of Biden becoming the presumptive nominee in early March appears to have always been the case, even in spite of being lulled into a false sense of security by increasingly positive polls and a pandemic supposedly changing the dynamic of the race. It was pretty static all along.

What this means though is, in spite of Biden still doing the right thing and actually making a strong effort to contest the state this year, is that if Democrats want to hang on to Wisconsin they still should probably shore it up even more to be safe. Biden winning it by <1% is still way too dicey if there aren't other states like Arizona or Georgia to fall back on. Thankfully now we know that effort can come at the expense of Florida, Iowa, and Ohio at the presidential level which really aren't worth it anymore for Democrats to bother with. F*** those states.

[wbrocks67]

Yep. The conventional wisdom of how the election would most likely turn out as of Biden becoming the presumptive nominee in early March appears to have always been the case, even in spite of being lulled into a false sense of security by increasingly positive polls and a pandemic supposedly changing the dynamic of the race. It was pretty static all along.

What this means though is, in spite of Biden still doing the right thing and actually making a strong effort to contest the state this year, is that if Democrats want to hang on to Wisconsin they still should probably shore it up even more to be safe. Biden winning it by >1% is still way too dicey if there aren't other states like Arizona or Georgia to fall back on. Thankfully now we know that effort can come at the expense of Florida, Iowa, and Ohio at the presidential level which really aren't worth it anymore for Democrats to bother with. F*** those states.

Yep. Especially Iowa. The fact that Biden was a way better fit for that state, as was Greenfield, and he still lost by 8%, only 1% better than Clinton is really frustrating. Especially Greenfield, who was objectively a very good fit for the state while Ernst is somehow perennially terrible fit for that state and clearly out of touch, and she can still win by nearly 7%. Not sure what else Greenfield possibly could've done to get any closer.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Yeah, the upper Midwest didn't like Hillary, she was too far left for them, that's why Biden turned them back blue, he was unClinton

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

Yeah, the upper Midwest didn't like Hillary, she was too far left for them, that's why Biden turned them back blue, he was unClinton

The 278 friewall is back OC.

[Hope For A New Era]

Yep. The conventional wisdom of how the election would most likely turn out as of Biden becoming the presumptive nominee in early March appears to have always been the case, even in spite of being lulled into a false sense of security by increasingly positive polls and a pandemic supposedly changing the dynamic of the race. It was pretty static all along.

What this means though is, in spite of Biden still doing the right thing and actually making a strong effort to contest the state this year, is that if Democrats want to hang on to Wisconsin they still should probably shore it up even more to be safe. Biden winning it by >1% is still way too dicey if there aren't other states like Arizona or Georgia to fall back on. Thankfully now we know that effort can come at the expense of Florida, Iowa, and Ohio at the presidential level which really aren't worth it anymore for Democrats to bother with. F*** those states.

Yep. Especially Iowa. The fact that Biden was a way better fit for that state, as was Greenfield, and he still lost by 8%, only 1% better than Clinton is really frustrating. Especially Greenfield, who was objectively a very good fit for the state while Ernst is somehow perennially terrible fit for that state and clearly out of touch, and she can still win by nearly 7%. Not sure what else Greenfield possibly could've done to get any closer.

She would have won without Trump on the ballot. Make the US a country with six-year presidential terms and 2020 a second midterm, and Greenfield wins easily. 2018 makes that clear.

[walleye26]

I was amazed how hard the Driftless moved towards Trump. WOW saved Biden. I know it’s weird, but seriously Ozaukee (and to a lesser degree, Waukesha) moves hard left.

[Wiz in Wis]

I was amazed how hard the Driftless moved towards Trump. WOW saved Biden. I know it’s weird, but seriously Ozaukee (and to a lesser degree, Waukesha) moves hard left.

WOW helped for sure, but nearly the entire shift from -23 k to +20 k can be found in Dane County alone. I think Craig Gilbert at the Journal Sentinel said it best: "The Wisconsin Dems have a big rural problem, but the Wisconsin GOP has a bigger Madison problem"

[morgankingsley]

Im just kind of shocked at how close / blowout the electoral vote was simultaneously