62
[Discussion] Electioneering 2016 & 2020: No one is ready for 10 million white voters
posted ago by Gizortnik ago by Gizortnik +63 / -1

Figures

So, having talked about it for about two years (or more), here is my Electioneering post, on why the Democrats have misunderstood their own understanding of the demographic breakdown of their own voters, and how their own statistics are fooling themselves, particularly in regards to white voters.

I've put the history of how I decided to look into this back in 2016 in the comments, along with why Trump's win in 2016 validated the Electoral College

Studying 2016

After discovering that the Democratic narrative about Trump's win in 2016 was wrong by the evidence of margins of votes, I decided to take a look at how the exit polls could tell me what happened.

In 2016, 538 released an app called the Swing-O-Matic which allowed you to play with the turnout and partisan lean for 5 demographics: Black, Asian/Other, Hispanic, White College Educated, White Non-College Educated. You can see from Fig 4 just how far off the Default results were using the 2012 data. I decided that I would try to play with the Swing-O-Matic's sliders until I got to the actual results of 2016. For each demographic, even for the collapse in black turnout which the pollsters said was hugely significant to the outcome, the result really didn't change. Hillary should have still won by a significant margin. Only a one or two states flipped. However, when I adjusted the sliders on the White Non-College Educated demographic, over half-a-dozen states flipped blue to red.

Suddenly, it was wildly clear, by Fig 5, what the hell happened. White non-college educated voters were absolutely decisive to winning Trump's election. All this crap about white women not voting Democrat, black voters not turning out, and Jill Stien was just horse shit. That didn't matter. Even if Trump won 50% of the Black vote in 2016, he still would have lost the election. White. Votes. Matter.

So... how the hell couldn't the Democrats have seen this?

I listened to some astonishing things in 2016. I listened to NPR announcers be audibly shocked that white men were the only demographic to have a decreasing life expectancy, as if they'd never considered that a possibility before. I listened as, over the past 2 years, I had heard that white people were not just making up fewer and fewer Americans, but that the actual percentage of the population seemed to be wildly changing. Supposedly the white population was decreasing, this was somehow a good thing, and that states that were too "old and white" like mine weren't going to matter in elections going forward. Again, NPR. I even heard claims that the whites in America made up as low as 53% of the population.

But that's wrong. They make up 73% of the population. The Leftists are sniffing their own farts about race.

So, I decided to tear apart all the results I could of the exit polls. I needed to see the raw vote totals instead of just what one percentage or another was each year. I decided that I could calculate something akin to the original raw vote totals from each demographic by party, through taking the total number of raw votes, finding the corresponding vote numbers for each demographic according to the exit polls, and then find each party's raw votes in each demographic by the split of each of those votes. I could do this all the way back to 1980, which was when I first found demographic exit poll breakdown. You can see these calculations in Tables 1, 2, and 3 above.

Something jumped out at me immediately. White votes absolutely fucking dwarf every other demographic. Not by a little either, but by everything. Donald Trump, damn near won the whole election on white votes alone, and that re-enforced my original point. But more than that, the Democrats basically haven't been able to reliably break 36 million white votes. And there's 98 million white voters out there. They need damn near 70 million votes to win anything!

Looking at Fig 3-7, you can see the serious problem that Democrats have with white voters. They need vast amounts of non-white voters to make up the lack of white votes. They need as many as they can get. Black votes are especially dire. They need significant & absolute majorities of every non-white demographic, and damn near the entirety of all Black turnout. All of it. Whites only made up 55% of all Democratic votes in 2016. Let me repeat that. They only managed half of 73% of the country. That is a fucking disaster. The Democrats are rabid race-baiters... because it's all they can do to win at all.

Looking at Fig 3, the historical breakdown is fairly stark. Please note the collapse in white voters for Republicans in 1992. We'll be talking about Ross Perot very soon. But 2 things to note in the historical demographic break down are: a) Donald Trump had some of the largest numbers of non-white votes in Republican party history (not-racist confirmed), b) the change in 2016 in demographic numbers is very significant. Hillary lost nearly a million black voters. That is a bad loss that would have been a serious set back in every election. But this time, the fact that Trump gained 1.3 million white voters on top of that Democratic loss is the thing that blows everything else out of the water. The scattershot placement of those white voters is a ton of different states is what gave him the win.

Understanding 2020

Knowing what we know now, all I can say is that the Democratic situation is even more absolutely dire. Trump is absolutely have significant gains in Black, Asian, and Hispanic votes without question. Hispanic Catholics and Anti-Socialists will be turning out. Disaffected blacks, pro-masculine blacks, and blacks that have benefited from stronger immigration controls are going to push Trump probably past 15% of the Black vote. Asians who have been explicitly targeted by Democratic racial laws, are anti-China, and have seen the US improve relations with South Korea, India, and Japan are all going to be happy to support Trump. On top of that, Cop Kamalla and Crime Bill Biden will probably collapse black support even further for the Democrats. But none of that actually matters.

Take a look back at Table 3. Remember Ross Perot? Look at the split in 1992 in total white votes compared to both Dem & Rep white vote totals. That's a lot of white voters voting for an eccentric billionaire, running against a corporate establishment, and focuses heavily on fixing NAFTA. Gee, fucking remind you of anyone? Well, that's not the only thing. Due to their sheer size, white voters can swing by millions at a time. Even small percentage changes lead to many millions moving about. But white voters swung by 5 million votes or more 5/10 times since 1980. No other demographic even comes close to that. The depth in numbers that white voters will wing is pretty substantial too. Look at 2000-2008. 5 million gain. 8 million gain. 3 million gain. Whites can seemingly pour out of the woodwork.

Several groups have claimed that they expect over 150 million voters this year. That basically guarantees that there will be more than 100 million white voters for the first time in American history. A lot more than 100 million. Look at Table 3 again. 150 million voters would be an increase of 12 million voters from 2016. Do you really expect that to come from almost entirely blacks and hispanics? I don't think so. I think the number of hispanic voters might fall given the fact that immigration control has improved, and during times of economic hardship, the US undergoes an outflow of migrants. For blacks, you have a lot of Black National Socialists calling for revolution regardless of who wins. It is far more likely in my mind that blacks will have smaller turnout than in 2016, and so will hispanics. I'm willing to bet that we're looking at significant white turnout. Especially given the anti-white Black National Socialist rhetoric in their schools, jobs, and entertainment. Let's not forget that the Left has apparently abandoned the midwest, working class whites.

I think that we are looking at 8 to 12 million white voters... and I'm not sure that the Democrats are even get a third of that. They might even lose white votes. Let's split the difference between 8-12 and call it 10 million more white voters.... Literally no one is ready for 10 million more white voters.

Hey.

Hey.

Wanna see a whitelash?

That Swing-O-Matic from 538 has a decedent. MSNBC calls it the Swing-The-Vote, but it's basically the same thing. If we adjust for the 12 million more white voters that I expect, and 15 million total black and hispanic voters (which would be steady for hispanics and a loss for blacks), and we swing non-college educated white voters to the right a bit. We get percentages that look like Fig 6, note that even a swing of 12 million white voters, still shows only whites with 73% of the total vote, which would be very deceptive to anyone looking at only the relative measurements because it would be a 1-point increase in the vote share. But, like 2016, the effects are dramatic. For the map, see Fig 7 Minnesota is apparently in play if the Biden campaign's actions are anything to go on... but no one has said shit about the others. Virginia is supposed to be confirmed for Biden. Nevada is still supposed to be confirmed for Biden. Maine isn't up for discussion, nor is New Mexico. The Democrats are pretending that Ohio and Texas are in play... they've entirely lost the plot. They simply do not seem to recognize the disaster that is befalling them. Florida stays, Ohio stays, Pennsylvania stays, Michigan stays, Wisconson stays, Texas stays. And then states they aren't even prepared for are up for grabs.

Unfortunately, MSNBC doesn't give us any information on how close the individual states are. The 538 Swing-O-Matic can do that for us. The demographic information is out of date, so it's prediction off of my results are more in favor of Trump but it does tell us the states that are absolutely neck and neck... and it's all bad. Really bad. Washington, Oregon, New Jersey, Maine, Connecticut, Delaware, even Illinois.

The point to take away here is that Minnesota is a swing state, not Ohio. Not Texas. The battleground states are places the Democrats aren't even looking at. And the states that could surprise people, are ones they aren't even imagining are in danger. Oregon, Virginia, New Hampshire, Maine, Washington, New Jersey... Illinois? It's similar to the same fatal mistake that Clinton made. They were sure Ohio was the swing state. But it was Wisconsin, it was Pennsylvania. And now it's going to be even worse, because these demographic calculators don't tell you anything about how the people on the ground are effected by the riots. If Oregon flips, the political shock-wave will be devastating.

Get your fucking popcorn boys.

Electoral Majority of >350, and an indisputable popular vote win.

Questions

But Gizortnik, how will we know if "it's happening"?

Watch New Hampshire. Trump lost New Hampshire by a smaller vote margin than your local school levy. He lost by 2,736 votes. If the white vote swings hard for Trump, New Hampshire should be a solid win.

But Gizortnik, every good hypothesis should be falsifiable. What would make yours wrong?

I'd have to be completely wrong about white people. It would have to be massive minority voter turn in a scale that would be enormous. Bigger black turnout for Obama in 2008, bigger hispanic turnout than for Bush in 2000. That, and white people would have to just be dissolutioned with Trump, and a whole bunch would be going for Biden. ... I'd have to be fundamentally wrong about literally everything I just said.

But I don't see how that's possible. It must be my lying fucking eyes again. I live in a "swing state" according to the Democrats. But I also live in a red county with a majority white population. On Saturday and Sunday, when the building is closed, the Board of Elections parking lot is filled with people hand delivering early votes to a secure box. Do you know how long the early voting line was 2 weeks ago on a Wednesday? A half hour. A Trump convoy passed by my house for a second time today.

If I'm wrong, it is because I'm living in a bubble the size of my fucking county.

And Historically Speaking, platform to platform, Trump-Biden looks a lot like what happened with Nixon-McGovern and Reagan-Mondale.

49 comments
49 comments share save hide report block hide replies