Tweet

Nate Cohn

27 Nov, 11 tweets, 3 min read

A few thoughts on the disconnect between Biden's popular policies and his personal unpopularity nytimes.com/2021/11/27/us/…

TLDR... I think it is worth fully internalizing the century-long pattern of voters a) rewarding parties for presiding over peace/prosperity; b) punishing presidents for enacting ambitious agenda.

The obvious implication: a popular, ambitious policy agenda doesn't do you much good if there isn't normalcy/peace/prosperity, especially if that agenda is not seen as attempting to respond to immediate challenges at hand

This is a hard implication for people to internalize or take seriously, since it's really not how most people think about politics! Most people do want their president to do their agenda. They don't flip between parties based on the economy, or something

And yet that's how the electorate behaves as a whole. A crucial segment of voters just isn't sufficiently demanding of an ideological policy agenda for an ambitious legislation to do a president much good, and those same voters respond to the economy/natl environment

These people may tell pollsters they support a policy. But they're not exactly demanding it or even care. Trying to win over a swing voter on a policy issue, when they're dissatisfied by the economy, is like trying to sell someone something they're not asking for. It's hard!

https://twitter.com/MidwestDeplore/status/1464670196480757767?s=20

The New Deal was was overwhelmingly focused on addressing an immediate economic crisis--you know, relief/reform/recovery. It's fits the 'economy key' framework.
Democrats got pummeled after the Great Society

https://twitter.com/MidwestDeplore/status/1464670196480757767?s=20

Now look, I don't think that BBB is going to hurt Biden like Obamacare hurt Obama or something. For all the talk about thermostatic backlash, most of his agenda is still popular.
I just don't see why we'd expect it to help, given what voters say they're concerned about

https://twitter.com/MattGrossmann/status/1464674066049249287?s=20

One interesting themes in the replies is how many people see the New Deal as a precedent for a popular progressive agenda, as opposed to a president who was going to exceptional lengths, by the standards of the time, to restore the economy

https://twitter.com/MattGrossmann/status/1464674066049249287?s=20

From some of these replies, you'd think Roosevelt would have done just as well if he had passed a child daycare subsidies and universal pre-K in his first 100 days

And the number of people who suppose the Great Society helped Democrats electorally is also surprising. They lost 47 seats in 1966 and went on to lose 5 of the next 6 presidential elections.
Not saying it's 100% causal, but this is not exactly a favorable precedent

• • •

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

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

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

More from @Nate_Cohn

Nate Cohn

@Nate_Cohn

21 Nov

@jbouie

I'm late to this @jbouie piece, but I do think it's worth coming back to a week later to reiterate how odd it is that HR1/FPA, for all their gangly ambition, don't include a republican government-based attack on state legislative gerrymandering
nytimes.com/2021/11/12/opi…

A guarantee-clause based attack might be very different than what you usually hear about on this website.
It would narrowly establish that republican gvt = majority rule = can't draw maps that would thwart majority rule

Only one metric would logically follow from a republican government clause attack: the mean-median gap.
A lot of the usual anti-gerrymandering would be irrelevant in this framework, like commissions, efficiency gap, compactness, communities of interest, proportionality, etc.

Read 7 tweets

Nate Cohn

@Nate_Cohn

19 Nov

We did a poll of Wisconsin just after the unrest in Kenosha. Biden led by 5, 48-43
It had some pretty interesting findings on the issue was playing out in the race, with a mixed bag for both sides
int.nyt.com/data/documentt…

BLM fav/unfav: 53-42
Who handles protests best? Biden+8
Who handles race relations best? Biden+19
Who handles crime best? Even
Who handles law and order best? Even
What's more important: covid or law and order? COVID +1

On defund, voters opposed it by a huge margin (19% said defund, 40% maintain, 36% increase)
And voters thought Biden supported defund, 45-38 (including 22% of Dems and 38% of nonwhite voters)
They also thought Biden hasn't done enough to condemn rioting, 31% enough 56% not enough

Read 5 tweets

Nate Cohn

@Nate_Cohn

4 Nov

It will be a while until we have authoritative data on turnout in Virginia, but at the moment I think it's fair to say two things, judged against 2020:
--Black/non-white turnout was weak for Democrats
--Otherwise, Democratic turnout was probably fine

For clarity, I've assigned the turnout among early voters to each precinct using voter file data, allowing for a direct comparison to 2020 turnout using vote history data

In overwhelmingly Black precincts, turnout was just over half of 2020 levels. It was at about 75% of 2020 levels in areas with no Black voters.

Read 6 tweets

Nate Cohn

@Nate_Cohn

3 Nov

I said this to a few people on the phone so it may be worth adding publicly too: from the standpoint of electoral implications, one of the most important things about CRT (either IRL or caricature) is that it's a critique of liberalism from the left.

The implication: it lets certain GOPers be relatively liberal on race.
If CRT is raised to sufficient salience, GOPers don't have to rev up the base with outright conservative views--like anti-immigration or denial of police brutality--to polarize along racial attitudes

Of course, many Republicans will instead emphasize outright conservative views that alienate more voters. I'd guess one might have lost VA.
But for more moderate GOPers, CRT is a gift. They can bash the left and earn cred by merely sounding like... Obama '08

Read 8 tweets

Nate Cohn

@Nate_Cohn

3 Nov

There are only four precincts where Hispanics make up a majority in Virginia, but they did pretty notably underperform our baseline for a tied election--perhaps suggesting continuing, disproportionate Democratic weakness with the group

It also seems like the turnout in majority Black and Hispanic precincts was relatively weak (see right hand column)

I know it's kind of annoying to judge compared to some vague 'expectations,' but it's sort of necessary in Virginia, where all of the absentee/early vote is reported by county, while precincts are all Election Day precincts

Read 4 tweets

Nate Cohn

@Nate_Cohn

3 Nov

It's still a very inconsistent, mixed bag of results by county in New Jersey. It's rare to have such an uneven picture. And I do think the likeliest explanation is that there are a lot of places without all their mail ballots

It is *possible* that the Democrats can be good in Hunterdon, ok in Middlesex, crushed in Cape May and so on. I don't want to dismiss that possibility. But in the absence of better reporting, I think uneven vote by method is the likelier story

And so on that note, I'll ask whether anyone has seen any information that speaks to this question.

Read 6 tweets

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

Thank you for your support!

Share this page!

Nate Cohn

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @Nate_Cohn

Nate Cohn

Nate Cohn

Nate Cohn

Nate Cohn

Nate Cohn

Nate Cohn

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Like this author's thread?