Tweet
I think the salient point of the article is this:
You could similarly say 2016 may have had more to do with a very disliked and untrusted politician. Instead they ignore that and go full-throttle "Democrats are in ruins!"
Hillary needed about 200k more votes in 3 states and she would have been president. This is someone who was unpopular with her own base, unable to excite almost anyone, under investigation by the FBI with the announcement a week before the election which drove the polling average to striking range at just the right time. The % swings in latino and black votes doesn't matter much. Black vote was down significantly (1.1 million votes) even though population has increased. Ds need a candidate that can enthuse their base, rather than turn them off. Hillary almost surely would have won, perhaps in a landslide, if she had been even a moderately good candidate.
If Rs hang their hat on this election, they're ****ed. Because Trump brings things no other R could, and loses things no other R would. So for Trump is was a strategy that reached close to the expected R vote tally. But for any other R it would have been disastrous. Rs might want to think about ways to reach both Trumps wing, and the previous establishment wing. That may be difficult given Trumps wing is ideologically opposed to the previous establishment. If they can't do that, Rs can reasonably expect to simply go back to business as usual with normal candidates and perform similarly as well as Trump did. They can't reasonably expect to continue to do as well as Trump did without a Trump type character, and maybe not even with a Trump type character once Trump becomes "the establishment". Part of his draw was simply to blow things up.
If Ds abandon their coalition because of this election, they're stupid. Ds might want to think about ways they can bring previously moderate establishment Rs into the fold, or reach out to white union workers. Though they don't have to necessarily. To continue to have a good (and growing) chance of winning the presidency, D's can stick to their coalition and run a less horrid candidate that can bring out the vote.
Now ... Trump's presidency could change things at least on the R side. If Trump finds a way to be a popular president, getting things done with a high approval rating, getting elected to a second term against a decent D candidate ... the R's may have to accept this is their party now.
Instead, its success in 2008 and 2012 may have had more to do with a uniquely talented politician who also happened to be the first black president.
Hillary needed about 200k more votes in 3 states and she would have been president. This is someone who was unpopular with her own base, unable to excite almost anyone, under investigation by the FBI with the announcement a week before the election which drove the polling average to striking range at just the right time. The % swings in latino and black votes doesn't matter much. Black vote was down significantly (1.1 million votes) even though population has increased. Ds need a candidate that can enthuse their base, rather than turn them off. Hillary almost surely would have won, perhaps in a landslide, if she had been even a moderately good candidate.
If Rs hang their hat on this election, they're ****ed. Because Trump brings things no other R could, and loses things no other R would. So for Trump is was a strategy that reached close to the expected R vote tally. But for any other R it would have been disastrous. Rs might want to think about ways to reach both Trumps wing, and the previous establishment wing. That may be difficult given Trumps wing is ideologically opposed to the previous establishment. If they can't do that, Rs can reasonably expect to simply go back to business as usual with normal candidates and perform similarly as well as Trump did. They can't reasonably expect to continue to do as well as Trump did without a Trump type character, and maybe not even with a Trump type character once Trump becomes "the establishment". Part of his draw was simply to blow things up.
If Ds abandon their coalition because of this election, they're stupid. Ds might want to think about ways they can bring previously moderate establishment Rs into the fold, or reach out to white union workers. Though they don't have to necessarily. To continue to have a good (and growing) chance of winning the presidency, D's can stick to their coalition and run a less horrid candidate that can bring out the vote.
Now ... Trump's presidency could change things at least on the R side. If Trump finds a way to be a popular president, getting things done with a high approval rating, getting elected to a second term against a decent D candidate ... the R's may have to accept this is their party now.
Comment