Virginia/New Jersey Elections

[JohnStOnge]

Here's the thing about the Virginia race:

It wasn't because of the way in which non Whites voted. To the extent that the distribution of racial voting mattered at all, it was the fact that non Whites were a lower percentage of the total vote.

In 2020 non Whites in Virginia voted for Biden over Trump by 78% to 20%. In 2021 non Whites voted for McAuliffe over Youngkin by 79% to 19%. I think it's safe to say there is no evidence that Youngkin did better than Trump did among non Whites in terms of how those who actually voted voted.

BUT: In 2020, 32% of the votes in Virginia were cast by non Whites. In the 2021 Virginia governor's race, only 26% of the votes were cast by non Whites.

What happened in Virginia this week didn't happen because Republicans did better among non Whites. It did not contradict the idea that, as the proportion of non Whites in the population increases, things will eventually get worse for Republicans. Much worse.

[UNI88]

Your entire premise banks on the fact that demographics will NEVER change the way they vote.

Newsflash, pal: It’s happening before your very eyes….just open them.

I've always said that the situation is premised upon whether demographic voting patterns change. it's not happening. I have been tracking the trends, at least in terms of Presidential races.

The average percentages of the Black and Hispanic vote Democrats got during 1976 through 2020 are 88% and 66%. They got 87% and 65% in 2020. I guess you could say that the Democrats doin 1 percentage point worse in the polling point estimate than average is REALLY showing progress for Republicans. But if you do you are kidding yourself.

They didn't start providing estimates for Asians until 1992. But the average Democrats got from Asians during 1992 through 2020 is 56% and they got 61% in 2020. So that doesn't show a lot of progress for Republicans either.

I know I have seen a lot of spin about how Republicans are REALLY doing better among non Whites. But it's just not there. There was a thing with Hispanics in Florida due to those of Cuban ancestry. OK. But overall there wasn't some big shift in the basic paradigm whereby non whites in general and/or hispanics in particular voted overwhelmingly for the Democrat.

I'm about to type something on the Virginia race about that too.

Lumping black and brown voters into one big monolithic block is racist.

How do your conclusions look if you break them out and show voting pattern trends? Also what are the trends for each group's share of the voting population?

[JohnStOnge]

I've always said that the situation is premised upon whether demographic voting patterns change. it's not happening. I have been tracking the trends, at least in terms of Presidential races.

The average percentages of the Black and Hispanic vote Democrats got during 1976 through 2020 are 88% and 66%. They got 87% and 65% in 2020. I guess you could say that the Democrats doing 1 percentage point worse in the polling point estimate than average is REALLY showing progress for Republicans. But if you do you are kidding yourself.

They didn't start providing estimates for Asians until 1992. But the average Democrats got from Asians during 1992 through 2020 is 56% and they got 61% in 2020. So that doesn't show a lot of progress for Republicans either.

I know I have seen a lot of spin about how Republicans are REALLY doing better among non Whites. But it's just not there. There was a thing with Hispanics in Florida due to those of Cuban ancestry. OK. But overall there wasn't some big shift in the basic paradigm whereby non whites in general and/or hispanics in particular voted overwhelmingly for the Democrat.

I'm about to type something on the Virginia race about that too.

Lumping black and brown voters into one big monolithic block is racist.

How do your conclusions look if you break them out and show voting pattern trends? Also what are the trends for each group's share of the voting population?

I did separate them out in the post to which you are responding. On average 1976 through 2020 the percentages of Black, Hispanic, and Asian vote Democrats got were 88%, 66%, and 56% respectively. For the single year 2020 the rates were 87%, 65%, and 61% respectively. Slightly lower than average for Blacks and Hispanics and a tad higher than average for Asians. No indication of a change in the basic picture.

I also did trend analysis for the margins (Democrat percent minus Republican percent). During 1976 through 2020 there is a positive trend suggesting Democrats have done better with Blacks over time. But it's not quite "significant" by convention. 94% confidence. The coefficient for how Democrats have done with Hispanics over time is negative. But it's not anywhere close to being "significant." 47% confidence. Coin flip. There is a trend towards Democrats doing better among Asians significant at 97% confidence.

When it comes to Hispanics, the 2020 Republican performance was better than average. The average margin Democrat minus Republican for 1976 through 2020 is 36 percentage points. In 2020 it was 33 percentage points. But that is 5th best in 12 races in terms of how Republicans have done. The Democrat minus Republican margin among Hispanics was 9 in 2004, 19 in 1980, 27 in 2000, and 32 in 1984. So it's not like losing by "only" 33 percentage points among Hispanics is some indication of dramatic change. 5th of 12 may be better than average but it's not exactly remarkable.

There really isn't any indication in the data, at all, that there has been some change in the basic picture. Doesn't mean there won't be an indication in the future. But so far it was true in 1976 that Republicans don't do well at all among non Whites and it was still true in 2020. Also true in the 2021 Virginia Governor's race. It's still the case that, if something doesn't change very significantly in the way non Whites vote and HAVE voted for the past 45 years at least, the fact that we are moving towards a majority non White country is bad news for Republicans.

They can stall things with doing great on turning out relatively uneducated White voters like they just did in Virginia. They can try to suppress the vote with the laws they are passing in State legislatures they control. So on and so forth. But the handwriting is still on the wall. At some point, unless they can change a basic picture with respect to the demographics of voting that has been in place for at least 45 years, none of that is going to be enough.

[AZGrizFan]

I've always said that the situation is premised upon whether demographic voting patterns change. it's not happening. I have been tracking the trends, at least in terms of Presidential races.

The average percentages of the Black and Hispanic vote Democrats got during 1976 through 2020 are 88% and 66%. They got 87% and 65% in 2020. I guess you could say that the Democrats doin 1 percentage point worse in the polling point estimate than average is REALLY showing progress for Republicans. But if you do you are kidding yourself.

They didn't start providing estimates for Asians until 1992. But the average Democrats got from Asians during 1992 through 2020 is 56% and they got 61% in 2020. So that doesn't show a lot of progress for Republicans either.

I know I have seen a lot of spin about how Republicans are REALLY doing better among non Whites. But it's just not there. There was a thing with Hispanics in Florida due to those of Cuban ancestry. OK. But overall there wasn't some big shift in the basic paradigm whereby non whites in general and/or hispanics in particular voted overwhelmingly for the Democrat.

I'm about to type something on the Virginia race about that too.

Lumping black and brown voters into one big monolithic block is racist.

How do your conclusions look if you break them out and show voting pattern trends? Also what are the trends for each group's share of the voting population?

Nice qualifier. We’re not talking presidential races, are we? State senate seats. Governorships. LT governorships. AG’s.
Go ahead and keep in denial…you sound like AOC even more. It’s happening, whether you want to admit it or not.

[andy7171]

Here's the thing about the Virginia race:

It wasn't because of the way in which non Whites voted. To the extent that the distribution of racial voting mattered at all, it was the fact that non Whites were a lower percentage of the total vote.

In 2020 non Whites in Virginia voted for Biden over Trump by 78% to 20%. In 2021 non Whites voted for McAuliffe over Youngkin by 79% to 19%. I think it's safe to say there is no evidence that Youngkin did better than Trump did among non Whites in terms of how those who actually voted voted.

BUT: In 2020, 32% of the votes in Virginia were cast by non Whites. In the 2021 Virginia governor's race, only 26% of the votes were cast by non Whites.

What happened in Virginia this week didn't happen because Republicans did better among non Whites. It did not contradict the idea that, as the proportion of non Whites in the population increases, things will eventually get worse for Republicans. Much worse.

This reminds me...
There are 1- Lies, 2- DAMNED LIES and 3- Statistics.

[DSUrocks07]

The statement, "minorities should/will always vote Dem" in itself is racist.

But those who use that phrase will never be able to see that.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

[JohnStOnge]

Here's the thing about the Virginia race:

It wasn't because of the way in which non Whites voted. To the extent that the distribution of racial voting mattered at all, it was the fact that non Whites were a lower percentage of the total vote.

In 2020 non Whites in Virginia voted for Biden over Trump by 78% to 20%. In 2021 non Whites voted for McAuliffe over Youngkin by 79% to 19%. I think it's safe to say there is no evidence that Youngkin did better than Trump did among non Whites in terms of how those who actually voted voted.

BUT: In 2020, 32% of the votes in Virginia were cast by non Whites. In the 2021 Virginia governor's race, only 26% of the votes were cast by non Whites.

What happened in Virginia this week didn't happen because Republicans did better among non Whites. It did not contradict the idea that, as the proportion of non Whites in the population increases, things will eventually get worse for Republicans. Much worse.

This reminds me...
There are 1- Lies, 2- DAMNED LIES and 3- Statistics.

It's not lying with statistics. It's reality. I've said many times: It's possible to try to lie with statistics just as it's possible to lie in other ways. But if someone knows how to interpret statistics that's not going to work with them. The proposition that non Whites consistently vote overwhelmingly for Democrats is not a lie. It is the truth. And both sides know it.

If only non Whites voted, I think it's likely Trump would not have carried a single State in 2020. You can see that by going to https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit- ... al-results and clicking on the individual States. Among non Whites he lost to Biden by 67% to 31% in Texas. He lost by 67% to 32% in Florida. He lost by 81% to 18% in Alabama.

ironically, the ONLY State exit polling that indicated Trump may have won among non Whites in 2020 is Montana. If you look at the overall non White vote in Montana it has Trump winning it by 50% to 45%. But when you try to figure out what is going on there you find that the sample sizes for each racial group other than White are too small so you can't see what that is. So it's POSSIBLE that Trump could have won Montana if only non Whites voted and lost the Electoral College by "only" 535-3.

To me, any Republican who doesn't realize that their party is in jeopardy for the long term if they don't find a way to change that basic picture is really whistling past the graveyard.

And again: This has been going on for 45 years. When you look at the basic picture now it's the same as it was 45 years ago. This is a very well established thing with a lot of negative inertia from the Republican standpoint.

[CID1990]

This reminds me...
There are 1- Lies, 2- DAMNED LIES and 3- Statistics.

It's not lying with statistics. It's reality. I've said many times: It's possible to try to lie with statistics just as it's possible to lie in other ways. But if someone knows how to interpret statistics that's not going to work with them. The proposition that non Whites consistently vote overwhelmingly for Democrats is not a lie. It is the truth. And both sides know it.

If only non Whites voted, I think it's likely Trump would not have carried a single State in 2020. You can see that by going to https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit- ... al-results and clicking on the individual States. Among non Whites he lost to Biden by 67% to 31% in Texas. He lost by 67% to 32% in Florida. He lost by 81% to 18% in Alabama.

ironically, the ONLY State exit polling that indicated Trump may have won among non Whites in 2020 is Montana. If you look at the overall non White vote in Montana it has Trump winning it by 50% to 45%. But when you try to figure out what is going on there you find that the sample sizes for each racial group other than White are too small so you can't see what that is. So it's POSSIBLE that Trump could have won Montana if only non Whites voted and lost the Electoral College by "only" 535-3.

To me, any Republican who doesn't realize that their party is in jeopardy for the long term if they don't find a way to change that basic picture is really whistling past the graveyard.

And again: This has been going on for 45 years. When you look at the basic picture now it's the same as it was 45 years ago. This is a very well established thing with a lot of negative inertia from the Republican standpoint.

It is already changing and you don’t see it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Col Hogan]

[houndawg]

I did not declare that at all. What I said is that, over time, the demographic trend is in the Democrats' favor. And it is. You are going to have back and forths. You are going to have variations. But, inevitably, the Republican Party is doomed to obscurity unless is finds a way to actually win among non White groups. Nothing has changed in that regard. The country is going to become majority non White. Texas is already majority non White and Texas Republicans are already trying to address that through redistricting and voter suppression. But at some point it is going to be too much. The dam is going to break.

I have said before that it may not happen in my lifetime as I am pretty old right now. But the handwriting remains on the wall for Republicans.

You're completely overlooking Latinx. They are hard-working Christians who don't need handouts. They value the family and education. And as you rightly said, they're multiplying faster than any other group. They're Democrats' worst nightmare.

They would be if the GOP could ameliorate their racism enough to accept them - but they can't. They need the votes badly but the Latinos get that the only thing the GOP has for them is rhetoric and that the single item on their agenda is a free ride for the hyper-wealthy

[houndawg]

Here's the thing about the Virginia race:

It wasn't because of the way in which non Whites voted. To the extent that the distribution of racial voting mattered at all, it was the fact that non Whites were a lower percentage of the total vote.

In 2020 non Whites in Virginia voted for Biden over Trump by 78% to 20%. In 2021 non Whites voted for McAuliffe over Youngkin by 79% to 19%. I think it's safe to say there is no evidence that Youngkin did better than Trump did among non Whites in terms of how those who actually voted voted.

BUT: In 2020, 32% of the votes in Virginia were cast by non Whites. In the 2021 Virginia governor's race, only 26% of the votes were cast by non Whites.

What happened in Virginia this week didn't happen because Republicans did better among non Whites. It did not contradict the idea that, as the proportion of non Whites in the population increases, things will eventually get worse for Republicans. Much worse.

This reminds me...
There are 1- Lies, 2- DAMNED LIES and 3- Statistics.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is very interesting, what they don't reveal is vital." Juran or Deming, I think.

[AZGrizFan]

You're completely overlooking Latinx. They are hard-working Christians who don't need handouts. They value the family and education. And as you rightly said, they're multiplying faster than any other group. They're Democrats' worst nightmare.

They would be if the GOP could ameliorate their racism enough to accept them - but they can't. They need the votes badly but the Latinos get that the only thing the GOP has for them is rhetoric and that the single item on their agenda is a free ride for the hyper-wealthy

You haven’t a clue.

[UNI88]

They would be if the GOP could ameliorate their racism enough to accept them - but they can't. They need the votes badly but the Latinos get that the only thing the GOP has for them is rhetoric and that the single item on their agenda is a free ride for the hyper-wealthy

You haven’t a clue.

Houndy is just applying CRT to politics. To him, racism is the foundation of Republican politics.

[Winterborn]

This reminds me...
There are 1- Lies, 2- DAMNED LIES and 3- Statistics.

1. Quoted for truth.

2. Damn good book that more people should try to understand.

[89Hen]

[JohnStOnge]

It's not lying with statistics. It's reality. I've said many times: It's possible to try to lie with statistics just as it's possible to lie in other ways. But if someone knows how to interpret statistics that's not going to work with them. The proposition that non Whites consistently vote overwhelmingly for Democrats is not a lie. It is the truth. And both sides know it.

If only non Whites voted, I think it's likely Trump would not have carried a single State in 2020. You can see that by going to https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit- ... al-results and clicking on the individual States. Among non Whites he lost to Biden by 67% to 31% in Texas. He lost by 67% to 32% in Florida. He lost by 81% to 18% in Alabama.

ironically, the ONLY State exit polling that indicated Trump may have won among non Whites in 2020 is Montana. If you look at the overall non White vote in Montana it has Trump winning it by 50% to 45%. But when you try to figure out what is going on there you find that the sample sizes for each racial group other than White are too small so you can't see what that is. So it's POSSIBLE that Trump could have won Montana if only non Whites voted and lost the Electoral College by "only" 535-3.

To me, any Republican who doesn't realize that their party is in jeopardy for the long term if they don't find a way to change that basic picture is really whistling past the graveyard.

And again: This has been going on for 45 years. When you look at the basic picture now it's the same as it was 45 years ago. This is a very well established thing with a lot of negative inertia from the Republican standpoint.

It is already changing and you don’t see it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fine if you think that. But the numbers do not support your belief at this point. You could end up being right. But if you do it'd be because you made a lucky guess. There are no trends towards things getting better for Republicans among Hispanics, Blacks, or Asians.

[JohnStOnge]

Ok. The exit polling results on the Virginia election are readily accessible now at https://www.cnn.com/election/2021/novem ... a/governor.

One I find interesting is that Virginia voters that voted and also voted for Biden in 2020 voted for the Democrat by 95% to 5%. Those that voted and also voted for Trump in 2020 voted for the Republican by 98% to 2%. So there was SOME effect of people changing the way the voted between Democrat and Republican.

But that effect is not nearly enough to account for what happened. If you took the numbers from the 2020 Presidential election and did the math to see what would have happened if there was "vote switching" consistent with those numbers, the Democrat would have won the governor's race by 53% to 47%.

It was a turnout thing. We always expect lower turnout in situations like this. But the Republican vote in the 2021 governor's race was 85% of what it was during the 2020 Presidential election. The Democrat vote in the 2021 governor's race was 66% of what it was during the 2020 Presidential election.

That does not mean what happened wasn't significant. But it was much more a matter of more enthusiasm by Republican voters than it was a matter of people who voted changing the way they voted.

[UNI88]

It is already changing and you don’t see it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fine if you think that. But the numbers do not support your belief at this point. You could end up being right. But if you do it'd be because you made a lucky guess. There are no trends towards things getting better for Republicans among Hispanics, Blacks, or Asians.

You're too focused on macro-data. Data collection in the social sciences is not like data collection in the physical sciences. The data is not as solid as you seem to want to believe it is. Flaws and biases in how the data is collected take time to discover and fix. It is completely rational to believe that the macro-data is lagging and that the examples of Republicans doing well with Latins on a local level are indicators of a potential shift.

[DSUrocks07]

It was a turnout thing.

Ladies and gentlemen, he finally gets it.

Its ALWAYS going to be about turnout.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

[JohnStOnge]

She probably should not have said it because nobody is running for President yet officially but I can recall on election day that exit polling indicated that Biden had a little bit better of a popularity rating than Trump did among Virginia voters. I also think his proposals poll well when they are taken one by one. Here's one article on that phenomenon:

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/10/21 ... explaining

Only 36% of Americans believe the bill’s passage would be good for their families, while another one-third believe they’d be hurt. But taken separately, the elements of the Democrats’ social spending proposals poll extremely well.

They just need to do a better job of communicating in a way that makes people focus on the individual elements.

[JohnStOnge]

It was a turnout thing.

Ladies and gentlemen, he finally gets it.

Its ALWAYS going to be about turnout.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

Turnout will always be a factor. But there is a point at which it is not enough. For example: It is very unlikely that turnout will make the difference in who gets California's electoral votes in 2024.

I do think the Republicans have the advantage in terms of being able to count on turnout. But at some point it's not going to be enough because it's clear that the country is evolving away from it.

[JohnStOnge]

Fine if you think that. But the numbers do not support your belief at this point. You could end up being right. But if you do it'd be because you made a lucky guess. There are no trends towards things getting better for Republicans among Hispanics, Blacks, or Asians.

You're too focused on macro-data. Data collection in the social sciences is not like data collection in the physical sciences. The data is not as solid as you seem to want to believe it is. Flaws and biases in how the data is collected take time to discover and fix. It is completely rational to believe that the macro-data is lagging and that the examples of Republicans doing well with Latins on a local level are indicators of a potential shift.

So, you are saying that we should try to find trees to focus on that support our narrative instead of looking at the forrest?

[UNI88]

You're too focused on macro-data. Data collection in the social sciences is not like data collection in the physical sciences. The data is not as solid as you seem to want to believe it is. Flaws and biases in how the data is collected take time to discover and fix. It is completely rational to believe that the macro-data is lagging and that the examples of Republicans doing well with Latins on a local level are indicators of a potential shift.

So, you are saying that we should try to find trees to focus on that support our narrative instead of looking at the forrest?

No, that's not what I'm saying.

[Winterborn]

She probably should not have said it because nobody is running for President yet officially but I can recall on election day that exit polling indicated that Biden had a little bit better of a popularity rating than Trump did among Virginia voters. I also think his proposals poll well when they are taken one by one. Here's one article on that phenomenon:

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/10/21 ... explaining

Only 36% of Americans believe the bill’s passage would be good for their families, while another one-third believe they’d be hurt. But taken separately, the elements of the Democrats’ social spending proposals poll extremely well.

They just need to do a better job of communicating in a way that makes people focus on the individual elements.

No shit Sherlock.

The Biden administration is exactly like the Trump administration in this regard. They can't help themselves but screw up and stick their collective feet in their mouths.

[JohnStOnge]

She probably should not have said it because nobody is running for President yet officially but I can recall on election day that exit polling indicated that Biden had a little bit better of a popularity rating than Trump did among Virginia voters. I also think his proposals poll well when they are taken one by one. Here's one article on that phenomenon:

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/10/21 ... explaining



They just need to do a better job of communicating in a way that makes people focus on the individual elements.

No shit Sherlock.

The Biden administration is exactly like the Trump administration in this regard. They can't help themselves but screw up and stick their collective feet in their mouths.

I don't think the two Administrations are similar at all with respect to communicating. Trump was constantly lying and exaggerating. Doing stuff like saying it was the greatest economy ever when it wasn't and saying he built it when he didn't. He'd do things like brag about how many jobs the economy created under his watch when the rate of job growth actually slowed as compared to Obama's second term. Trump was very good at convincing the gullible that he was just the greatest thing ever when he wasn't. Biden doesn't even really try.