The 2020 election explained
1 response | 0 likes
Started by mcfarmer - Dec. 31, 2023, 12:06 p.m.

I am doing a good job of limiting my social media exposure and I must say it is giving me a better outlook on life. More folks should try it, make it a New Year’s resolution to visit less often. (Sorry Mike)


I do like to check in here since I occasionally get some different viewpoints on topics; for one, like Alex,  Mike has moderated my views on climate change, specifically the benefits of CO2 in the atmosphere. Of course personal experience always helps and as I said some time ago our son has been doing research on plant yields in a controlled green house environment that attempts to replicate CO2 levels in the future. Research that unfortunately was defunded. But, he received tenure and then promptly moved on where his research was better appreciated.

One observation I have noticed across all sites is when I visit after a period of time the same folks are hashing the same topics with no movement of positions. Mike has demonstrated this many times when he lists the postings  a given topic was the subject of. Probably  unavoidable.

Anyway, to the election topic. Mike has clearly and repeatedly pointed out the fallacy of election fraud the leaders of the right wing have imbedded  in the “captured minds” of their followers.

One thing I have learned is to try and see the truth generally evident in both sides of any discussion, sometimes both can be right, to some degree. I wish I could reference the source of the editorial but it was long ago and I don’t even remember where I read it. To be clear, the idea isn’t mine. 

The editorial argued that the right claims election fraud because they can’t say out loud the real reason for their loss. In reality they can’t   dispute the number of votes but the problem is who voted. Due to Covid the states, mainly blue states to be sure, passed legislation that greatly expanded early voting, mail voting and remote drop boxes. Look who these measures benefited, Biden by a large margin. 

Now our constitution gives the states the responsibility of running the elections, that is why the courts found these measures legal and the far right claims of fraud unfounded.

This article best summarizes the 2020 election :

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/06/30/behind-bidens-2020-victory/

Go down towards the bottom of the charts. Mail and absentee votes were 46% of the total and Biden received 58% of those. That is your margin of victory.

Trump shot himself in the foot by saying BEFORE the election the remote voting methods were fraudulent. Republican voters overwhelmingly voted on Election Day in person.  

So, in summary the far right‘s problem isn’t fraudulent voting, but WHO voted. Anytime you increase the minority vote it helps the democrats, and now we see the red states do everything they can to restrict voting other than in person, on Election Day. 

Of course, I could be wrong.

Have a good 2024, may you live in interesting times.



Comments
By metmike - Dec. 31, 2023, 1 p.m.
Like Reply

Wonderful post and link, mcfarmer!

The analysis at that link hits lots of nails on the head.


They allude to this but I will repeat my version of describing it.

Recent elections have been won based on the NOT candidate because both have higher UNFAVORABLE poll numbers.

2016 was won by NOT Hillary Clinton in 2 ways. 

 Many Ds voted for Clinton just because she was the D And they always vote D.

However, millions of Ds stayed home because they disliked her so much as did many independents. 

People  disliked her so much that some of them voted NOT Hillary Clinton. Trump got several million NOT Hillary Clinton votes.

In 2020, after Trump had been president for almost 4 years, he generated millions of NOT Donal Trump votes for whomever the D running against him was.


In 2016, a lot of Ds stayed home because they disliked Clinton and didn't hate Trump enough.

In 2020, even more Ds voted, record numbers because they disliked Trump so much, even if they didn't like Biden.

99% chance that Biden will NOT be the candidate in 2024(in my opinion) because he generates a record amount of NOT Joe Biden votes.  Trump has his cult/core group that will vote for him, even if the other person running was George Washington or Abraham Lincoln.  But he needs several million in addition to that group. Those  would easily  come from NOT/NEVER Joe Biden.

Gavin from California doesn't have enough exposure and most people don't know him enough to be NOT Gavin Newsom(yet). This is EXACTLY why they are waiting until the last moment for Biden to step down and Gavin to replace him.  There won't be enough time to generate the NOT/NEVER Gavin Newsom votes in this age of the NOT/NEVER person votes winning elections for THE OTHER PERSON and he will get massive numbers of NOT Donald Trump votes from tens of millions that will vote for anybody but Donald Trump, especially an unknown that they didn't have enough time to dislike. 

I am almost 100% certain that this is the exact strategy. If it doesn't turn out this way, I will go back to this post/thread to point out my error/prediction flop.

I'm not saying Gavin will win for sure, just that Trump and especially another R will get less NOT Gavin votes than Trump/or another R will get NOT Joe Biden votes by millions, which SHOULD BE enough to make a difference in the outcome. 

It's the profound (sad) dynamics of elections in this age.


Very Happy and prosperous/enlightening New Year to you too mcfarmer!