Nate Cohn Profile picture
14 Nov, 12 tweets, 2 min read
A few random thoughts this morning on what Democrats should take from the election results, as the recriminations and so on begin
1) Democrats shouldn't blame themselves for *quite* so much!
This election was about Trump. He was the incumbent. It was a referendum on him, and everyone knew it. If the GOP did better, it's mainly because Trump was stronger than understood--not simply because Dems blew it
Or put differently: I'm not really sure there was much Democrats could do about what happened here. Trump completely dominated American life for the last four years, people knew what they thought of it, and it's hard to believe there were magic words to undo it
2) Democrats *do* need to recognize just how much Trump pitch has really undermined the way they usually win elections.
This has been true since 2016, but it's been obscured by the focus on Trump's appeals on race/immigration--and that liberals didn't appreciate the 'old' way
To oversimplify *a lot*: between 92-12, Dems won elections by saying that the GOP was the party of business/corporations and the religious right.
They were at their best when they could attack the GOP for outsourcing and trying to get rid of Planned Parenthood.
This playbook didn't work against Trump
On economics, he flipped the tables on outsourcing/trade/China, took social security off the table, and added immigration as a pitch, etc.
Yes, he kept the tax cuts. But this is a far stronger economic position for the GOP
On cultural issues, no one was going to see Trump as the embodiment of cultural conservatism--no matter who he nominated to the courts.
Instead, Democrats attacked him more on his conduct/statements--and I think we can say this just wasn't as material as Dems wanted
3) Democrats have a really tough to choice on how to compete with a Trump-like GOP.
OTOH, they appear unwilling to own the anti-Trump position on many of his favored issues--IE become a rich left-liberal party of free trade, immigration, no trade wars, various lefty social stuff
OTOH, they do not appear willing to co-opt his message, and several influential minorities of the party remain pretty committed to playing into the Trump wedge issues where the party, as a whole, realizes it's not on firm ground (defund police as one ex.)
4) Incumbency is really powerful. It's a lot easier to set the agenda and define what you're for when you're in charge. For ex.: if Biden wants to be tough on China and own that issue, he can do that in a way Democrats simply couldn't when Trump was POTUS.
As a result, Dems don't have to try and figure out how to win the last election. They do need a better pitch: their 92-16 pitch is gone, and their 16-20 pitch (trump bad) is gone now too. But Trump was also a big impediment to a better pitch, and there's more room for it now
And it is not at all clear that the GOP will pursue every strategic part of the Trump message. I'd guess they will on cultural issues. The economic stuff? I think it'll be hard for someone else to be as good at bashing China, for ex. They won't be getting credit for stimulus

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Nate Cohn

Nate Cohn Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Nate_Cohn

13 Nov
I think that's still a pretty good guess, though getting from Biden +75/80k to 100k depends on two kinds of hazy votes that may be worse (or better) for Biden than I've roughly penciled-in: the 10k late absentees and provisional ballots
Right now, Biden's up ~60k and there are another ~40k regular absentees. So getting into the 75-80k range before provisionals/post-election absentees is straightforward, even if we conservatively assume that a disproportionate share of remaining absentees will be rejected
From there, we've got
--10k late absentees--which I'd expect to be good (say 2-1) but maybe not amazing for Biden, since Dems disproportionately returned their ballots early.
-- ~70k uncounted provisionals, very disproportionately in Dem areas
Read 5 tweets
12 Nov
I've got a lot of questions about race calls in my 'interactions' today, so let's go through a quick update
First, we've uncalled NJ-07, which the AP called some time ago.
In general, we automatically accept AP calls (a few exceptions, like top presidential states--where we independently evaluate whether to accept). I think we've seen enough to say the NJ-07 call was premature
Next up is Arizona, where Trump has no realistic hope of mounting a comeback but where none of the news network decision desks have made a projection (excluding the erroneous AP/Fox call on Election Night). Why isn't this one called?
Read 9 tweets
11 Nov
I have no doubt--based on great data in FL/NV, and fuzzier data elsewhere--that GOP beat our final turnout estimates, and perhaps by a lot
Whether that's only a modest or big part of the polling error is still an open question
As an aside, I do wonder whether Democrats will rethink whether mail/early voting is a great deal, given how badly they get clobbered on Election Day--the time when low propensity, election winning voters go to the polls.
What if 'GOTV efforts' are a lot less powerful in mobilizing turnout than, say, everyone around you going to vote. Election Day being a nonevent in your neighbrhood/community/peer group may be demobilizing
Read 4 tweets
10 Nov
I haven't tweeted much about NC since Election Night, but with Cunningham conceding today let's take a look in at what's going on there
As far as I can tell, there are not nearly enough provisional and absentee ballots left for Ds to have a credible chance of making up their deficit.
Biden's down 75k votes; but there are 40k provisionals (won't all count) and maybe another 35k absentee ballots. Doesn't add up.
I do have pause about one thing, though, and I wonder whether it's a factor for any of the decision desks: some of the oddities in the results that I was tweeting about on Election Night
Read 8 tweets
10 Nov
Let's look at the change in turnout *so far,* based on number of votes cast compared to 2016 turnout.
Let's start nationwide, at a high level: areas in purple have counted *fewer votes* than 2016. Most of those areas still just have lots of votes left to count
As you can see, there's a ton of vote left to count in Chicago, New York state, and parts of MD/CA. I'd guess these ballots generally break Democratic, padding Biden's national lead.
One thing you might have overlooked: Philly.
For all the complaints about the count there... it's still the only place in PA that's counted fewer ballots than 2016
Read 10 tweets
10 Nov
Some early theories on went went wrong with the pre-election polling this year
nytimes.com/2020/11/10/ups…
Before we go into what went wrong, let's just call a spade a spade here: this was a bad polling error. It's comparable to 2016 in size, but pollsters don't have the excuses they did last time.
This year's polls would have been *way* worse than 2016 with a 2016 methodology
There are really two halves of polling: the quality of the sample you get, and the adjustments you take to improve the representativeness of your sample.
Since 2016, pollsters got better at the adjustments, but the underlying sample got worse
Read 14 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!