|
Lead out in cuffs posted:So here's a morbid thought: we're at the stage with Delta where the vast majority of those dying are the unvaccinated, and the vast majority of the unvaccinated are Republican voters. And this wave of deaths is only just beginning, with the potential to accelerate as hospitals get spread thinner. My guess would be that it matters most in R+5ish districts. Any higher R-value percentage is unlikely to have much of an impact in terms of voting. Unless a whole bunch of reliable R-districts suddenly really really like whatever the Dems get through in reconciliation and change their vote from Republican to democratic candidates. Also, all the 2022 districts are being redrawn, so who knows what is going to happen.
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2021 17:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 09:05 |
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:So here's a morbid thought: we're at the stage with Delta where the vast majority of those dying are the unvaccinated, and the vast majority of the unvaccinated are Republican voters. And this wave of deaths is only just beginning, with the potential to accelerate as hospitals get spread thinner. I sure have, and it flies in the face of how I prefer to live my life and the way I try to think about people in general but I'd be lying if I didn't remind myself that this is second delta wave is killing the very people that terrify me and who I think are threatening my country in ways that help me feel better about who, precisely, is suffering from the outbreak right now. It sucks to feel myself becoming like this but these fuckers just never let up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2021 17:56
|
|
|
I'm not a hundred percent convinced that the vast majority of the unvaccinated are Republican voters. As Bird in a Blender mentioned Black Americans for example are less vaccinated and have a higher percentage of the COVID death toll than they should by population. I was discussing this with a coworker whose parents live in NYC, his Mom is a pharma tech, and both are still unvaccinated. He wasn't happy about it, but didn't seem particularly surprised either. It's weird. There seem to be more non-political or dem leaning people waiting to get vaccinated than I ever would have guessed. But anecdotally the number of "This right winger preached against COVID and now they died from it" and "This celebrity has COVID" stories has gone through the roof in the last few weeks. It will be interesting to see if that moves the needle on vaccinations at all, especially if someone particularly famous dies. Perhaps Tom Hanks could have sacrificed himself to save us all at the beginning of this whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2021 17:57
|
|
|
The unvaccinated are also more likely to be younger. Like 80% of people 65+ are fully vaccinated. 18-24 is 46%. I think it’s just going to be near impossible to know how COVID deaths affect the electorate. I think a bigger affect will be from people who are vaccinated who are sick of Republicans fighting against it. There’s obviously a lot of older republicans who are vaccinated, and I’m sure they’re not too happy how things have come roaring back. Will they take that out against R politicians next year?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2021 18:27
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:So here's a morbid thought: we're at the stage with Delta where the vast majority of those dying are the unvaccinated, and the vast majority of the unvaccinated are Republican voters. And this wave of deaths is only just beginning, with the potential to accelerate as hospitals get spread thinner. The closest state that Trump won was North Carolina. Trump got 2,758,775 votes, Biden 2,684,292 - a margin of 74,483. 1% of that 2.7 million votes is 27,588 votes - still too little to change anything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2021 21:17
|
|
|
In the event that Biden doesn’t run again in 2024, do you think dems would coalesce around Kamala? Kamala’s campaign was pretty disastrous. I think it would be a bad idea to put all your eggs in that basket, but I can’t even think of anyone other than Bernie who did better than her in 2020. Bernie’s going to be even older than Biden in 2024. The uphill battle of 2022 and the shaky looking field of 2024 have me worried a bit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 07:53
|
|
|
I’m not sure if they’ll quickly coalesce around Harris, but she’d definitely be the front runner. I don’t know who else would even run at this point. Bernie is not going to run again, and everyone else from 2020 were drat near copies of each other. Buttigieg may try again I guess. This is sort of the Dems problem when their old leadership refuses to move on. The leaders of the party are full of people too old to run for President, and there’s only a few young people with any name recognition at all. Maybe Warnock out of Georgia runs, but that would be a lot of races in a short amount of time for him.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 12:10
|
|
|
Vorik posted:In the event that Biden doesn’t run again in 2024, do you think dems would coalesce around Kamala? Kamala’s campaign was pretty disastrous. I think it would be a bad idea to put all your eggs in that basket, but I can’t even think of anyone other than Bernie who did better than her in 2020. Bernie’s going to be even older than Biden in 2024. The uphill battle of 2022 and the shaky looking field of 2024 have me worried a bit. Biden will definitely run barring a serious health problem, but Kamala and Buttigieg have been set up as your two "real" choices in 2028 at the latest. The "insurgent" candidate replacing Bernie would be someone from the squad. Whether Democrats generally accept Kamala will depend on the Biden administration's time going reasonably well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 12:40
|
|
|
Vorik posted:In the event that Biden doesn’t run again in 2024, do you think dems would coalesce around Kamala? Kamala’s campaign was pretty disastrous. I think it would be a bad idea to put all your eggs in that basket, but I can’t even think of anyone other than Bernie who did better than her in 2020. Bernie’s going to be even older than Biden in 2024. The uphill battle of 2022 and the shaky looking field of 2024 have me worried a bit. Sodomy Hussein posted:Biden will definitely run barring a serious health problem, but Kamala and Buttigieg have been set up as your two "real" choices in 2028 at the latest. The "insurgent" candidate replacing Bernie would be someone from the squad. The same primary calendar that lended Bernie early legitimacy in 2016 and 2020 will be a tremendous uphill climb for any members of the squad, and it remains unclear if any of the bad blood from the latest campaign still lingers with AOC in particular. Who Bernie gives the nod to will be important, but it's also an open question how many of his supporters would move along to a woman (or anyone not white)---Biden spent nearly the entire race as the leading second choice of Sanders supporter according to polling, despite a number of... more ideologically aligned... candidates to choose from. Of course, many folks are taking his "very slim" chance of running comments a lot more seriously than they would from other highprofile Dems (anything but a flat "absolutely not" from Hillary would generate weeks of headlines about her considering another run). I'll be interested to see how strong the effort to clear the field around Harris is--most of 2019 was South Carolina voters urging one of Booker and Harris to drop out and not split support. One would expect Booker to try again, along with Castro, Gillibrand, Pete, more selffunded billionaires in the vein of Steyer or Bloomberg and a host of other candidates that nobody has really considered yet. Of course, the known GOP field isn't looking terribly strong either. The 3 (I think we can drop Gaetz?) FL Republicans are all happy to tell you why the other sunshine staters have no hope, Cruz is likely to run again, and then you have Haley, Noem, Cotton, whichever waste of skin wins in OH, Hawley, and the Trump failsons (or Ivanka, but that seems less likely).
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 14:01
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:That’s why Fox News has had some sudden shifts to promoting the vaccine. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it settled law that you can't gerrymander to reduce the political power of racial minorities? If so, I would guess that most heavily african american neighborhoods are zoned together and less likely to swing than other districts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 14:26
|
|
|
Old James posted:Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it settled law that you can't gerrymander to reduce the political power of racial minorities? If so, I would guess that most heavily african american neighborhoods are zoned together and less likely to swing than other districts. Judicial review also doesn't typically throw out maps for that upcoming election, since there isn't time to redraw. As I recall, North Carolina had 3 or 4 different district maps in the past decade
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 14:36
|
|
|
On the other hand, most Republican gerrymandering consists of clumping urban minority voters into as few districts as possible, while spreading Republican constituencies across as many districts as they can while maintaining thin majorities. If Democratic casualties are coming disproportionately from gerrymandered D+50 districts and Republican casualties are coming from gerrymandered R+5 districts it could still have an impact, but as pointed out upthread the direct population impact of covid is just too small to be all that noticeable on the scale of elections (that could conceivably change, but if enough bodies piled up to have a real effect then poo poo would be hosed enough to throw any political calculus out the window.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 15:01
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:Who Bernie gives the nod to will be important, but it's also an open question how many of his supporters would move along to a woman (or anyone not white)
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 15:13
|
|
|
Tnega posted:In 2016, 41% of donors for Clinton were men, in 2020 43% of donors for Sanders were women. 41% in 2016. I point this out because no one asks "Would Clinton voters vote for a man?". If you want the Sanders wing to vote "for a woman", run a woman who is aligned with their political preferences. Or don't and just keep implying hundreds of thousands of potential voters are irredeemable sexists and or racists. Paracaidas posted:---Biden spent nearly the entire race as the leading second choice of Sanders supporter according to polling, despite a number of... more ideologically aligned... candidates to choose from. As an example:  That doesn't mean I think all or most or a disproportionate number of Sanders supporters are racist sexists, despite your wild rear end leap. It means that if E:numbers are hard Paracaidas fucked around with this message at 17:52 on Aug 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 15:45
|
|
|
Old James posted:Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it settled law that you can't gerrymander to reduce the political power of racial minorities? If so, I would guess that most heavily african american neighborhoods are zoned together and less likely to swing than other districts. Oh well, poo poo. I didn't realize it was illegal. GOP congress members would never just ignore the law or anything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 15:56
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:That doesn't mean I think all or most or a disproportionate number of Sanders supporters are racist sexists, despite your wild rear end leap. It means that if 46% of Sanders supporters in 2019 preferred Biden, Pete, and Bloomberg to the other candidates, it's an open question how many of his supporters would follow his endorsement of a woman candidate if a white guy who is similarly aligned with their political preferences is also running.  my personal opinion on that is they were the only two running ads on tv.But to point to your chart itself, more Sanders voters had Warren as their second choice than Biden as their second, once again pointing tward the theory of "respondents are just picking the two names they recognize." The open question is different than the one posed previously, as in this case Sanders would almost certainly be endorsing in a primary, as opposed to just endorsing a candidate (which could be a general election endorsement or a primary endorsement). I do believe that anyone Sanders endorses in the primary is going to get the support of those supporters of his that have not checked out of politics completely. Tnega fucked around with this message at 16:06 on Aug 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:00
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Oh well, poo poo. I didn't realize it was illegal. GOP congress members would never just ignore the law or anything. They would obey the law because racial gerrymanders do get courts to throw out maps. So, better to leave that alone so you can get away with the rest of the ratfuck.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:01
|
|
|
Tnega posted:I do believe that anyone Sanders endorses in the primary is going to get the support of those supporters of his that have not checked out of politics completely. I certainly think the recipient of his endorsement (should he decide not to run again) will get most of the support from his base... but "how many" is relevant because 51%, 67%, and 80% all mean very different things for the viability of that candidate. The second choice polling from last cycle leads me to believe that, if running in an open primary in 2024, a Sanders endorsement of Mark Pocan would see fewer Sanders voters defecting to other candidates than an endorsement of a squad member would. I could be wrong, and I'd love if I was! It's also not all (directly) racism and sexism. I imagine most of the Old James posted:They would obey the law because racial gerrymanders do get courts to throw out maps. So, better to leave that alone so you can get away with the rest of the ratfuck.  with a $20 donation to the 2022 house candidate of your choice if any house maps are redrawn after being struck by the courts and then used for 2022 elections. Far, far more often the struck map is used for the coming election and redrawn for the next one. If that seems extremely hosed up to you, it is!e:innumeracy Paracaidas fucked around with this message at 17:50 on Aug 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:28
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:I certainly think the recipient of his endorsement (should he decide not to run again) will get most of the support from his base... but "how many" is relevant because 51%, 67%, and 80% all mean very different things for the viability of that candidate. The second choice polling from last cycle leads me to believe that, if running in an open primary in 2024, a Sanders endorsement of Mark Pocan would see fewer Sanders voters defecting to other candidates than an endorsement of a squad member would. I could be wrong, and I'd love if I was! Yeah, there are a lot of variables with the Sanders endorsement, break out the popcorn, we have 3 years to go! Though I still question where you are getting the 46% number from, if it was from the chart you posted, I think one of us is reading it backwards. I for one blame 538 on that, because they are filthy centrists!
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:38
|
|
|
Oh ffs. You were reading correctly. I killed embeds so I couldn't confirm on preview and was too lazy to doublecheck. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:51
|
|
|
the holy poopacy posted:On the other hand, most Republican gerrymandering consists of clumping urban minority voters into as few districts as possible, while spreading Republican constituencies across as many districts as they can while maintaining thin majorities. If Democratic casualties are coming disproportionately from gerrymandered D+50 districts and Republican casualties are coming from gerrymandered R+5 districts it could still have an impact, but as pointed out upthread the direct population impact of covid is just too small to be all that noticeable on the scale of elections (that could conceivably change, but if enough bodies piled up to have a real effect then poo poo would be hosed enough to throw any political calculus out the window.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2021 09:34
|
|
|
Trump getting booed by his fans when he talked about getting vaccinated is going to be hilarious as it plays out in Republican primaries. I imagine R voters are going to be split on the vaccine issue and could decide some primaries.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2021 15:45
|
|
|
Double post, but Biden's approval numbers have started to tank on 538, mostly from two polls. Suffolk and Rasmussen both have him way under water with 41A/55D, and 44A/55D respectively. Rasmussen isn't surprising, but I don't know much about Suffolk. I think it's all pretty much because of the Afghanistan withdrawal, so we'll have to see if this has any sticking power in a month or so when Afghanistan likely drops out of the news. People still approve of the withdrawal, but disapprove of how it's going. If nothing really comes of the Taliban taking over, then his numbers probably go back up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2021 18:30
|
|
|
The fact that the Dems are about to actually pass both the Reconciliation AND the Bipartisan bill will certainly help.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2021 18:31
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:The fact that the Dems are about to actually pass both the Reconciliation AND the Bipartisan bill will certainly help. Citation needed on the former, especially after Sinema said she wouldn't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2021 18:46
|
|
|
Neo_Crimson posted:Citation needed on the former, especially after Sinema said she wouldn't. As lovely as Sinema is I find it extremely hard to believe she's willing to single-handedly kill Reconciliation. Manchin was already leaning on House Blue Dogs to shut their loving mouths and just vote for both when they tried to strongarm Pelosi into giving their their bill first so they could try to kill the other one. Sinema may be stupid, but she's not so stupid as to torch her entire future both in and out of government by making an enemy of every human being in America.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2021 19:24
|
|
|
Even Trump had moments where polling spiked/tanked before returning to the mean; as Afghanistan fades into the backdrop Biden's numbers probably recover.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2021 19:28
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:Sinema may be stupid, but she's not so stupid as to torch her entire future both in and out of government by making an enemy of every human being in America. I repeat: citation loving needed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2021 19:28
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:Double post, but Biden's approval numbers have started to tank on 538, mostly from two polls. Suffolk and Rasmussen both have him way under water with 41A/55D, and 44A/55D respectively. Rasmussen isn't surprising, but I don't know much about Suffolk. I think it's all pretty much because of the Afghanistan withdrawal This doesn't surprise me and is 100% due to Afghanistan.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2021 20:26
|
|
|
Neo_Crimson posted:I repeat: citation loving needed. I mean she didn't vote against the covid relief bill; her opposition has never single handedly killed any bill, there was always another handful of Dems, almost never just her or her and Manchin. I don't think we've seen her vote down something Manchin voted for.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2021 20:50
|
|
|
Neo_Crimson posted:I repeat: citation loving needed. They're going to pass Reconciliation. Sinema wants attention and praise for...whatever it is she is doing. They will find a bill that is acceptable to her and she will vote for it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2021 21:06
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:So here's a morbid thought: we're at the stage with Delta where the vast majority of those dying are the unvaccinated, and the vast majority of the unvaccinated are Republican voters. And this wave of deaths is only just beginning, with the potential to accelerate as hospitals get spread thinner. Well, the margin of victory in several key states is down in the few thousands in national elections and probably closer than that in some state level elections. So I think it could certainly swing an election here or there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2021 23:43
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Has anyone crunched the numbers on when attrition of Republican voters starts to affect swing states and swing districts? This was a drunk exercise last week shortly after I convinced my irl circle to get a booster (didn't take much convicting), there's just not enough direct death yet. Like, it's not even close or the swing states are stupendously undercounting deaths. like, not just whatever some lovely red state country decided to call a covid death, but death in general. The silver lining you're looking for in this circus of tragedy isn't there. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 00:16 on Aug 25, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2021 00:13
|
|
|
Unfortunately every anti-mask/anti-vaxx person who died in a crowded hospital took a few underpaid retail workers down with them, so demographic shifts are unlikely at this stage
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2021 00:32
|
|
|
DarklyDreaming posted:Unfortunately every anti-mask/anti-vaxx person who died in a crowded hospital took a few underpaid retail workers down with them, so demographic shifts are unlikely at this stage It is somewhat trivial to demonstrate via uncut, in-context audio/video that Brian Kemp is completely aware that this screws black Georgia worse than the chuds. Deliberate genocide, or just Tuesday in America.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2021 01:08
|
|
|
Stolen from the coronavirus thread and relevant to the recent discussion. Phlag posted:Looking at that trend from a similar angle:
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 02:05
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:Double post, but Biden's approval numbers have started to tank on 538, mostly from two polls. Suffolk and Rasmussen both have him way under water with 41A/55D, and 44A/55D respectively. Rasmussen isn't surprising, but I don't know much about Suffolk. I think it's all pretty much because of the Afghanistan withdrawal, so we'll have to see if this has any sticking power in a month or so when Afghanistan likely drops out of the news. People still approve of the withdrawal, but disapprove of how it's going. If nothing really comes of the Taliban taking over, then his numbers probably go back up. How do they compare to other negative historical events? I find the continuing theme of "This is Biden's Jimmy Carter Sweater Moment!" a poor analogy. Even despite a bungled exit American Public sentiment continually for decades wanted to the war to end and I don't think that's changed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 04:42
|
|
|
ShadowHawk posted:On the other hand "I had someone close to me die or suffer serious injury because of Covid" is going to be a significant multiple of that number, and it just might make people angry enough to vote about it. If Covid was a significant issue in the 2020 election, it may end up being very salient in the next one.  I really wonder how Covid is going to impact Florida and Texas Republicans. I hope it's just as brutal as COVID.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 04:43
|
|
|
[Crossposting from the California Politics thread] SF Chronicle has a report on a poll confirming that the Recall Newsom movement is sputtering. quote:With less than two weeks before the Sept. 14 special election, the campaign to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom is falling short as a majority of likely voters approve of how he is handling the top issues facing California and as Republicans have failed to broaden the coalition of opponents who want to get rid of him, according to a new study released Wednesday. More at the link: https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/New-poll-shows-Newsom-recall-failing-as-16429540.php Interesting possibility of a feedback cycle - if there are enough stories about Newsom's numbers rising and the recall failing, Republican enthusiasm will begin to falter, which is extremely bad news for the recall campaign given how many Republicans have said they're waiting until election day to cast their votes in person (can't trust Joe Biden's mail service!)
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 06:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 09:05 |
|
|
Least there's something decent in this shitshow of a week.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2021 06:48
|
|
