|
I think boomers dying off as some de facto boon for Democrats is overblown, anyway. Look at the people who attend Trump rallies and the Capitol rioters -- all dudes in their 40s-50s who are going to be voting for anyone who promises to own the libs for the next 5-6 electoral cycles at least. We're probably all millennials here, but we have a lot more in common politically with Gen Z than Gen X.
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 20:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 17:51 |
|
|
exquisite tea posted:I think boomers dying off as some de facto boon for Democrats is overblown, anyway. Look at the people who attend Trump rallies and the Capitol rioters -- all dudes in their 40s-50s who are going to be voting for anyone who promises to own the libs for the next 5-6 electoral cycles at least. We're probably all millennials here, but we have a lot more in common politically with Gen Z than Gen X. This is true: A LOT of Gen X sold out hard after the 90s and just became worse boomers culturally and politically
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 20:28
|
|
|
TulliusCicero posted:This is true: A LOT of Gen X sold out hard after the 90s and just became worse boomers culturally and politically The Limp Bizkit fans of the late 90s are now reliable Trump voters 20 years later. The storming of the capitol was just a repeat of Woodstock '99.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 20:32
|
|
|
https://www.ocregister.com/2021/01/10/southern-california-republicans-face-reckoning-after-insurrection-in-d-c Not a very representative sample (and how many people change their party registration in January) but Orange County tracks voter registration daily and Republicans apparently lost voters after they stormed the capitol.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 20:37
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:I think boomers dying off as some de facto boon for Democrats is overblown, anyway. Look at the people who attend Trump rallies and the Capitol rioters -- all dudes in their 40s-50s who are going to be voting for anyone who promises to own the libs for the next 5-6 electoral cycles at least. We're probably all millennials here, but we have a lot more in common politically with Gen Z than Gen X. It will probably help a little, but demographics aren't destiny. Polls show that each generation is more left-wing and more Democratic than the one before, on polls asking for self-identification, for party affiliation, and for views on specific issues. Silents are more conservative than Boomers, Boomers are more conservative than Gen X, Gen X are more conservative than Millennials, and Millennials are more conservative than Zoomers. Here are two posts from the old thread where I compiled some of this polling data: vyelkin posted:Nope. vyelkin posted:And if you start looking at views on specific issues, Silents are noticeably more right-wing than boomers, who are already more right-wing than the rest of us.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 20:43
|
|
|
Yea, I just want to add that younger people voting for the more liberal candidate hasn't really been true until very recently. I know I've posted this before somewhere, but to summarize, this is party voting lines by generation, and it's a few years old. Look at GenX, in 98, the oldest GenXer was 33, which would be equivalent to 2014 for Millenials. In 98, GenX was practically evenly split between the parties, but Millenials are voting like 15% more for the Dems. The GenX and Boomer lines are practically flat, Silent is a slight uptick towards Republicans, then you see Millenials, and they are steadily increasing towards the Dems, so either the younger millenials are that much more Dem leaning, or millenials are just moving that direction as they get older. I'm going to assume the younger millenials are just that much more favored to vote D. The issue for Dems is more about clustering of their voters and how the senate works against them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 21:05
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:Yea, I just want to add that younger people voting for the more liberal candidate hasn't really been true until very recently. From what I remember, Gen X also votes very differently depending on which portion of Gen X you're looking at. You're talking about a generation born between 1965 to 1980, which in turn leads to very different formative experiences ranging from which politicians they were raised to idolize to how bad or good their post-college job prospects were. Being 22 in 1987 with a BA or a BS was very different than being 22 and graduating right in the middle of the dot com bust and seeing your military buds getting sent to Iraq.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 21:18
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:I think boomers dying off as some de facto boon for Democrats is overblown, anyway. Look at the people who attend Trump rallies and the Capitol rioters -- all dudes in their 40s-50s who are going to be voting for anyone who promises to own the libs for the next 5-6 electoral cycles at least. We're probably all millennials here, but we have a lot more in common politically with Gen Z than Gen X. There are actually quite a few Gen Xers on these forums. Also, I'd be very cautious about drawing conclusions by generalizing from the demographics of a Trump rally to the wider population. Trump rally attendees are not even a representative sample of Trump voters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 21:25
|
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:From what I remember, Gen X also votes very differently depending on which portion of Gen X you're looking at. You're talking about a generation born between 1965 to 1980, which in turn leads to very different formative experiences ranging from which politicians they were raised to idolize to how bad or good their post-college job prospects were. Yea, I forgot where I saw it, but GenX was essentially a transition generation. It was practically a straight line of voting tendencies where the older part were more R, and the younger part were more D. I think GenX has held off the younger generation because they voted more. In 2016 at least, GenX was 35.7% of the vote share, while millenials were 31.3%, but there are actually 2% more millenials in the US than GenX (22% vs. 20% of the population).
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 22:07
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ezraklein/status/1348736652160626689?s=20 I would love this but my understanding was that multimember districts are unconstitutional - is that not true?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 22:10
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/pollreport/status/1348733254203936769 https://twitter.com/pollreport/status/1348733937309294593 Trump doesn't have 95% approval among Republicans any more. What were George W. Bush's numbers at the end? Still worse than this, right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 22:10
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:https://twitter.com/ezraklein/status/1348736652160626689?s=20 Dante fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Jan 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 22:17
|
|
|
DTurtle posted:https://twitter.com/pollreport/status/1348733254203936769 https://news.gallup.com/poll/116500/presidential-approval-ratings-george-bush.aspx W was 35% at this point in his presidency. So not really much worse because Republicans are cultists at every level
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 22:23
|
|
|
Is that his lowest Republican number ever? Anecdotally I’ve spoken to a few Republicans who are completely disgusted by this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 22:33
|
|
|
DarklyDreaming posted:https://news.gallup.com/poll/116500/presidential-approval-ratings-george-bush.aspx Yea, but W bottomed out at 25% right around election time in 2008. Not sure Trump will get that low in the next two weeks, but I'm sure he'll try.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 22:42
|
|
|
paternity suitor posted:Is that his lowest Republican number ever? Anecdotally I’ve spoken to a few Republicans who are completely disgusted by this. The effect of letting a bunch of people who look to be a couple cans short of a six pack turn the capitol building into their playground was jarring across party lines. It undermines the Republican party identity. Losing an election also has a cascading effect, from your ability to keep the rank and file members in line with your rhetoric to Americans just not liking a loser. They really don't like a sore loser.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 22:51
|
|
|
paternity suitor posted:Is that his lowest Republican number ever? Anecdotally I’ve spoken to a few Republicans who are completely disgusted by this. Disgusted! - still votes and supports straight ticket R.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 23:07
|
|
|
Oh wow: https://twitter.com/pollreport/status/1348753471911022593
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 23:16
|
|
|
It feels absurd to break this kind of stuff down to polling but those are like, should you run over puppies with your car numbers
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 00:32
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:https://twitter.com/ezraklein/status/1348736652160626689?s=20 My understanding is that at-large multi member districts were the norm in the very early days of the US and some states still used an at-large system until Congress mandated single member districts in the 1840s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 01:16
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:My understanding is that at-large multi member districts were the norm in the very early days of the US and some states still used an at-large system until Congress mandated single member districts in the 1840s. Multi member districts have long been a tool of segregationists to keep minorities out of city councils and other layers of government. They're mostly banned now to ensure proportional minority representation. There is every reason to expect that this would be abused in the same way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 01:20
|
|
|
paternity suitor posted:It feels absurd to break this kind of stuff down to polling but those are like, should you run over puppies with your car numbers Last I checked, which was like a few years ago, 10% gets you about the same number of people who believe in vampires or that the moon landing was faked. So, yeah, 10% is probably about as low as it’s gonna get.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 01:20
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:Trump doing better among any group is pretty easily explained by the checks or increased unemployment. If he'd send out another check, he might've won. Oh Mitch, you idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 01:52
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Multi member districts have long been a tool of segregationists to keep minorities out of city councils and other layers of government. They're mostly banned now to ensure proportional minority representation. I feel like there was probably a specific process in which occurred, that might not be as relevant in the post Civil Rights era? I can't imagine how in our current de facto two party system it having the same effect. Because a heavily urban district is going to elect 2 to sometimes 3 democrats under Single Transferable Vote which would I think have at least proportionally the same amount of minority representation to increasing it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 05:01
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/amandakhurley/status/1349021580958060547?s=20 If high propensity voters keep trending D, are we going to end up in a situation where low turnout elections are regularly better for Democrats than high turnout ones?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 16:59
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:https://twitter.com/amandakhurley/status/1349021580958060547?s=20 I think in some cases this has already been the case. Obviously you can look at the lower turnout midterm and correctly identify a number of places where Democrats did better than they did in November, despite a lower turnout. Or a more recent example is the difference between the Georgia runoff and 11/3. I would generally posit that the redder the state, the better off you are if turnout is low - more voters mean the electorate better reflects the partisan leaning of the state, whereas a low turnout gives the minority a chance to make up a disportionately high percentage of the vote (such as in 2019 Kentucky gov). The issue with the most extreme right-wing folks not actually being reliable voters is a pretty interesting one. A lot of people have been looking up the voting histories of those who were actually arrested at or after the capitol and finding it surprisingly sparse. Same, too, with the militia members who planned to kidnap Gov. Whitmer. David Shor would probably group these people as "low social trust" voters - folks who don't trust their neighbors, don't participate in civic events, and (most importantly to us) don't answer polls. The idea of "missing Trump voters" is hardly a new one, but it does suggest that these voters are so distinct and vote so irregularly that it is probably not possible for us to ever actually correctly account for them in polling - our only hope is that future candidates do not capture lightning in a bottle with this group by simultaneously winning nearly all of them while also motivating this group of sporadic non-voters to also get to the polls in high numbers. After all, polls were generally pretty accurate in 2018 and the GA runoff - so maybe it really is just a Trump problem. Maybe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 17:59
|
|
|
I'm totally fine with crazy republicans not voting because they think it's all rigged anyhow. Well, so long as they don't storm government buildings armed to the teeth over it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 18:22
|
|
|
The thing is, I'm not even sure if these people are Republicans in the conventional sense. I think Donald Trump legitimately tapped into a certain type of person that gets fixated on things that aren't necessarily political, but in this case were political. Or which these people never realized were political, or never conceptualized in a political way. Much like very religious people didn't used to vote, and some groups of highly religious people still don't, I think conspiracy theorist generally didn't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 18:24
|
|
|
 I don't think this fellow is all about soberly reading the Wall St. Journal over his eggs and coffee and making sure to vote for Romney during a midterm so that the capital gains rate stays low. I think he's probably mainly interested in smashing the teeth out of someone like me, and excited to vote for, march for, and maybe kill for the guy who tells him it's a good thing to do that, and that he's special and he loves him for doing it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 18:29
|
|
|
White non college/rural/etc voter turnout is pretty low. This only has estimates for 2012 and 2016, but white non college turnout is 20% lower than white college. I guess you don't really know whether the ones that don't vote would vote the same way if they showed up. I can't find anything about it but I remember 2016 primary polls saying voters with a negative opinion of the Republican party supported Trump.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 18:36
|
|
|
Pick posted:The thing is, I'm not even sure if these people are Republicans in the conventional sense. I think Donald Trump legitimately tapped into a certain type of person that gets fixated on things that aren't necessarily political, but in this case were political. Or which these people never realized were political, or never conceptualized in a political way. Much like very religious people didn't used to vote, and some groups of highly religious people still don't, I think conspiracy theorist generally didn't. Yeah, that's a good point. Wasn't there a poll somewhere showing how he tapped into a lot of people who typically don't vote?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 18:52
|
|
|
Pick posted:The thing is, I'm not even sure if these people are Republicans in the conventional sense. I think Donald Trump legitimately tapped into a certain type of person that gets fixated on things that aren't necessarily political, but in this case were political. Or which these people never realized were political, or never conceptualized in a political way. Much like very religious people didn't used to vote, and some groups of highly religious people still don't, I think conspiracy theorist generally didn't. It's this A lot of them are not Republicans: they are fascists, they are hooligans and thugs, they are authoritarians, and every other type of scum you can think of. It also has a contingent of just low-information conspiracy cranks. Trump engaged a ton of low information, but stupid and angry, and many violent nonvoters, because he is "anti-establishment" and gave them what they want. It's the "Culture War is my only priority" people Again as silly as this sounds, part of it is Prosperity Gospel, part of it is Racism and neo-confederacy, part of it is loving Goobergate of all things, part of it is authoritarian "back the blue", and part of it is Qanon It's the ner'do'well vote, and he's got it on lock
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 19:19
|
|
|
Yeah, and that's not a defense of Republicans at all. They are bad in their own way. And some of these people certainly were already registered that way. But my point is, the complete Looney Tunes bus stop shouting pedo satan cult bonkers people I think before this generally weren't very partisan. Prior to this, they were obsessed with fluoride in the water or sprinklers shooting rainbows or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 20:03
|
|
|
Pick posted:The thing is, I'm not even sure if these people are Republicans in the conventional sense. I think Donald Trump legitimately tapped into a certain type of person that gets fixated on things that aren't necessarily political, but in this case were political. Or which these people never realized were political, or never conceptualized in a political way. Much like very religious people didn't used to vote, and some groups of highly religious people still don't, I think conspiracy theorist generally didn't. In some way this seems like a corollary to a now-"classic" Chris Hayes article on undecided voters, from 2004 (!!), where he broadly makes an observation that 'undecided' voters he and his colleagues interviewed didn't really connect issues such as healthcare or worker's rights in their lives to political decision-making, in this case Bush v. Kerry. And of course the racist undercurrents, etc. I happened to listen to a few of Trump's rallies back in 2016, and a lot of his stream-of-consciousness touched on the types of issues the undecideds in Hayes's article worried about, but Trump didn't necessarily frame them as 'political' issues as polliwonk-people understand it, it was bombing and torturing scary foreigners, Mexico paying for a wall to keep rapists out, jobs back from CHYNA, etc. And he pointedly didn't really out-line any plans for any of his nonsense, it'd just get done. (One might segue into a discussion of 'will to power' and other quasi-mythical stuff Nazis were so fond of here, but that's a bit outside this thread's topic I suppose) The question is, will the genie go back into the non-voting bottle once it was energized for four years 
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 20:07
|
|
|
Pick posted:Yeah, and that's not a defense of Republicans at all. They are bad in their own way. And some of these people certainly were already registered that way. But my point is, the complete Looney Tunes bus stop shouting pedo satan cult bonkers people I think before this generally weren't very partisan. Prior to this, they were obsessed with fluoride in the water or sprinklers shooting rainbows or whatever. Exhibit A: Ben Garrison.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 20:16
|
|
|
Pick posted:Yeah, and that's not a defense of Republicans at all. They are bad in their own way. And some of these people certainly were already registered that way. But my point is, the complete Looney Tunes bus stop shouting pedo satan cult bonkers people I think before this generally weren't very partisan. Prior to this, they were obsessed with fluoride in the water or sprinklers shooting rainbows or whatever. This also helps with the interpretation of Trump voters supporting him because they saw him as a brick through the establishment window. If your honest-to-god beliefs are the complete Looney Tunes bus stop shouting pedo satan cult conspiracies, you generally didn't vote because you thought everyone in power was cooperating to put fluoride microchips in your water or whatever. The appeal of Trump to that particular demographic is that he came along and validated their beliefs that everyone on both sides of the political aisle were corrupt and needed to be destroyed, and the more he's appeared incompetent and stymied by the realities of governing (and now the realities of losing an election) the more it's validated their existing beliefs that the rest of the political class needs to be destroyed, which is basically the radicalization process QAnon has taken conspiracy theorists on over the last four years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 20:23
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:In some way this seems like a corollary to a now-"classic" Chris Hayes article on undecided voters, from 2004 (!!), where he broadly makes an observation that 'undecided' voters he and his colleagues interviewed didn't really connect issues such as healthcare or worker's rights in their lives to political decision-making, in this case Bush v. Kerry. And of course the racist undercurrents, etc. Man, I know I'd read that article a few times before but it's depressing every time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 20:36
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:https://twitter.com/amandakhurley/status/1349021580958060547?s=20 GA runoff results suggest that we won't have any more *low* turnout elections for a while, but lowER turnout will in fact favor Dems. There was probably some reversion of split ticket college whites back to the GOP, but the bottom line was that with 10% lower turnout than in November, Dems won ~3-4% more of the vote. Add the upcoming GOP civil war and the total revulsion of big tech and big corporations with the Q enabling faction in general, and the Dems are probably in for a much stronger decade than most people here think. After the GE, January 5th and 6th are likely the most important two days for the political direction of the country for a long time, and both are much more massively positive than anybody's realized thus far.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 20:39
|
|
|
From my experience with focus groups of infrequent voters they generally aren't crazy or completely inundated within a specific political worldview. Hyperpartisan looney tunes voters are in general very political engaged and consume a lot of (questionable) media. Infrequent voters are just mostly low-information voters without strong political priors or high engagement in political debate. I think it's a lot like imagining yourself listening to a very hotly contested debate about something you don't know anything about for 5 minutes and then being asked to pick one of two very divergent opinions about the topic. It's not a great recipe for informed opinion, but it's not necessarily because you're an idiot. Granted these weren't american voters, but I imagine the observation generalizes. All major left parties in Europe do some field mobilization work (though not anything close to the US scale), and since field work is inherently geographical you can very easily see that there's some low-turnout areas they don't prioritize, which is because you're probably looking at a net loss or (at least a decreased return) from increased turnout there as you rank areas by "left-leaning/non-voting". While I don't think the needle has tipped in an entire country where higher turnout is a disadvantage for the left, it certainly has in specific usually very white low income areas and I wouldn't be surprised if you could end up in that situation where the turnout advantage is reversed for democrats and republicans. If nothing else the long slow march of the education realignment kinda indicates this anyway as education is highly correlated with voting.
Dante fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Jan 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 20:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 17:51 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 20:50
|
|
posted: