One interesting thing about this election is the extent that the 2016 post-mortems and subsequent arguments for how Democrats should win--by basically everyone!--don't necessarily look great in retrospect.
-
Show this thread
-
There were basically two major diagnoses for Clinton's win--and two main arguments for how Dems should win going forward. Neither is how Biden pulled it off
9 replies 23 retweets 270 likesShow this thread -
One theory was that Trump won by flipping white, working class Obama voters, and therefore Dems needed to lure them back--maybe with a populist economic pitch. I think that explanation for Trump's win was accurate, but Biden had very, very limited success with Obama-Trump vote
18 replies 31 retweets 301 likesShow this thread -
A lot of the data preelection suggested Biden did have some success there, but it's really, really hard to see the case for it now. In fact, many Obama-->Trump counties swung even *more* toward Trump in WI, OH, IA, etc.
13 replies 28 retweets 284 likesShow this thread -
A second theory was that Trump won because of a bad progressive, youth, and nonwhite (but especially Black) turnout. To win, all Democrats needed was to recreate the Obama turnout, win some Jill Stein votes, etc.
11 replies 22 retweets 222 likesShow this thread -
The evidence never really matched this theory IMO, but it looks even worse today. The black share of the electorate did not increase, and quite possibly dropped. The voter file data we have so far suggests that the partisan turnout balance was unchanged or even *better* for Rs
15 replies 32 retweets 254 likesShow this thread -
And most of all, this theory assumed--implicitly--that all Dems needed to do was win 2016, as the president had maxed out his support, hadn't won any new converts, and couldn't compete in a higher turnout election. That assumption was wrong
7 replies 22 retweets 259 likesShow this thread -
Instead, Biden wound up winning in a way that I think many post-2016 post-mortems allowed as a possibility, but that I think had relatively few advocates: more-or-less run the Clinton playbook, but with a less polarizing candidate
40 replies 53 retweets 521 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @Nate_Cohn
Some of us saw this coming from start of Biden campaign. It's a coalition that can win against Trump -- whether its a coalition that is good for the Dems in the long run is another question. The dampening enthusiasm about POC & young is a problempic.twitter.com/tghaGkhvAm
4 replies 4 retweets 34 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
The one time in this century that the Democrats had a coalition large enough to govern was when they got young people to come out (2008). Failing to do that in subsequent elections has hurt the party.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @JAndrew_Cochran @Nate_Cohn
Nominate charismatic young politicians instead of doddering party functionaries would be a good start.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes - Show replies
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.