Polliwonks: Wasserman, his eyes uncovered!

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Polliwonks: Wasserman, his eyes uncovered!

wilderthanmild: Jun 21, 2010; Posting shit; Grimey Drawer

exquisite tea posted:

No state is going to willingly break itself up as long as we have a winner-take-all electoral college to determine the presidency. DC statehood is popular because you effectively get something for nothing in a Dem+90 area.

Yeah I guess it would gently caress them over in the EC, but make them more competitive in the senate.

How many EV and Reps would PR get? 4/4? DC would have to be 1/1, right?

# ? Oct 29, 2020 19:56

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 25, 2024 22:34

Rea: Apr 5, 2011; Komi-san won.

wilderthanmild posted:

Yeah I guess it would gently caress them over in the EC, but make them more competitive in the senate.

How many EV and Reps would PR get? 4/4? DC would have to be 1/1, right?

I believe the minimum required EVs/reps for a given state is 3.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 19:57

Pick: Jul 19, 2009; Nap Ghost

Also, excellent post, thank you. I know I've been beating on this drum a lot, but I think that the parties are shaking out by gender, pretty much full stop.

However, it does get interestingly conflated with the fact that women are getting more educated.

Also, if given the opportunity to choose between one or the other, the party that gets women is probably in a better position. Women tend to make up the majority of voters, Which makes sense because there are more women in the United States than men.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 19:58

Quorum: Sep 24, 2014; REMIND ME AGAIN HOW THE LITTLE HORSE-SHAPED ONES MOVE?

wilderthanmild posted:

Yeah I guess it would gently caress them over in the EC, but make them more competitive in the senate.

How many EV and Reps would PR get? 4/4? DC would have to be 1/1, right?

EV is Reps + Senators, so DC is 3 (the same number they're currently allotted by constitutional amendment). Puerto Rico would have ~4 representatives, IIRC, so 6 EV.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 19:59

TulliusCicero: Jul 29, 2017

Rea posted:

Kavanaugh keeps siding with Roberts and the liberals on this. I'm wary of what his game is, he has to be doing this for a reason.

He has his seat, truth be told he probably doesn't give much of a gently caress anymore. Also the NYT recently released the tax info from Deutsche Bank and Anthony Kennedy's son effectively buying his replacement seat from Trump, so maybe he wants to lay low

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:00

Rea: Apr 5, 2011; Komi-san won.

TulliusCicero posted:

He has his seat, truth be told he probably doesn't give much of a gently caress anymore

You'd think he'd want to exact revenge on the Dems, given his meltdown at the end of his hearings.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:01

Pick: Jul 19, 2009; Nap Ghost

Not only are there more women, but women vote more. The gap between eligible voter turnout percentages by the way, was 0% in 1980, up to a height of 5% in 2008, and 4% in 2016.

Dollars for donuts, a party losing one point with men across the board, is worth the gain of one point with women

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:02

Shimrra Jamaane: Aug 10, 2007; Obscure to all except those well-versed in Yuuzhan Vong lore.

https://twitter.com/albamonica/status/1321883419673038860

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:02

Rea: Apr 5, 2011; Komi-san won.

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

https://twitter.com/albamonica/status/1321883419673038860

Every Trump rally in the final days of the race is turning into a negative news cycle and honestly, I'm here for it.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:04

Kalit: Nov 6, 2006; The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

https://twitter.com/albamonica/status/1321883419673038860

Wow..... that's a lot of people.......really crowded together....

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:05

Nieuw Amsterdam: Dec 1, 2006; Dignit�. Toujours, dignit�.

Ok Comboomer posted:

I think expecting any state to go �full red� at this historical moment (by which I guess I mean like this decade) doesn�t really account for the total picture, or for what outcomes might be possible given different actions and events.

Its voting patterns have definitely shifted red but how sustainable can that be long-term? Are white boomers and old Cuban expats going to keep swelling the republican voter rolls for a decade? Two decades?

Writing Florida off as �full red� implies that it�s a lost cause and that resources should be expended elsewhere.

Also, people started saying similar things about Wisconsin in 2016, when the reality was that the state�s political machinery was being hijacked and rebuilt by the GOP to counter the true makeup of the state�s electorate.

There is no state in this country that is becoming politically more conservative or more white. Florida isn�t enemy territory, lost to the Hordes of Mordor, because Governor Skeletor laid the groundwork for DeSantis to perform some ratfuckery and trump is extra popular among revanchists. And consider how much of American partisanship is due to age, and that we�re already seeing the effects of a big cultural split between boomers who are older than 65 and those below, and that covid continues to tear its way through the country.

Florida in 2, 4, 6 years could look and vote totally differently than it does now. Hell, say Romney manages some way to become the nominee in 2024, do you think he�d inspire the same response from the base?

We know something already about this �gentrification� process in the Sun Belt et al.

Colorado, Nevada, and Virginia are fully gentrified. Solid D states.

North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona are midway there. Ties or flippable.

South Carolina and Texas are in the early stages. Possible in a big wave election.

Florida doesn�t fit the mold because the people who move there are more likely to be retirees than people working in tech or college educated professionals.

There�s a reverse gentrification, too, where states get older and poorer and redder.

Missouri, Ohio, Iowa, all going fast in the other direction. Michigan and Minnesota not as deep blue as they once were.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:07

Sarcastro: Dec 28, 2000; Elite member of the Grammar Nazi Squad that

Pick posted:

Lol ~~they sent~~ Cheney took a vacation to Hawaii ~~based on bad polling~~ during Bush's campaign

Pick posted:

It's actually amazing how little [Indiana's] been polled

It is weird, but I sure as hell don't think there's any chance at all that it can go blue this time like in 2008. That was based on extra turnout in the Chicagoland region of NW Indiana, which was based on Obama being from Chicago and therefore essentially a local. Obama won by the skin on his teeth in 2008, and Indiana reverted back very hard indeed in 2012. As much as I'd like to imagine it, I can't imagine that happening again for Biden this time, and certainly most of the rest of the state apart from the areas already mentioned by others are very much not the kind of places where Trump will have lost meaningful levels of support.

To support the above analysis, I will cite to my 50-state correct call of the results in 2008, as documented on a map I printed out for a party that year that has been lost or thrown away somewhere in the interim, which must be recognized as dispositive evidence.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:10

Shimrra Jamaane: Aug 10, 2007; Obscure to all except those well-versed in Yuuzhan Vong lore.

Indiana will probably be in single digits.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:11

Shammypants: May 25, 2004; Let me tell you about true luxury.

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

Indiana will probably be in single digits.

With how voting is going in Idaho, plus the virus, I think Idaho will be red but way closer than normal as well.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:12

Kalit: Nov 6, 2006; The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

Nieuw Amsterdam posted:

We know something already about this �gentrification� process in the Sun Belt et al.

Colorado, Nevada, and Virginia are fully gentrified. Solid D states.

North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona are midway there. Ties or flippable.

South Carolina and Texas are in the early stages. Possible in a big wave election.

Florida doesn�t fit the mold because the people who move there are more likely to be retirees than people working in tech or college educated professionals.

There�s a reverse gentrification, too, where states get older and poorer and redder.

Missouri, Ohio, Iowa, all going fast in the other direction. Michigan and Minnesota not as deep blue as they once were.

~~Huh?? How are you coming up with this list for gentrification on a state level/where do you get the data from?~~

E: Nevermind, I didn't pick up on the context of that, sorry.

Kalit fucked around with this message at 20:17 on Oct 29, 2020

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:13

SoggyBobcat: Oct 2, 2013

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

Indiana will probably be in single digits.

And to remind everyone: Clinton lost it by 19%, so this would be a significant improvement.

Shammypants posted:

With how voting is going in Idaho, plus the virus, I think Idaho will be red but way closer than normal as well.

The only thing interesting with Idaho is if Biden wins Ada County, home of Boise. It hasn't been won by a Democrat since 1936; even LBJ didn't win it in his landslide despite winning the state.

SoggyBobcat fucked around with this message at 20:17 on Oct 29, 2020

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:15

brugroffil: Nov 30, 2015

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1321880450525179904

https://twitter.com/NilesGApol/status/1321672250152652801

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1321892222766297088

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:16

trilobite terror: Oct 20, 2007; BUT MY LIVELIHOOD DEPENDS ON THE FORUMS!

vyelkin posted:

I did a post like this for gender a few days ago, but this made me curious about the long-term spread based on education.

2016:
High school or less: 49/45 Trump (18%)
Some college: 52/43 Trump (32%)
College grad: 49/45 Clinton (32%)
Postgrad: 58/37 Clinton (18%)

Even starker when you add race and gender into the mix:

White college grads overall: 49/45 Trump (37%)
White non-college grads overall: 67/28 Trump (34%)

White women college grads: 51/44 Clinton (20%)
White men college grads: 53/39 Trump (17%)
White women non-college grads: 61/34 Trump (17%)
White men non-college grads: 71/23 Trump (16%)
Non-white college grads: 71/23 Clinton (13%)
Non-white non-college grads: 75/20 Clinton (16%)

Past years don't have the detailed race/gender/education breakdown, but they still have education.

2012:
No high school degree: 64/35 Obama (3%)
High school grad: 51/48 Obama (21%)
Some college: 49/48 Obama (29%)
College grad: 51/47 Romney (29%)
Postgrad: 55/42 Obama (18%)

2008:
No high school degree: 63/35 Obama (4%)
High school grad: 52/46 Obama (20%)
Some college: 51/47 Obama (31%)
College grad: 50/48 Obama (28%)
Postgrad: 58/40 Obama (17%)

2008 has by race as well:
White college grads: 51/47 McCain (35%)
White non-college grads: 58/40 McCain (39%)
Non-white college grads: 75/22 Obama (9%)
Non-white non-college grads: 83/16 Obama (16%)

2004:
No high school degree: 50/49 Kerry (4%)
High school grad: 52/47 Bush (22%)
Some college: 54/46 Bush (32%)
College grad: 52/46 Bush (26%)
Postgrad: 55/44 Kerry (16%)

My source is missing this data for 2000 for some reason

1996:
No high school degree: 59/28/11 Clinton (6%)
High school grad: 51/35/13 Clinton (24%)
Some college: 48/40/10 Clinton (27%)
College grad: 46/44/8 Dole (26%)
Postgrad: 52/40/5 Clinton (17%)

1992:
No high school degree: 54/28/18 Clinton (6%)
High school grad: 43/36/21 Clinton (24%)
Some college: 41/37/21 Clinton (27%)
College grad: 41/39/20 Bush (26%)
Postgrad: 50/36/14 Clinton (17%)

My source is missing 1988, 1984, and 1980 as well.

1976:
No high school degree: 58/41 Carter (11%)
High school grad: 54/46 Carter (28%)
Some college: 51/49 Carter (28%)
College grad: 55/45 Ford (27%)

So what's the takeaway here? First of all, the educational divide is nowhere near as stark as the gender divide (see my previous post here). 1976 was the last presidential election without a noteworthy gender divide, and in every election that divide was women voting more Democratic than men. Even in landslide Democratic victories, the Democrat might win a plurality of men but doesn't win a majority (the closest anyone came since Carter was Obama getting 49% of men in 2008 compared to 48% for McCain).

There was a very strong divide in education in 2016. And where exit polls have given us race/education crosstabs, we see that white low-education voters are the most reliably Republican demographic by education. But overall, education is less of a predictor of political preference, with the caveat that postgrads are a reliably Democratic bloc. College does not automatically make someone a Democrat. By education, college graduates were the only demographic that went for Romney in 2012! The some-college and no-college groups narrowly voted for Obama.

Going back further in time, what we really see is a demographic shift over decades. We go from 1976 when college grads were 27% of voters and 11% didn't even have a high school degree, to 2016 where college grads and postgrads together are 50% of voters and there are so few non-high-school voters (3% in 2012) that they now just get lumped in with those who do have a high school degree. And, as we go back in time and watch this demographic shift, we actually see the opposite of the pattern today: college grads are more reliably Republican and other blocs are more reliably Democratic (again, with the Democratic postgrad caveat).

My hunch is that seeing this educational divide back in time we're actually looking at a racial divide. In every single one of these elections, white people overwhelmingly voted Republican. As the demographic of people with higher education changes and becomes less white, people with higher education have become more Democratic. Look at those 2016 crosstabs: it's the 71/23-Clinton non-white college grads (13% of voters) who are dragging the college grad category into heavy Clinton territory, away from the relatively-Clinton white female college grads (20% of voters) and the heavily-Trump white male college grads (17% of voters). If we go back a few decades and the college grad share of the population is more heavily white, the college grad voter bloc is more heavily Republican.

I will be very curious to look at exit polls after this election to see if these trends hold up in what is otherwise looking like a blowout landslide. It's foolish to see demographics as destiny, but looking into this I'm not sure education in the long run is a significant indicator of preference when compared to gender and race. In this sense 2016 looks like a real anomaly. In the long run it looks less like Trump capitalized on an existing education gap and more like he created one where one previously wasn't a major factor in presidential elections. Whether that's because he appealed to a demographic that's both whiter and less educated while putting off the growing demographic of more-educated people of colour, or because he was particularly appealing to less-educated voters and particularly unappealing to more-educated ones, is a question to be sure. Based on looking at the 2016 education breakdown I'd be inclined to suggest the former, since Trump won white college grads too, he just didn't win them by as much as he did white non-college grads.

Anyway long story short I'm not a trained pollster or anything but I expected there to be a larger education gap than there actually was. It seems to me like race and gender remain stronger indications of political preference than education, and in the long run we may look back on Trump as an anomaly whose exacerbation of race and gender polarization happened to also increase educational polarization. But while race and gender are long-term divides in the US, whether an educational divide sticks around after Trump is another question.

I posted about this a few weeks ago, but 1974-76 (really the early-to-mid 70s) is an important inflection point for the intersection between education and gender too. It�s the time period when tons of universities and colleges (notably many elite ones that have historically fed halls of power) became coeducational.

There�s a really noticeable split between women over 65 and those younger (even those over 60).

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:17

Rea: Apr 5, 2011; Komi-san won.

brugroffil posted:

https://twitter.com/NilesGApol/status/1321672250152652801

Does... Does Cook and other handicappers like it normally do this many ratings changes this close to E-Day? Shifting GA senate races away from the GOP with 5 days left sounds, much like shifting Texas's EVs, like DEFCON 1 for the GOP.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:18

Failed Imagineer: Sep 22, 2018

Rea posted:

I believe the minimum required EVs/reps for a given state is 3.

fivefortyone.com and it's numeric equivalent are both being squatted on anyway. Hopefully some entrepreneur is planning to shake down Nate Silver

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:20

Tim Whatley: Mar 28, 2010

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1321894527888773121

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:22

Dapper_Swindler: Feb 14, 2012; Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Kavros posted:

The poo poo that gets me right now is the deep unpopularity ��ESPECIALLY among undecideds ��of trump's rallies. They make things WORSE for him wherever he does them ... and he's targeting them specifically at where he thinks his campaign most essentially needs to try to get ahead the most.

Trump is surgically targeting malus at the places he needs to win the most desperately and loving nobody will be able to tell him to stop because it's essentially his mental fixation to feed his narcissistic supply. It's the most kung pow rear end, wimp lo rear end, "My face to your fist style, how'd you like it?" thing i have ever seen incarnate and i'm living strong for it.

its because his brain is loving broken and he legit thinks everyone who hates him is lying OR the media is lying about how hated he is. he will never understand that this poo poo hurts him way way more than if he would just shut up and maybe pretend to care sometimes.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:23

SamuraiFoochs: Jan 16, 2007; Grimey Drawer

Kalit posted:

Wow..... that's a lot of people.......really crowded together....

Holy poo poo on so many levels.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:23

Grouchio: Aug 31, 2014

Tim Whatley posted:

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1321894527888773121

For reference, that is the Villages.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:24

Brain Curry: Feb 15, 2007; People think that I'm lazy
People think that I'm this fool because
I give a fuck about the government
I didn't graduate from high school

Tim Whatley posted:

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1321894527888773121

That�s The Villages

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:24

Failed Imagineer: Sep 22, 2018

Tim Whatley posted:

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1321894527888773121

This is The Villages btw. The olds are mobilising

E: welp

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:25

Grouchio: Aug 31, 2014

Failed Imagineer posted:

This is The Villages btw. The olds are mobilising

But which olds? The really, really chuddy ones or the moderates?

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:25

Rea: Apr 5, 2011; Komi-san won.

Tim Whatley posted:

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1321894527888773121

https://twitter.com/beganovic2021/status/1321894701109256193

Wasserman's metric for Trump being in deep poo poo in FL is if he gets below 67% in Sumter. It's not inconceivable, with numbers like this, that Trump falls short of that.

And, like, even if over half of NPA voters break for Trump, and assuming all Dem voters vote for Biden and all GOP voters for Trump, that still only puts him at...the minimum that Wasserman thinks Trump needs to not have immediately lost FL.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:26

Subvisual Haze: Nov 22, 2003; The building was on fire and it wasn't my fault.

Tim Whatley posted:

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1321894527888773121

Florida is also a state that can begin counting mail in ballots before election day (just not post the results). So theoretically Florida could be called very quickly on election night.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:27

Grouchio: Aug 31, 2014

Subvisual Haze posted:

Florida is also a state that can begin counting mail in ballots before election day (just not post the results). So theoretically Florida could be called very quickly on election night.

Is the Sumter metric very good or very bad

Oh, and is Miami beginning to catch up?

Grouchio fucked around with this message at 20:31 on Oct 29, 2020

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:29

Bodyholes: Jun 30, 2005

exquisite tea posted:

Reading all about how Clinton left Russ Feingold out to dry in Wisconsin left me chanting LOCK HER UP.

Well he did vote against the Patriot Act. I can see why she might not like him.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:29

exquisite tea: Apr 21, 2007; Carly shook her glass, willing the ice to melt. "You still haven't told me what the mission is."

She leaned forward. "We are going to assassinate the bad men of Hollywood."

Grouchio posted:

But which olds? The really, really chuddy ones or the moderates?

The Villages have historically voted super mega Republican. Trump is still expected to win here, but if Biden can cut into his margins then it will really hurt him statewide.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:30

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

Grouchio posted:

Is the Sumter metric very good or very bad

Uncertain, I'm afraid. But it seems likely to me that the Trump olds were always going to turn out in full force no matter what, so there's a good chance all the non-CHUDs in the area are turning out as well.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:31

Shammypants: May 25, 2004; Let me tell you about true luxury.

Rallston did a big update on NV and the gist of it seems to be Trump loses even if he wins independents by 10%. He needs at least 11% of independents to have an off chance. Sounds, not good.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:33

vaginite: Feb 8, 2006; I'm comin' for you, colonel.

They have the rallies outdoors for safety but pack everyone on buses to get them there.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:33

mutata: Mar 1, 2003

Shammypants posted:

Rallston did a big update on NV and the gist of it seems to be Trump loses even if he wins independents by 10%. He needs at least 11% of independents to have an off chance. Sounds, not good.

Wait, not good for whom?

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:34

Shammypants: May 25, 2004; Let me tell you about true luxury.

mutata posted:

Wait, not good for whom?

Not good for Trump. In what world does Trump win double digit independents anywhere?

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:34

mutata: Mar 1, 2003

Shammypants posted:

Not good for Trump. In what worlds does Trump win double digit independents anywhere?

Despite technically being one, I do not really have a clear picture of independents. I know that they'll generally break towards Biden, but I don't know the margins.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:35

Rea: Apr 5, 2011; Komi-san won.

https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1321889961587560448

mutata posted:

Wait, not good for whom?

Not good for Trump, although "not good" understates it. If recent polls of NV are anything to go by, Trump would be lucky to break even with NPA voters, let alone win them by 10.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:35

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 25, 2024 22:34

vyelkin: Jan 2, 2011

Ok Comboomer posted:

I posted about this a few weeks ago, but 1974-76 (really the early-to-mid 70s) is an important inflection point for the intersection between education and gender too. It�s the time period when tons of universities and colleges (notably many elite ones that have historically fed halls of power) became coeducational.

There�s a really noticeable split between women over 65 and those younger (even those over 60).

That's a really good point and would probably help explain the Democratization of the college-educated demographic, since it isn't just getting more racially diverse since the 70s but also more gender-diverse.

# ? Oct 29, 2020 20:36

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Polliwonks: Wasserman, his eyes uncovered!

«‹›1049 »