|
I did some quick back-of-the-envelope calculations on Texas. At the moment we're at 107% of turnout, and I'll presume a total of 120% turnout by the end of the election day (no idea if that's realistic or not, though). In 2016 we had: Clinton: 3,877,868 Trump: 4,685,047 Other: 406,311 For a total of 8,969,226 votes, and a Trump lead of about 800,000. If there's 120% turnout in Texas, there will be a total of 10,763,071 votes in 2020. If we presume for simplicity's sake that 100% are 2016 voters and 20% are non-2016 voters, that will mean 1,793,845 new votes. If we assume that 2016 voters vote the same way as in 2016, to overcome the 800,000 vote deficit Biden would need to win about 1.3 million out of the 1.8 million new votes:in other words, he would need to beat Trump 72-28 (slightly more if we include 3rd party voters). That's not impossible, but obviously not really likely. However, nationally Biden is currently leading among Clinton 2016 voters 95-2 and Trump is currently leading among Trump 2016 voters 90-6. If we plug those into the 2016 numbers, then we get: Biden: 3,683,974 (C2016) + 252,992 (T2016) = 3,936,966 Trump: 4,216,542 (T2016) + 77,557 (C2016)= 4,294,099 Which already cuts Trump's lead back from ~800,000 to ~350,000 votes. If we presume 120% turnout, that will mean 2,532,006 non-2016 voters. To win Texas, Biden would need to win about 1.45m of those new votes, meaning he would need to beat Trump 57-43 among non-2016 voters (slightly more if we include 3rd party). That wouldn't be easy either, but if you consider that Biden is leading 56-27 among non-2016 voters nationally, it's hardly out of the question! These numbers obviously change depending on turnout (the more new voters there are, the lower the percentage Biden needs to win them by to carry the state) and how many Trump 2016 voters defect (if he matches Biden's 2% defection rate, he almost certainly wins). Nonetheless, I think the numbers say there is realistic hope here for Biden!
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 16:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 23:55 |
|
|
britishbornandbread posted:Just booked Wednesday off work here in the UK so I can stay up and watch everything be ok.   
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:01
|
|
|
Blurred posted:I did some quick back-of-the-envelope calculations on Texas.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:03
|
|
|
HappyHippo posted:https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1322545324708286465 Collin and Denton are the suburbs north of Dallas - Forth Worth. They both voted for Trump around 20 points in 2016, but Beto only lost Collin by six points and Denton by 8 points. Those counties are whiter than Texas on a whole, affluent, educated, growing fast with a lot of immigrants. If the suburban surge for Biden is gonna win him Texas he probably needs to flip those two counties (or at least do better than Beto did). Travis is Austin - Hillary won it with 65% of the vote in 2016, Beto got up around 75%. Increased turnout there is good news for Dems. Hays and Williamson are the suburbs(or exurbs? idk) around Austin. They both voted for Trump but then Beto flipped them in 18. He won Williamson by 2 and Hays by 16. Fort Bend is southern Houston suburbs. Voted for Hillary by 7 in 2016, voted for Beto by 12. Comal and Guadalupe (between Austin and San Antonio), Montgomery (north of Houston), and Ellis (south of Dallas) are all Trump country, and all voted either 60% or 70% and higher for Trump in 16 and Cruz in 18. My takeaway from all that is that increased voting is happening in the fastest growing parts of the state (the suburbs around the big cities), but that growth has generally been beneficial to Dems demographically. So if you subscribe to the theory that the suburban shift has continued from 2018, and Biden will do better in Collin, Denton, Williamson, Hays, etc. than even Beto did then this is good news. I think it also shows that Republicans are motivated to vote too - there was really no shift towards dems in places like Comal or Montgomery from 16 to 18. Maybe Biden will improve the margins but I expect these areas to go pretty heavily to Trump still.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:04
|
|
|
Chef Boyardeez Nuts posted:The GOP is overdue for a civil war between business interests and white nationalists. A Donald Trump Real Presidency in Exile/2024 is the perfect catalyst to kick it off. TulliusCicero posted:This is the real plague we have to fight, and the cause of all of it: this toxic macho bullshit that's built in idiocy and ignorance, and the illusion of strength The more I look at demographic data the more I think that “defender of masculinity” is going to be possibly the biggest breakpoint for the electorate going forward in the next two years, more so than white nationalism even. It’s why the issue of trans rights- and really trans legitimacy- is such a big deal for the GOP right now. It’s why masks have become this signifier of “alpha/cuck” on the right. Don’t get me wrong, it was always there- after all a deference to and obsession with machismo is one of the bedrock hallmarks of fascism, but now we’re really going to see it take center stage. Expect to see conservative groups really double down on chasing lower-education men of color, especially if a Biden admin brings us the LGBTQ gains that we’re hoping for.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:13
|
|
|
Glumwheels posted:Trump’s closing statement had a lot of Hillary in it and she’s know where to be found with Biden’s campaign. From what I have seen: We are getting the final Selzer poll of Iowa tonight. Emmerson will be releasing results from 14 states this Sunday NYT releasing PA/AZ/WI/FL polls on Sunday NBC/WSJ is releasing a national poll and some battleground polling on Sunday Monmouth is releasing a PA poll on Monday
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:17
|
|
|
Ok Comboomer posted:The more I look at demographic data the more I think that “defender of masculinity” is going to be possibly the biggest breakpoint for the electorate going forward in the next two years, more so than white nationalism even. looking forward to Crenshaw 2024
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:17
|
|
|
Finally, President Solidus Snake.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:So are you more or less skeptical on a blue texas after all of that? The bigger the total turnout, the better Biden's chances, all other things being equal. I can't see it being decided by more than a couple of points in either direction. If I was a Republican I'd definitely be making GBS threads myself right now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/1322555349178765314 PPP's final (apparently) publicly released polls for this election are Biden +11 in MN, Biden +2 in Texas.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:21
|
|
|
DutchDupe posted:Big shout out to the Dem who won Harris County judge in 2018 and helped make this possible. Down ballot races again proving to be critical. This was awhile back but I wanted to add a few more details to this post. In 2018 the judge and clerk jobs both went to Dems and my guess is Beto O’Rourke running played a big part of that shift happening. The incumbents were both Republican white guys who weren’t maliciously bad but just kinda maintained status quo (The previous judge was Ed Emmett and he did a decent job during Harvey). Once Lina Hidalgo (judge) and Diane Truatman (clerk) took over the budget to run elections went from $4m to $31m, and that has probably been the biggest factor to all this change. Trautman had to retire in May for health reasons and her spot is being executed by Chris Hollins who is probably responsible for coming up with drive thru voting as well as polling locations being open for 24hrs (really 36) Thursday morning to Friday evening. Local conservatives have tried to sue every step of the way along with Gov Abbott limited absentee ballot drop boxes to 1 per county. This has galvanized a large contingent of voters who were probably ambivalent to the election prior to that. All of this democracy in Harris county has caught the eye of national media (they had a drat concert with local rapper/legend bun b on Thursday night near the Texans stadium at one of the 24 hour locations. It was socially distanced and masked enforced.) and they are seeing the local population cast a poo poo load more votes than usual. I would not be surprised if other city level democrats take a lot of notes from what Harris county did this year and implement similar things where they have power. Local elections matter if you want big Number. b0ng fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Oct 31, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:23
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/RobertCahaly/status/1322562403259895815 The dweeb wars are heating up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:24
|
|
|
Blurred posted:The bigger the total turnout, the better Biden's chances, all other things being equal. I can't see it being decided by more than a couple of points in either direction. If I was a Republican I'd definitely be making GBS threads myself right now. Wasserman said 12 million was possible so it would be 2 million more than your estimate if that happened. We also can't assume everyone from 2016 is voting the same way because we have evidence they aren't from polling, we've seen a lot of movement away from Republicans. I agree though it will probably be a 2 point race or less in either direction.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:25
|
|
|
Why is it always bowties with these people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:25
|
|
|
Ok Comboomer posted:The more I look at demographic data the more I think that “defender of masculinity” is going to be possibly the biggest breakpoint for the electorate going forward in the next two years, more so than white nationalism even. I can't speak for anyone else, but personally I'm offended by the notion that I need a bunch of greasy misogynists to "defend" my masculinity. My masculinity is fine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:25
|
|
|
Pick posted:And as a note, a lot of things I do like about Biden are not the things most people like. I think he's just a way savvier operator than he appears. I think his non-strategic persona hides a deeply strategic persona. And if that's all in a bloodthirsty desire to become the most powerful man in the world, well, god knows he put in the work Curiosity question for you, Pick: do you consider yourself to be more conservative than most of the other posters here? It can be economically, politically, socially.....whatever. Do you think that your goals, politically speaking, are different from those of the less Biden-friendly cohort here? I ask because a lot of the things that you appear to really like and appreciate about Biden are things that certain other posters seem to loudly despise and mistrust him for.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:28
|
|
.
|
Ok Comboomer posted:Expect to see conservative groups really double down on chasing lower-education men of color, especially if a Biden admin brings us the LGBTQ gains that we’re hoping for. Hmm...I can see it being done opportunistically, but it probably won't become the dominant strategy in the foreseeable future. There's too much tension between different two angles, those same lower-education men of color are also one of the most vilified groups among 'conservatives'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:29
|
|
|
I know we have touched on this subject pages ago, so I apologise now, but looking at time difference if I want to watch the results come in - all.m things being equal, and there’s no tomfoolery, what time (EST) will meaningful news or results start to come out? 11pm, midnight, earlier?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:30
|
|
|
Glumwheels posted:https://mobile.twitter.com/RobertCahaly/status/1322562403259895815 Is the 53h8ers a club I can apply to or...?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:31
|
|
|
britishbornandbread posted:I know we have touched on this subject pages ago, so I apologise now, but looking at time difference if I want to watch the results come in - all.m things being equal, and there’s no tomfoolery, what time (EST) will meaningful news or results start to come out? 11pm, midnight, earlier? https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-results-timing/
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:32
|
|
|
DutchDupe posted:Is the 53h8ers a club I can apply to or...? 53hate is right loving there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:33
|
|
|
DutchDupe posted:https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/1322555349178765314 I find the difference in numbers between Q3 and Q4 for TX fascinating. Does that show a meaningful (maybe large) number of 3rd party and didn't vote people breaking for Biden?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:33
|
|
|
Telsa Cola posted:53hate is right loving there. need a gang tag for this
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:34
|
|
|
Glumwheels posted:https://mobile.twitter.com/RobertCahaly/status/1322562403259895815 Why is CNN giving them a platform
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:36
|
|
|
britishbornandbread posted:I know we have touched on this subject pages ago, so I apologise now, but looking at time difference if I want to watch the results come in - all.m things being equal, and there’s no tomfoolery, what time (EST) will meaningful news or results start to come out? 11pm, midnight, earlier? While actual calls might not be made until much later in the evening, we should have a pretty good idea of how the rest of the night is going to go relatively early. Georgia, North Carolina and most of Florida all have poll closing times of 7:00pm EST, and have already started to count their early votes. As much as 80% of North Carolina's vote could be in by 7:30pm, with red shifts expected to occur as day-of votes are counted. If any one of those states gets an early call, Biden is almost certainly the winner regardless of what happens in the Midwest. If the results are very close or ambiguous there, however, then things get a lot more muddled as Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan will almost certainly not have all or even most of their votes counted on November 3rd. An early call for Biden in any one of NC, Florida and Georgia likely means an easy night for Democrats. If he loses all three then he's still favored but the election is much closer than anticipated and we could be waiting a few agonizing days for the Pennsylvania results.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:37
|
|
|
britishbornandbread posted:I know we have touched on this subject pages ago, so I apologise now, but looking at time difference if I want to watch the results come in - all.m things being equal, and there’s no tomfoolery, what time (EST) will meaningful news or results start to come out? 11pm, midnight, earlier? Obama was declared the winner in 2008 at about 10pm, 2012 was closer to 11pm. Trump was announced in 2016 at 3am. Of course, all the mail-in ballots this time around will probably skew things even later. Who knows - we’re kind of in new territory here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:37
|
|
|
LabyaMynora posted:Obama was declared the winner in 2008 at about 10pm, 2012 was closer to 11pm. Trump was announced in 2016 at 3am. This is all EST, I presume?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:39
|
|
|
DutchDupe posted:Wasserman said 12 million was possible so it would be 2 million more than your estimate if that happened. We also can't assume everyone from 2016 is voting the same way because we have evidence they aren't from polling, we've seen a lot of movement away from Republicans. I agree though it will probably be a 2 point race or less in either direction. If 12 million vote, then Biden would only need to win 63-37 among non-2016 voters, presuming all 2016 voters vote the same way. That's doable in itself. If 12 million vote and Trump suffers the same rate of defection that he's suffering around the rest of the country (~6%) then Biden needs to win 55-45 among non-2016 voters, in which case you'd almost have to say he's the favourite.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:39
|
|
|
Antillie posted:I find the difference in numbers between Q3 and Q4 for TX fascinating. Does that show a meaningful (maybe large) number of 3rd party and didn't vote people breaking for Biden? Pretty much and this has been backed up in other polls I have seen - people who didn't vote last election (either because they didn't like the candidate or couldn't yet) or voted third party prefer Biden over Trump this year. That is playing out in their Minnesota poll too - respondents to that poll were 45-44 voting for Hillary in 2016, but are now 54-43 in favour of Biden. Trump loses a point from 2016 (just like the Texas poll) while Biden eats up a large portion of that 11% who didn't vote or voted 3rd party in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:41
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:I can't speak for anyone else, but personally I'm offended by the notion that I need a bunch of greasy misogynists to "defend" my masculinity. My masculinity is fine. Much like with Joffrey Baratheon, the masculine person who has to keep reminding everyone how masculine he is is not actually masculine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:42
|
|
|
Straight White Shark posted:looking forward to Crenshaw 2024 I'm gonna quote this in hopes of preventing the jinx
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:42
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:Why is it always bowties with these people. I can't prove it but I think its become a sort of signalling to the chuds after Tucker went out of his way to keep it as part of his image following Jon Stewart's public excoriation of him on his own show years ago.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:50
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:I can't prove it but I think its become a sort of signalling to the chuds after Tucker went out of his way to keep it as part of his image following Jon Stewart's public excoriation of him on his own show years ago. Nah bowties have been a mainstay or insufferable conservative “intellectuals” for decades. Tucker is a highly visible example, but he’s not the originator by any means.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:54
|
|
|
Ok Comboomer posted:Curiosity question for you, Pick: do you consider yourself to be more conservative than most of the other posters here? That's outside the scope of this thread. I consider myself solidly inherently liberal particularly in the respect that I strongly support left-wing-associated positions that do not serve to benefit me personally, at all. However, my main reply would be something I think answers a lot of confusion people have about the electorate generally. I don't think "liberal" and "conservative" are very useful or as coherent as people act like they are. And I don't think it encapsulates many of the biggest divides among voting demos. I do feel like there are other huge issues going on. For example, I think you hit on one area where a lot of people here are weirdly aligned with Trump 2016 voters or Trump sympathizers. I mentioned earlier that Biden had been working to become President for a long time (not just earlier today, earlier like several weeks ago?) and that was automatically assumed to be a dig. That's bizarre to me. Ideally, the President is someone who has diligently worked their way up to the Presidency. I don't think it should go to someone who lucked into it, or is ambivalent about it. Isn't that how America is ideally supposed to work: you get stuff you worked for, not that you lucked into? I'm currently reading a book called The Death of Expertise: The Campaign against Established Knowledge and Why it Matters, by Tom Nichols, a dude I do not like. (But I'm willing to read books by people who don't share my political alignment, among other things.) I wouldn't have thought "it is good that the person who becomes President has been working towards that goal" was bad. Many people didn't like that about Hillary, either. I think there's a substantive ideological divide there, which apparently doesn't inherently unite the left or the right. I'm also hugely skeptical of "team sports" politics. Goodness knows it's successful. But it's worrying when people derive their views directly as a distillation of leadership they mostly seem to prefer by dint of attitude. We know this happens because, well, it's a well-established phenomenon, but Trump for example did it overnight with huge Republican policy positions. We had Republicans go from interventionist and globalist to isolationist almost overnight. And yet, this didn't unite the parties on these issues; suddenly, the other team has to shift to disagree. Happened on immigration, happened on environmentalism. How set in stone are who is and isn't a "bad guy" if your morality is determined by your views and actions, but people will rapidly swap their views and actions based on what their favorite idol instructs?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:55
|
|
|
Ok Comboomer posted:Curiosity question for you, Pick: do you consider yourself to be more conservative than most of the other posters here? I am actually pretty excited about Biden's Housing, Transportation Infrastructure, and Opioid Crisis plans. The plan to juice the gently caress outta trains makes the train nerd in me unseasonably happy. Like, I campaigned for Warren and Bernie, but...Biden ain't making me as upset as I thought he would. Like, I would have preferred other people but...I dont think they would have had the same down ballot effect we are seeing right now. Like it or not, Americans want Democracy Grandpa and if that is the vehicle in which we expand majorities in the House and flip the Senate ALONG with taking state gouses? I am here for it. I realize you are addressing Pick here, but I just thought I would chime in on my feelings as an activist on the ground.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:56
|
|
|
Guys, HugeGrossBurrito will eat a huge gross burrito if Biden wins: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3941141&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=6 Aardvark is designing the burrito in his burrito lab as we speak. All the more reason to get out there and vote Biden, or at least not Trump whydirt posted:Nah bowties have been a mainstay or insufferable conservative “intellectuals” for decades. Tucker is a highly visible example, but he’s not the originator by any means. Well I don't like the man but counterpoint: 
Phlegmish fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Oct 31, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:58
|
|
|
also i love trains
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 17:58
|
|
|
So, assuming that at least 2.1% of the electorate in Texas shows up on election day, which I think will probably happen, Texas will beat not only its numerical 2016 turnout, but also its 2016 turnout percentage this year. Edit: Also the number of under 30 people voting is up 165% so far. Antillie fucked around with this message at 18:25 on Oct 31, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 18:01
|
|
|
DutchDupe posted:Collin and Denton are the suburbs north of Dallas - Forth Worth. They both voted for Trump around 20 points in 2016, but Beto only lost Collin by six points and Denton by 8 points. Those counties are whiter than Texas on a whole, affluent, educated, growing fast with a lot of immigrants. If the suburban surge for Biden is gonna win him Texas he probably needs to flip those two counties (or at least do better than Beto did). This sounds like really solid analysis to me. If those who have already voted are Biden plus 2 then Trump could make that up on election day. The biggest movements away from Trump and towards Biden/Dems are in the suburbs, so high turnout there and in the cities could determine the win. I live in Collin County and never expected that it would boot out a GOP congressman (I think it literally voted over 80 percent for Bush in 2000 although "yeeha Texas" chauvinism I'm sure accounted for much of that), much less an established one like Pete Sessions, but it happened in 2018 due to Beto's campaign and coattails. The new voters registered and local officials and judges elected as a consequence of Beto's campaign have had a huge effect that can't be overestimated. It's fashionable to trash Beto here for running for President which was in hindsight clearly a mistake, but Texas wouldn't be anywhere near the position it's in now but for that Senate run. If we don't complete a descent into full fascism on Tuesday (knock on wood), the book on American politics in the 2020s will start with the Beto and Stacey Abrams campaigns and the cascade of consequences that have followed in their wake.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 18:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 23:55 |
|
|
Flopsy posted:Another asked which candidate is offering reparations and when I said neither huffily said "Well you have nothing to offer me then." Did you ask them if they had stairs in their house? Sanguinia posted:I think there's some historical merit to the notion that there have been times where common ground between the opposition forces of politics existed and that big accomplishments came with that. Off the top of my head I would think of the Progressive Era, where both Democrat and Republican had a fair degree of consensus that Monopolies Bad and so we were able to get Trust Busting accomplished. Hell, if you want an Evil Version That Will Make You Sick To Think About, just look at what the Bush Administration "accomplished," with that Bipartisan Consensus in both the public and political spheres. The world and our society was LITERALLY reshaped. “Remember when only white men really mattered and everybody understood their place in the race and gender hierarchy? We used to find so much common ground between the two political parties then!” Blurred posted:I appreciate the sentiment about the need to reach out to Republicans, and I certainly understand why the growing political division in the US should be seen as cause for concern, but I also see calls for "reconciliation" (to be instigated from the Democratic side, presumably) to be a little bit naive. Let me explain from my perspective as an outsider.... 1) you’re describing countries that are racially, ethnically, economically much more homogeneous than the US 2) aren’t Australian conservatives one of the most vehemently racist and anti-environment political demographics anywhere in the world? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 18:01
|
|