Thanks Simon. I think another motivation for getting to 55 is that we want the election to be over on election night. In 2020 for many reasons the vote count dragged on for days and the AP didn’t call the race until Saturday. If we can win NC and the other battlegrounds handily then it’ll be done Tuesday night giving MAGA less time to spin their web of lies.
Thank God Democrats are taking NC seriously but the media is still ignoring my state just like they did in 2022. It drove me crazy that the media put so much more focus on the Ohio Senate race even though polls showed that Cheri Beaseley’s chances were as good or better than Ryan’s. Despite that and the fact that NC is much more of a purple state than red Ohio, the mainstream media ignored that Senate race. Beaseley performed much better in the election — she lost her Senate race by 3.5 points; Ryan lost by 6.
I feel strongly that Beaseley needed the kind of national media attention that Ryan got. There are so many new residents in NC who were not familiar with state politics or knew who Beaseley was. From what I can tell many new residents rely get a lot on the national media for political news so it would have helped if Beasely had gotten the kind of attention Ryan received.
Thank you for the link!!! Other than sources like Hopium, volunteering has been the biggest thing preserving my sanity through the last few election cycles. It's also great to see an organization focusing on closer states than IA and OH this time around.
Jess Craven highly recommend Movement Voter Project. Great bang for your buck. NC Dem party has a great organization and leader now so donating directly to them is also good.
Thanks so much! I can’t believe how difficult it is to find out the most effective organizations, although I do know that Anderson Clayton is an amazing state party chair.
I get tons of emails from Democrats asking for money but there isn’t a good way to evaluate which organizations are effective. It would be great if there were an equivalent of a Charity Watch or a Charity Navigator for political organizations.
No problem. I highly recommend you subscribe to Chop Wood Carry Water here on Substack. Jess will point you to the best organizations who will use your money effectively.
I'm enjoying your posts. The enthusiastic approach, while looking at reality...we have a lot of work to do...is really helpful in keeping scary Trumpism under control! Thank you.
Those last two videos are POWERFUL. How can we share them on FB, Twitter, other places? I'm sure they are on YouTube, but I can't find them. Right clicking does not give me an option to download or share. Thanks!
Question for you, Simon. I’m a political science prof who largely agrees with your analysis of the election. When I found you in 2022, the data you and Bonier put together really helped me show my classes where things stood. Contra the pundit class, we were not expecting a red wave. 😉
But what do you make of Josh Barro’s argument that the reason Dems have done well in the multiple midterm and off-cycle elections isn’t that Republicans are sickened by their party and are staying home so much as that there has been a realignment and the Dem electorate is now the highly motivated, reliable voters who turn out no matter what and it’s the Republicans who have the less reliable off-cycle voters who will however show up in the general, especially with Trump on the ballot. He says the Dems are in trouble because when these low propensity voters, especially Latino and Black voters who have switched to Trump, turn out to vote, they will vote red.
This is not my area of research so I can’t dig into the data. What do you make of that? (And fu apologies to Barro if I have misstated his argument!)
It's an interesting theory, but in practice, it hasn't happened. We've only lost the popular vote once since 1988, and in the last 4 elections we've outperformed the Rs 51-46, our best four cycle performance since FDR. Only people who are not involved in politics every day could somehow get to a place where the party that just keeps winning elections of all kinds all across the country for 18 months is somehow actually losing.
Well to be fair to him he’s talking about realigning trends that would be altering the national vote pattern in this upcoming election, and that deviates from the pattern you mention. I am not convinced but there is undoubtedly some movement in the Democratic coalition. I don’t know how seriously to take polls showing slippage among voters of color. I just need a persuasive and respectful way to respond to that kind of argument. Most of my students are pretty mad at Biden (because of Gaza and Israel) and not planning to vote for him at the moment. I’m pretty sure that will change for many of them but I’m not sure about the switch in working class voters of color because I don’t understand what’s driving the change.
The college youth vote is pretty tiny; as a retired educator and father of two recent grads, I do not see any of them turning to trump or even that upset about Gaza. You might refer the students to Jonathan Alter's recent interview with the elder statesman of journalism, Marvin Kalb, ( 93 years old and still sharp; a man who actually interviewed Gen. Zhukov! ) for his take on Israel and the conflict. In short, in his experience, that part of the world does not respect restraint. Granted the students I know are all science majors and only took a social science course because the honors program required it. They just don't get into this stuff in science classes, which had hundreds of students and a TA going over notes. It's not even necessary to attend class. I hate to say it, but there is an undercurrent of anti-semitism to some of this; when I hear the UN saying this is unprecedented, I'm like, what about Ukraine? I am not Jewish but I can see there is something to this. Kalb, IIRC, gave Biden high marks for his handling of things. That says something. Now I am a bit older and don't hold me to everything, I'm going from memory here!
Also, fwiw, it appears to me that a lot of the analysis claiming meaningful erosion for Ds of youth and communities of color are not based on polling specific to those communities with large samples and broad methodologies (surveys conducted online that attract participants via social media and texting in addition to cell phone calls), but rather on those demographic subsets in SOME broader polls of the whole electorate. The problem is that if the whole poll got 800 - 1000 responses and had an overall margin of error of +/- 3 - 4%, the 80 - 120 young people in the sample (who in the worst looking polling for Ds tend to be getting only cell phone calls which will skew the data significantly because the typical young person barely answers their phone for their parents let alone an unknown number) might have a margin of error of +/- 10 - 12%.....so, I’m not arrogant enough to dismiss the theory as impossible on its face, but there’s no significant pool of high quality data to support it, and there’s s growing pool of high quality data to support the opposite
What he argues could happen in 2024. A meteor could also hit the Earth tomorrow. While either are possible neither are likely, for all the reasons I write about here every day. A few points:
- Biden won people making less than $100,000 by 13 pts in 2020
- The lesson of 2022 is that centering your understanding of our elections right now around polling is risky. Additionally, much of this analysis is based on the overall 2022 vote which ignore my two elections explanation of 2022 and that Democrats actually gained ground in AZ, CO, GA, MI, MN, NH, PA.
- Recent large sample polls of Hispanics and young people show Biden at his 2020 numbers, no erosion. Please do not conflate college students with young people. The chance of Israel-Hamas being a voting issue for all but a narrow few cohort of young people by Nov is very unlikely. History tells us economy, health care, guns, climate, end of democracy will be far more important to the vast majority of young people when it comes time to vote.
- It also ignores that this heightened Dem intensity is providing us with unprecedented money and volunteers in our campaigns, so the impact of this intensity is not limited to voting - it's giving us a far bigger and more powerful political machine to win all elections
- polling is already substantially better for Biden than it was in Oct of 2023 and the NYT polls which caused much of this discussion.
- the thing far more commentators should be focusing on is what has caused the huge counter cyclical success for Dems in 2022-2023? When has a party in power gained ground in two consecutive elections? It's an unprecedented in the modern era, and should be dominating our understanding of the relative strength of the two parties right now.
The bottom line - I understand the theory, and I don't agree with it.
For those of us in the business of winning and losing elections the casual dismissal of repeated electoral victories is a bit shocking, and undermines whatever constructive insight comes from this school of thought
God, I hope a meteor doesn’t hit us. I don’t even have that on my Things to Dread list.
This is helpful — just what I was looking for. And thanks for the reminder that all young people are not college students. I tend to forget. I think even the college kids are going to move past this pretty quick, I’m genuinely not concerned about them.
The data about Biden gaining with Hispanics is just what I need.
Thanks for the reply. Looking forward to Wednesday night!!
I see again that Simon has left NV off his battleground list. I think the state is a genuine worry. We came far too close with Cortez Masto for Senate in 2022 and Jackie Rosen is a rough fit for NV in this year. Biden has never been a good fit for NV - the electorate is young, working class, and butch. we could lose NV (and still win nationally) but I worry. Comments?
Janis, I haven't left it off the list. We didn't gain ground there in 2022 as we did in these other states. I have spent time and worked in NV, and it will one of the 7 battleground Presidential states - AZ, GA, MI, NC, NV, PA, WI.
We didn’t gain vote share and narrowly lost the governorship, which hurt my heart after having lived there for 16 years (recently relocated to home state of Nebraska). But, I was still encouraged by the fact that we ran the table on other statewide offices, kept our competitive US House members, and maintained control of both state legislative chambers. It’s gonna be a dogfight there this year, but what the state showed me in 2022 is that it doesn’t like election deniers anymore than any of the other swing states, and election denier in Chief will be at the top of the ballot this year. We won everything I mentioned above in a year where all the political winds were in our face post COVID, in a state that already had pretty robust abortion rights protections somewhat neutralizing that issue at the time (but it won’t be a non issue this year with the R calls for national bans), in a state with a libertarian attitude about personal freedom and disproportionately hurt economically by the COVID lockdowns.....that we only lost one major race there to the most “normie” R they managed to put on the ballot gives me optimism for the state this year....but it will be a very hard fought battle
I don't think those less motivated voters are going to show up for trump; once all the baggage about his rape conviction comes out, along with his increasing evidence of cognitive issues ( which can be due to a number of things, let's not diagnose him from afar; simple stress of being under constant indictment is enough to cause mental cloudiness, especially in the elderly; he also had a bad case of Covid, and this is a recognized long term complication) he is going to lose voters. Folks like Joe Trippi and Rick Wilson, who know their politics, think trump's ceiling is in the high 30's and Biden's floor is in the low 40s. They are more concerned about 3rd party candidates and Dems staying home. I do not think enough Dems will stay home to cost us the election; we are going to lose some, even Obama did, because this is not an "excitement" election, but I think enough people are going to side with old and stable as opposed to old and just plain nuts. And criminal. And treasonous....
Possibly. I don’t think we know enough about why that shift in the polls is taking place. I thought Simon might have a more granular take.
I feel pretty confident about the election for multiple reasons, Simon’s work chief among them. But I’m puzzled about that shift. And, yes, concerned about the third party efforts and about foreign interference. Judging from the misinformation campaign that hit young people over Israel, I shudder to think what can be done with this election. (And to forestall a debate, I’m not defending Netanyahu’s conduct of the war in the least. But the sheer fabrications rampant on TikTok — and the gullibility with which they were met — were mind blowing.)
...because this is not an "excitement" election...
Both FL and AZ are working to get initiatives on the Nov ballot to put abortion rights into their state constitutions. TX had that outrageous ruling regarding the woman who sought and exemption to the TX ban on abortion. I'm guessing TX voters are riled up.
So while there may not be a presidential candidate that excites the electorate, I disagree about there not being issues that drive voter turnout - at least in selected states.
I'm in NC and one thing that Anderson Clayton, our now-26-yo chairman of the NCDP, did was work hard on candidate recruitment. Of the 190+ races on the ballots in NC only 4 races do not have a Democratic candidate on the ballot and only 2 are for state legislative races vs. 30+ uncontested state house races in 2022. When you consider how badly gerrymandered the GOP-controlled legislature drew the maps, this is quite an accomplishment! I'm hoping this will generate some voter enthusiasm in more rural red areas where Dems previously had no say in who represented them in their state house and senate districts.
Some of you may recall the woman who ran as a Democrat and switched parties mid-way through the term to give the NC GOP a veto-proof majority in the legislature. The GOP redrew the district from D+ at least 13 points to an R+2 district to try and protect this traitor. There are THREE Democrats competing to run against her in the Nov election.
Good. Thomas Frank predicted 20 years ago that if Rs ever succeeded in overturning Roe, the Dems would start winning races immediately. We'll see how right he was. And he was talking about Kansas.
That’s cynical. He’s a smart, serious journalist. I don’t love his analysis as a rule, which is why I make doubly sure that I’m not rejecting it for the wrong reasons.
Not to deflect any readers, but what is the source for any piece of Barro's argument? None of it lines up with any of the analysis I've seen of any election results. I've seen several sources noting significantly stronger Republican results with Trump on the ballot over the last couple cycles, but I haven't seen any analysis that attributes this to "less reliable" voters. Republicans still poll much more strongly among older demographics, who tend to be the voters who show up in every primary, caucus and midterm. Is Barro citing any specific polling that would show a change from the patterns of the last couple decades, or is this just his gut feeling? Analysts generally acknowledge statistically significant movement in Latino and Black voters, but these are still very small percentages. Both populations still lean strongly Democratic overall, so higher turnout in these populations would generally be expected to drive stronger results for Democrats unless there would be some reason to expect a difference between turnout rates between the parties in these specific groups.
It seems like he's reaching for any explanation of surprisingly strong Democratic off-cycle results other than the driving factor of abortion. Even the most cautious outlets generally acknowledge the Dem electorate has better results in races where abortion access or prohibitions are explicitly on the ballot. (Compare KS and OH to Texas, where abortion was effectively banned before Dobbs, and no state race held any real promise of granting abortion access.) I'd be much more concerned about trends similar to what Barro expects in 2024 if Republicans weren't continuing to campaign on nationwide bans and Democrats weren't presenting this as a key issue. (I don't see many political ads since we use ad-free streaming TV, so the Dem ads included here were extremely encouraging to see.)
He’s referring to polling and election results showing educated suburban voters moving to the Dems. And a couple of polls that have shown Dems losing some degree of support (not a lot but it wouldn’t take a lot) of working class people of color moving away from Dems to Reps (along with considerable working class whites). I’ve seen the polls too. The movement of educated people to the Dems is real — education is the biggest fault line in politics right now. The polls showing the decline in Dem support among Black and Latino working class voters are fewer and as Simon indicated, have probably gotten undue attention because it’s such a counter-intuitive finding.
It is WAY too early for polls to tell us much at all (which is why watching the actual elections is key!) But if those shifts were to happen in large enough numbers, then it would be Dems with the more reliable voters and Reps with the more fair weather support. But, Simon also indicates, it’s more complicated than Barro makes it appear. The coalitions haven’t flipped. Older voters still stick with Reps and younger voters may be disenchanted but they aren’t moving to the right. And the number of people in color in play, if they are in play, is small.
None of us knows how it will finally resolve in a general. I tend to be with Simon that the off-cycle elections show an undeniable trend, but Barro got me thinking that there might be a partly competing explanation for those victories. I was just curious what Simon’s take on that argument is. Barro isn’t a political scientist but he’s not stupid and he used to be a Biden supporter. He’s gone off him lately — not sure what his beef is. I don’t read him as regularly as I once did. But I didn’t mea. To set him up as a target here. And I agree he’s probably not focused on abortion. I think that saves us. I know my level of fury hasn’t abated one iota.
I hope I can help put some of your concerns to rest. I believe I found the source of your concern - the 1/21 blog post The Stupidest Election? Yes, I searched because the shifts he's citing would be pretty astounding.
First, I believe you are absolutely right that the educational divide is real. BUT... even with the educational divide, Trump won just 41% of Hispanic voters without a college degree. (https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/06/30/behind-bidens-2020-victory/) Yes, this is higher than the 30% he won of Hispanic voters with a college degree. At the end of the day, reporting that does not clearly state that Hispanic voters, both with and without college degrees, still vote Democratic by very large margins paints a very inaccurate picture.
I also hope you can take some heart in knowing that Barro's single source on the shift among less reliable voters is an interview between Ezra Klein and an explicitly Republican pollster. There are no specific numbers presented; she only states that this is from analysis of the voter file. Most importantly, she very clearly never states that Republicans are supported by a majority of less-reliable voters (or even a higher percentage of less-reliable voters than prior years). Her exact description is that Democrats have absorbed highly reliable voters that turned away from Trump, which is very different from saying that Republicans gained among or turned out new less-reliable voters. The most specific description she provides indicates that analysis of the voter file shows a higher percentage of Democratic voters also voted in the 4 prior elections. According to her statements, analysis found movement among highly reliable voters towards Democrats, which is not the same as finding movement among less reliable voters towards Republicans. Please rest a little easier knowing that she is working hard to put a positive spin on something I guarantee is causing concern in Republican campaigns, and that Barro made the statements on less reliable voters based on zero numbers from polling or election results.
His statements on Biden's "trouble with irregular voters" do have real numbers behind them, but it's also a very broad, indirect interpretation of 1 poll that shows Trump leading by 2 points only among voters who did not vote in 2022. The analysis includes explicit statements showing Biden still has majority support among young voters of color, just smaller majorities among those who did not vote in 2022. The flip side of this analysis is their takeaway that more Democratic and Biden voters skipped 2022 than Republicans and Trump voters. This should be especially terrifying for Republicans given that Democrats still defied polling expectations and historical trends, achieving much stronger results than almost anyone thought possible.
No one can tell the future with any real certainty, and Barro isn't stupid. Again - BUT... he's relying on already broad analysis that gives a skewed impression of the underlying data to draw even more indirect conclusions with almost no real relation to the original data. Maybe he's just as scared as we all are of even a sliver of a chance of a Trump victory - or what might happen in the event of a narrow Trump loss. I'm sure his concern is real; it's just not supported by these sources.
I’m not sure what poll he was referring to or that you are referring to. The one that got the most attention was the NYT/Sienna poll that found some shift of people of color to Republicans from Democrats. I would hesitate to dismiss that as a Republican pollster so I assume you’re referring to a different poll. In any case, there have been a couple that found similar trends. I don’t have time to grab the cites but the NYT poll made a big splash when it came out because it’s the NYT. I’m sure you can find it if you are interested.
In any case, I wasn’t really looking for reassurance. I’m good, as I believe I said. I was interesting in Simon’s response since Barro’s conclusion runs headlong into his thesis and I wanted to see how he would respond. And he did.
I assign some of Simon’s stuff in my class and I’ll raise the Barro argument and let the kids work it out. Having Simon’s response in hand will be fun.
One of my strategies here at Hopium is to not respond to every article or commentary that may slightly veer from what I write here for I would never have time to do anything else, as we've seen today. I just work really hard every day to share with you what I think it most important, and help you disregard the noise that's out there all around us. So in the spirit of moving on a few final points:
- we learned in 2022 not to center our understanding of US politics around horserace polling. It has struggled to capture the dynamic we've seen, and our continued overperformance in election after election since Dobbs. As I say here the most important electoral data available to us today is the electoral data we've seen since Dobbs. Any attempt to dismiss or downplay this data, or speculate that it may not carry over to 2024 when we actually saw it carry over to 2024 last week in Iowa and Florida is in my mind deeply suspect.
- As a matter of data integrity, my conclusions are based on the results of hundreds of millions of people voting over 4 elections - 2018, 2020, 2022 and 2023. Their theory is based on the results of a few polls, with the NYT/Sienna polls having in my mind deeply suspect findings among Hispanics and young people. The kinds of swings in coalitions being discussed here only happen with extraordinary events like a failed war, deep recession, etc. None of that has happened under Biden. Again, while everything this school argues is could happen in 2024 it has not happened yet, while our strong performance has happened again and again all across the country in every type of election going back to 2018.
Finally, this is all a distraction from the core of what I wrote today, and I am frustrated with myself for taking so much time on something that could have created a diversion from people staying focused on the material and matter on hand, today. Sorry everyone.
Hi, Simon! Thank you so much for sharing the excellent recent videos from the Biden/Harris campaign! In the future, could you please post a link to the videos so that we can share them as well? Preferably the link you post will be to YouTube, not to X, since many people are now not using that platform. I noticed that the great ad highlighting Trump's confusion between Haley and Pelosi and other items, is not yet on the Biden-Harris YouTube channel. I will reach out to the DNC to encourage them to always post ads there at the same time as they post them to X. Thanks for all your good work!
Thank you, Simon, for posting the links. I am also very glad you are in touch with the DNC on this. It's important that with videos with the potential to go viral (such as the Haley/Pelosi ad) they post them at the same time as on other social platforms so that they can benefit from people reposting. A couple of days later and they will likely miss the window for viral social activity..
Friends, I have put links to the various videos into the online version of the post, on the Hopium site. The Biden campaign is dramatically stepping up its social media game so would strongly recommend you follow them however you engage on social. I get most of my stuff from Twitter, where I maintain an aggressive presence.
Good morning Simon! I want to share with you a couple things that I am doing in my area of coastal Northern California since the only power I have is within my own community. I’m starting a thing on social media and also in my local newspaper letters to the editor Called. “Thank you, Joe.” We have to continue to put Joe Biden in a positive light for the many things that he has done for our country, and for our people, A “Thank You, Joe” campaign would go along way in adding the positive to all the negative not only by the Trump campaign but also the negative of the Biden campaign about Trump. Delineates the two very nicely. I would love to see a nationwide, “Thank you, Joe” campaign. Any thoughts? I’ll save the other big thing that we’re doing locally for a different post. But I think you’ll like it
Thanks for sharing these simple, plain spoken truths, Simon. It's empowering to play on offense when the contrasts between right and wrong are so stark.
Nikki Haley is for a federal abortion ban. Americans For Prosperity might think she is a candidate, who can beat President Biden, but I disagree. Today is 51 years since Roe v. Wade. I remember my mom and all her friends were so happy when Roe v. Wade happened. Mom knew of friends getting harmed by back alley abortions.
Simon on your recent video I was unable to use close caption and I had to struggle to hear it. Was I doing something wrong? It was chock full of good information and I do use it. I got taken to task when I said we have to be information warriors and do the hard work; I was told then why give money to the DNC? I had not answer for that, except do the work or we all suffer the consequences. No more let's agree to disagree; lay out the case, calmly and without yelling ( not so easy for this old Jersey guy ).
I’m very concerned about the Biden campaign ad featuring Niki Haley. It makes her an appealing alternative to Trump and I think this is dangerous. Many educated Republicans would vote for Haley along with many independents who believe Biden is “too old”. And to have Biden “approve “ the message is a knife in my heart! Biden can beat Trump and I am not so sure he can beat Niki Haley. There are other ways of showing Trump’s cognitive decline without featuring Haley! Take down this ad!!!!
Imo, your comment is an over-reaction. Please remember to stay ‘grounded’ and not let (in this case) an ad, get the whole message twisted. With respect, I appreciated it.
Simon reminds us to not get blown around. The general could start tomorrow, so lets all bury our roots deeper with facts & data.
You could be right, Doc, but I have to think these ads are focus group tested by campaign experts. These people know what they are doing. My gut tells me ( yeah I know, never rely on that ) that there is no danger of Haley winning, as she is really an "empty suit". She is for abortion bans, she is for raising the age of SS to 70, two very unpopular things right there, and she was part of trump's failed administration and, as we have seen over and over, anything tainted by trump turns to manure. Also, Haley's attacks on trump and Biden's ages has drawn harsh rebuke online; there are a lot of seniors out there, and most do not have dementia. And they don't like this kinda stuff, and they are practically the most reliable vote there is. I'd want them voting for me if I were forced to choose between them and the youth vote. But I think we will get both; there has been some polling showing Biden winning the over 65 crowd, though it was USA Today IIRC and a crap poll. Take the good with the bad.
1) We need to be rooting for a better R party that will accept the outcomes of free and fair elections. We will never like the public policy they advocate for, but it’s unsustainable to continue in perpetuity with only one party that agrees to the basic rules of democracy, and if WE truly stand for democracy we have to accept that we won’t always win and not be afraid to take our case to the American people even against their best candidates. Nikki isn’t my cup of tea and I would work my ass off to beat her this year or unseat her in four years, but if she is a step toward rehabilitation for the Rs so that we aren’t in constant fear of losing democracy if we lose an election, then I am glad she is competitive to any degree on their side.
2) Because of the “winner take all” allocation of delegates in the R primary system, and the over representation of Evangelicals in most of the states’ primary elections, Trump has pretty much an insurmountable advantage and at worst will very likely have the nomination sewn up by Super Tuesday in early March. The unusual dynamics of a totally open primary and the ability to switch parties even on election day and vote in the party of your choice as an independent in New Hampshire give Hayley an unusual amount of strength and competitiveness there that won’t be present in most of the other closed primaries that only registered Rs can vote in where you have to have your partisan registration locked in for days or weeks to participate. Unless Trump pulls out of the race unexpectedly or has an accident or sudden health crisis that claims his life, he’s nearly certain to be the nominee
3) If by a miracle Nikki managed to win the nomination, she would indeed win back some (not all) never Trump Rs, but Trump would almost certainly go on one of the craziest tantrums in history and do everything he could to take out retribution on her for humiliating him like that and would dissuade an even greater share of the lower propensity Trump Only voters from voting at all, making it a dogfight between the two coalitions
4) Whatever the polls say about a Hayley/Biden matchup today are somewhat meaningless because they don’t take into account a billion dollar media campaign against her letting persuadable voters know her positions on abortion rights, tax cuts for the rich, her fecklessness and cowardly refusal to acknowledge that slavery was the cause of the bloodiest and most destructive conflict in our nation’s history, etc..... she is far away from the voters on the issues and the right flank of her base, especially the radical evangelical Christians won’t let her moderate enough to sound reasonable. She’s a formidable candidate, but she wouldn’t have a cakewalk to victory....it would be a knife fight in a phone booth that would just as likely end with a Biden win as a Hayley win
5) The biggest attack the Rs have against Biden is his age, which they then try to conflate into cognitive decline. The harder they go after Trump early on the same thing, the more they neutralize the issue later in the campaign cycle because the Rs will conclude that it’s hurting them as much or more as Biden for mental and cognitive acuity to be the topic of conversation...so I think this is some shrewd, sneaky, wily, brilliant guerrilla warfare
In the coming weeks I would like to know how the to tie House Republicans in swing districts with Trojan Horse Speaker Johnson AND Trump. Some of these Representatives pretend Johnson is a conservative, but we know there is an extreme MAGA agenda underneath he’s maneuvering.
Thanks Simon. Based on the ground noise, I envision a democratic blowout this year if we all do the work.
I would like to get your take on focusing our donations. In the past few years we have donated heavily to races that we were just not going to win. I think we should be strategic in our time and resources. What are your thoughts on this?
New sub here. Contrary to your post, no Arizona Repub leader has been indicted for any election issues (AFAIK). That claim is starting to become an echo-chamber creation, which we don't need on our side.
It is true that Az GOP Chair Kelli Ward was a fake elector. She also committed direct election interference in telling Maricopa Cty to "stop the count" when Trump began to lose. Those issues ARE being investigated by the state AG but no results yet. Ward also petitioned SCOTUS to throw out the entire Az vote based on lies she told them about Dominion machines. She has fled to the Bahamas to avoid accountability in this world.
You're right. I'm focused on the fake electors and other attempts to hijack the election. These are comparative nobodies being charged for some nutball political theater, which they knew was pointless and which happened to break a law. BUT their indictment is a very good thing. Thanks.
Thanks Simon. I think another motivation for getting to 55 is that we want the election to be over on election night. In 2020 for many reasons the vote count dragged on for days and the AP didn’t call the race until Saturday. If we can win NC and the other battlegrounds handily then it’ll be done Tuesday night giving MAGA less time to spin their web of lies.
Good point - hadn't thought of this.
Thank God Democrats are taking NC seriously but the media is still ignoring my state just like they did in 2022. It drove me crazy that the media put so much more focus on the Ohio Senate race even though polls showed that Cheri Beaseley’s chances were as good or better than Ryan’s. Despite that and the fact that NC is much more of a purple state than red Ohio, the mainstream media ignored that Senate race. Beaseley performed much better in the election — she lost her Senate race by 3.5 points; Ryan lost by 6.
I feel strongly that Beaseley needed the kind of national media attention that Ryan got. There are so many new residents in NC who were not familiar with state politics or knew who Beaseley was. From what I can tell many new residents rely get a lot on the national media for political news so it would have helped if Beasely had gotten the kind of attention Ryan received.
We at Hopium are definitely not ignoring NC this year. There is a lot at stake between the presidential, governor and attorney general races.
Just moved to NC from Florida and I am already focused on electing Dems, including Josh Stein.
Here's one way to help NC: text to unregistered voters
https://www.mobilize.us/buildbridges4am/event/597093/
Thank you for the link!!! Other than sources like Hopium, volunteering has been the biggest thing preserving my sanity through the last few election cycles. It's also great to see an organization focusing on closer states than IA and OH this time around.
Activism and community will get us through!
I really want to donate to the most effective GOTV organizations both in NC and other states but I haven’t been able to find that information.
Jess Craven highly recommend Movement Voter Project. Great bang for your buck. NC Dem party has a great organization and leader now so donating directly to them is also good.
Thanks so much! I can’t believe how difficult it is to find out the most effective organizations, although I do know that Anderson Clayton is an amazing state party chair.
I get tons of emails from Democrats asking for money but there isn’t a good way to evaluate which organizations are effective. It would be great if there were an equivalent of a Charity Watch or a Charity Navigator for political organizations.
No problem. I highly recommend you subscribe to Chop Wood Carry Water here on Substack. Jess will point you to the best organizations who will use your money effectively.
I'm enjoying your posts. The enthusiastic approach, while looking at reality...we have a lot of work to do...is really helpful in keeping scary Trumpism under control! Thank you.
Those last two videos are POWERFUL. How can we share them on FB, Twitter, other places? I'm sure they are on YouTube, but I can't find them. Right clicking does not give me an option to download or share. Thanks!
Found one of them on Twitter - https://twitter.com/BidensWins/status/1749432409060212945 - and it's super easy to download Twitter videos to repost on FB, IG, etc.
Click on he “share to” icon….
Question for you, Simon. I’m a political science prof who largely agrees with your analysis of the election. When I found you in 2022, the data you and Bonier put together really helped me show my classes where things stood. Contra the pundit class, we were not expecting a red wave. 😉
But what do you make of Josh Barro’s argument that the reason Dems have done well in the multiple midterm and off-cycle elections isn’t that Republicans are sickened by their party and are staying home so much as that there has been a realignment and the Dem electorate is now the highly motivated, reliable voters who turn out no matter what and it’s the Republicans who have the less reliable off-cycle voters who will however show up in the general, especially with Trump on the ballot. He says the Dems are in trouble because when these low propensity voters, especially Latino and Black voters who have switched to Trump, turn out to vote, they will vote red.
This is not my area of research so I can’t dig into the data. What do you make of that? (And fu apologies to Barro if I have misstated his argument!)
It's an interesting theory, but in practice, it hasn't happened. We've only lost the popular vote once since 1988, and in the last 4 elections we've outperformed the Rs 51-46, our best four cycle performance since FDR. Only people who are not involved in politics every day could somehow get to a place where the party that just keeps winning elections of all kinds all across the country for 18 months is somehow actually losing.
Well to be fair to him he’s talking about realigning trends that would be altering the national vote pattern in this upcoming election, and that deviates from the pattern you mention. I am not convinced but there is undoubtedly some movement in the Democratic coalition. I don’t know how seriously to take polls showing slippage among voters of color. I just need a persuasive and respectful way to respond to that kind of argument. Most of my students are pretty mad at Biden (because of Gaza and Israel) and not planning to vote for him at the moment. I’m pretty sure that will change for many of them but I’m not sure about the switch in working class voters of color because I don’t understand what’s driving the change.
The college youth vote is pretty tiny; as a retired educator and father of two recent grads, I do not see any of them turning to trump or even that upset about Gaza. You might refer the students to Jonathan Alter's recent interview with the elder statesman of journalism, Marvin Kalb, ( 93 years old and still sharp; a man who actually interviewed Gen. Zhukov! ) for his take on Israel and the conflict. In short, in his experience, that part of the world does not respect restraint. Granted the students I know are all science majors and only took a social science course because the honors program required it. They just don't get into this stuff in science classes, which had hundreds of students and a TA going over notes. It's not even necessary to attend class. I hate to say it, but there is an undercurrent of anti-semitism to some of this; when I hear the UN saying this is unprecedented, I'm like, what about Ukraine? I am not Jewish but I can see there is something to this. Kalb, IIRC, gave Biden high marks for his handling of things. That says something. Now I am a bit older and don't hold me to everything, I'm going from memory here!
Also, fwiw, it appears to me that a lot of the analysis claiming meaningful erosion for Ds of youth and communities of color are not based on polling specific to those communities with large samples and broad methodologies (surveys conducted online that attract participants via social media and texting in addition to cell phone calls), but rather on those demographic subsets in SOME broader polls of the whole electorate. The problem is that if the whole poll got 800 - 1000 responses and had an overall margin of error of +/- 3 - 4%, the 80 - 120 young people in the sample (who in the worst looking polling for Ds tend to be getting only cell phone calls which will skew the data significantly because the typical young person barely answers their phone for their parents let alone an unknown number) might have a margin of error of +/- 10 - 12%.....so, I’m not arrogant enough to dismiss the theory as impossible on its face, but there’s no significant pool of high quality data to support it, and there’s s growing pool of high quality data to support the opposite
What he argues could happen in 2024. A meteor could also hit the Earth tomorrow. While either are possible neither are likely, for all the reasons I write about here every day. A few points:
- Biden won people making less than $100,000 by 13 pts in 2020
- The lesson of 2022 is that centering your understanding of our elections right now around polling is risky. Additionally, much of this analysis is based on the overall 2022 vote which ignore my two elections explanation of 2022 and that Democrats actually gained ground in AZ, CO, GA, MI, MN, NH, PA.
- Recent large sample polls of Hispanics and young people show Biden at his 2020 numbers, no erosion. Please do not conflate college students with young people. The chance of Israel-Hamas being a voting issue for all but a narrow few cohort of young people by Nov is very unlikely. History tells us economy, health care, guns, climate, end of democracy will be far more important to the vast majority of young people when it comes time to vote.
- It also ignores that this heightened Dem intensity is providing us with unprecedented money and volunteers in our campaigns, so the impact of this intensity is not limited to voting - it's giving us a far bigger and more powerful political machine to win all elections
- And as I show in this analysis, it's Republicans who are eroding with Hispanics not Democrats - https://www.hopiumchronicles.com/p/videoanalysis-democrats-and-the-hispanic
- polling is already substantially better for Biden than it was in Oct of 2023 and the NYT polls which caused much of this discussion.
- the thing far more commentators should be focusing on is what has caused the huge counter cyclical success for Dems in 2022-2023? When has a party in power gained ground in two consecutive elections? It's an unprecedented in the modern era, and should be dominating our understanding of the relative strength of the two parties right now.
The bottom line - I understand the theory, and I don't agree with it.
I think this scenerio below is far more likely to happen in 2024 than what the theory you cite hopes for - https://www.hopiumchronicles.com/p/memo-get-to-55-expanding-our-coalition
For those of us in the business of winning and losing elections the casual dismissal of repeated electoral victories is a bit shocking, and undermines whatever constructive insight comes from this school of thought
God, I hope a meteor doesn’t hit us. I don’t even have that on my Things to Dread list.
This is helpful — just what I was looking for. And thanks for the reminder that all young people are not college students. I tend to forget. I think even the college kids are going to move past this pretty quick, I’m genuinely not concerned about them.
The data about Biden gaining with Hispanics is just what I need.
Thanks for the reply. Looking forward to Wednesday night!!
I see again that Simon has left NV off his battleground list. I think the state is a genuine worry. We came far too close with Cortez Masto for Senate in 2022 and Jackie Rosen is a rough fit for NV in this year. Biden has never been a good fit for NV - the electorate is young, working class, and butch. we could lose NV (and still win nationally) but I worry. Comments?
Janis, I haven't left it off the list. We didn't gain ground there in 2022 as we did in these other states. I have spent time and worked in NV, and it will one of the 7 battleground Presidential states - AZ, GA, MI, NC, NV, PA, WI.
We didn’t gain vote share and narrowly lost the governorship, which hurt my heart after having lived there for 16 years (recently relocated to home state of Nebraska). But, I was still encouraged by the fact that we ran the table on other statewide offices, kept our competitive US House members, and maintained control of both state legislative chambers. It’s gonna be a dogfight there this year, but what the state showed me in 2022 is that it doesn’t like election deniers anymore than any of the other swing states, and election denier in Chief will be at the top of the ballot this year. We won everything I mentioned above in a year where all the political winds were in our face post COVID, in a state that already had pretty robust abortion rights protections somewhat neutralizing that issue at the time (but it won’t be a non issue this year with the R calls for national bans), in a state with a libertarian attitude about personal freedom and disproportionately hurt economically by the COVID lockdowns.....that we only lost one major race there to the most “normie” R they managed to put on the ballot gives me optimism for the state this year....but it will be a very hard fought battle
I don't think those less motivated voters are going to show up for trump; once all the baggage about his rape conviction comes out, along with his increasing evidence of cognitive issues ( which can be due to a number of things, let's not diagnose him from afar; simple stress of being under constant indictment is enough to cause mental cloudiness, especially in the elderly; he also had a bad case of Covid, and this is a recognized long term complication) he is going to lose voters. Folks like Joe Trippi and Rick Wilson, who know their politics, think trump's ceiling is in the high 30's and Biden's floor is in the low 40s. They are more concerned about 3rd party candidates and Dems staying home. I do not think enough Dems will stay home to cost us the election; we are going to lose some, even Obama did, because this is not an "excitement" election, but I think enough people are going to side with old and stable as opposed to old and just plain nuts. And criminal. And treasonous....
Possibly. I don’t think we know enough about why that shift in the polls is taking place. I thought Simon might have a more granular take.
I feel pretty confident about the election for multiple reasons, Simon’s work chief among them. But I’m puzzled about that shift. And, yes, concerned about the third party efforts and about foreign interference. Judging from the misinformation campaign that hit young people over Israel, I shudder to think what can be done with this election. (And to forestall a debate, I’m not defending Netanyahu’s conduct of the war in the least. But the sheer fabrications rampant on TikTok — and the gullibility with which they were met — were mind blowing.)
I responded above.
...because this is not an "excitement" election...
Both FL and AZ are working to get initiatives on the Nov ballot to put abortion rights into their state constitutions. TX had that outrageous ruling regarding the woman who sought and exemption to the TX ban on abortion. I'm guessing TX voters are riled up.
So while there may not be a presidential candidate that excites the electorate, I disagree about there not being issues that drive voter turnout - at least in selected states.
I'm in NC and one thing that Anderson Clayton, our now-26-yo chairman of the NCDP, did was work hard on candidate recruitment. Of the 190+ races on the ballots in NC only 4 races do not have a Democratic candidate on the ballot and only 2 are for state legislative races vs. 30+ uncontested state house races in 2022. When you consider how badly gerrymandered the GOP-controlled legislature drew the maps, this is quite an accomplishment! I'm hoping this will generate some voter enthusiasm in more rural red areas where Dems previously had no say in who represented them in their state house and senate districts.
Some of you may recall the woman who ran as a Democrat and switched parties mid-way through the term to give the NC GOP a veto-proof majority in the legislature. The GOP redrew the district from D+ at least 13 points to an R+2 district to try and protect this traitor. There are THREE Democrats competing to run against her in the Nov election.
Good. Thomas Frank predicted 20 years ago that if Rs ever succeeded in overturning Roe, the Dems would start winning races immediately. We'll see how right he was. And he was talking about Kansas.
Just to add, Josh Barro is a journalist, not an expert in off year versus presidential year turnout. It’s click bait, not analysis.
That’s cynical. He’s a smart, serious journalist. I don’t love his analysis as a rule, which is why I make doubly sure that I’m not rejecting it for the wrong reasons.
Not to deflect any readers, but what is the source for any piece of Barro's argument? None of it lines up with any of the analysis I've seen of any election results. I've seen several sources noting significantly stronger Republican results with Trump on the ballot over the last couple cycles, but I haven't seen any analysis that attributes this to "less reliable" voters. Republicans still poll much more strongly among older demographics, who tend to be the voters who show up in every primary, caucus and midterm. Is Barro citing any specific polling that would show a change from the patterns of the last couple decades, or is this just his gut feeling? Analysts generally acknowledge statistically significant movement in Latino and Black voters, but these are still very small percentages. Both populations still lean strongly Democratic overall, so higher turnout in these populations would generally be expected to drive stronger results for Democrats unless there would be some reason to expect a difference between turnout rates between the parties in these specific groups.
It seems like he's reaching for any explanation of surprisingly strong Democratic off-cycle results other than the driving factor of abortion. Even the most cautious outlets generally acknowledge the Dem electorate has better results in races where abortion access or prohibitions are explicitly on the ballot. (Compare KS and OH to Texas, where abortion was effectively banned before Dobbs, and no state race held any real promise of granting abortion access.) I'd be much more concerned about trends similar to what Barro expects in 2024 if Republicans weren't continuing to campaign on nationwide bans and Democrats weren't presenting this as a key issue. (I don't see many political ads since we use ad-free streaming TV, so the Dem ads included here were extremely encouraging to see.)
He’s referring to polling and election results showing educated suburban voters moving to the Dems. And a couple of polls that have shown Dems losing some degree of support (not a lot but it wouldn’t take a lot) of working class people of color moving away from Dems to Reps (along with considerable working class whites). I’ve seen the polls too. The movement of educated people to the Dems is real — education is the biggest fault line in politics right now. The polls showing the decline in Dem support among Black and Latino working class voters are fewer and as Simon indicated, have probably gotten undue attention because it’s such a counter-intuitive finding.
It is WAY too early for polls to tell us much at all (which is why watching the actual elections is key!) But if those shifts were to happen in large enough numbers, then it would be Dems with the more reliable voters and Reps with the more fair weather support. But, Simon also indicates, it’s more complicated than Barro makes it appear. The coalitions haven’t flipped. Older voters still stick with Reps and younger voters may be disenchanted but they aren’t moving to the right. And the number of people in color in play, if they are in play, is small.
None of us knows how it will finally resolve in a general. I tend to be with Simon that the off-cycle elections show an undeniable trend, but Barro got me thinking that there might be a partly competing explanation for those victories. I was just curious what Simon’s take on that argument is. Barro isn’t a political scientist but he’s not stupid and he used to be a Biden supporter. He’s gone off him lately — not sure what his beef is. I don’t read him as regularly as I once did. But I didn’t mea. To set him up as a target here. And I agree he’s probably not focused on abortion. I think that saves us. I know my level of fury hasn’t abated one iota.
I hope I can help put some of your concerns to rest. I believe I found the source of your concern - the 1/21 blog post The Stupidest Election? Yes, I searched because the shifts he's citing would be pretty astounding.
First, I believe you are absolutely right that the educational divide is real. BUT... even with the educational divide, Trump won just 41% of Hispanic voters without a college degree. (https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/06/30/behind-bidens-2020-victory/) Yes, this is higher than the 30% he won of Hispanic voters with a college degree. At the end of the day, reporting that does not clearly state that Hispanic voters, both with and without college degrees, still vote Democratic by very large margins paints a very inaccurate picture.
I also hope you can take some heart in knowing that Barro's single source on the shift among less reliable voters is an interview between Ezra Klein and an explicitly Republican pollster. There are no specific numbers presented; she only states that this is from analysis of the voter file. Most importantly, she very clearly never states that Republicans are supported by a majority of less-reliable voters (or even a higher percentage of less-reliable voters than prior years). Her exact description is that Democrats have absorbed highly reliable voters that turned away from Trump, which is very different from saying that Republicans gained among or turned out new less-reliable voters. The most specific description she provides indicates that analysis of the voter file shows a higher percentage of Democratic voters also voted in the 4 prior elections. According to her statements, analysis found movement among highly reliable voters towards Democrats, which is not the same as finding movement among less reliable voters towards Republicans. Please rest a little easier knowing that she is working hard to put a positive spin on something I guarantee is causing concern in Republican campaigns, and that Barro made the statements on less reliable voters based on zero numbers from polling or election results.
His statements on Biden's "trouble with irregular voters" do have real numbers behind them, but it's also a very broad, indirect interpretation of 1 poll that shows Trump leading by 2 points only among voters who did not vote in 2022. The analysis includes explicit statements showing Biden still has majority support among young voters of color, just smaller majorities among those who did not vote in 2022. The flip side of this analysis is their takeaway that more Democratic and Biden voters skipped 2022 than Republicans and Trump voters. This should be especially terrifying for Republicans given that Democrats still defied polling expectations and historical trends, achieving much stronger results than almost anyone thought possible.
No one can tell the future with any real certainty, and Barro isn't stupid. Again - BUT... he's relying on already broad analysis that gives a skewed impression of the underlying data to draw even more indirect conclusions with almost no real relation to the original data. Maybe he's just as scared as we all are of even a sliver of a chance of a Trump victory - or what might happen in the event of a narrow Trump loss. I'm sure his concern is real; it's just not supported by these sources.
I’m not sure what poll he was referring to or that you are referring to. The one that got the most attention was the NYT/Sienna poll that found some shift of people of color to Republicans from Democrats. I would hesitate to dismiss that as a Republican pollster so I assume you’re referring to a different poll. In any case, there have been a couple that found similar trends. I don’t have time to grab the cites but the NYT poll made a big splash when it came out because it’s the NYT. I’m sure you can find it if you are interested.
In any case, I wasn’t really looking for reassurance. I’m good, as I believe I said. I was interesting in Simon’s response since Barro’s conclusion runs headlong into his thesis and I wanted to see how he would respond. And he did.
I assign some of Simon’s stuff in my class and I’ll raise the Barro argument and let the kids work it out. Having Simon’s response in hand will be fun.
One of my strategies here at Hopium is to not respond to every article or commentary that may slightly veer from what I write here for I would never have time to do anything else, as we've seen today. I just work really hard every day to share with you what I think it most important, and help you disregard the noise that's out there all around us. So in the spirit of moving on a few final points:
- we learned in 2022 not to center our understanding of US politics around horserace polling. It has struggled to capture the dynamic we've seen, and our continued overperformance in election after election since Dobbs. As I say here the most important electoral data available to us today is the electoral data we've seen since Dobbs. Any attempt to dismiss or downplay this data, or speculate that it may not carry over to 2024 when we actually saw it carry over to 2024 last week in Iowa and Florida is in my mind deeply suspect.
- the October NYT/Sienna polls are no longer relevant and should not be cited any longer in any serious analysis. The national NYT poll released a few weeks ago had Biden up 2 over Trump, not 4-5 points behind. Additionally as I write below, large sample high quality polls of Hispanics and young people are not finding significant Biden erosion from 2020 - https://www.hopiumchronicles.com/p/more-notes-on-polling-and-why-i-am?utm_source=%2Fsearch%2Flimits%2520polling&utm_medium=reader2
- As a matter of data integrity, my conclusions are based on the results of hundreds of millions of people voting over 4 elections - 2018, 2020, 2022 and 2023. Their theory is based on the results of a few polls, with the NYT/Sienna polls having in my mind deeply suspect findings among Hispanics and young people. The kinds of swings in coalitions being discussed here only happen with extraordinary events like a failed war, deep recession, etc. None of that has happened under Biden. Again, while everything this school argues is could happen in 2024 it has not happened yet, while our strong performance has happened again and again all across the country in every type of election going back to 2018.
Finally, this is all a distraction from the core of what I wrote today, and I am frustrated with myself for taking so much time on something that could have created a diversion from people staying focused on the material and matter on hand, today. Sorry everyone.
Hi, Simon! Thank you so much for sharing the excellent recent videos from the Biden/Harris campaign! In the future, could you please post a link to the videos so that we can share them as well? Preferably the link you post will be to YouTube, not to X, since many people are now not using that platform. I noticed that the great ad highlighting Trump's confusion between Haley and Pelosi and other items, is not yet on the Biden-Harris YouTube channel. I will reach out to the DNC to encourage them to always post ads there at the same time as they post them to X. Thanks for all your good work!
Just posted links on the Hopium site. I am encouraging them to make all their videos more readily accessible. It will happen - still early days.
Thank you, Simon, for posting the links. I am also very glad you are in touch with the DNC on this. It's important that with videos with the potential to go viral (such as the Haley/Pelosi ad) they post them at the same time as on other social platforms so that they can benefit from people reposting. A couple of days later and they will likely miss the window for viral social activity..
Thank you Simon, keep putting the truth out there.
Friends, I have put links to the various videos into the online version of the post, on the Hopium site. The Biden campaign is dramatically stepping up its social media game so would strongly recommend you follow them however you engage on social. I get most of my stuff from Twitter, where I maintain an aggressive presence.
Good morning Simon! I want to share with you a couple things that I am doing in my area of coastal Northern California since the only power I have is within my own community. I’m starting a thing on social media and also in my local newspaper letters to the editor Called. “Thank you, Joe.” We have to continue to put Joe Biden in a positive light for the many things that he has done for our country, and for our people, A “Thank You, Joe” campaign would go along way in adding the positive to all the negative not only by the Trump campaign but also the negative of the Biden campaign about Trump. Delineates the two very nicely. I would love to see a nationwide, “Thank you, Joe” campaign. Any thoughts? I’ll save the other big thing that we’re doing locally for a different post. But I think you’ll like it
Thank you Kenneth. What a great idea 💡!
It could be immensely powerful if large groups like Indivisible adopted this across the country!!!
Thanks for sharing these simple, plain spoken truths, Simon. It's empowering to play on offense when the contrasts between right and wrong are so stark.
Nikki Haley is for a federal abortion ban. Americans For Prosperity might think she is a candidate, who can beat President Biden, but I disagree. Today is 51 years since Roe v. Wade. I remember my mom and all her friends were so happy when Roe v. Wade happened. Mom knew of friends getting harmed by back alley abortions.
Simon on your recent video I was unable to use close caption and I had to struggle to hear it. Was I doing something wrong? It was chock full of good information and I do use it. I got taken to task when I said we have to be information warriors and do the hard work; I was told then why give money to the DNC? I had not answer for that, except do the work or we all suffer the consequences. No more let's agree to disagree; lay out the case, calmly and without yelling ( not so easy for this old Jersey guy ).
I’m very concerned about the Biden campaign ad featuring Niki Haley. It makes her an appealing alternative to Trump and I think this is dangerous. Many educated Republicans would vote for Haley along with many independents who believe Biden is “too old”. And to have Biden “approve “ the message is a knife in my heart! Biden can beat Trump and I am not so sure he can beat Niki Haley. There are other ways of showing Trump’s cognitive decline without featuring Haley! Take down this ad!!!!
Imo, your comment is an over-reaction. Please remember to stay ‘grounded’ and not let (in this case) an ad, get the whole message twisted. With respect, I appreciated it.
Simon reminds us to not get blown around. The general could start tomorrow, so lets all bury our roots deeper with facts & data.
Sound advice, as always from our brilliant friend from NC 😎
You could be right, Doc, but I have to think these ads are focus group tested by campaign experts. These people know what they are doing. My gut tells me ( yeah I know, never rely on that ) that there is no danger of Haley winning, as she is really an "empty suit". She is for abortion bans, she is for raising the age of SS to 70, two very unpopular things right there, and she was part of trump's failed administration and, as we have seen over and over, anything tainted by trump turns to manure. Also, Haley's attacks on trump and Biden's ages has drawn harsh rebuke online; there are a lot of seniors out there, and most do not have dementia. And they don't like this kinda stuff, and they are practically the most reliable vote there is. I'd want them voting for me if I were forced to choose between them and the youth vote. But I think we will get both; there has been some polling showing Biden winning the over 65 crowd, though it was USA Today IIRC and a crap poll. Take the good with the bad.
A few thoughts for what it’s worth....
1) We need to be rooting for a better R party that will accept the outcomes of free and fair elections. We will never like the public policy they advocate for, but it’s unsustainable to continue in perpetuity with only one party that agrees to the basic rules of democracy, and if WE truly stand for democracy we have to accept that we won’t always win and not be afraid to take our case to the American people even against their best candidates. Nikki isn’t my cup of tea and I would work my ass off to beat her this year or unseat her in four years, but if she is a step toward rehabilitation for the Rs so that we aren’t in constant fear of losing democracy if we lose an election, then I am glad she is competitive to any degree on their side.
2) Because of the “winner take all” allocation of delegates in the R primary system, and the over representation of Evangelicals in most of the states’ primary elections, Trump has pretty much an insurmountable advantage and at worst will very likely have the nomination sewn up by Super Tuesday in early March. The unusual dynamics of a totally open primary and the ability to switch parties even on election day and vote in the party of your choice as an independent in New Hampshire give Hayley an unusual amount of strength and competitiveness there that won’t be present in most of the other closed primaries that only registered Rs can vote in where you have to have your partisan registration locked in for days or weeks to participate. Unless Trump pulls out of the race unexpectedly or has an accident or sudden health crisis that claims his life, he’s nearly certain to be the nominee
3) If by a miracle Nikki managed to win the nomination, she would indeed win back some (not all) never Trump Rs, but Trump would almost certainly go on one of the craziest tantrums in history and do everything he could to take out retribution on her for humiliating him like that and would dissuade an even greater share of the lower propensity Trump Only voters from voting at all, making it a dogfight between the two coalitions
4) Whatever the polls say about a Hayley/Biden matchup today are somewhat meaningless because they don’t take into account a billion dollar media campaign against her letting persuadable voters know her positions on abortion rights, tax cuts for the rich, her fecklessness and cowardly refusal to acknowledge that slavery was the cause of the bloodiest and most destructive conflict in our nation’s history, etc..... she is far away from the voters on the issues and the right flank of her base, especially the radical evangelical Christians won’t let her moderate enough to sound reasonable. She’s a formidable candidate, but she wouldn’t have a cakewalk to victory....it would be a knife fight in a phone booth that would just as likely end with a Biden win as a Hayley win
Oh....one more....
5) The biggest attack the Rs have against Biden is his age, which they then try to conflate into cognitive decline. The harder they go after Trump early on the same thing, the more they neutralize the issue later in the campaign cycle because the Rs will conclude that it’s hurting them as much or more as Biden for mental and cognitive acuity to be the topic of conversation...so I think this is some shrewd, sneaky, wily, brilliant guerrilla warfare
If you are going to be sharing a lot of video (helpful tool!) does the platform allow you to do it in YouTube format? Much easier for me to share.
In the coming weeks I would like to know how the to tie House Republicans in swing districts with Trojan Horse Speaker Johnson AND Trump. Some of these Representatives pretend Johnson is a conservative, but we know there is an extreme MAGA agenda underneath he’s maneuvering.
Thanks Simon. Based on the ground noise, I envision a democratic blowout this year if we all do the work.
I would like to get your take on focusing our donations. In the past few years we have donated heavily to races that we were just not going to win. I think we should be strategic in our time and resources. What are your thoughts on this?
New sub here. Contrary to your post, no Arizona Repub leader has been indicted for any election issues (AFAIK). That claim is starting to become an echo-chamber creation, which we don't need on our side.
It is true that Az GOP Chair Kelli Ward was a fake elector. She also committed direct election interference in telling Maricopa Cty to "stop the count" when Trump began to lose. Those issues ARE being investigated by the state AG but no results yet. Ward also petitioned SCOTUS to throw out the entire Az vote based on lies she told them about Dominion machines. She has fled to the Bahamas to avoid accountability in this world.
Yes, Republicans have been indicted in Arizona - https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/arizona-election-deniers-indicted-holding-2022-results-rcna127225
You're right. I'm focused on the fake electors and other attempts to hijack the election. These are comparative nobodies being charged for some nutball political theater, which they knew was pointless and which happened to break a law. BUT their indictment is a very good thing. Thanks.