The part of Emerging Democratic Majority that everyone--even including its authors--forgot: "The key for Democrats [...] will be in discovering strategy that retains support among the white working class, but also builds support among college-educated"
The book didn't exactly have the answer, as the quoted passage suggests. It did imagine that a 'progressive centrism' was possible, on the assumption that working class and professional values were converging in post-industrial metros
Whether you think that convergence was a total illusion depends on whether you think of Trump era shifts more as a continuation of longer-term trends (just the latest in 70 yrs of D gains with col+, R w wwc) or a more fundamental departure from Clinton-Bush-Obama trend
Either way, the assumption couldn't be sustained. The Dems either never had/found that message, or Dems '06/Obama '08 did strike the balance and couldn't stick to it in office, didn't deliver enough growth, and ultimately found itself overtaken by the new-new left type anyway
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
With Election Day vote largely counted, "no" still has a considerable 64%, down from 67 at race call.
That may come down a bit--Biden fell about 1.5 pts between now and the outcome. OTOH, mail ballots over the last few days didn't seem as disproportionately GOP as 2020.
We'll see what it looks like in the end, of course, but at the moment I don't really see any signs that Newsom fared particularly poorly among Latino voters, as the exit poll suggested.
The results in relatively Latino counties appear about the same as 2018
And in the end, it may be that the polls underestimated 'no' by a fairly modest margin. Just typing that out, it's hard not to wonder whether acquiesce bias--the tendency for people to say 'yes' to be agreeable--might play a role. But there are many other plausible explanations
The polls have closed in California's gubernatorial recall election.
NYT results here >>> nytimes.com/interactive/20…
Expect Newsom to take an early lead, as the disproportionately Democratic early mail votes will be the first counted.
If the 2020 election is any indication, the 'no' vote could start out 5 pts higher than the ultimate result.
The exits show "no" up by around 18 points or so.
If so, those early Newsom votes may be enough to yield an early call cnn.com/election/2021/…
A flash-back to around 1AM ET on 11/4, with some modest implications for following the vote tonight
The early dump of advance votes was overwhelmingly for Biden.
In the end, Biden won California by a more modest margin--a mere 29 points--as the Election Day and late mail votes ate away at his lead, as it did in Arizona.
When you piece it all together, the Election Day vote was basically 50/50 and the late mail votes were more like 60/40. The early mail dumps were 70/30.
Looks like we're finally going to get to see the new Democratic voting rights compromise nytimes.com/live/2021/09/1…
In theory, it should put progressives more-or-less where they would have like to have been in February: unified behind a bill that Manchin could be a) enthusiastic about and b) convinced the GOP ought to support on the merits in a functioning chamber
If those two conditions are met, you theoretically open up that 1-in-10 chance--or whatever it may be--that Manchin could seriously consider reforming the filibuster to secure its passage
In a lot of ways, this article retreads a fairly well-established and uncontested history. But there is a twist here that I'd like to make explicit: it centers the rise of four-year college as the driving and explanatory force behind the rise of edu/cultural polarization
In a slight contrast, consider this very good piece from @edsall today, which tells the familiar tale of the rise of postmaterialist values without really talking about the role of rising educational attainment in shaping the content of postmaterialism nytimes.com/2021/09/08/opi…
Eric Adams would have defeated Maya Wiley by 10 points, 54.9 to 45.1, if she had reached the final round of ranked choice balloting in the NYC Democratic primary, per ballot-level data published by the NYCBOE
Though interestingly, Wiley would have narrowly edged out Garcia, 50.6 to 49.4 -- with way more undervotes, at 24% of ballots -- in a hypothetical Wiley v. Garcia final round
I should note that NYC BOE has only published the raw data, and my analysis doesn't *exactly* replicate the original result. The difference is only a few hundred votes (attached), so I don't think it affects the analysis. Overvotes or late affidavits may be a factor