It is almost 2 pm and my various duties are more or less
done for the day, so I have some time to play pundit. [Next week, the elevator in my building will
be out of service while it is repaired.
This poses obvious problems for several residents, most particularly for
the lovely 96 year old lady who lives across the hall from me on the third
floor. As the Precinct Representative
for my building, I feel a responsibility to make sure she is looked after
properly. Like that.]
Let me say several things about the presidential election in
the aftermath of the first debate and before the second, tonight. First of all, these are very early days, so let
us all relax and be a bit patient. There
seem to be only four people with a real shot at the nomination – Biden,
Sanders, Warren, and Harris. By October,
almost all of other two dozen or so will either be out or be on the way. It will matter a lot where their bits and
pieces of support go.
Second, Biden’s current strength in polls comes very heavily
from Black respondents. So did Clinton’s
until Iowa in 2008. Let us see how
things shake out.
Third, the three states on which everyone is fixated, Michigan,
Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, would have gone for Clinton if Black Obama voters
had simply turned out in anything like their numbers of 2012. We don’t need to peel voters off Trump’s
base. We need to motivate our base in
the way it was motivated in 2018.
Fourth, there are fifteen months until the election, and Trump
will be driven to ever more extreme expressions of xenophobic racism, beyond
even what we have just witnessed. It is
very difficult for me to foresee how that will play out, but not well for
Trump.
I conclude that this is one of those elections in which Democratic
passion and outrage and intensity, not exquisite political titration, will win
the day. Whatever his strengths may be,
Biden lacks all of those qualities. He may
win Black votes in the primaries, but he will not amp up their turnout in the
general.
6 comments:
Indeed, how his expressions of xenophobic racism play out is part of the question, and the answers seem hard to come by.
For example, if you're okay with the conclusion -- which is "it's hard to say" -- some of you may find this 538 piece about turning white identity politics into a campaign strategy somewhat interesting.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-trumps-use-of-white-identity-politics-strategic/
My recollection of accounts of turnout (long) after the 2016 election were that not only was motivation of AA voters down, but that the obstacles to their voting were much higher in WI & MI that year than in earlier years (i.e., stricter voter id requirements).
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/10/voter-suppression-wisconsin-election-2016/
(though see this too: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/10/20/the-case-that-voter-id-laws-won-wisconsin-for-trump-is-weaker-than-it-looks/?utm_term=.a8305f214ded )
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/05/low-black-turnout-may-have-cost-clinton-the-election.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/03/12/4-4-million-2012-obama-voters-stayed-home-in-2016-more-than-a-third-of-them-black/?utm_term=.023385a90c85
https://www.thenation.com/article/wisconsins-voter-id-law-suppressed-200000-votes-trump-won-by-23000/
Cory Booker made that point about voter suppression in the debate last night in the course of what was otherwise, I thought, an unimpressive performance on his part.
LFC, funny you should mention Cory Booker. After yesterday's debate, I wonder if he has better than a small chance of joining the first tier of candidates. And he would turn out Black voters, I believe.
'I conclude that this is one of those elections in which Democratic passion and outrage and intensity, not exquisite political titration, will win the day.'
I gather that you have a point in mind, but I cannot approve of this locution, 'political titration'. A titration is a technique where a solution of known concentration is used to determine the concentration of an unknown solution. The determination of acid content is done by titration. Fair enough, and you have some sort of analogy in view. And, shall we say, the liquid in the political tube is going to change color. Oops, at least I did manage a pun! I blame you for this. I wonder if, alternatively, there is 'political inferenece of the presence of nonlinear determinism in a noisy signal'?
Danny,my dear boy, snarky comments should be much more succinct.
Post a Comment