View Poll Results: Who wins?

Voters
26. You may not vote on this poll
  • The god emperor Donald Trump

    16 61.54%
  • Sleepy Joe Biden

    6 23.08%
  • There won't be an election...

    4 15.38%
Page 10 of 30 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213141520 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 294

Thread: 2020 POTUS Election: Trump v Biden ("The Steal")

  1. #91
    Senior Member
    Emma of Normandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Last Online
    Friday, July 16th, 2021 @ 04:15 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    England, Germany
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    North Carolina North Carolina
    Location
    Piedmont
    Gender
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Librarian
    Politics
    Conservative, nationalist
    Religion
    Anglican Church in North America
    Posts
    106
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    82
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    118
    Thanked in
    67 Posts
    We've already cast our votes for President Trump and, in the interest of optimism, I picked him in the poll as well, but I am honestly unsure how this will turn out. Democrats will do everything they can to steal it, of course, but forced demographic change and Jewish media control are also huge factors. I feel confident an overwhelming majority of the American people as I understand it and as our Founders understood it will vote for Trump. Many, many people who are legally American citizens under current law will not.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Emma of Normandy For This Useful Post:


  3. #92
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Nachtengel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Online
    Saturday, April 17th, 2021 @ 11:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Posts
    6,434
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    201
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,260
    Thanked in
    744 Posts
    I’m Here To Remind You That Trump Can Still Win

    A 10 percent chance isn’t zero. And there’s a chance of a recount, too.

    It’s tempting to write this story in the form of narrative fiction: “On a frigid early December morning in Washington, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that disputed mail ballots in Pennsylvania—” You know, that kind of thing. But given the stakes in this election, I think it’s important to be prosaic and sober-minded instead.

    So let’s state a few basic facts: The reasons that President Trump’s chances in our forecast are about 10 percent and not zero:

    • As in 2016, Trump could potentially benefit from the Electoral College. Projected margins in the tipping-point states are considerably tighter than the margins in the national popular vote.
    • More specifically, Joe Biden’s lead in Pennsylvania — the most likely tipping-point state, according to our forecast — is solid but not spectacular: about 5 points in our polling average.
    • Without Pennsylvania, Biden does have some paths to victory, but there’s no one alternative state he can feel especially secure about.
    • While a lot of theories about why Trump can win (e.g., those about “shy” Trump voters) are probably wrong, systematic polling errors do occur, and it’s hard to predict them ahead of time or to anticipate the reasons in advance.
    • There is some chance that Trump could “win” illegitimately. To a large extent, these scenarios are beyond the scope of our forecast.
    • There’s also some chance of a recount (about 4 percent) or an Electoral College tie (around 0.5 percent), according to our forecast.


    Before we proceed further, a short philosophical note. I hate it when people use phrases — to be fair, we often use phrases like these ourselves! — such as “Nate Silver is giving Biden a 90 percent chance” or “FiveThirtyEight still gives Trump a 10 percent chance.” We aren’t giving anybody anything. Instead, as former FiveThirtyEight politics host Jody Avirgan puts it, what we’re doing is “mapping uncertainty.” In other words, if Biden leads by about 9 points in national polls, 8 points in Wisconsin, 5 points in Pennsylvania, 2 points in Florida, etc., how does that translate into a probability of victory? That’s what our model is trying to figure out.

    And indeed — although nobody needs any reminders of this after 2016 — Trump can win. All the election models are bullish on Biden, but they are united in that a Trump win is still plausible despite his seemingly steep deficit in polls.

    A huge part of why our model and others’ think Trump can still win is the Electoral College. Trump has only a 3 percent chance of winning the popular vote in our model. Other models put his chances at less than 1 percent. It’s very likely that Democrats will win the popular vote for the seventh time in the last eight elections.

    But while a roughly 8-point deficit in the popular vote is hard to overcome — as of this writing, at 7:30 p.m. ET on Sunday, our model forecasts Biden to win the popular vote by 7.8 percentage points — a 5-point gap is a lot easier to close. And that’s our current forecast in Pennsylvania: Biden wins by 4.7 points. Note the roughly 3-point gap between the popular vote and the outcome in Pennsylvania, the most likely tipping-point state. That’s similar to 2016, when Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by around 2 points but lost the tipping-point state, Wisconsin, by just a little under 1 point.

    Or if you want a more sophisticated version of this, we can look at how often Biden is projected to win the Electoral College from various potential margins in the popular vote:

    Biden needs a popular vote cushion

    If Biden wins the popular vote by 2 to 3 percentage points, the Electoral College is roughly a toss-up. But if Biden wins the popular vote by less than 2 points, Trump is a fairly heavy favorite to win the election. Even popular vote margins of up to 6 points are not entirely safe for Biden if his votes are distributed in exactly the wrong way. So you can see why an 8- or 9-point lead in the popular vote shouldn’t make Biden feel that secure; despite being a landslide margin, it’s also only a few points removed from the inflection point where the Electoral College starts to become competitive.

    Biden’s position would simply be a whole lot safer if one of two things were true: If either the polling in Pennsylvania were like that in Wisconsin and Michigan, where he has a larger lead … or if another state such as Florida were also polling more like Pennsylvania to give Biden a clear Plan B. But neither of those things are true. The gap between Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and Michigan has actually grown in the waning days of the election. And no state has emerged out of the pack of Arizona, North Carolina, Florida and Georgia to be Biden’s clear Plan B (Biden is forecasted to win each state by between 1 and 3 points). Arizona is probably Biden’s best bet in this group, but winning it would also require him to win either Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District or Maine’s 2nd Congressional District to break a 269-269 Electoral College tie; he’s favored in both districts but they aren’t sure things.

    Biden’s lead in Pennsylvania is narrow

    Moreover, because polling errors are somewhat correlated from state to state, if Biden loses Pennsylvania, he would no longer be a favorite in states such as Florida and Georgia — where he’s narrowly ahead now — because it would be a sign that Trump had outperformed his polls again. Of course, this only goes so far: In 2016, Trump massively outperformed his polls in the Midwest, but there wasn’t much of a polling error in Arizona. Still, losing Pennsylvania would take Biden from favorite to underdog.

    Pennsylvania will tell us a lot

    You’ll notice that I’ve mostly been focusing here on the whats and not the hows or the whys. In other words, I’m describing what combinations of states could plausibly produce winning maps for Trump given the possibility of a polling error, but not describing why such a polling error might occur.

    To some extent, that’s on purpose. If pollsters knew what the source of a polling error might be, they’d presumably try to fix it. Many pollsters are weighting by education now, something many didn’t do in 2016, and that was a big source of error that year. Another big source of error in 2016 was the large number of undecided voters, who broke toward Trump in the Midwest. To some extent, that one isn’t on the pollsters, since polls aren’t really supposed to try to predict the vote of people who say they’re undecided. Nonetheless, that’s much less of an issue this year, because there are far fewer undecided voters.

    There are, however, some new potential sources of error this year. One of them is the huge growth in people who are voting early or by mail. It’s not only that more people are using these methods, but also that — unlike in the past, when they were relatively bipartisan — Democrats are far more likely to vote by mail than Republicans. Republicans are much more likely to vote in person on Election Day, conversely, while early in-person voting falls somewhere in between.

    One issue for pollsters here could be the rate of ballot spoilage. Because of processing delays, some mail ballots won’t be received by states’ deadlines. And voters might not complete the instructions correctly, as we’ve already seen in Pennsylvania with the issue of “naked ballots”, that is, voters forgetting to enclose their ballot in its extra, secrecy envelope.

    So imagine, for instance, that in a certain state, the vote is divided evenly at 50-50 in a poll between Biden and Trump. But two-thirds of Biden voters are voting by mail, whereas two-thirds of Trump’s supporters are voting in person, and the rate of mail ballot spoilage is 3 percent. That would be enough for Trump to win 50.8 to 49.2, meaning that you had a polling error of 1 or 2 points.

    However, there are several mitigating factors here. First, 3 percent is probably on the high side for mail ballot rejection rates; other estimates hover at closer to 1 percent, although the number could be higher this year with so many first-time mail voters. Second, some ballots are also spoiled during in-person voting because of errors with voting technologies (think about hanging chads, for instance). Third, there is considerable evidence that Democrats mailed in their ballots early, which could put them less at risk of spoilage. According to the United States Elections Project, the party registration on mail ballots received so far favors Democrats by 24 percentage points. But for mail ballots requested but not yet received — those that might trickle in late — the partisan gap is just 11 points in Democrats’ favor. Polls find that Democrats are also more likely to drop off their ballots at drop boxes, which reduces the risk a ballot is rejected.

    In addition, there’s something to be said for the idea that it’s worthwhile to lock in a vote. If someone has already voted, they’re 100 percent likely to vote (and 98 or 99 percent likely to have their vote counted, depending on the rate of ballot spoilage). What about someone who says they’re planning to vote on Election Day but hasn’t done so yet? They’re certainly not 100 percent likely to vote. Something could come up on Election Day — they get stuck late at work, they blow out a tire, they feel sick, they don’t bother because they think their candidate is losing. Indeed, even some of the people that pollsters deem to be the most likely voters don’t wind up voting. If 2 percent of mail voters have their votes rejected, but 5 percent of “likely” Election Day voters don’t wind up voting, then polls could underestimate Democrats.

    Wait, wasn’t this supposed to be a post about how Trump could beat his polls? Well, the point is just that mail voting creates additional uncertainty this year, and it’s easy to imagine how that could help out Trump or Biden.

    Another potential source of anxiety for pollsters is the Hispanic vote. Polls show Trump having made significant gains relative to 2016 with Hispanic voters — and to a lesser extent with Black voters, especially Black men. This is not enough to offset gains that Biden has made with white voters, however, including white voters both with and without a college degree.

    But are these changes real? Both white voters and Hispanic voters without a college degree can be hard groups to reach on the phone. It can also be hard to get a representative sample — if, for example, you don’t get enough Cuban American voters in Florida, or if you aren’t reaching enough Hispanic Americans who primarily speak Spanish. Hispanic voters and white voters without a college degree can also work somewhat at cross-purposes to one another when you’re weighting a poll, because while white voters without a college degree are more Republican than whites with a college degree, the opposite is true for Hispanics.

    Overall, I don’t particularly think there is any reason to distrust the polls here. If anything, polls have tended to underestimate Democratic support in recent elections in states such as Nevada that had a large number of Hispanic voters. Still, suppose that Trump’s growth in Hispanic support is real, while Biden’s gains among white voters without a college degree are not, for whatever reason. That could lead to a rough night for Biden: The lack of white non-college support could cost him Pennsylvania, while a mediocre performance among Hispanics could keep Arizona and Florida in Trump’s column. Maybe Biden would eke out a win in Georgia or North Carolina, but that’s a much narrower path then he’d planned on.

    And what about those “shy” Trump voters? There’s no particularly good evidence that Trump voters are likely to conceal their intentions to pollsters. Nor — if we want to expand the sample size a bit — is there any reason to believe that nationalist or right-wing parties tend to beat their polls in other countries.

    Conversely, there is quite a bit of evidence that most of Biden’s polling gains relative to Clinton come from vote-switchers, rather than from an expectation of higher Democratic turnout. If a respondent tells a pollster that they voted for Trump in 2016 but will be voting for Biden this year — and there aren’t a lot of those people, but a few make a big difference — it’s hard to consider them a “shy” Trump voter.

    Still, the theory isn’t completely crazy. Social desirability bias — not wanting to provide an answer you think the person on the other side of the line won’t like — has been a problem in some other polling contexts. The point is that even if you mostly aren’t worried about “shy” Trump voters — or think it’s equally likely that there are “shy” Biden voters! — that’s different than being 100 percent sure that the theory isn’t true. And if we’re trying to account for how 10 percent chances happen, we have to accept that sometimes it’s because our assumptions are wrong.

    Finally, there are the factors our model doesn’t try to account for, such as the many, many things we’re tracking on our election administration blog: attempts to disqualify various groups of ballots, voter intimidation, polling-place irregularities, and so forth. Plus, there’s a good chance that Trump will try to declare a premature victory.

    It isn’t terribly easy to sort out the heat from the light here. But it may sometimes be worth putting magnitudes on things. Problems at one polling place are not going to have nearly as much of an impact as a Republican attempt to throw out 120,000 ballots cast in Texas’s Harris County, for instance. Yet, as much of an affront to democracy as that would be, even that would still only amount to around 1 percent of the vote in one state. Let’s up the ante: What about Republican legislatures trying to send alternative slates of electors to the Electoral College? Now, that could have a really big impact, although it’s not clear how likely it is.

    It’s also worth recognizing that there is another side to this, too. There is — long overdue in my view — far more attention paid to voter suppression and voter disenfranchisement than there used to be. (We’ve certainly made a big effort to put far more resources into those stories at FiveThirtyEight.)

    But … is it actually harder now to vote than it has been in the past? It depends on the state, but in most states, the answer is no. According to the Brennan Center’s annual reports, recent years have seen more efforts to expand voting rights than to restrict them. And the COVID-19 pandemic has brought about an expansion of voting options, some temporary and some permanent. If it’s still too hard to vote for disadvantaged groups — but it’s easier than it used to be — that could lead to a net increase in turnout for Democrats relative to past elections. The FiveThirtyEight model does try to account for changes to voting laws in each state; that’s part of the reason why it’s relatively bearish on Biden in Texas, for example, which has some of the strictest laws in the country.

    So when I say that there are certain things outside the scope of the model — well, the truth is a little bit messier than that. One reason that we make relatively conservative assumptions, such as by using fat-tailed distributions, is to account for “unknown unknowns.”

    Here’s what it seems safe to say, though. In an election that is very close, a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court is likely to side with Trump. Our model shows a 4 percent chance of an election that winds up with one or more decisive states within 0.5 percentage points, close enough to trigger a recount. If you want to round up Trump’s odds slightly by assuming he wins the lion’s share of those 4 percent of cases, plus most of the 0.5 percent of the time that the election ends up in an Electoral College tie, I wouldn’t strenuously object to that. Mostly, though, I’d just be worried about the meltdown that could occur if a recount or a tie comes up. The odds are against it, but the stakes are awfully high.
    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...can-still-win/

  4. #93
    Senior Member
    Winterland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Last Online
    Wednesday, August 4th, 2021 @ 04:57 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    German; Scot-Irish; Scandinavian
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Coastal region
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Free Lance
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    407
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    319
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    237
    Thanked in
    173 Posts
    The media uses propaganda espousing their chosen candidate for a landslide win from labeling "Nazi" to threatening statements of starting a war with Iran. We hear the same rhetoric and babble during every US election. When we had Obama in office, I literally prayed that he would pull out our troops after eliminating Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, but "the puppet" could not even do this much for Americans. Americans had a better chance to end the war with Obama, BUT it never happened. It does not matter if we had Obama or Mit Romney in office as lobbyist groups have seized power probably well before WW1 and remained with a tight fist on us for a century. Both US and Europe have allowed in many enemies without our votes and with Big Business's approval for cheap labor and forced growth.

    Oddly, with more shootings like Vienna, terrorism, and BLM riots in the midst, you think our elections would have a better impact towards national security at home, yet it does not. US may have slowed down the terrorist attacks by reducing the refugee numbers to 20,000, but it should be around 1,500 at best. Europe and US are both swamped with people and already reached "overpopulated" for our resources. You can see the problems generating around higher food costs, high rents, difficulty in attaining a quality education, overcrowded hospitals, riots, Covid disease, and concentrated poverty. Our birth rates are terrible due to closed in and economic conditions in big cities. With the mass baby production in both India and North Africa, they will keep coming like Mexico and Central America (500 million) with or without benefits until a government uses force to stop the tides. European peoples don't encourage them to overpopulate their countries and create unbearable living conditions or squalor, so we're not responsible for their cultural issues and corruption.

    If Trump does not win, we will have more impoverished peoples, more drug-gang violence, more terrorism and more failing, dangerous schools, and more anti-white hatred at all levels. Our children are forced to read many social justice books (conflict theory) in elementary schools. The riots may stop, but then, we'll have more snooping and so-called "hate speech laws" passed with sites shut down. It seems what Britain does America does too.........they're more ahead in limiting free speech. Trump makes a small difference, but he cannot get around his multiple law-suits and Congress's lack of funding.

  5. #94
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    KYAnglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Last Online
    2 Days Ago @ 03:23 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    England/Britain
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R1b>U106>L48
    mtDNA
    H3af
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    The Pennyrile
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Single parent
    Occupation
    Paying the bills
    Politics
    Confederate
    Religion
    Folkish Heathen
    Posts
    934
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    340
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    450
    Thanked in
    298 Posts
    https://www.foxnews.com/us/volunteer...ce-outcome.amp

    "Volunteer group warns of planned Antifa election violence, regardless of outcome".

    No surprise there. The scum just want to cause mayhem and destruction, regardless. It's past time those criminal punks were met with ruthless, crushing force.
    "Almost every name belongs to well-known families of English stock....these soldiers were of ancient American lineage"- Prof. N.S. Shaler on the 1st Kentucky "Orphan" Brigade, Confederate States Army

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to KYAnglo For This Useful Post:


  7. #95
    Senior Member
    Astragoth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Last Online
    6 Hours Ago @ 01:23 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    New York New York
    Gender
    Posts
    1,094
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,126
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,129
    Thanked in
    620 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KYAnglo View Post
    https://www.foxnews.com/us/volunteer...ce-outcome.amp

    "Volunteer group warns of planned Antifa election violence, regardless of outcome".

    No surprise there. The scum just want to cause mayhem and destruction, regardless. It's past time those criminal punks were met with ruthless, crushing force.

    Agreed. I am very sick of them.

  8. #96
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Æmeric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Britain, Ulster, Germany, America
    Subrace
    Dalofaelid+Baltid/Borreby
    Y-DNA
    R-Z19
    mtDNA
    U5a2c
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Indiana Indiana
    Gender
    Age
    59
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Anti-Obama
    Religion
    Conservative Protestantism
    Posts
    6,350
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    643
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    885
    Thanked in
    475 Posts
    I've discovered a few days ago that there is no assigned polling stations based on residence in Arizona anymore. You can go into any polling station, sign in and a ballot is printed for you depending on your address & the candidates pertinent to you. My wife and I voted at the one nearest our house. Busy but we didn't have to wait long. All the voters were White. I stopped and check out a couple more polling stations, nearly all White voters and zero Negroes. I guess all the minorities voted early of by mail or they aren't voting. This is likely the case with a lot of Negroes who probably haven't bothered to get AZ driver licenses or state IDs.

    The MSM have been reporting on the race "tightening" over the last weekend, giving them cover for a Trump victory.

  9. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Æmeric For This Useful Post:


  10. #97
    Senior Member
    Gegenschlag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Online
    1 Minute Ago @ 07:27 AM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Swiss-German
    Subrace
    Pred. (Hallstatt) Nordic
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    to every man a woman of his race
    Posts
    313
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    55
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    90
    Thanked in
    64 Posts
    The markets see now Trump as the favourite (1.5 odds to win). Biden was 1.44 favourite before votes started to be counted.

  11. #98
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Idis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Dutch, Low German & French
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Family
    Married parent
    Politics
    Free & Libertarian
    Religion
    Cultural Christian
    Posts
    216
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    150
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    206
    Thanked in
    100 Posts
    It looks like Biden is going to win after all, albeit by a small margin. Although Trump secured the swing states Florida and Pennsylvania, he's lost Arizona and it looks like he's losing Wisconsin and Michigan as well. Unless Trump manages to turn Michigan at the last moment, as the race is tightest there. Biden now leads in states worth 270 electoral votes, the number needed to win. Trump has actually vowed never to return to Michigan if he loses that state to Biden.

  12. #99
    Senior Member
    Gegenschlag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Online
    1 Minute Ago @ 07:27 AM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Swiss-German
    Subrace
    Pred. (Hallstatt) Nordic
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    to every man a woman of his race
    Posts
    313
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    55
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    90
    Thanked in
    64 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Idis View Post
    It looks like Biden is going to win after all, albeit by a small margin. Although Trump secured the swing states Florida and Pennsylvania, he's lost Arizona and it looks like he's losing Wisconsin and Michigan as well. Unless Trump manages to turn Michigan at the last moment, as the race is tightest there. Biden now leads in states worth 270 electoral votes, the number needed to win. Trump has actually vowed never to return to Michigan if he loses that state to Biden.
    And after a Trump loss, I hope Americans don't feel to disheartened. It's not like Trump's presidency has made much of a difference that I can tell. But many of you should consider moving "back" to Europe.

  13. #100

    Populism lives


    America’s pollsters and pundits were wrong – ‘Trumpism’ was not repudiated.


    So much for the blue wave. So much for a Biden blowout. So much for the final and firm repudiation of Trumpism. Virtually all of the polls predicted that that is what we would wake up to today: a stirring victory for ‘sanity’ over ‘chaos’, a landslide for the decency of the Biden camp against the lunacy of the masses who took a gamble on Trump four years ago. Media pundits spoke of little else. Pollsters and experts said it was in the bag. We’ll all be able to go back to our normal, stress-free lives, said the time-rich, upper-middle-class Trump-bashers of academia and the Twitterati. And it seems they were wrong. All of them.



    This is the story of the election. We may not know who has won. It’s still entirely possible Biden will take the White House. But regardless, the apparent wrongness of the expert classes, the delusions of the highly educated, the inability of pollsters to read the public (their job), is the most striking thing about this election so far. It speaks to the continuation of the most significant trend in Western politics right now: the gaping disconnect between the clerisy and the crowd, between the self-styled smart set who consider it their right to rule and vast numbers of ordinary people who think differently – very differently – to these people. From their self-reinforcing, self-congratulatory echo chambers of woke blather and identitarian myopia, the new elites cannot see or comprehend the swathes of people who hold different political and moral views.



    It seems fairly certain now that the blue wave isn’t coming. That’s certainly a realisation that has hit the elites over the past few hours. Their fantasy has collided with reality. In the words of a stunned writer for
    Slate, sounding like a Victorian anthropologist who’s just happened upon a hitherto undiscovered tribe in Africa, ‘A bigger proportion of the country than we thought is fine with things as they are. And they want more of it.’ From capitalist bibles like The Economist and the FT to pollsters and pundits like FiveThirtyEight, what these people thought would happen and what seems, so far, to be happening are strikingly different things. We live under governing and opinion-forming classes that have little to no understanding of their fellow citizens and what they are thinking.



    There are various reasons for the seeming chasm between expert predictions and electoral reality. There’s the shy Trump voter phenomenon, where, as some polls attested, many people who intended to cast their ballots for Trump felt they couldn’t tell other people about it, including, it seems, pollsters. This itself is a testament to the intolerance of the new elites and their creation of a political climate in which to support Trump is tantamount to being a fascist or a Covid denier or a granny-killer – that is, a Bad Person. This hysterical demonisation of a particular viewpoint has encouraged silence and even a sense of shame among some Trump voters, which is incredibly bad for democracy and the thing it thrives on: free, open debate. Another factor in the wrongness of the elites is their own dogmatic tendencies, of course; their inability to countenance the existence of a more populist, less woke, more community-oriented worldview to their own. Having turned politics into a moral pantomime in which they are good and anyone who disagrees with them is bad, they have made themselves blind to the perfectly normal and good existence of divergent political outlooks.



    The elites’ dream of populism’s decline seems to be giving way to a stark realisation – populism lives. Indeed, a new populist coalition seems to be emerging. The seeming shifts in voting behaviour among various social and ethnic groups in the US is fascinating. According to one exit poll, the only social group that has significantly shifted to the Democrats is white men, while white women, black men and black women, and, most strikingly, Latinos have shifted towards Trump. This is only an exit poll, so it needs further confirmation. But identity politics does seem to be taking a beating right now. The shrill narrative of Trump’s ‘white supremacy’ is being massively called into question. Latinos, who have been told by the clever, mostly white folks of the east coast and west coast elites that Trump loathes them, appear to be swinging things for Trump in some places. Of course there are already woke denunciations of Latino Uncle Toms cozying up to ‘white supremacy’ etc, etc. We can expect more such neo-racist fury in the coming days.




    And then there is class. It’s still unclear, and it is not a uniform phenomenon, but it seems likely that significant sections of working-class America are voting for Trump. That’s working-class whites, blacks and Latinos. A Bloomberg News analysis of which professions made donations to the Trump campaign and which made donations to the Biden campaign was incredibly revealing. Biden got loads of donations from the employees of banks, Big Tech and universities, while Trump’s coffers were far more reliant on donations from truckers, construction workers, farmers and cops. We seem to be witnessing the emergence of a populist coalition of working-class sections of society still keen to push back against the establishment and its cultural supremacy.



    In this election in the era of Covid, we have been given a real-life satire of the bourgeois sections of society. There they were in the comfortable homes, hiding from the virus, tweeting about how awful it all was and how Trump was going to kill everyone, while the people who carried on working – the people who carried on farming their food, delivering their Amazon-bought goods, fixing their patios and their toilets – seem to have been more likely to have voted for Trump. You could not have asked for a better snapshot of the current of elites vs masses that runs through American and Western politics right now. Whatever happens in the US in the next few days, or weeks, one thing seems clear: populism survives. It fights on. Ordinary people might feel demeaned and silenced by the woke elites, but they still have their vote. They will always have that.




    Populism lives - spiked

    04 XI 2020.


Similar Threads

  1. POTUS Election 2012
    By Æmeric in forum The United States
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012, 05:01 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •