You are truly a gem, Mr. Morris. May all of your thoroughly dissected data and prognostications come true!
We are all on tenterhooks as we hope and pray that that the elections result in Democratic control of the House and Senate. It's the minimum thrust we need to turn the ship of state back toward truth and hope and a better future for all.
Of course, we all know that Republicans are doing everything they can to cheat: lying about the economy, stealing seats through gerrymanders, bullying legislators and voters with bogus mail-in ballot "rules", promising $5K bribes.
I think it's tough to be optimistic, even in the face of good polling news, because we all got kicked in the face so hard two years ago.
1) I thought it was already well understood (from work here) that low knowledge voters were the swing, and that they went from tipping the vote for Trump to strongly against him
2) Republicans at least are acting like they know this already — by making it generally harder to vote they want to keep away low turnout voters — surely the Democrats can see that? (Or are they too inward looking and think those impediments are only about blocking Democrats?)
3) I was struck as much by the percentages of low turnout voters — not as large a group as I would have expected from recent media coverage, which suggests many more Trump voters disapprove and will just stay home (put another way, the small group of “Definitely Will Vote” who disfavor Trump — are the votes the Democrats should count on? I doubt it
4) On the “anti-status quo”: I have said for well over a decade that the most important political “party” in the US is the “throw the bums out party” — who instinctively figure out that whoever may be in power is to blame for all unhappiness, so let’s punish them and pick the other party. That’s what keeps taking us from guardrail to guardrail. It’s a problem we need to correct if democracy is to survive.
I don't fully accept the premise of today's piece. Yes, low turnout Rs are unhappy with the economy, but half of them still approve of Trump's overall handling of the presidency. To my eye that doesn't bode well for the supposed blue wave coming in November. Today people are first and foremost partisans. The question isn't who they'll vote for; they'll mostly vote for whoever is wearing their team's jersey. The question is whether they'll go to the polls. The voters in today's essay already show a propensity to stay home. Let's hope they do.
Hi JE. I could have explained the math a little better here. If Republicans are adding to their group of highly engaged, highly partisan current voters, a group of less engaged, less partisan (and more likely to vote democratic) group, that will only increase their overall vote share for November if they assume there is no equal increase in turnout probability for low-turnout Dems, which is not obviously the case. At any rate, it’s a gamble.
If this analysis is correct (and I trust that it is), then let's have a "Trumpalooza" every week between now and the election.
a. Maybe you said this and I missed it - they may be "disengaged" *because* they disapprove.
b. As you have pointed out, disapproving of Trump does not mean voting for Dems in the midterm.
You are truly a gem, Mr. Morris. May all of your thoroughly dissected data and prognostications come true!
We are all on tenterhooks as we hope and pray that that the elections result in Democratic control of the House and Senate. It's the minimum thrust we need to turn the ship of state back toward truth and hope and a better future for all.
Of course, we all know that Republicans are doing everything they can to cheat: lying about the economy, stealing seats through gerrymanders, bullying legislators and voters with bogus mail-in ballot "rules", promising $5K bribes.
I think it's tough to be optimistic, even in the face of good polling news, because we all got kicked in the face so hard two years ago.
I’m confused by the implications of this column.
1) I thought it was already well understood (from work here) that low knowledge voters were the swing, and that they went from tipping the vote for Trump to strongly against him
2) Republicans at least are acting like they know this already — by making it generally harder to vote they want to keep away low turnout voters — surely the Democrats can see that? (Or are they too inward looking and think those impediments are only about blocking Democrats?)
3) I was struck as much by the percentages of low turnout voters — not as large a group as I would have expected from recent media coverage, which suggests many more Trump voters disapprove and will just stay home (put another way, the small group of “Definitely Will Vote” who disfavor Trump — are the votes the Democrats should count on? I doubt it
4) On the “anti-status quo”: I have said for well over a decade that the most important political “party” in the US is the “throw the bums out party” — who instinctively figure out that whoever may be in power is to blame for all unhappiness, so let’s punish them and pick the other party. That’s what keeps taking us from guardrail to guardrail. It’s a problem we need to correct if democracy is to survive.
+ on number 4. This will be the motivating force in the 2028 democratic presidential primary
Agree that we need to vote FOR something instead of always AGAINST something.
I don't fully accept the premise of today's piece. Yes, low turnout Rs are unhappy with the economy, but half of them still approve of Trump's overall handling of the presidency. To my eye that doesn't bode well for the supposed blue wave coming in November. Today people are first and foremost partisans. The question isn't who they'll vote for; they'll mostly vote for whoever is wearing their team's jersey. The question is whether they'll go to the polls. The voters in today's essay already show a propensity to stay home. Let's hope they do.
Hi JE. I could have explained the math a little better here. If Republicans are adding to their group of highly engaged, highly partisan current voters, a group of less engaged, less partisan (and more likely to vote democratic) group, that will only increase their overall vote share for November if they assume there is no equal increase in turnout probability for low-turnout Dems, which is not obviously the case. At any rate, it’s a gamble.