A Note on the Scale of the Democrat’s Loss

Some sense of proportion would be nice.

Look, I know pundits gotta pundit, but I was reading a piece Mark Leibovich in The Atlantic, In Praise of Clarity, and was struck by his language. He writes of the Democratic Party’s, “electoral battering” and a “drubbing.”

Now, without any doubt, the Democrats lost. But let’s note the following:

  • The final popular vote gap between Trump and Harris is going to be less that two percentage points. And that is a conservative estimate. Nate Silver is projecting it to be less than a point. And yes, Trump will have won the popular vote, which is a big deal. But, if Silver’s projection is correct, he will have won the plurality and the not the absolute majority. This, at least, has implications for how much of a “drubbing” we just witnessed.
  • Yes, the House appears to be going to the Republican, but narrowly. Indeed, perhaps narrowly enough that Trump’s selection of Representatives to serve in his administration could temporarily give the chamber to the Democrats.
  • The Senate went Republican, but that was expected even if Harris won. Manchin’s retirement and a generally unfavorable map for Democrats had signaled that outcome a long time ago. The only reasonable scenario that would have left it with the Dems, as I recall, was a 50-50 chamber and a Vice President Walz as tie-breaker.

I am not saying that Democrats should ignore the loss and not try and address strategic ways to win in the future.

I agree that the loss of the so-called “blue wall” states was a devastating loss for the party. But I would also note that it appears that the results comport with the polling: very close and within the margin of error, just for Trump. WI was less than a point, MI was less than two, and PA was two. That comports with the polling, if one understands how MOEs work.

This was not a wave election that has transformed the structure of power.

I think that the Electoral College distorts our thinking. It amplifies winning, especially when we look at the colors and shapes on the map and not the numbers behind them. But even 312 electoral votes is only 58%. That’s good, but it is still isn’t a devastating outcome. I will wait until there numbers are all in, or close thereto, to look deeper than that. People are writing like it was 1984 or something (that was a drubbing!).

My fundamental point is this. If a shift of a couple of percentage points is all we are talking here to have had a different outcome, the notion that there is some massive, dramatic change needed for the Democrats strikes me overblown. Especially, again, given the obvious role that inflation played in this election, which does not provide some strategic lesson for the future.

The loss is real, and it is a big deal mostly because of who won. But the autopsies need a sense of proportion.

FILED UNDER: Open Forum, , , , , ,
Steven L. Taylor
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a retired Professor of Political Science and former College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog). Follow Steven on Twitter

Comments

  1. Stormy Dragon says:

    Unfortunately, McConnellism (the minority party obstructing purely for the sake of obstruction, and then blaming the majority party for the effects of that obstruction) works.

    The Republicans haven’t been able to pass spending in years without significant Democratic help.

    The Democrats should stop giving them that help.

    Start talking popular but ridiculously unworkable proposals to everything and make the Republicans say no.

    And in two months when the Republicans want to raise the debt ceiling, extract an extreme price for it.

    ReplyReply
    5
  2. Jen says:

    Agreed with everything you’ve written here.

    Democrats need to be extremely analytical in looking at these results. Looking at this:

    WI was less than a point, MI was less than two, and PA was two.

    …is important in the analysis. I’d recommend they layer the number of undervotes on top of each of those results. Undervotes–people who voted for Trump and left everything else blank–are unlikely to be (or become) frequent GOP party voters. This could have significant messaging and outreach ramifications for the 2026 midterms. (Please note that I am not engaging in any conspiratorial nonsense, I believe firmly that these were almost certainly legitimate votes from people who do not typically engage in politics.) I’m trying to relocate the source, but I believe I saw somewhere that North Carolina had something like an excess of 300,000 undervotes, which explains a Trump win and a Josh Stein win.

    It also (should) present some caution in messaging to Republicans, but we’ll see.

    ReplyReply
    2
  3. just nutha says:

    Are we still talking a ~10 million vote difference between 2020 and 2024 on the D side? If so, the question is where did those voters go and why.

    ReplyReply
    3
  4. JimJude says:

    Your side lost the popular vote to Donald Trump. If that’s not a wake up call, you probably should just stop posting about politics in general.

    ReplyReply
    2
  5. Sleeping Dog says:

    @Stormy Dragon:

    Basically the argument JV Last made at the Bulwark last week. He gave several examples of Dems saving R bacon from traps that they created for themselves. During the Biden years it was arguable that was needed to protect Joe, but not any longer.

    ReplyReply
    4
  6. Bill Jempty says:

    People are writing like it was 1984 or something (that was a drubbing!).

    It sure was as was 1972. Then there was another drubbing in 1974 but in reverse and involving Congress. Caused by Watergate.

    ReplyReply
    1
  7. Bill Jempty says:

    @JimJude:

    Your side lost the popular vote to Donald Trump. If that’s not a wake up call, you probably should just stop posting about politics in general.

    At least two regular commenters here, me and Michael Reynolds, predicted a Trump win.

    ReplyReply
    4
  8. Bill Jempty says:

    @Stormy Dragon:

    Your side lost the popular vote to Donald Trump. If that’s not a wake up call, you probably should just stop posting about politics in general.

    So let’s not want to govern either and score political points instead. That’s a great way to run a country by either party. NOT!

    ReplyReply
    2
  9. JKB says:

    @Stormy Dragon:

    Many incumbent Democrats in the House were essentially using the Republican talking points on immigration, inflation, etc. If they won, but their district moved Red, then the Dems in the House may not be as tight a coalition as hoped.

    The 18-29 moved toward Trump by near 15 points, still majority Democrat, but less so. The 30-44, the most populous age group, moved toward Trump to about a 50-50 split. Reagan made a lot of Republican voters in the early Gen Xers, who started voting in the 1980s. Democrats did see a slight increase in the 65+ demo, those born before 1959, so anyone who might remember the 1960s.

    ReplyReply
    1
  10. Matt Bernius says:

    I know I’m a broken record on this, but this post gets to why I think everyone should take a step back from reading hot takes.

    (1) The data are no all in yet.
    (2) The data needs to be contextualized in broader trends (not just internationally, but looking at the last three American election cycles where the party in power has flipped every time).
    (3) It needs to be understood in context of the down ballot elections.

    Put a different way, Biden’s win over Trump in terms of EV was quite similar and in terms of PV was significantly greater. Ironically, in response to Trump losing by 4+ PV points, the reaction of Republicans was to… checks notes… double down on Trump rather than change strategy.

    At the same time, it’s fair to say that Biden appears to have overestimated his “mandate for change” versus stabilization. I suspect that Trump is about to do the same thing. As I said to Jack yesterday, Trump may be making the right move.

    That said, given his promise was based on better higher paying jobs while reduction in inflation and the price of goods, and that at least in the short-term everyone agrees that his tariff and immigration policies have a strong chance of spiking prices and pushing people into jobs Americans have historically not wanted to do, it’s also equally possible that we might see a widespread rejection of his positions if positive change cannot come fast enough.

    ReplyReply
    4
  11. Lucysfootball says:

    @Stormy Dragon: And in two months when the Republicans want to raise the debt ceiling, extract an extreme price for it.
    Normally I would have a problem with that statement, if the two parties were responsible the raising of the debt ceiling should be a fairly streamlined process.
    But the Republican party puts party over country whenever there is a Democratic president. The Democratics need to start talking a page from the Republicans. And the price should be to temper some of the most odious Trump ideas.

    ReplyReply
    4
  12. Eusebio says:

    @just nutha:

    Are we still talking a ~10 million vote difference between 2020 and 2024 on the D side?

    No. Shortly after the election, what was claimed to be a 20-million vote difference by RW sources became a claimed 10-million vote difference that seeped in mainstream sources. But it was always going to be smaller D vote difference–perhaps 5 million votes when they’re all counted. That’s still a lot less than Biden got, but somewhat more than Trump got, in 2020.

    ReplyReply
    3
  13. Kylopod says:

    People are fretting over the fact that even states Harris won that are considered long-time Democratic strongholds, like New York and New Jersey, were won by much narrower margins than usual.

    That was very much the case the last time a Republican won the popular vote, in 2004. John Kerry was ahead by only single digits in California, Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, Delaware, and New Jersey.

    The common talking point that the popular vote doesn’t “matter” is overly reductive, in my view. The PV isn’t what decides elections, but it’s more closely aligned with what happens at the state level than is often acknowledged. A while back I did a little exercise: I determined that 2004 to 2008 saw a swing of about 10 points in a Democratic direction in terms of the PV margin. I then calculated what would happen if you took the 2004 map and added that Democratic increase to every state margin. The result? It was very nearly the 2008 map, with just a few exceptions (it showed the Dems winning Missouri, which Obama lost narrowly, and losing NC and Indiana, which Obama won narrowly). In other words, the relationship between the national and state vote remained essentially the same between the two elections, what changed was simply the popular vote, and the shift was reflected across the states in a more-or-less uniform way.

    And the fact is that popular vote is very ephemeral from one election to the next, much more than individual states, which show more long-lasting partisan attachments. That’s presumably why Cook’s Partisan Voter Index measures the partisan lean of states and districts by comparing them to the national vote, rather than simply reporting the vote share by party in isolation. Reagan won Massachusetts twice, but only by very narrow margins compared with the national vote, and so it was possible even then to recognize that MA was still a very Democratic state. The same applies to when Obama narrowly carried Indiana in 2008.

    That’s how we need to understand this election as well. For instance, according to the current numbers Wisconsin voted slightly to the left of the nation, and while that’ll probably shift after the count is complete, it’s almost certain Wisconsin voted less Republican relative to the nation than it did in 2020. So the narrative that Wisconsin shifted to the right is not accurate, and the difference is more reflective of the differing national environments between 2020 and 2024 filtering down to the states, rather than the states moving in a particular partisan direction.

    ReplyReply
    4
  14. gVOR10 says:

    It is only a slight swing, open to reversal as Trump reminds everyone why they threw him out in ’20. As you have taught us, it’s a shame our system has handed the entire government to one party with a 1% victory.

    ReplyReply
    5
  15. Stormy Dragon says:

    @Bill Jempty:

    So let’s not want to govern either and score political points instead. That’s a great way to run a country by either party.

    Since the voters keep rewarding the Republicans for this, this is clearly what the voters want.

    And as the election demonstrated, Democrats need to start delivering what the voters want instead of what they imagine is best for the country.

    ReplyReply
    10
  16. Jen says:

    @gVOR10:

    it’s a shame our system has handed the entire government to one party with a 1% victory.

    Radiolab recently had an interesting episode about the Electoral College, and Sen. Birch Bayh. One of the factoids that was included was that the smallest possible percentage of the popular vote that could still result in an electoral college win was something like 23% of the total vote.

    ReplyReply
    3
  17. Lucysfootball says:

    @Bill Jempty: So let’s not want to govern either and score political points instead. That’s a great way to run a country by either party. NOT!
    Either you play the game or you will never have to worry about what happens when you get in power because that will never happen. Under any Democratic president the debt ceiling is used to extract something, or worse still, to harm the Democrats at the expense of the country. For the Democrats not get something for the raising of the debt ceiling is foolish. We know the Republicans will not work with the Democrats in terms of policy – they don’t do it when they are in the minority, why would they do it when they are in power.

    ReplyReply
    4
  18. Beth says:

    My pet theory, is that, contrary to the radical centrists* in the Democratic party, this country does not want a Right-wing party AND a Conservative party. The Republicans expelled all their liberals, and drove away their moderates and more moderate conservatives. The Democrats haven’t done anything similar. Instead, we’ve simply absorbed moderates and conservatives and, for whatever reason handed the keys to them. We need to have a come to Hecate moment with some of them and have them decide which team their on. Lets drive out the criminals, like Menendez and the recalcitrant conservatives like Manchin (I realize both are gone, they are just examples.) Giving people a different vision of the country starts with recognizing that we have to actually have a different vision. People don’t want off brand Cheneys, they want the real thing.

    *another pet theory of mine is that the Republicans have done a bang up job of of damaging the words “Liberal” and “Conservative”. I think there is a good slice of Democratic politicians that would prefer to describe themselves as Conservatives (cause they are), but the connotation is poison. Also, why have people like Manchin been described as centrist or moderate when they clearly aren’t.

    ReplyReply
    7
  19. Beth says:

    @Bill Jempty:

    So let’s not want to govern either and score political points instead. That’s a great way to run a country by either party. NOT!

    It’s not “not wanting to govern”. It’s the Republicans have used these tactics to smash every single thing they can, and when the Democrats try to fix things they blame us for doing the hard shit. It’s time we let everyone see just how bad Republican governance is. We don’t have to smash everything, we just don’t have to help. And sometimes, most of the time now, playing extreme hardball will be the only way to protect things. People have forgotten Depressions, people have forgotten rivers catching on fire, people have forgotten Klan style terrorism, people have forgotten why many of these institutions were created and set up to be shielded from political influence. We are all going to be forced to remember.

    ReplyReply
    10
  20. steve says:

    There eis a major anti-incumbency trend. We had significant inflation. In other countries this resulted in the incumbents losing a larger percentage of the votes. Our vote ended up so close because Trump is a bad candidate and maybe Harris is better than given credit for. (I also think immigration and anti-trans were voter concerns.)

    Steve

    ReplyReply
    6
  21. Bill Jempty says:

    @Stormy Dragon:

    Since the voters keep rewarding the Republicans for this, this is clearly what the voters want.

    And as the election demonstrated, Democrats need to start delivering what the voters want instead of what they imagine is best for the country.

    So you are not interested in running the country or doing what is best for it.

    Whatever it takes to get your side in office. Screw the people in the meantime. That’s a wonderful attitude.

    ReplyReply
  22. Bill Jempty says:

    @Beth:

    It’s the Republicans have used these tactics to smash every single thing they can, and when the Democrats try to fix things they blame us for doing the hard shit. It’s time we let everyone see just how bad Republican governance is.

    Whatever it takes to get your side in office. Screw the people in the meantime. That’s a wonderful attitude.

    Scream at the GOP’s use of tactics. Then do it yourselves. Or scream at what the Republicans might do towards a country with a democraticaly elected government that was being invaded and forget what a democratic congress did to a country with a democraticaly elected government that was being invaded. You will say it was too late to help but then what about the money for the evacuation and refugee relief?

    Republicans acting like idiots. Democrats acting like idiots. We should despise both.

    ReplyReply
  23. Lucysfootball says:

    @Bill Jempty: When you have one party that supports someone who helped orchestrate an insurrection, is openly racist, is a rapist and a thief, you should treat the party as if they are all those things. You play hardball when you have the chance. It is now worked into markets that the US will only raise the debt ceiling right near the deadline, that is the new normal. It doesn’t harm the country to extract something, and as Beth says, it may be the only way to protect things. You have people in charge who would have no problem rounding up Americans and putting them into camps, and that includes the next president. Trump literally talked about using the military against Americans. Oh, but he’s not really going to use the military against Americans, it was just talk. He wanted to have the Guard shoot protesters in the legs!

    ReplyReply
    4
  24. Bill Jempty says:

    And Trump may pull us out of NATO when some of those countries may have to deal with Russia once that country is through with the Ukraine.

    Democratic Majority leader sponsored legislation in the middle of the cold war that would have reduced US troops in Europe by 50%.

    History repeats itself. Republicans acting like idiots Democrats acting like idiots. Real people suffering or dying as a results. We should despise both.

    ReplyReply
  25. DK says:

    @Lucysfootball:

    You play hardball when you have the chance.

    I see what you mean overall and agree. But letting voters get what they voted for is hardly playing hardball.

    Voters chose a Republican government. Democrats should allow Republicans to govern. Elections have consequences.

    ReplyReply
    8
  26. Kevin says:

    @Bill Jempty: You’re conflating short-term and long term goals.

    I have two small children. When they decide that they’re going to do something stupid, I will warn them, because they don’t know any better. But if they proceed, I don’t stop them, and then make them clean up the mess they just made, because that’s sometimes how people learn. And after a certain point, by cleaning up other people’s messes, you’re just enabling them, as the Democrats have been doing for the Republicans for a generation or more.

    ReplyReply
    10
  27. Lucysfootball says:

    @DK: In normal times I would agree. When you have someone who will do the things that Trump and his people will do you have to change tactics. When the president outright says that he considers the enemy within to be more of a threat than foreign adversaries, listen to him. In case people have forgotten the Republicans NEVER work on the principle that Democrats, when they win elections, should be allowed to govern.

    ReplyReply
    2
  28. DK says:

    @Kevin: Liberals should consider — even hope — that we are wrong, that what we consider to be rightwing MAGA extremism is actually good for the country. Hope, because nobody should want to see people hurt.

    Maybe another round of conservative tax cuts for billionaires and supply-side trickle down will help the working clsss. It has not before, but maybe this time will be different. And if so, great.

    Maybe cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare will benefit working and middle class households.

    Maybe anti-Biden leftists and Michigan Muslims will prefer Trump helping Netanyahu annex Gaza and the West Bank than the muddled Biden response.

    Maybe mass deportation won’t happen. If it does, perhaps the loss of cheap farm, construction, and service labor won’t worsen inflation. Maybe the loss of immigrant tax dollars won’t harm the US fiscally; maybe economic growth won’t slow with slowed migration (in this era of declining birth rates).

    Maybe the crackup of NATO, frayed US-Europe relations, and the fall of Ukraine won’t make world less safe.

    Maybe climate disaster won’t worsen. Maybe hate crime and domestic terror won’t spike under Trump II like under Trump I. If the MAGA Republicans who don’t want the debt ceiling raised win that intraparty battle, perhaps the resulting default or cuts won’t be catastrophic.

    If indeed the working class thrives under Trump, quality of life improves, and the world is more peaceful — we should all celebrate a success and liberals should adjust their worldview accordingly. Democrats are Keynesians, and it was Keynes who said, “When the facts change, I change my opinion.”

    If, on the other hand, Trumpism leads to harm and increased suffering — then that’s what the people voted for. We will have gotten what we chose to get. So be it.

    I hope the president-elect will be good for Americans. His failed first term, his preference for fascism, and the bleak history of rightwing governance leave me skeptical. But I would very much like to be proven wrong.

    ReplyReply
    9
  29. Lucysfootball says:

    @DK: Hitler took power legally. Trump ain’t Hitler, but he’s evil and will hurt a lot of people. And many of them will be hurt intentionally, because for Trump, Stphen Miller, Homan and a host of others, the cruelty is the point.

    ReplyReply
    5
  30. Beth says:

    @Bill Jempty:

    History repeats itself. Republicans acting like idiots Democrats acting like idiots. Real people suffering or dying as a results. We should despise both.

    You are being being deliberately obtuse. I am not preparing to FLEE MY FUCKING HOME because of the DEMOCRATS. I am going to be one of the people bearing the brunt of the Trump administration.

    Democrats have spent years cleaning up Republican messes. REPUBLICANS HAVE MADE THIS FUCKING MESS. It’s theirs to own. We need to let them. You need to wake the fuck up because the harm is already fucking here. Do you know what I’m dealing with today? A ton of panicked women wondering if their name change or passport change is going to end them in a camp. The harm is already here.

    Democrats, for all the problems and nonsense are not the ones doing this. REPUBLICANS are.

    ReplyReply
    13
  31. Beth says:

    @Lucysfootball:

    Shitty people with shitty values.

    ReplyReply
    7
  32. Kevin says:

    @Bill Jempty: At least for the next four years, NATO is done. Trump doesn’t need to pull us out. The NATO charter doesn’t require any member to do anything, and even if it did, there’s no enforcement mechanism. The strength of NATO completely depends on the belief that an attack on one is an attack on all. Trump doesn’t share that belief.

    ReplyReply
    8
  33. Lucysfootball says:

    These are not normal times. We have a party in power that:
    1. will do anything to stay in power, and that includes supporting insurrection.
    2. as part of their election strategy demonizes groups of people, implying that they will do something about them.
    What Trump and Vance and the party said about Haitians was a modern form of blood libel, pure and simple. It was right out of the Nazi playbook, spread a lie about a group of people based on race, religion or ethnicity, and repeat the lie incessantly until it becomes the truth for their supporters.
    Living in Florida I did not see almost any presidential ads. My brother lives in NJ and he saw endless ads demonizing trans people. He said they were vile but almost certainly effective, in his opinion. As he put it, you would think that the existence of trans people is one of the largest problems facing the country. Trump and virtually every Republican politician no longer even pretend. They refer to trans women as men, they deadname just about every chance they can. Day one it is almost a given that Trump will overturn Biden’s executive order preventing discrimination on basis of gender identity or sexual orientation. But I assume he will also signal that the sky’s the limit in terms of what states can do, and he will have the SCOTUS and lots of Trump-appointed judges. How long before Alabama decides on conversion therapy as a “cure” (to be paid for by the family, of course).
    Desperate times call for desperate measures. No one is calling for pushing policies that will harm the country, but when you have some leverage, you use it.

    ReplyReply
    8
  34. wr says:

    @Bill Jempty: “Democratic Majority leader sponsored legislation in the middle of the cold war that would have reduced US troops in Europe by 50%.”

    Well, you’ve convinced me. I’m never voting for Mike Mansfield again.

    Not sure why I’m supposed to be convinced to think any way about the current Democratic party based on the actions of a single senator more than half a century ago, but whatevs…

    ReplyReply
    8
  35. becca says:

    @Beth: Brava!

    ReplyReply
    6
  36. Michael Reynolds says:

    Steven, the size of the loss has to be measured against the fact that we lost to a pig. If the LA Dodgers lost a game to a Little League team – even by just a few points – it’d still be an extraordinary loss.

    ReplyReply
    9
  37. Kathy says:

    I vote for hardball, but with one major caveat:

    Democrats have to make sure they have the messaging and spin to lay the blame where it belongs, and not take the blame themselves.

    I refer you to the 2011 credit rating downgrade on the US sovereign debt. It was a result of the GQP’s intransigence over the debt ceiling, but Obama took the brunt of the blame among the average person.

    Without good messaging, it would be extremely dangerous. the republic party is louder, and tries multiple lines of attack without regard to truth, accuracy, or even consistency.

    ReplyReply
    5
  38. DK says:

    @Michael Reynolds: 54% of America’s adult population cannot read above a 6th grade level. I’m not sure any election result is extraordinary in that context.

    Finland electing Trump twice would be extraordinary. The US electing Trump twice is only extraordinary if one is still blinkered about who and what the average American is.

    Yes, the US has produced exceptional individuals, institutions, and identities who have done and continue to do amazing things. On average though, we are not the cream of the crop.

    Our peer nations are building high-speed rail. Meanwhile, we’re electing billionaires and telling them to pick our pockets, because something something transgender aliens something something woke hurt my feelings. Mucho estupido.

    ReplyReply
    9
  39. Gustopher says:

    @Bill Jempty:

    Whatever it takes to get your side in office. Screw the people in the meantime. That’s a wonderful attitude.

    People voted for Republicans control. By teeny-tiny margins, the citizens of this country have made their preference known, and we should respect that, not try to reduce the consequences of their choices by overturning the will of the people.

    I’ve been in favor of getting rid of the filibuster for ages. It prevents government from getting anything done, and it removes the negative (or positive!) feedback loop that would cause people to maybe stop voting for lunatics. Instead, people pay no price until the lunatics are so firmly entrenched that they will be hard to dislodge when the time comes to undo what the lunatics eventually do (made worse by them using all the institutions to prevent change that were previously used to blunt the effects of their terrible policies).

    If George W. Bush privatized Social Security, as he wanted to, it would have been terrible, and we probably would have reversed it, and it would have cost a lot of money. But it would have been cheaper dealing with it then than now.

    Democrats’ general policy should be: Go on, touch the stove.

    The only thing is we should have let people touch the stove earlier, before it got this hot.

    ReplyReply
    5
  40. Gustopher says:

    @Michael Reynolds: if all the Major League Baseball teams were losing to little league teams, though, we might say the the LA Dodgers did relatively well by losing by a single run, and that this is something we should build on. And that the entire MLB had contracted bird flu or something.

    Also, if they never left Brooklyn, the Dodgers would have won.

    ReplyReply
    2
  41. just nutha says:

    @Eusebio: You don’t need to know where 5 million votes disappeared to? Fair enough.

    ReplyReply
    1
  42. just nutha says:

    @Stormy Dragon: Can the Democratic base survive as the party of racism lite, bigotry lite, transphobia lite, tax cuts for the wealthy lite, cave in to despots lite, etc.? Maybe, given that Democrats are already some distance along that road. Either way, it’s what I mean when I say the center is where progress goes to die.

    ReplyReply
    3
  43. just nutha says:

    @Beth: Alas, in the continuum in which America exists, Manchin may well be the center. 🙁

    ReplyReply
    1
  44. Beth says:

    @just nutha:

    I suspect that this election show’s that’s not true. There is an important story here about the people who stayed home. I suspect a lot stayed home because they are convinced that Democrats and Republicans are the same.

    The conventional wisdom, for as long as I can remember is that the U.S. is a conservative country. I think that conventional wisdom is wrong. People here have been lulled into a sense that everything here is shit and garbage and that is objectively false. But the people that benefit from that are conservative and they have spent the last 40 years making people afraid of some imaginary liberal. Democrats can’t be a conservative party or even allow the conservatives to be in charge. If they do that, then they just become a shadow of the Republicans. Why vote for the shadow when you can have the real thing.

    ReplyReply
    5
  45. just nutha says:

    @Beth:

    I suspect a lot stayed home because they are convinced that Democrats and Republicans are the same.

    If so, yes that shifts the continuum I’m suggesting. (And is close to where my worldview lies currently.)

    ReplyReply
    1
  46. Michael Reynolds says:

    @DK:
    Americans have an exaggerated opinion of themselves because: rich superpower.

    We should bear in mind that we are geographical nepo babies. We have far and away the world’s best navigable river system, an abundance of natural ports on both oceans plus the Gulf, mostly temperate weather, staggering amounts of the richest farmland, plenty of water, wood, coal, iron and oil, weak and compliant neighbors and two big oceans to keep potential enemies away. There is no country on earth with our physical patrimony. It would be all but impossible not to become rich and powerful, particularly given our willingness to ethnically cleanse the original inhabitants, use the labor of millions of slaves and steal half of Mexico.

    Still, the initial colonies might have failed had they not found a way to become the world’s pre-eminent exporters of an addictive and deadly drug called tobacco that has killed many, many times more humans than every other drug combined with the possible exception of alcohol. We didn’t so much wn independence as have it handed to us by France. And despite it all, we lasted just 80 years before carrying out a brutal civil war. We also helped to precipitate and deepen the Great Depression, sat out WW1 until Europe had been bled dry, and did it again just 20 years later so that we could emerge, ta da! as the only untouched major power.

    Born on third base and acting like we hit a triple.

    Yes, we have had a lot of great people. But a lot fewer if you subtract the foreign born, the Blacks, Jews, Japanese and Latinos who we’ve treated with contempt through most of our history.

    But this is probably not the message we should run on in four years.

    ReplyReply
    5
  47. Beth says:

    @just nutha:

    Just so I understand more clearly, which way are you saying the shift would go?

    ReplyReply
    1
  48. Jack says:

    Well isn’t this a pleasant thread.

    I understand the cathartic process. But many of you really need to look in the mirror. Stomping of feet, and holding your breath isn’t cold blooded analysis. And if you really want to win elections so you can implement policy then pissing in every direction you can isn’t going to do it.

    Take some time off.

    ReplyReply
    1
  49. Kathy says:

    @Gustopher:

    I’m terrified by burns, but I concur. Especially seeing how the trolls will yowl and blame us when the policies they voted for from the individual they advocated for give them bad burns.

    ReplyReply
    1
  50. Beth says:

    @Jack:

    Are you lonely? Would you like a hug?

    ReplyReply
    3
  51. Michael Reynolds says:

    @Beth:
    He’s like Trump and Musk: needy. So desperate to be cool, but only embraced by people he knows are losers.

    ReplyReply
    1
  52. Lucysfootball says:

    @Jack: Guessing you are a white, straight male. I am too, so I am probably far down on the list of people who would be targeted by the Republicans (I am Jewish, maybe Trump will decide he can make some political hay by going after the Jews, Elon sounds like he would definitely be on board). But make no mistake, the Republicans will be targeting people. Because they have a tendency to do that more than Democrats anyway, and they are led by Trump who has a lifetime of going after people, usually punching down. The point is there are people in this forum who will be targeted, and telling them to take a chill pill is pretty stupid/asinine/insulting. “Just calm down and don’t worry, they won’t do what they have said they will do”.

    ReplyReply
    6
  53. Gustopher says:

    @Beth:

    I suspect a lot stayed home because they are convinced that Democrats and Republicans are the same.

    They would have had to think the Democrats and Republicans are more the same than in 2020, to have bothered to vote then but not now.

    This is fundamentally a change year — people want change because they think the country is going in the wrong direction. Democrats offered status quo, but younger, while Republicans offered a change back to something that sucked.

    I can absolutely see people feeling like their desires aren’t being met and staying home, even if they don’t think the Democrats and Republicans are the same.

    Also, Democrats probably benefited from 2020 being so mail-in-ballot heavy, because it helped them commit fraud avoid going to a polling place, wait in line and talk to people. Republicans didn’t embrace vote-by-mail, and would be less impacted by access to it decreasing.

    I’m far more curious about the “Trump only, skip the down ballot” voters.

    ReplyReply
    1
  54. DK says:

    @Beth: I can’t understand why MAGA incels are still so angry and bitter, so desperate for the approval and attention of anti-Trumpers.

    Is it because their lives suck no matter who’s in power? Did they waste money on Capitol-storming gear they can’t return to Wal-Mart? Did they expect liberals to stop being hot, woke, elite, petty, witty, and fun?

    Not ruminating too much over the theories why, but I do enjoy the taste of sore winner tears ngl hahaha

    ReplyReply
    5
  55. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @Beth: If Manchin is further to the right (CORRECTION) left than center, there is effectively no actual left by my perception of left and right*. Daddy Reynolds–who has in the past taken the position that he represents hard core liberalism on this site–may well only be center left in this proposed universe.

    YMMV, but since you asked, that would be my answer. And the “liberals” here may be perfectly happy with Center Left as the boundary–progressives get beaten like red headed stepchildren from each direction**. My sense of disenfranchisement–both left and right provide few of the particular balance points I would prefer–proceeds apace either way.

    *Which is colored by having lived in Korea (where actual communists–in the Stalinist sense–run for office). The party that brought Korea Park Gun-hye was more liberal on some issues than the Democrats as a cohort.

    **And may deserve to be; I’m not an “eat the rich” guy to any degree. I just want to lever some accumulated capital back into the working money supply. Maybe most of it, maybe not. Since no one except Warren and AOC seem to be inclined that way, it’s fruitless to consider degrees.

    ReplyReply
    2
  56. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @Lucysfootball: Yes! This comment was more in the realm of the Jack we’ve come to know and love be made nauseous by.

    ReplyReply
    1
  57. Jack says:

    @Beth:

    Not from you.

    ReplyReply
  58. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @Jack: Stay classy, Jack.

    ReplyReply
    6
  59. Jack says:

    @Michael Reynolds:

    You jest keep tellin’ yerself that.

    ReplyReply
  60. Jack says:

    @Lucysfootball:

    Paranoia strikes deep, into you life it will creep……..

    ReplyReply
  61. Jack says:

    Blah, blah, blah……..

    Just the usual invective. Stew in it for a few days. Maybe you will emerge healed.

    ReplyReply
  62. Beth says:

    @Jack:

    Your loss darling, I give excellent hugs.

    ReplyReply
    4
  63. Kathy says:

    BREAKING!

    New linguistic research has determined the term “MAGA” is indeed trumpish for “sore winner.”

    ReplyReply
    3
  64. Michael Reynolds says:

    @Jack:
    And yet you keep coming here, while I make no effort to look for you and your ilk.

    ReplyReply
    2
  65. Michael Reynolds says:

    @Kathy:
    They can’t stand the fact that the world is appalled rather than rapturous. Russian TV is showing multiple nudes of Melania while the anchors stifle derisive laughter. And they tell themselves Trump projects strength. Yeah, that’s respect.

    Any American abroad is going to need to find a way to signal that he’s not one of the morons. Gonna have to find a Never Trump patch or I’ll have French waiters hawking loogies in my fish soup and calling it aioli.

    ReplyReply
    3
  66. @Michael Reynolds:

    Steven, the size of the loss has to be measured against the fact that we lost to a pig. If the LA Dodgers lost a game to a Little League team – even by just a few points – it’d still be an extraordinary loss.

    I understand where you are coming from, but this is just not the right analogy.

    First, I think if the GOP had nominated a normal candidate, the loss would likely have been larger. But that really isn’t the point.

    Second, regardless of what you want to say about Trump, and I have said a lot (and will say more), he isn’t a little leaguer. Just being the R nominee means he is a big leaguer. And he is a former president.

    ReplyReply
    2
  67. @just nutha: Let’s wait until the final tallies and then we can ask about 2020 v. 2024.

    ReplyReply
    1
  68. @Jack: Honest question: what is your goal with that comment?

    ReplyReply
    2
  69. charontwo says:

    @Michael Reynolds:

    Saw a golf cart earlier today while out walking the neighborhood with a fresh sticker on its rear window:

    “suck it up buttercup

    Trump is President”

    Nice. This gloating and taunting is not some guy who is embarrassed.

    ReplyReply
    1
  70. just nutha says:

    @Michael Reynolds: When I was in Korea, many US expat teachers used to wear maple leaf pins and tees and claimed to be from Vancouver and Toronto. You might give it a try

    ReplyReply
    1
  71. just nutha says:

    @Steven L. Taylor: At the risk of repeating myself and boring y’all:

    Are we still talking a ~10 million vote difference between 2020 and 2024 on the D side? If so, the question is where did those voters go and why. [emphasis added]

    ReplyReply
    1
  72. Michael Reynolds says:

    @just nutha:
    Well, I do like donuts. I could be Canadian, eh?

    ReplyReply

Speak Your Mind

*