|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Dean Phillips trying to find the silver lining in somehow coming in 4th place in a two-person race. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QptgDy8TbCM i am just thinking of this song when i think of dean.
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 01:55 |
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Marianne Williamson's campaign that has been over for weeks ended up slightly beating Dean Phillips in the Michigan primary, so she is now unsuspending her campaign. Lol I saw this, I thought she had been banned off Twitter and was announcing the return of her account. Everyone is claiming that the result in Michigan vindicates their priors and confidently taking victory laps. I have no idea what the uncommitted vote means, but I do know that Trump is once again coming in at double-digit underperformance of his pre-primary polling results.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:22
|
|
|
zoux posted:Everyone is claiming that the result in Michigan vindicates their priors and confidently taking victory laps. I have no idea what the uncommitted vote means, but I do know that Trump is once again coming in at double-digit underperformance of his pre-primary polling results. To be fair, Trump's situation is the same as Obama's, Biden's, Romney's, etc. Primary results aren't indicative of GE performance. Most of the people who voted against Trump in the primary will still vote for him in the general, the primaries are only tiny fractions of actual voters, both sides are more or less uncontested so the only people coming out are diehard supporters and protest votes, etc. Trump is going to pull way more than 60% of Republicans in Michigan in November. The polls have consistently overestimated his actual results in the primary, but it is also hard to model primary results when the race is more or less over.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:29
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:https://michiganadvance.com/2023/10/03/how-some-michigan-muslims-united-with-extremist-republicans-against-lgbtq-rights/ ill add that parts of the muslim american and arab american communities in michigan were already moving away from the dems before the horror show, mostly because social conservatism and have been in the last couple elections. gaza will probably accelerate some of that. that being said tlaib barely won last time but she will probably be fine this year. Will conservative Muslim voters rally behind a Christian theocracy because “at least it’s a theocracy”? I think republicans may be thankfully hurting themselves a bit by tying their regressive policies so tightly to Christianity and not a vague “religious morals”.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:31
|
|
|
borkencode posted:Will conservative Muslim voters rally behind a Christian theocracy because “at least it’s a theocracy”? I think republicans may be thankfully hurting themselves a bit by tying their regressive policies so tightly to Christianity and not a vague “religious morals”. Arab and Muslim Americans were a Republican demographic prior to 2004. Bush won the Muslim and Arab-American vote in 2000. It was only after Republicans really ramped up the Islamophobia and anti-Arab sentiment post-9/11 that they started voting Democratic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:35
|
|
|
borkencode posted:Will conservative Muslim voters rally behind a Christian theocracy because “at least it’s a theocracy”? I think republicans may be thankfully hurting themselves a bit by tying their regressive policies so tightly to Christianity and not a vague “religious morals”. yeah. other articles said that alot of muslim and arab folks who joined up with the GOP basicaly got pushed to the back of the room and given low positions at best. the Michigan GOP is batshit insane and hardline trumpists and apperently the moms for liberty stuff has been imploding all over the country so who knows if that will have the same pull it does post trump. but yeah the GOP is super bigoted in general to pull in alot of socially conservative minorities. watching some of the various social right nutjobs on social media, their is a divide of "make allies with nonwhite/non chirstian conservatives to fight the perfidious homos" or "white chirstian power now and forever" types.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:38
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Arab and Muslim Americans were a Republican demographic prior to 2004. Bush won the Muslim and Arab-American vote in 2000. It was only after Republicans really ramped up the Islamophobia and anti-Arab sentiment post-9/11 that they started voting Democratic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:38
|
|
|
The majority of voters are not rational in any way, so trying to use reason to predict how certain groups will act is a pointless exercise. If people oppressed by republicans didn't vote republican, they wouldn't win any elections
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:41
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Generally voters don’t take having their families bombed very well, yeah. It wasn't even bombing. They turned against George Bush and Jeb Bush in October 2001 - before a single bomb had dropped and when W. had an 80+% approval rating among other demographic groups. To be fair to Bush, he did try to tamp down the Islamophobia and Anti-Arab sentiment in the months after 9/11, but the Republican party in general had spent the last two months in overdrive and that was when they started to drift away. quote:U.S. Muslims—a strong, new presence on America’s political landscape—are unhappy with the Bush brothers—George W., the man they helped win the presidency last November, and Jeb, who seeks re-election next year as governor of Florida. quote:On election day [2000], Bush received 70 percent of the Muslim vote nationally and 90 percent in Florida. quote:Saeed, chairman of the American Muslim Alliance and chief architect of the bloc vote, is upbeat. "We did not expect overnight successes in Washington," he commented, "but we are confident of steady progress if we continue to work together. Muslims are in the political arena for the long haul. We are focusing our attention on next year's elections, which will decide the control of the next Congress, and on the 2004 presidential contest, especially in the battleground states where partisan margins are narrow." https://www.wrmea.org/2001-october/george-jeb-and-the-muslim-vote-election-2002.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:44
|
|
|
Aztec Galactus posted:The majority of voters are not rational in any way, so trying to use reason to predict how certain groups will act is a pointless exercise. If people oppressed by republicans didn't vote republican, they wouldn't win any elections Polls show the majority of voters are poorly educated about public policy, but they aren't necessarily irrational. If you genuinely believe that life begins at conception or hate Mexicans to such a degree that it impacts your life, then it is totally rational to vote for the party that will do that and also cut your Medicaid if you value those things more. If Christ is lord and we need to get right with Jesus or we are going to hell, then obviously it is way more important and rational to focus on that than to give a poo poo about Medicare prescription drug reimbursement rates. Same with all of the rich Democratic lawyers and doctors in NYC that vote overwhelmingly for the group that is more likely to raise their taxes because they care about social issues or guns. People are only irrational if you are assessing it from one specific angle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:48
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Turnout is way up because it is a primary with 9 days of early in-person voting and universal vote by mail instead of a caucus. This is the biggest factor in terms of the total number of votes. Michigan has a strong Secretary of State that has implemented a system to get the greatest number of voters voting as possible. James Garfield posted:I think success for the uncommitted campaign was more about getting journalists to report on it than actually winning votes. It was obviously never going to get enough votes to matter, but journalists did cover it so it was probably a success. There were many precincts in Dearborn yesterday where the national media outnumbered the local media at a rate of 10 to 1, and outnumbered the actual voters themselves. This was a campaign designed to get national media attention, and it worked. Main Paineframe posted:If Biden is underperforming, my first concern would be that Biden's unprecedented pro-union moves haven't really won him much goodwill against a weirdly Trumpy union rank-and-file. The union base is strongly behind Biden. The Trump voters are in management or not in union-backed jobs. Dapper_Swindler posted:https://michiganadvance.com/2023/10/03/how-some-michigan-muslims-united-with-extremist-republicans-against-lgbtq-rights/ ill add that parts of the muslim american and arab american communities in michigan were already moving away from the dems before the horror show, mostly because social conservatism and have been in the last couple elections. gaza will probably accelerate some of that. that being said tlaib barely won last time but she will probably be fine this year. Hamtramck, the town within the city of Detroit, had a big conflict last year over pride flags in public places. Lots of Republican-leaning voters in practice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:54
|
|
|
Eh, I'd argue plenty of voters are irrational, in that their votes absolutely don't line up with their values and knowledge, although they're irrational in the normal human "Using lovely heuristics in place of thinking things through because they don't like to actually think about things like that and have other poo poo going on in their life" and "saying and doing things in ways that they vibe with emotionally without any real thought as to what the consequences are likely to be" ways.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:57
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:a weirdly Trumpy union rank-and-file. There's probably a love of tariffs in that crowd. Also, the GOP has been doing better and better among people without a college education (especially with white people) while it's a mirror image for the Democrats. I forget the regular poster in this thread who pointed out that Michigan has a lot of important voting blocks that aren't college educated. https://www.politico.com/interactives/2022/midterm-election-house-districts-by-education/ I'm sorry for the Politico link. I'm having a hard time finding a better article about this point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 16:01
|
|
|
Remember how they had that huge rush of Republicans coming out with public statements to assure everyone that they support IVF and would never attempt to ban it (despite voting for bills that ban it)? Turns out that now that they have had some time to think about it, they still want you know that they absolutely support IVF as a concept, but are actually fine with banning it and will block any attempts to legalize it federally. quote:“IVF Sad” Republicans are Republicans who are discomfited by having to ban IVF or at least don’t want to get caught supporting banning IVF but also have to admit that they agree with the judge who banned it. quote:‘A Quandary’: Republicans Hesitant To Back Federal Protections For IVF https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ivf-...62e28d5ba35f850
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 16:04
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Biden could at least try to ameliorate this issue by not supporting the extremely right wing government of Israel who in the past has openly campaigned on behalf of his 2024 opponent.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 16:13
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Remember how they had that huge rush of Republicans coming out with public statements to assure everyone that they support IVF and would never attempt to ban it (despite voting for bills that ban it)? yeah the GOP is stuck because a big vocal portion of the base WANTS an IVF ban and even beyond that and if the congriss critters dont bend the knee to that, then they can lose primaries. the obvious probablem is, this plays into the hands of the dems because unless they give a resounding "yeah we arnt banning IVF" then they will eat poo poo with scared moderates/suburbs/women,
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 16:14
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:Is there evidence that the slight increase in uncommitted is actually due to Biden's support of Israel? It's my understanding that a large majority of both Democrats and Republicans support Israel, or that it is a non-issue when compared to stuff like grocery prices? We don't have direct evidence, but most counties averaged about 10% uncommitted (basically the same as Obama in 2012). The two that were much higher than average were the counties with Ann Arbor (young college students) and Dearborn (large Muslim population), which got 15-17%. That seems to indicate that those counties had about 5-7% more uncommitted vote share than the baseline for the other counties. Edit: And a ~15% vote share compared to a ~10% vote share is about a 50% relative increase in total vote share, so those would be statistically significant figures. It ended up not being a significant percentage of voters overall, but those two areas were disproportionately more inclined to be uncommitted and polls show that college students and Muslim voters are most likely to care about Gaza and have a negative opinion, so that seems to line up with the conclusion that it did have a statistically significant impact in those areas even if it wasn't a major impact statewide. It doesn't 100% prove it, but it is very likely. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 16:27 on Feb 28, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 16:17
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:We don't have direct evidence, but most counties averaged about 10% non-committed (basically the same as Obama in 2012).
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 16:20
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:We don't have direct evidence, but most counties averaged about 10% non-committed (basically the same as Obama in 2012). That's absolutely right. Certain counties had a small spike, and that's the best way to measure the impact.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 16:23
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Remember how they had that huge rush of Republicans coming out with public statements to assure everyone that they support IVF and would never attempt to ban it (despite voting for bills that ban it)? Note that this is the culture warrior classic of no moral X but my x. They are absolutely dying to find a pivot to keep the true single issue anti abortion crowd going. Being anti IVF gets really deep into the theology of that. Otherwise it's -60 among their own base and only opposed by anti natalist and some fringe naturalists elsewhere. This is absolutely a move to cut off a primary attack from the right.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 16:24
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Eh, I'd argue plenty of voters are irrational, in that their votes absolutely don't line up with their values and knowledge, although they're irrational in the normal human "Using lovely heuristics in place of thinking things through because they don't like to actually think about things like that and have other poo poo going on in their life" and "saying and doing things in ways that they vibe with emotionally without any real thought as to what the consequences are likely to be" ways. This might be splitting hairs, its more about prioritization. Voters will choose prioritize things that they think are important that we (I would say correctly) deem as not important. But they value the things they value.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 16:35
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:Is there evidence that the slight increase in uncommitted is actually due to Biden's support of Israel? It's my understanding that a large majority of both Democrats and Republicans support Israel, or that it is a non-issue when compared to stuff like grocery prices? A plurality of both Democrats and Independents disapprove of Israel's handling of the war and want more humanitarian aid to Gaza instead of military aid to Israel. In fact, most voters in general don't want the US to continue giving Israel military aid. https://web.archive.org/web/20240223223833/https://pro.morningconsult.com/analysis/israel-hamas-polling-february-2024 None of this really matters though since much of the party is just doing whatever is necessary to keep Biden competitive with Trump. Biden is clearly continuing to pursue his current course of action because he just really loves Israel and he has no issues with taking down the party with him and letting Trump win. And the party can't exactly criticize him because he is the incumbent and is going to be the candidate and needs all the help he can get right now. So you end up in this bizarre situation where most Dem politicians are way to the right of your average Dem voter on the issue because they have to support Genocide Joe or else Trump wins. A majority of even Republicans ("At the same time, roughly 3 in 5 voters — including 70% of Democrats, 55% of independents and 51% of Republicans — continue to express support for a cease-fire, similar to the levels of support captured last month.") want a ceasefire while tons of Dem politicians absolutely refuse to say the word. koolkal fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Feb 28, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:15
|
|
|
I followed 2016 here and saw lots of confident predictions about how various demos would vote with comparisons to previous elections. The confidence of some folk's predictions is giving me feelings reminiscent of those times and I think we should use as much caution as possible here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:37
|
|
|
koolkal posted:A plurality of both Democrats and Independents disapprove of Israel's handling of the war and want more humanitarian aid to Gaza instead of military aid to Israel. In fact, most voters in general don't want the US to continue giving Israel military aid. Biden's openly pushing for a humanitarian ceasefire. He's just doing it through private direct negotiations with Israel and Hamas, rather than public posturing. Additionally, of the 69 members of Congress who've explicitly called for a ceasefire, literally every single one of them is a Democrat. You can be disappointed that Biden isn't exerting as much pressure as you'd like for a ceasefire, and you can be disappointed that not as many Democrats as you'd hope have endorsed a ceasefire, but maybe dial down the hyperbole a little bit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:39
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Biden's openly pushing for a humanitarian ceasefire. He's just doing it through private direct negotiations with Israel and Hamas, rather than public posturing. There are 212 House members and 51 Senate members. 69 / (212 + 51) = 26% vs. 70% of Dem voters. That is absolutely insane.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:41
|
|
|
koolkal posted:A plurality of both Democrats and Independents disapprove of Israel's handling of the war and want more humanitarian aid to Gaza instead of military aid to Israel. In fact, most voters in general don't want the US to continue giving Israel military aid. And heres a poll that says mostly the opposite https://twitter.com/DSchwammenthal/status/1762560219270300049?t=jSVK0zHN53psJPLu2lVpyw&s=19 can we just ban pollsters already
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:41
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:And heres a poll that says mostly the opposite An independent poll is far different than a poll from the Director of the AJCTAI. When you're polling whether voters support Israel or Hamas, it's not a great poll. You're simply muddying the waters and trying to claim all polling is bad by using an incredibly partisan poll.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:44
|
|
|
koolkal posted:A plurality of both Democrats and Independents disapprove of Israel's handling of the war and want more humanitarian aid to Gaza instead of military aid to Israel. In fact, most voters in general don't want the US to continue giving Israel military aid. This narrative is a little old, though. Most of the things you are saying haven't happened have actually happened in the last month. Additionally, the polling is also conflicted on this. People want a ceasefire, but they also don't want Israel to stop until "Hamas is destroyed" and only 31% says we are supporting Israel "too much" in the most recent Yougov poll. It also doesn't seem to be translating into votes either. In a basically uncontested and meaningless primary vote where "throwing your vote away" has no cost, the potential protest vote was only about 2% higher than the baseline for 2012. https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1762854398424699190
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:44
|
|
|
On the one hand that makes sense, on the other hand Bad Nate is a nimrod and almost always wrong (since 2008)
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:57
|
|
|
Tatsuta Age posted:On the one hand that makes sense, on the other hand Bad Nate is a nimrod and almost always wrong (since 2008) Nate is almost always wrong about punditry. His numbers and analysis are still good. People called him crazy for giving Trump a 35% chance to win in 2016 when everyone else had it at 1%.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:58
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Nate is almost always wrong about punditry. His numbers and analysis are still good. I think the "shoot the messenger" effect on that is a non-trivial part of why he ended up so specifically hated by people who were 100% rock certain Clinton was going to win, including and perhaps especially the subset of those that hated her.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 18:13
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Polls show the majority of voters are poorly educated about public policy, but they aren't necessarily irrational. If you genuinely believe that life begins at conception or hate Mexicans to such a degree that it impacts your life, then it is totally rational to vote for the party that will do that and also cut your Medicaid if you value those things more. If Christ is lord and we need to get right with Jesus or we are going to hell, then obviously it is way more important and rational to focus on that than to give a poo poo about Medicare prescription drug reimbursement rates. If hating minorities more than liking security is rational, then the word rational doesn't mean anything. If what you're trying to say is they rationally pursue irrational goals, then sure.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 18:13
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:If hating minorities more than liking security is rational, then the word rational doesn't mean anything. If what you're trying to say is they rationally pursue irrational goals, then sure. That is pretty much what I am saying. Acting rationally doesn't mean it is good, but if you legitimately believe that the country needs to get right with god or we're all going to hell, then it is 100% rational to make that your #1 priority above all else. It would be completely irrational to believe that and then not make it a major defining issue of your life. If everyone was a completely rational actor based on economic and social status security, then no black people would vote Republicans, no wealthy people would vote Democrats, no secular people would vote Republican, and nobody who believes religion needs to play a big role in public life would vote for Democrats. But, all of those things do happen - quite a lot!
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 18:18
|
|
|
koolkal posted:An independent poll is far different than a poll from the Director of the AJCTAI. When you're polling whether voters support Israel or Hamas, it's not a great poll. You're simply muddying the waters and trying to claim all polling is bad by using an incredibly partisan poll. The poll cited was not one from the Director of the AJCTAI, but instead was from Harvard-Harris, which is a regular polling outfit. You can read its questions and see that they aren't particularly partisan, and in fact the questions seem more sympathetic to Gaza in ways. For example, its question about supporting Israel's ground invasion gives the context of "If you knew that 1.7 million people were there and at significant risk of harm and death". And the invasion STILL got approval.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 18:19
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QptgDy8TbCM I can't stop thinking about Howard Dean every time I read Dean Phillips name. https://www.nbcnews.com/video/howard-deans-famous-2004-scream-555744835521
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 18:19
|
|
|
Nate is right. There's really no reason to fret over what ~100,000 voters are going to do in Michigan. https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1762486466922377529
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 18:21
|
|
|
Nervous posted:I can't stop thinking about Howard Dean every time I read Dean Phillips name. The idea that doing a weird scream, getting your picture taken with a women who isn't your wife sitting on your lap, or plagiarizing a line from someone else's speech could disqualify you for the presidency is almost charming and quaint in 2024.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 18:23
|
|
|
B B posted:Nate is right. There's really no reason to fret over what ~100,000 voters are going to do in Michigan. I'd be insanely shocked if all 100,000 of those uncommitted voted Trump or didn't vote Biden. Or even 1% of that 100,000. As usual, polls aren't predictive this far out. Also: All of those are within the margin of error,
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 18:26
|
|
|
B B posted:Nate is right. There's really no reason to fret over what ~100,000 voters are going to do in Michigan. Correct. That 2% above the baseline is not even close to ~100k voters, primary results have no predictive basis on GE performance (Trump is only going to get 65% of Republican votes in November!), and you are being very silly is you are attributing motive to 100% of the votes in a primary. Roughly 93% of the people who voted uncommitted in 2012 ended up voting for Obama (same with Trump in 2016). You're also doing the very silly thing of using absolute vote totals. Trump got fewer votes when he won Michigan than George W. Bush did when he lost it. How is that possible if he got a bigger number? Biden has real problems going into November, but those aren't really indicative of that. It just seems like people are trying to work in a pre-written narrative into the Michigan results when there are real problems out in the open that they are ignoring.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 01:55 |
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:If hating minorities more than liking security is rational, then the word rational doesn't mean anything. If what you're trying to say is they rationally pursue irrational goals, then sure. "Rationality" can only apply, by definition, to intermediate goals. All ultimate goals are irrational. Every single one of them. There isn't any way to rationally arrive at ultimate goals, that's just... how life works. The definition of rationality you are trying to use here is, I think, incoherent. How would one go about setting ultimate goals and underlying values to be "rational" to begin with? Rationality can only be determined in relation to those things. That said, a lot of voters are irrational specifically because they set intermediate goals that do not make a lick of sense in relation to their ultimate goals and values, for a whole host of reasons, but that's a different issue entirely.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 18:29
|
|