I missed that.
Starting in June and July 2020, and continuing until the general election, I see Biden polling somewhat better than earlier in the year:
If you mean that Trump outperformed polls in the 2020 general election, yes he did, just as he did in 2016, and just as Milei did in Argentina on Sunday, and just as Wilders did today in the Netherlands. I don’t associate this with gaining votes, but with reluctance to admit voting for an unkind leader.
I thought @JohnT was saying that Trump had gained votes relative to four years prior, even thought the economy was in the shitter, reeling from COVID.
That last. If the Carville quote is an ironclad rule of American politics, then it was broken in 2020.
You have no obligation to unconfuse me, but I am confused. If you wish to answer, my question is, what is the date range, before and after, when Trump “gained votes” despite have “lost 16 million jobs?” Or am I totally missing the point?
My view that “it’s the economy stupid” is still a big factor, but hard to use for analysis or prognostication because it’s not the economy in general, but how the economy is at the point in time where someone decides who to vote for. Unfortunately, people who already planning to vote for Trump are unlikely to change their mind because of events occurring after they decided. Not saying voter intention change is impossible, but it would have to be an extremely shocking event.
Undecided voters will be influenced by next year’s economy, but how many are there? Fewer than normal at this point in the cycle, I think.
62,984,828 people voted for Trump in 2016.
74,223,975 people voted for Trump in 2020.
He very straightforwardly gained votes.
Sorry, let me clarify.
In 1928, Herbert Hoover won the Presidency with 21,000,000 votes cast for him. The Great Depression happens, up to 25% of Americans lose their jobs, so that by 1932 he loses (coincidentally) 25% of his support, with just 15,000,000 voting for him.
In 2016, Trump won with 63,000,000 votes. In 2020, COVID happens and 16,000,000 jobs are lost (as well as 240,000 lives)… and yet Trump gained 11,000,000 votes compared to his 2016 total, which goes counter to Carville’s rule of “it’s the economy, stupid”. If the economy mattered as much as this rule implies, there was zero chance that Trump would have gained a single vote… yet he did.
Also, the economy was doing very well in 1968, yet the ‘rule’ didn’t do LBJ any favors either.
Perhaps I’m fighting the hypothetical but, really, history fights it too.
A lot happened in those four years besides an unemployment spike. Of course, in saying that I am conceding that “It’s the economy stupid” can only be one factor.
Another thing that occurred between 2016 and 2020 is that Trump, after being outspent 2-1 by HIllary Clinton, managed to, less decisively, outspend his new opponent. This meant that Trump ran a tremendous number of 2020 advertisements, each of which were a reminder to all registered voters to get out and vote. Overall, political spending in the 2020 election totaled $14.4 billion, more than doubling the total cost of the record-breaking 2016 presidential election cycle. It is very hard to spend a lot of money for your side without reving up the juices of your opponents, and IMHO that’s just what happenned.
And that’s the point. There’s always a lot more going than the economy.
I don’t know why this is directed at me. I was just pointing out that, “He gained votes,” means more people voted for him the second time.
The economic modeling theories, to explain presidential election results, have to do with the ratio of Democratic to Republican votes, not the absolute numbers.
By the way, economic models seems to be saying Biden will do better next November than the early polls tell me, at least if this two-week-old link I found is accurate:
I couldn’t find the original source of the 51.03 percent and 53.7 percent numbers above, but I the link author is a respectable journalist. I would be interested to see what percent those models say will go to third parties.
I was under the impression that Carville wasn’t directing the line at the general public, but to the workers on the Carter campaign.
The American electorate: High school students assigned an important project with a four-year deadline, who wait until the last two weeks to start working on it
You probably mean the Clinton campaign? If he was, then he was still talking about an actual weak economy, not a strong economy that, for mysterious reasons, people think is a weak economy.
Arrghh! Right, Clinton.
I think there are registered American voters on this board, and I have yet to hear any saying that they are uncertain who they will vote for if the nominees are Biden and Trump, or even that family members are on the fence. Pollsters hear some voters saying they are undecided, but when asked for a lean, they get it.
Personally, as a registered Democratic swing voter, if Haley is the nominee, think I would vote for Biden – but I would read the debate transcripts and try to have an open mind. However, with Biden-Trump, the open mind just isn’t there.
Here’s evidence that the Biden campaign knows – or fears – voters are making up their minds early:
Joe Biden bucks tradition, bets big on early swing-state advertising
Why is it that lowering inflation didn’t budge Trump’s numbers? Is it because the voters don’t care about inflation? Or is it that they made up their minds during the inflation? I think the latter.
Sure, there are some undecideds who will decide the last two weeks – just fewer than normal.
Forgive me. Present company accepted.
Because inflation is at something like 5%, not 40%. You can’t hand out more money than actually exists.
Dividing a million dollars across one person and across 10,000 persons end up as very different numbers ($1m and $100, respectively). We’re talking economics here, not magic and not fantasy.
There isn’t a good reason the CEO should receive a higher percentage raise.
What the holy fuck does that have to do with Biden and the election? The president does not- and should not- have any direct control of what CEOs or anyone not on the public payroll gets.
Sure, there is an income disparity in America- and the rest of the World. Biden has nothing to do with it.
Who said that? That’s just off the wall.