Coattails (Wyandotte, MI)

Wyandotte, MI is over 90% White, very Democratic, very pro-Bernie, very polluted, and strongly pro-union. It also has had a declining population since the 1970s. It is precisely the type of place that’s likely to swing to Trump. Even though I didn’t think it’d quite go as far as going for Trump, go for Trump it did, probably because many of his voters there were not aware of his stance on right-to-work. And he (and Her) had massive coattails all the way.
wyandottecoattails
Clinton’s negative coattails on Dingell were even larger than Trump’s positive coattails on the GOP candidate for House!

Clinton was an absolute disaster for downballot Dems. Most traditionally Dem voters who went #NeverHillary didn’t even come out to vote Dem downballot. Sad!

Monday Assorted Links 2

1. First Vietnamese-American legislator (is a total creature of the swamp while presenting herself as a Washington outsider)

2. How The Alternative Hypothesis got FL and PA right (primary votes matter)

3. Scientists horrified by Trump’s and Pence’s lack of regard for science and con-artistry

4. How a Trump presidency affects SCOTUS

5. 8 things Gallup learned from this election

6. The next steps for the Dems

Monday Assorted Links

1. Dems now claim system is so rigged. Note most Indians almost certainly actually supported Bernie.

2. Nobody’s getting the legally-allowed cash rewards from reducing over-classification

3. Forecaster Enten is a terrible forecaster

4. The comments here are heartening

5. A perspective on the Jewish Question

6. No, Alex Tabarrok is not a great guy. Total cuck.

7. Dewey beats Truman

8. More Dewey beats Truman. Yes, the moon is very bright, but I’m not sure what to do with it.

Sunday Assorted Links

1. The bullet America dodged

2. Where Trump went right (a rare elite admission!)

3. Those endorsements, man

4. Clinton spent more ad dollars in Omaha than Wisconsin

5. Rural political opinions. I admit to badly underestimating the sheer power of the rurals in Michigan and failing to fully grasp the meaning of Black turnout returning to 2004 levels.

6. A Muslim and an immigrant for Trump (due to Saudi Barbaria)

Man is the WaPo churning out a lot of good pieces lately.

Sunday Assorted Links

1. The view from Indianapolis

2. Dewey beats Truman

3. The crushing of Obama’s situational comedy coalition

4. Thanks, Obama. If Obama isn’t executed on the White House lawn the second day of the Trump presidency, I will be very saddened.

5. Robert Price, everyone

6. Airstrikes restart in East Aleppo

7. [[[Chris Matthews]]] v. Rachael Maddow

8. More on the crushing of Obama’s situational comedy coalition

Saturday Assorted Links

1. Votecastr was off, but not as off as many

2. Western civ: the box set

3. Trump and the media

4. Trump’s margin over Bush 2000

5. Social Media Update 2016. Twitter users constitute a quarter of Americans.

6. Dewey beats Truman

7. A half-correct take on Trump

8. 23% of Clinton voters do not accept Trump as legitimate president

BTW, it just occurred to me Trump did win with a silent (to pollsters) majority (in the EC). He was right.

Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio: Primary and General

Note primary results from counties with a high Black population would be most likely to overestimate Clinton’s general election percentage, due to a much larger percentage of Black general election Hillary voters than White ones voting for Her in the primary.

Trump was the first Republican candidate in history to win Michigan without winning Muskegon (honestly not sure what the heck’s going on there, but it’s a county filled with New Deal/Clinton Dems). He was also the first Republican presidential candidate since Benjamin Harrison in 1892 to win Michigan without winning Oakland County -a big reason I strongly doubted Trump would be able to pull out a win in Michigan, though I said explicitly Michigan could easily go for Trump if Clinton had a stroke on election day.

2012 (Obama got 54.8% of the two-party vote):

2016 primary (Clinton got 54.4% of the two-candidate vote):
mi_trumpher
2016 general (Clinton got of 49.7% the two-party vote):

Now, for Ohio. One curious thing here is is that many of the anti-Kasich Dems in Eastern Ohio who voted for Trump in the general did not vote for Trump in the primary, thus making the primary results underestimate Trump’s general election performance in much of Eastern Ohio. An even more interesting question is why Summit County, OH (Akron) flipped to Clinton from the primary to the general. In fact, it had more Republican primary voters than Trump general election voters. Only possible explanation? Those Dems (“saboteur Berniebros” as I put it at the time) screwing with the GOP primary by voting for Kasich I told you all about earlier in the year. They’re real.

2012 (Obama got 51.5% of the two-party vote):

2016 primary (Clinton got 48.3% of the two-candidate vote):

oh_trumpher

2016 general (Clinton got 45.5% of the two-party vote):

Now, for Wisconsin.

2012 (Obama got 53.5% of the two-party vote):

2016 primary (Clinton got 52.8% of the two-candidate vote):

wi_trumpher

2016 general (Clinton got 49.5% of the two-party vote):

Might I remind you I was exactly correct in the entirety of this paragraph (written October 1, 2016)?

I suspect the driftless area of southwestern Wisconsin, notorious for having a majority of its Whites vote for Obama, will, like Iowa, swing mostly, though not entirely, to the Republican candidate this year.

Overall, expect a Trump overperformance in northern Wisconsin and a Trump underperformance in the rich Cruzlim parts of Wisconsin.

This, like Pennsylvania, is a swing state worth watching. It almost went for Bush in 2004 as a result of his strong performance in the rich Southeast of Wisconsin. Cruz got more votes in Wisconsin than Clinton (though not Sanders) in the primary, and Trump got 47.17% of the combined Clinton+Trump vote -not impressive, but better than Mitt’s performance in the 2012 general election and, given the strong Cruz performance there, nothing to sneeze at, either. Certainly, Wisconsin is a competitive state for Trump, though it depends on what extent Cruz supporters stay with Trump and Sanders supporters stay with Clinton.

Indeed, it was precisely looking at the driftless area’s primary results in Illinois and Iowa earlier this year just before the Wisconsin primary that led me to project a Trump win in that primary. I didn’t realize those Juan McSame (as opposed to rural populist Huckabee) and Mitt Rmoney (as opposed to rural populist Rick Santorum) voters in Southeast Wisconsin would naturally gravitate to the ultra-conservative Senator Ted Cruz, who, in Iowa at least, won the rural populist vote.

Here’s the wise Larry Kestenbaum on Michigan. Apparently, many Kasich cucks and Bernie bros crossed party lines in the general election this year, but understood they were voting for dictator, not simply president, so straight-ticket voting actually went up as a percentage of votes cast, and those who crossed party lines in the presidential race also tended to do so downballot, as well. Again, I voted straight Republican, even though I am by no means a fan of my pro-Trump GOPe representative. Paradoxically, to vote against the establishment, you have to vote with the GOPe.

As for how predictive the primary results were: Trump ended up winning every state in which Republican primary attendance exceeded Democratic (in the same type of contest) except for New Hampshire (surprising, given that Trump won more primary votes there than Clinton) and, completely unsurprisingly, Virginia. I thought GOP primary turnout exceeding Democratic in Michigan and Wisconsin was just a fluke due to Clinton’s inevitability and Trump’s lack of it. Wrong!