Debunking the popular theory that Nikki Haley's relatively substantial support in GOP primaries has been due to Dem leaning voters flooding the GOP primary vote, thereby suggesting that Haley's strong showing isn't actually a bad sign for Trump...
We recently analyzed the GOP primary individual turnout history in the NC primary. Haley won 23% there. Looking at the unaffiliated voters who comprised one-third of the GOP vote, there is no indication that these voters were Dems seeking to stop Trump.
They were not substantially younger than the GOP voters (41% over 65 vs 45% among reg GOPs). They were overwhelmingly white (94% of Inds vs 97% of GOPs), and were actually more likely to be men (51% of Ind GOP primary voters vs 50% of GOPs).
Every indicator suggests these Independents voting in GOP primaries are more likely GOP voters. They just don't like Trump. If I were the Biden campaign, I would be investing in outreach to any Ind who voted in a GOP primary (or if I was the @ProjectLincoln).
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here's my grand* unified theory of this presidential race, and why I feel like the Biden team should feel pretty good about their standing:
*this is not all that novel or deep
Polls are consistently showing Biden faring much better among "likely voters" relative to all registered voters or American adults. We can quibble about what a likely voter is, but the same thing is apparent if you filter on past turnout history.
If I can channel @DougJBalloon (and invert things), here's why this is good news for Biden:
On the first page of tabs, a look at the sample. Remember, this is registered voters. So voters age 65+ are 22% of this poll's sample, but will be closer to 35% of ballots cast. More in a second on what that means...
On Biden's job approval, you get the first sign of what I'd call "age inversion". The older the voter, the more likely it is they approve of the job the President is doing. This isn't new, but traditionally younger voters would be stronger.
Lots of fun dismissive jokes today about "crosstab truthing" towards anyone raising any concerns about this poll, but this is perhaps the more insidious counterweight to questioning crosstabs: lending them lots of credibility when they support your priors, ignore when they don't.
If you're going to write a story about how Biden is hurting with young voters based on one poll, shouldn't you write a follow up story now talking about how Biden has miraculously rallied back support among young voters? (trick question, you should write neither)
"Crosstab truthing" isn't the problem. Crosstab credence is. Remember in 2022 when, prior to the election, many stories were written about supposed wild swings to the GOP among independent women? Crosstab credence was to blame.
Some of the loudest messaging right now is Dems/progs demanding that we all admit that Biden is old, and "deal with it".
Here's a newsflash - everyone is aware of his age. I understand why it might worry you, because the stakes are so high. But what are we asking for here?
Not a single voter will be convinced to change their mind if they think Biden's age is a concern. They can be convinced of two things:
- All evidence suggests he has been a very capable president, regardless
- The alternative is far, far worse
So maybe let's focus on that?
These Dem voices are a problem. They validate more press coverage and keep the message front and center. If we are talking about signs of aging, Trump is clearly far worse, yet you don't see those stories written because GOPers don't handwring about it endlessly.
The early in person votes have all been cast now, with >60k votes ready to be counted. By party reg they are +10 Dem (ie, the share of early votes cast by reg Dems is 10 pts higher than that of GOPs). That's a 2.8 pt improvement on '22.
The mail votes will continue to trickle in over the coming days, but I wouldn't expect to see more than a few thousand more come in. About 13k have been returned, and by party reg they are +29D, compared to +26 in '22.
So the early vote overall is just under two points more Dem than it was in '22. The most common question I've heard over the past few days is if Dems lost the seat by 7.5 pts, does a roughly 3 pt improvement in the early vote mean they are running behind?
Perhaps unsurprising to anyone, I have lots of issues with Matt Yglesias' latest piece "Joe Biden is Currently Losing the Election". Some disagreements based on perspective, some on outright errors.
I will agree with Matt on one broad point - we should all be operating with the understanding that Trump can win this election, and it won't take some far-fetched scenario for that to happen, and act accordingly.
My first area of disagreement is the general framework of Yglesias' piece. Polls are not telling us what would happen "if the election were held today". It is impossible to transpose the psychology of casting a vote, aware of the consequences, and answering a poll 10 months out.