U.S. presidential election modelling

[iNow]

I suggest some of the other changes I recommended in a previous post are prerequisite to giving a 3rd party a chance, hence my focus there. 

15 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

a third party would make it more likely.

 

[J.C.MacSwell]

44 minutes ago, swansont said:

No, that’s not argument from authority. 
 

 

Why are you asking me to cite a pundit that might agree with me?

1 hour ago, swansont said:

Who out in pundit-land is calling for this?
 

 

[swansont]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Why are you asking me to cite a pundit that might agree with me?

 

To see if this is a widespread notion.

[J.C.MacSwell]

2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I googled it. My context was "a person who holds moderate views, especially in politics". I hadn't realized Americans consider it centre left.

The Oxford dictionary suggests the first definition and Wiki suggests the latter for Americans but not otherwise.

 

I read that too quickly. Centre on the left-right spectrum. So essentially I believe I used it correctly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderate

I was actually trying to find a more acceptable term when I reread it.

It's not cut and dried and I'm certainly no linguist, so quite happy to be corrected and open to being convinced, but there you go..

"In recent years, the term political moderates has gained traction as a buzzword. The existence of the ideal moderate is disputed because of a lack of a moderate political ideology. Voters who describe themselves as centrist often mean that they are moderate in their political views, advocating neither extreme left-wing politics nor extreme right-wing politics.

Gallup polling has shown American voters identifying themselves as moderate between 35–38% of the time over the last 20 years.^[4] Voters may identify with moderation for a number of reasons: pragmatic, ideological or otherwise. It has even been suggested that individuals vote for centrist parties for purely statistical reasons"

56 minutes ago, swansont said:

To see if this is a widespread notion.

Advocating civil discourse? Obviously many are lamenting the lack of it. Is that not evidence of a preference for it?

Edited December 23, 2020 by J.C.MacSwell

[swansont]

15 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Advocating civil discourse? Obviously many are lamenting the lack of it. Is that not evidence of a preference for it?

And it’s proportional to the level of offense?

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 minute ago, swansont said:

And it’s proportional to the level of offense?

Uncivil discourse? It's probably proportional to the level of offence the propagator is attempting to imply. Like the boy who called wolf, credibility gets lost when the call is not accurate and when the level doesn't match the rhetoric.

 

I'm not sure why that's controversial, other than it can be debated whether to focus more on the base and motivating reluctant voters within it or focusing on persuading swing voters that are likely to vote.

Do you not respect Republicans more that try to keep that in balance, than those that just espouse angry rhetoric toward the Left? Or are they just wasted lives that don't deserve any consideration at all?

[iNow]

49 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

read that too quickly. Centre on the left-right spectrum. So essentially I believe I used it correctly.

But as the Overton window shows, the entire spectrum is often displaced rightward or leftward, so the “center” is itself relative.

Also... The US has been shifting rightward overall these last several decades. Said another way, the left is already closer to the center than the right yet that’s where you focus your criticisms... on the ones already doing what you’re advocating while ignoring those doing the exact opposite. 

This one example from a study done just last year:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/26/opinion/sunday/republican-platform-far-right.html

21 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Like the boy who called wolf, credibility gets lost when the call is not accurate and when the level doesn't match the rhetoric.

Or, as PT Barnum and basic psychology shows, when you repeat a lie often enough people believe it more. 

Edited December 23, 2020 by iNow

[J.C.MacSwell]

4 minutes ago, iNow said:

The US has been shifting rightward overall these last several decades.

I really don't see that. At all. The Democrats seem to be holding their own, despite clearly shifting Left. In fact your graphic displays them to the Left of median Europe.

I would take the NY times opinion with a grain or two of salt.

As one should with any clearly agenda based "journalism".

29 minutes ago, iNow said:

Or, as PT Barnum and basic psychology shows, when you repeat a lie often enough people believe it more. 

Or is it okay when the article comes from a Left leaning (how have they not keeled over) publication?

Disclaimer: Yes. Right leaning publications can be just as egregious.

[iNow]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I really don't see that. At all

You may have a point, but I at least cited a source for my claim and instead of challenging any specific claims my source made or showing flaws in their methodology, you just dismissed the NYTimes whole cloth.

You also didn’t bother to find data in support of your opposition, so I did it for you (though it’s hardly as convincing as you suggest, and obviously differs from one issue to the next and by age group):

 

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2017/10/05/1-partisan-divides-over-political-values-widen/
 

Quote

Republicans and Democrats are now further apart ideologically than at any point in more than two decades, a continuation of the trend Pew Research Center first documented with these measures in 2014. For instance, overall, on this scale of 10 political values, the median (middle) Republican is now more conservative than 97% of Democrats, and the median Democrat is more liberal than 95% of Republicans.

By comparison, in 1994 there was substantially more overlap between the two partisan groups than there is today: Just 64% of Republicans were to the right of the median Democrat, while 70% of Democrats were to the left of the median Republican. Put differently, in 1994 23% of Republicans were more liberal than the median Democrat; while 17% of Democrats were more conservative than the median Republican. Today, those numbers are just 1% and 3%, respectively.

 

[MigL]

I think almost everyone here has missed my point.
My apologies for not explaining myself better.

I'm pretty confident everyone involved in this discussion would have voted Democrat in this last election, even us non-Americans, if we could.
Why is that ?

Is it because one party cares about the economy more than people's lives ?
Is it because that party gives tax breaks which predominantly benefit the rich ( and themselves ), and want the middle class to pay for it, and the poor to fend for themselves ?
Is it because that party wants to deny ( under the guise of freedom of choice ) ordinary Americans Health coverage, so their donors ( private insurance companies ) can keep making huge profits on the backs of sick and disabled Americans ?
Or because other donors to their party want them to spend almost as much on the yearly Defense budget as they did on Covid relief, one time; and nearly defeated after months of talks breaking down.
Is it because that party is trying to subvert democracy, and actively considering martial law to overturn the will of the people in this last election ?

Or is it because most Democrats actually care about the people they represent and want the best America for them ?

IOW, would everybody have voted Democrat in the last election because they are the 'nicer' party ?

See, being 'nice' does work !

[iNow]

35 minutes ago, MigL said:

I'm pretty confident everyone involved in this discussion would have voted Democrat in this last election, even us non-Americans, if we could.
Why is that ?

It is because they support policies, programs, and approaches that are also supported by the majority of Americans. 

And also those other things you said (except that bullshit about being nice... lol)

[MigL]

Bullsh*t about being nice … lol ?
Are you laughing at me ?

Americans are fairly even split on immigration, with almost equal numbers through the last several years for increasing, maintaining, or decreasing.
So that is not a policy supported by a majority of Americans.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1660/immigration.aspx

Yet only a 'mean' party, like the Republicans, would lock up immigrant children in cages.
Certainly not very nice.

1 hour ago, MigL said:

See, being 'nice' does work !

 

[iNow]

1 minute ago, MigL said:

Bullsh*t about being nice … lol ?
Are you laughing at me ?

Not this time, no

If Americans wanted “nice,” then surely 74 million votes wouldn’t have gone to give Trump a 2nd term

[MigL]

Ahh, but 8 million more people wanted a 'nicer' J Biden.
( or possibly a sane President )

1 hour ago, MigL said:

See, being 'nice' does work !

 

[swansont]

What are some of the examples of democrats not being nice?

 

[MigL]

The simple answer ?
When they start acting like the current Republicans.
Lying or hiding truth, manipulating people with fear, subverting voter's rights and democracy, putting military in the streets to quell protests or overturn legal elections, withholding help for people in a pandemic unless there is something in it for them and theirs, turning a blind eye to Presidential wrongdoings for fear of losing power, …
How much time have you got ?

Not claiming that the Democrats have done any of those things, like Republicans have, or have threatened to do, although they contributed to the impasse with the pandemic relief bill as much as they could, and they  have manipulated the truth somewhat ( all politicians do, and call it 'spin' ), and voters with fear ( possibly justified ) of what D Trump might do.

So overall, Republicans are 'mean', while Democrats are not perfect, but quite a bit 'nicer' to people/voters.
A simplistic assessment, but far from untrue.

 

[J.C.MacSwell]

3 hours ago, swansont said:

What are some of the examples of democrats not being nice?

 

Might as well give an example of a "nice" apology for one.

https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-staffer-jen-omalley-dillon-apologizes-gop-expletive-2020-12

Now that Biden is President elect he may even refrain from claiming Mitt Romney would put African Americans "back in chains".

We can be optimistic...

Disclaimer: Republicans are worse and we can't be optimistic about them changing any time soon.

[CharonY]

On 12/22/2020 at 11:09 PM, MigL said:

Ahh, but 8 million more people wanted a 'nicer' J Biden.
( or possibly a sane President )

 

That is actually worrying given the current state of the US. In any other well-informed and functional democracy one might expect an incompetent leader who has personally fueled needless deaths of his voters to be ousted from office in a landslide. Then of course there is the damage done especially to low to middle income folks (perversely, the rich are doing even better during the pandemic).

After all it is citizens dying not asylum seekers, or kids which no one cares about. That in my mind demonstrates the power of identity politics that is divorced from policy goals. You can have things fall apart all around you and still support the folks who are responsible for it. 

I actually want to mention that there are several things mixed in the arguments above. One is how Democrats should act to be morally superior, and the other in order to win votes. While the former argument is easier to state in terms of taking the high road, the latter is much more difficult. Studies have established that the US is massively polarized. The study I cited above indicated that a significant proportion of conservative voters would vote for Republicans even in conflict with their own interests. That means that the Republican party can implement unpopular policies without losing votes, whereas the Democrats will have a hard time implementing policies that will keep their voters happy. I think iNow and me have repeatedly shown that middle-of-the-road policies are not the way as what voters want are far more progressive than the political landscape indicates. Again, part of it is driven by the fact that the Republicans have mostly killed off their moderate wing, which can in fact kill policies that are actually preferred by their electorate (such as public health care options) without being severely punished.

 

 

[iNow]

7 minutes ago, CharonY said:

part of it is driven by the fact that the Republicans have mostly killed off their moderate wing

And also the wing that gives a rats ass about basic decency, honesty, and reality based discussions. 

[CharonY]

13 minutes ago, iNow said:

And also the wing that gives a rats ass about basic decency, honesty, and reality based discussions. 

It is a bit funny that I know more about US politics than in other places which I live of have lived. But I think part of it is because it is fairly one-dimensional and thus easier to grasp (to some degree). It also highlights weaknesses in democracies. The slide of the Republicans into an alternative reality was like a slow-motion trainwreck and I am not even sure when it began. It certainly has memorable highlights, of which the tea party and Trump are just recent highlights. While there has been much talk about electability of moderates, the reality seems to show otherwise. The Republicans have become more and more conservative and extreme, but it does not look like the progressive wing of the Dems, simply because they are not a wing, they are the majority. In fact the few remaining moderate conservatives would probably be considered the mainstream right a while ago. 

Meanwhile the left wing of the Dems could be seen as more aligned with public sentiments when it comes to support of taxes for the rich, healthcare for all, livable wages and so on. In fact, recent polls indicated that instead of putting off voters, they were instrumental in getting otherwise non-voting folks out to vote. In the US going the middle road means being stranded, nowadays. It also is funny to see how the red scare is fading. A while ago communist and socialist were venomous insults and evoked enemies such as Russia.

Nowadays it seems that in the Republican mindset Russia has been replaced by Democrats. The US looks like country with complete communication breakdown. However, it is not unique to them. Looking e.g. at Europe, parties with similar tendencies like the Reps now have become prominent over the years. In Germany I suspect because of the failures of the Trump administration the similar populist right-wing party (AfD) has been losing ground on the federal level, after getting tons of support, especially in the aftermath of the migrant and refugee crisis. But the parallels are uncanny (including outright denial of scientific fact, a romanticized backward view on the past, blaming foreigners etc.), though their media support is much weaker and they are not considered mainstream (yet)

[MigL]

25 minutes ago, CharonY said:

part of it is driven by the fact that the Republicans have mostly killed off their moderate wing

If by moderate you mean centrist, one only has to look at the graphs provided by INow, a few posts back, that show how much further apart Democrats and republicans are.
You will note that the previously bell shaped graphs are currently skewed right for Republicans, AND skewed left for Democrats.
Which means a larger portion of people are leaning towards the extremist fringe, in BOTH camps.

The only difference is that the extremist fringe of the Republicans are Tea Party descendants, and a generally nasty bunch of characters.

Even N Gingrich, the Republican everyone loved to hate, has now become a relative 'centrist', and imploring M McConnel to allow a vote on the $2000 payouts for Covid relief, without the added conditions.

[iNow]

1 minute ago, MigL said:

Which means a larger portion of people are leaning towards the extremist fringe, in BOTH camps.

The only difference is that the extremist fringe of the Republicans are Tea Party descendants, and a generally nasty bunch of characters.

Also, those on the right seem to want to shoot and maim those on the left like a bunch of traitors who raped their daughters, whereas those on the left want to provide healthcare, better more cost effective education, and stop police from murdering black people. 

I’m not comfortable with the level of nazi-style dehumanization and vitriol I’m seeing pretty consistently on my own local representatives comments sections. 

[MigL]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

the left want to provide healthcare, better more cost effective education, and stop police from murdering black people. 

But you are looking at it from the point of view of a left wing urban dweller.
Try putting on their shoes, and recognize what's important to them.

I'm talking about coal miners in West Virginia and Wyoming, who are losing jobs with no replacements in sight.
I'm talking about farmers in the mid-west where farming has become big business, and local farmers have been pushed out.
Or older people in Florida and Arizona, who have worked hard all their lives, and have to get by on a pension which is less than what is paid to younger people ( some of whom never work ) by social assistance.
Or people who go fight for their country, and risk their very lives, so that some left wing urban dwellers have the right to protest them ( and call them murderers ), deny them jobs, and take away their veteran's benefits.

These disillusioned people, whether right or wrong in their grievances, are easily taken advantage of by hucksters like D Trump; and we end up with the situation we've had the last 4 years. The Democrats, and J Biden are now  lawmakers and the President of these people also.
Don't ignore them, or else 2024 is going to be another bad year.

[iNow]

35 minutes ago, MigL said:

These disillusioned people, whether right or wrong in their grievances, are easily taken advantage of by hucksters like D Trump; and we end up with the situation we've had the last 4 years.

Try to remember those farmers being pushed out of the Midwest by giant agri-businesses are my neighbors. I’m not as oblivious to them and their grievance as you suggest. 

That said, you’re right that they’re being taken advantage of... being offered simplistic solutions like “blame that other guy over there... they’re the reason your life is challenging.” And that’s turning into not just threats of violence, but actual measurable spikes in it. 
 

35 minutes ago, MigL said:

The Democrats, and J Biden are now  lawmakers and the President of these people also.
Don't ignore them

This has been core to Biden’s message since the primaries... that he’ll be the president for everyone, not just those who voted for him. It’s how he’s governed for over 40 years. He’s lived a life that helps him understand their problems. He’s capable enough to help improve their lives through policy and competent staff. 

Unfortunately, 70-80% of republicans are certain the election was rigged and Biden is not a legitimate president, that violent overthrow of those evil liberals and Democrats is the only patriotic thing to strive toward. I’ve read the words “civil war” and “ammunition” at least 15x today alone, and I haven’t even been online that long. 

Edited December 30, 2020 by iNow

[ScienceNostalgia101]

All this math and so little emphasis on the possibility that poll respondents were simply lying through their teeth?

 

Who would've predicted 2016 better; a pollster, or someone who spends all their spare time staring at the things people say about Muslims and Mexicans in YouTube comments? Whatever happened to the notion of "spontaneous sincerity"?