Tag Archives: election 2024

election post-game

Leave a reply

I’ve had a few days to process the election now. I’ve heard and pondered a variety of explanations for why it went so decisively in Trump’s favor. Here are a few thoughts.

  1. “A referendum on the Biden administration.” The economic pain felt by a large majority of voters is real. The root cause, somewhat obviously, is inequality. The inequality in turn is the result of decades of poor policy choices resulting in erosion in real wages for working people, regressive taxation, lack of government services and benefits that citizens of other developed countries take for granted, and destabilization of our planet’s biophysical life support system which allows us to grow food and live near coast lines. The thing is, people don’t react strongly to gradual changes. A complex system like the economy can be under stress for a long time and then break when subjected to an extreme event. The extreme event in this case was Covid-19 and the worldwide inflation that followed. This caused a very real and painful reduction in peoples’ disposable income, and they are understandably pissed off. Trump offers simple (but wrong) explanations and people to blame: Biden. Harris. Democrats. Immigrants. China. Then he offers simple (but wrong and counter-productive) fixes like tariffs and mass deportation of foreigners.
  2. Lack of critical thinking. I think there is something to this. The simplistic answers are wrong, and intelligent people should be able to see this but they are not. There is at least some possibility that Covid or testicle-shrinking chemicals in our food/air/water have made us all stupider than we used to be. But I don’t really believe this. So it is clearly a failure of the education system if a large majority of the people, most of whom are perfectly intelligent, are not able to see through obvious illogical claims and false promises.
  3. Democrats’ lack of a clear alternative. The Democrats did not offer any easy to understand, coherent counter-narrative, and they do not have a track record they can point to suggesting they can reverse the decline in disposable income. I’ll let Bernie Sanders say it: “it should come as no great surprise that a Democratic Party which has abandoned working class people would find that the working class has abandoned them.”
  4. Lack of talented leaders in politics. I loathe Trump and everything he stands for. But I went to the polls on Tuesday feeling like I was voting for the less bad of the two very limited options being offered to me. I did not find Harris to be visionary or inspiring. I can say the same about Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and George W. Bush. Barrack Obama was a talented, visionary, inspiring leader even though his policies were status quo in many ways. I find Bernie Sanders inspiring. I personally found Bill Clinton inspiring, although again his policies were quite conservative on any rational spectrum. And that’s it for the last three decades or so! But I see talented leaders at the state and local level, in corporations and non-profit organizations and universities all the time. In a nation of 350 million odd people, there have to be thousands if not tens of thousands of people with leadership potential. Our political system is not identifying these people, inspiring them to pursue a political career, and bringing them to the forefront for the electorate to choose from.

Election DAY Check-in

Leave a reply

I’m writing on the morning of election day, November 5, 2024. I have cast my personal vote, in-person since my cracker-ass state will take days to count mail-in ballots and that will allow people who want to cast doubt on the results as they “change” to do so. No results are available yet, so I might as well do one last wrap up of the numbers.

STATE2020 RESULTSilver Bulletin (October 1)Silver Bulletin (November 5)538 (November 5)RCP (November 5)
ArizonaBiden +0.4%Trump +1.5%Trump +2.4%Trump +2.1%Trump +2.8%
GeorgiaBiden +0.3%Trump +1.0Trump +1.0%Trump +0.8%Trump +1.3%
WisconsinBiden +0.6%Harris +1.9%Harris +1.0%Harris +1.0%Harris +0.4%
North CarolinaTrump +1.3%Trump +0.5%Trump +1.1%Trump +0.9%Trump +1.2%
PennsylvaniaBiden +1.2%Harris +1.2%Trump +0.1%Harris +0.2%Trump +0.4%
MichiganBiden +2.8%Harris +2.1%Harris +1.2%Harris +1.0%Harris +0.5%
NevadaBiden +2.4%Harris +1.8%Trump +0.6%Trump +0.3%Trump +0.6%

If we take the Nate Silver numbers as an accurate prediction of the vote, Trump will win the electoral college 287-251. Of course, just flip Pennsylvania to the Harris column and she wins 270-268. If the polling results end up being systematically biased by 1% in either direction, which would be statistically completely unsurprising, it could be a landslide either way. Still, I think I would rather be Trump this morning, because a 1% bias in his direction delivers a huge landslide, whereas a 1% bias in Harris’ direction puts her right on the edge of maybe winning Georgia and Nevada (which Biden won) and North Carolina (which Biden lost). Arizona, which Biden won, would be an even heavier lift. So in other words, these poll numbers suggest she is underperforming 2020 Biden, and that was a close call. It pains me to say all this. And I don’t think it is necessary to even say this: THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE IS A STUPID UNDEMOCRATIC RELIC DESIGNED TO GET 18TH CENTURY SLAVE OWNERS TO AGREE TO BE PART OF THE UNITED STATES, AND WE ARE STILL STUCK WITH IT.

Finally, looking at the betting sites (at 8:50 am EST), PolyMarket is 62% to 38% in favor of Trump, PredictIt is 55 cents to 51 cents, and Kalshi is 60% to 40% in favor of Trump. So whoever bets on these sites seems to agree with the polls more or less. Of course, they are looking at the same polls and other betting sites as everyone else when they decide how to bet, so these are not really independent data points. There may also be shady people manipulating these odds similar to how they are able to manipulate sports odds, who knows.

So I think Harris has a very good chance but I am certainly not confident she will win. We may start to get a sense 12 hours or so from now, or we may not really know for a week or even more.

Do I even need to make my case against Trump again? Well, I will, one last time. These are the really, really bad potential consequences of four more years of Trump.

  1. Climate change has gone from a serious risk that could have been avoided or mitigated to an actively unfolding disaster that needs to be managed to produce the least bad outcome still possible. It is coming for our homes, our cities, and our food supply, and it is going to fuel massive movements of people that are going to cause major social instability. The world can’t afford four more years of denial, propaganda, inaction, and backsliding.
  2. Trump will put incompetent clowns in charge of all major federal departments and programs. Incompetent clowns will not be able to deal with crises and emergencies effectively. The risk of nuclear proliferation, nuclear war, and nuclear terrorism has gone way up over the past decade. This is a huge, imminent existential threat that could bring our country and entire human civilization to its knees. Another major pandemic with a much higher mortality rate among young people, whether bird flu, a Covid relative, or a biological weapon, is another existential threat clowns will not deal with effectively (as they did not last time). Even a major earthquake affecting major population centers, dealt with incompetently or not at all, could deal a body blow to our country.

My list does not include important issues like inequality, health care, child care, education, abortion, gun control, campaign finance reform, or constitutional reform because we can get away with bickering over these things for four more years without the risk of major systemic collapse of our nation and civilization. And neither of the political parties we are allowed to choose from are going to address these issues effectively, although Democrats will attempt some marginal adjustments from time to time. They just make us a little bit poorer and more miserable gradually over time. Hopefully the robot takeover is at least a decade away. What we can’t afford is not having mature, rational grownups running things at a time of growing existential risk.

should Trump be “running away with the election”?

Leave a reply

I am writing this on Halloween, October 31, 2024. You may be reading this after the 2024 U.S. election, in which case you know what happened and I don’t!

Parts of this op-ed in Project Syndicate by a political science professor surprised me.

Others grew alienated during the grueling experience of the Trump presidency. For some Republicans (and independents), the last straw was his loyalty to himself over his party and country when it came to endorsing candidates and dealing with foreign allies and adversaries. For others, it was his pandering to evangelicals, his embrace of isolationism, and his indulgence of racist white nationalists. For still others, it was his attempt to steal the 2020 election, culminating in the uniquely shameful attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021. Most Democrats and many independents, of course, have resisted Trump from the start.

Thus, the reason Trump isn’t running away with the 2024 election is Trump himself. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that the Republicans would be the favorites in a normal year with a normal candidate. But 2024 is not a normal year, because Trump is not a normal candidate.

The American electorate’s decision is being influenced both by the quotidian concerns that usually structure election outcomes and by one outsize personality. Never has the latter been such a key consideration. Hundreds of thousands of voters – perhaps millions – are putting aside their party loyalty, policy priorities, and complaints about current conditions to stand against a candidate they consider unfit for the presidency and unworthy of election. We will soon know whether politics as usual or unusual politics will carry the day.

I am surprised by the idea that a “more normal” Republican would be running away with the election. I think it is more likely that an “average Republican” would be hard to distinguish from Kamala Harris who, other than a mildly interesting personal history consisting of being a mixed-race childless cat lady, is a very “average Democrat”.

The Democrats delivered Social Security almost a century ago and Medicare more than half a century ago. These programs are hugely beneficial to voters. However, they have been around for so long that voters take them for granted and do not connect them to the Democratic Party. Since enactment of these programs, Democrats have made many promises to middle class voters and almost entirely failed to deliver on them. (Obamacare might be the biggest success from this period – it was certainly the absolute most that was politically possible at that moment, and much better than nothing, but also much less than fully satisfying. My family would have to pay about $2500 a month out of pocket for coverage, just for the privilege of then paying more when we go to the doctor. This is not affordable or acceptable to the people who need the program most, which are middle income people in the gap between corporate employer-provided coverage and piss-poor quality but free Medicaid for low income people.) So from the Democrats we get positive messages coupled with utter failure to deliver. The Republicans promise nothing and deliver nothing to the middle class. The Democrats’ failure to deliver allows Republicans to focus entirely on negative messaging around things like taxes and immigration, which connects the middle class with people and policies to blame for our misery. The connections are logically and empirically almost entirely false, but the misery is very real. So the election ends up being a referendum against a bland average administration people connect with that misery. My guess would be Trump’s personality turns people on and off in about equal measure, so I suspect substituting a bland average Republican for him (see 2020 Joe Biden) would still result in a near-tossup election.

Don’t get me wrong. My fingers are crossed for Kamala Harris and a Democratic majority in Congress. Another Democratic administration will not deliver for the middle class, but it is much more likely to inch us in the right direction on climate change and manage risk created by the various international crises. These are existential risks, and re-electing Trump just fans the flames of some very, very bad possibilities that could bring down our nation or even our global civilization. To deliver for the middle class, we would need to modernize our constitution, end the control of government policy by wealthy and powerful corporations and billionaires, and get rid of the current insurmountable barriers for candidates outside of the two dominant parties.

how the 2020 census affected electoral votes in the 2024 election

Leave a reply

It’s interesting that the U.S. Census is conducted every 10 years, presidential elections are conducted every four years, and census results affect the number of electoral votes apportioned to each state. So the 2020 Census was too late to change electoral votes in the 2020 election, but it has changed them slightly in the 2024 election.

From Newsweek (and I haven’t confirmed this from other sources):

Texas was the biggest gainer, according to the Census numbers that were released in 2021. The Lone Star state gained two more votes in Congress and the Electoral College for the next 10 years. Colorado, Florida, Montana, North Carolina and Oregon also each gained one seat, while California, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia lost a seat each.

I count 3 votes shifted from states that voted Democratic in 2020 (Colorado +1, Oregon +1, California -1, Illinois -1, Michigan -1, New York -1, Pennsylvania -1) to states that voted Republican (Texas +2, Florida +1, Montana +1, North Carolina +1, Ohio -1, West Virginia -1).

It doesn’t seem like this will matter in 2024, but with the election possibly coming down to just 2 electoral votes in the Democrats’ favor (if they win Pennsylvania-Michigan-Wisconsin and lose Georgia-North Carolina-Nevada-Arizona), transferring 3 more points after the 2030 census could make all the difference in the 2032 election. But that is pretty far away and a lot of things can change in 8 years. For example, the actual people moving from “blue” to “red” states could take their “blue” politics with them and eventually shift their new state into the blue category or at least the swing state category. Maybe 8 years could be long enough to do away with the idiotic electoral college itself, which was created to convince 18th century slave owners to join a rebellion against an 18th century empire. But no, I am not this optimistic.

October 1 Election Check-In

Leave a reply

Here we go – if I stick to my once a month poll review, there will only be one more just before the election.

STATE2020 RESULTSilver Bulletin (September 1)Silver Bulletin (October 1)538 (October 1)RCP (October 1)
ArizonaBiden +0.4%Trump +0.6%Trump +1.5%Trump +1.5%Trump +2.1%
GeorgiaBiden +0.3%Harris +0.9%Trump +1.0%Trump +1.3%Trump +1.5%
WisconsinBiden +0.6%Harris +3.2%Harris +1.9%Harris +1.6%Harris +0.6%
North CarolinaTrump +1.3%Trump +0.4%Trump +0.5%Trump +0.7%Trump +0.7%
PennsylvaniaBiden +1.2%Harris +1.3%Harris +1.2%Harris +0.6%Trump +0.1%
MichiganBiden +2.8%Harris +1.9%Harris +2.1%Harris +1.9%Harris +1.4%
NevadaBiden +2.4%Harris +0.9%Harris +1.8%Harris +1.0%Harris +1.1%

The first thing that stands out is there is no disagreement between the weighted poll averages (Silver and 538) on the more likely winner of each state. They also agree with the RCP unweighted average with the exception of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania just looks dangerously close, with a 1% polling bias towards Harris (vs. how people in the state end up voting) making it a tossup. Still, you would rather have that polling average in your favor than against you. The difference between the weighted averages and RCP suggest that there either a lot of polls of Pennsylvania voters that the weighters consider Republican-biased garbage, a big recent trend toward Harris in Pennsylvania (because they rate more recent polls higher), or a combination. I can tell you from personal experience that the Democratic get-out-the-vote operation in my home city of Philadelphia is in hyperdrive, but I also assume the Republicans equivalent is in hyperdrive in Republican-leaning counties (like my old home county of Luzerne in Northeast Pennsylvania.)

If the polls are reasonably accurate, Georgia and Arizona might be moving out of Harris’s reach, and it is hard to believe North Carolina and Georgia are that culturally different (think about the Charlanta mega suburban sprawl cluster-f which is basically one thing).

If Harris wins Pennsylvania, she seems likely to win Wisconsin and Michigan and the electoral vote as a whole. Nevada would pad the score a bit for Harris, but it would not offset the loss of Pennsylvania.

Polymarket gives Harris 50% to 48% odds. Predict prices her at 56 cents to Trump at 48 cents, with other candidates given about 8 cents.

So all the signs kind of point to Harris, but if there is a systematic error of 1-2%, Trump could still pull it out.

September 1 U.S. election check-in

Leave a reply

Here’s my “official” take on the U.S. election for September 1. Sure, I admit I look at the polls almost every day. But I figure writing down the numbers and puzzling over them a bit once a month helps me to filter out some of the noise. So here goes. I still lean on the “Silver” numbers as probably reflecting the most well-thought-out adjustments of poll numbers to something close to reality. The 538 numbers are interesting to give a sense of how much small decisions about these adjustments matter, and the RCP numbers show what unadjusted (i.e., heavily biased) numbers would look like.

STATE2020 RESULTSilver Bulletin (August 1)Silver Bulletin (September 1)538 (September 1)RCP (September 1)
ArizonaBiden +0.4%Trump +2.7%Trump +0.6%Harris +0.3%Trump +0.5%
GeorgiaBiden +0.3%Trump +2.2%Harris +0.9%Harris +0.5%Trump +0.2%
WisconsinBiden +0.6%Harris +0.4%Harris +3.2%Harris +3.2%Harris +1.4%
North CarolinaTrump +1.3%Trump +2.2%Trump +0.4%Trump +0.3%Trump +0.6%
PennsylvaniaBiden +1.2%Trump +0.2%Harris +1.3%Harris +1.2%Harris +0.5%
MichiganBiden +2.8%Harris +2.6%Harris +1.9%Harris +2.4%Harris +1.1%
NevadaBiden +2.4%Trump +2.2%Harris +0.9%Harris +0.7%TIE

So going with the Silver numbers, the electoral college would be Harris 292, Trump 246.

270towin.com

Both Arizona and North Carolina have been in the Harris column during the month of August and flipped back over, while the numbers in Pennsylvania (>:-() seem like they might have tightened over the past two weeks. On the other hand, Georgia and Nevada are huge wins for the Harris campaign if they come through. Move Nevada and Georgia back into the Trump column and Harris still wins 270-268, with recount hilarity likely to ensue of course. This happens to match the RCP polling results above, if you give the Nevada tie to Trump. Surprisingly, she could lose Pennsylvania and still win the electoral college if everything else in the map above were to hold. But these things tend to be correlated and any event that moved Pennsylvania a whole point toward Trump would tend to move other states too. Unless we are talking some serious voter suppression or outright cheating by people in Harrisburg with pointy white hats in the back of their closets.

In the betting markets, PredictIt has Harris at a 56% chance of winning (the electoral college) vs. 47% for Trump (well actually $0.56 to $0.47 with about $0.08 given to other candidates, so apparently they don’t intend for these to add up close to 100%). Polymarket however has Trump at 51% to 48% for Harris. So whoever is betting on that site thinks they know something the rest of us do not.

So, my overall verdict is things look pretty good for Harris at the moment with two months to go. I think this election is hers to lose.

August 1 U.S. election check-in!

Leave a reply

Well, we’ve gone from an almost unspeakably boring election to a pretty exciting one in just over a month. We had the fateful Biden-Trump debate on June 27, the Trump assassination attempt on July 13, Biden’s announcement that he was dropping out of the race on July 21, and now the Democratic Party seemingly selecting Kamala Harris as its candidate.

Polls are a little crazy. 538 does not seem to be producing its typical weighted polling averages at this point, while Nate Silver’s substack is now posting some weighted polling averages for public consumption. Real Clear Politics unweighted polling averages are…there. One question is whether to include any polls from before July 21 in the averages. I am not going to do any math though, and just report the averages as these two sites are showing them on August 1 in my local time (11 hours ahead of EDT).

STATE2020 RESULT538 (TRUMP/BIDEN,
July 1)		Silver Bulletin (August 1)RCP (August 1)
ArizonaBiden +0.4%Trump +4.8%Trump +2.7%Trump +4.2%
GeorgiaBiden +0.3%Trump +6.3%Trump +2.2%Trump +3.6%
WisconsinBiden +0.6%Trump +0.8%Harris +0.4%Trump +0.2%
North CarolinaTrump +1.3%Trump +7.3%Trump +2.2%Trump +5.5%
PennsylvaniaBiden +1.2%Trump +2.0%Trump +0.2%Trump +2.7%
MichiganBiden +2.8%Trump +1.8%Harris +2.6%Harris +2.0%
NevadaBiden +2.4%Trump +3.8%Trump +2.2%Trump +4.0%

I tend to trust the Nate Silver numbers here, since they are weighted for recency and things have changed very recently. Based on his numbers, the electoral college as it stands today would be Trump 287, Harris 251. So despite Harris’s “momentum”, which the media is playing up because they want us to watch commercials, Trump still has it at this very moment. On the other hand, Pennsylvania is all but tied, and if it goes for Harris the electoral college would be Harris 270, Trump 268.

The momentum is clearly there – there has been a decisive shift toward Harris across the board compared to where Biden was a month ago. On the other hand, she is slightly underperforming Biden 2020 across the board. To me, Harris is a fairly bland center-right Democrat with less baggage than 2024 Biden or 2016 Hillary, so this all makes some sense to me. Being a mixed-race stepmother doesn’t really change my personal impression of her political leadership skills one way or the other, but perhaps it will affect turnout. For what it’s worth Polymarket gives a 55% chance of Trump winning and a 44% chance of Harris winning. Which seems consistent. Predictit seems to be blocked as an online gambling site in the jurisdiction I currently find myself in.

So, maybe more crazy things will happen, or maybe it will come down to economic trends and turnout, like it usually does.

the “election trifecta”

Leave a reply

This Freakonomics podcast describes an “election trifecta” three ideas to greatly improve US elections.

  1. Non-partisan, single ballot primaries, with the top four vote getters moving on to the general election
  2. ranked-choice voting in the general election
  3. non-partisan redistricting

This all sounds pretty good. The two major parties are not producing good candidates for leadership of our country, and they are preventing more talented potential leaders from competing.

I am a registered Democrat in a state with closed primaries, and I wrote in Bernie Sanders in the primary. I would have voted for Joe Biden in the general, but then again I would have voted and will vote for anyone who is not a serial rapist, convicted felon, and traitor who led a violent attack on the United States Congress.

Biden

1 Reply

This is one of those posts where I say I am not going to comment on fast-moving current events, and then I do anyway. I’m writing this the morning of Saturday, July 6, 2024, and anything can happen before this gets posted and certainly between now and when you are reading it, whoever you are.

Here are two interviews with Biden, one from September 2023 and one from last night. The difference is pretty clear to me. It’s clear that he is having a lot of trouble accessing words and names on demand. That in itself does not indicate that a person is not able to think clearly. Surely, if he had had a stroke his doctors, family and political team would not be trying to cover that up? (But see Woodrow Wilson where this exact thing happened – with his wife and doctors concealing the extent of it not just from the public but from Wilson himself. And some say losing his leadership was decisive in the harshness of the Treaty of Versailles, the failure of the League of Nations, both of which led to World War II being more likely.) Not being a particularly articulate person, I have had this problem myself in many stressful situations, such as job interviews and first dates, even in my 20s. But I am not a professional politician. Being articulate and appearing to be sharp thinking on their feet is their stock in trade, and as they say, “perception is reality” in politics.

In terms of the hard nosed probability of a Democrat winning this election in November 2024, a few days ago I thought the risk of someone other than Biden was greater than the risk of Biden losing. If Biden could return even to the form we see below from September 2023, I think the “bad night” at the debate would blow over and the election would be at least a tossup. I am coming around to the idea though that the situation is deteriorating and will continue to deteriorate over the next four months. Biden seems to be having more trouble over time and the spotlight is going to be on him every second. So I think the situation is irretrievable. Taking a sort of reverse inspiration from Woodrow Wilson, his doctors can “discover” some condition that requires his immediate retirement, and he can then announce that he is retiring with some relative saving of face. Maybe we’ll get that “contested convention” we are always hearing about. Personally I like Kamala Harris okay, and maybe she would inspire enough turnout in Philadelphia, Detroit, and Milwaukee to eke out a victory. Or maybe a percentage point or two of suburban swing voters won’t bother to turn out for her because they just “don’t like her”, as happened to Hillary. Or maybe Trump will suffer an honest-to-god stroke in the next four months. The country has had a run of bad luck and we are due.

ProPublica, September 2023
ABC News, July 5, 2024

July U.S. Election Check-in

Leave a reply

Well, I was all set to tell you that the polls moved decisively toward Biden in June, and that would have been true with just a few days to go. But it seems the debate on June 27 really did cause a sharp swing toward Trump. I don’t like it, but these are the facts of the case. We will see if the effect is persistent or if things slowly revert to trend. Either way, the polls closing in the last few days of June may not fully indicate the state of the damage, so it may get worse before it gets better for Biden, if it does in fact ever get better.

STATE2020 RESULTMost Recent 538 Poll Average (as of 7/1/24)
ArizonaBiden +0.4%Trump +4.8% (June 1: Trump +4.7)
GeorgiaBiden +0.3%Trump +6.3% (June 1: Trump +5.5)
WisconsinBiden +0.6%Trump +0.8% (June 1: Trump +1.4%)
North CarolinaTrump +1.3%Trump +7.3% (June 1: Trump +6.2%)
PennsylvaniaBiden +1.2%Trump +2.0% (June 1: Trump +2.0%)
MichiganBiden +2.8%Trump +1.8% (June 1: Trump +0.6%)
NevadaBiden +2.4%Trump +3.8% (June 1: Trump +5.9%)

In June, 1/7 swing states had large (> 1%) movement toward Biden – Nevada.

In June, 1/7 swing states had small (< 1%) movement toward Biden – Wisconsin.

In June, 1/7 swing states had no change – Pennsylvania.

In June, 2/7 swing states had small (< 1%) movement toward Trump – Arizona, Georgia.

In June, 2/7 swing states had large (> 1%) movement toward Trump – North Carolina and Michigan.

So the trend is all over the place, with big swings toward Trump coming right at the end of the month. Trump obviously has all the swing states at the moment and is headed for an electoral college landslide if current trends hold.

Enough has been written about the debate. I’ll just link to this Politico article that points out that if you were just reading the transcript, a lot of what he said was very reasonable and even astute. That was my impression when listening to the actual debate. But I can’t excuse any politician for failing to be prepared and put on a decent rhetorical performance – that is what they do, and there 10,000 politicians who could have done it better than Biden did on Thursday night. So either he was inexplicably, inexcusably poorly prepared, or he really is faltering physically and mentally, with dire consequences for our nation’s future.