The problem is people never ever see this third group, not in the media, not in the movies and definitely not in social media, simply because this group is really boring to be in the spotlight.
No, the "rationals" have a lot of vocal folks. They love debate. They are not low-key at all.
The folks you are looking for are actually middle aged white working class folks. They are the invisible majority. They are the ones who gave Trump 71 million votes and yet remain totally invisible in all the pollster's radar. All pollsters predicted a landslide victory for Biden. It was anything but landside.
This group is practically invisible, impossible to point in a crowd and is never seen or heard, but represents everything that's good with America. This group is educated, not easily fooled, and does not have any loyalty to either party. This group does not care whether you are a Democrat or a Republican as long as you are bringing something this group needs.
Errr.... Nope.
The mythical Group you are referring to does not exists. The places with highest concentration of highly educated folks like Calif, Washington, New York etc often votes Blue consistently. Infact most of college educated folks vote for Democrats in USA.
To understand the phenomenon of "swing states" you may want to read this excellent piece from Times (Why Swing States Are a Thing).
These are basically folks who are not having college degrees. They have often voted for Democrats in past. They have been switching party lines recently but "swing" is more the product of motivation to vote or NOT to vote. Often the margin of victory in swing states is pretty less.
1. There are swing states in USA. People in USA do register to one party or another. While they are not obliged to vote for the party they register for, they do vote on the part lines.
2. US actually have "pro-incumbency" when dealing with getting a second term. Presidents often get the second term.
3. Its worth repeating this : There are swing states in USA more than swing voters. It is important to understand this otherwise you will be confused why things happen the way they happen.
For instance : When you say "This group correctly decided Clinton was a hack in 2016 while at the same time voted Obama to power in 2008.". You are wrong. Why? Because Clinton WON the popular vote. She HAD more votes than Trump. What tanked her was electoral college. It was swing states that caused her defeat NOT the "rational, educated" people whom you are referring to. She lost Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania. Not exactly the bastions of education and reason. The states with HIGHEST "educated rationals" like Calif and Washington voted for her and her only (http://usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/education/higher-education).
The key to understanding US presential elections is to understand this weird system called electoral college and how few states swing.
Okay, firstly you have to understand that I have been following US elections ever since Jug Suriya's Dubyaman started being published, so you can be sure I know how US elections work.
Second, you need to understand what I said here: And due to some lucky quirk of fate, some members of this group ended up in the right parts of the country that allows their vote to become important enough that they are the ones who end up steering America's fate.
I am talking about these swing states. It was because I knew the dynamics of the swing states that I called Trump's victory a year before he was elected in 2016. And the media completely failed to identify this third group because they form a sizeable chunk of the population in these "right parts of the country", where people do not have party loyalty. In other parts, Republican or Democrat states, they are completely crowded out by party loyalists, regardless of whether they are educated or not.
Thirdly, you have to understand that "educated" doesn't mean they represent only one or two parts of the US geography. They are everywhere. My point here is they are not the average stupid Republican supporter or the "intellectual" Democrat supporters and minorities who almost always vote Democrat. They are educated and have enough of it to not show party loyalty.
Clinton won the popularity vote for the same reason all Democrats almost always win the popularity vote, too few people in certains areas of the country with too many electoral votes and vice versa, which ends up favouring the Democrats.
The main aspect of the US elections is you must and always pander to the group of people who do not show any party loyalty. If you identify what these people need, you win an election every time. This has always been the one simple rule of American elections. The problem for all the candidates is this group is educated and can't be fooled. They change their vote based on what's being offered. No party loyalty = the best voter.
Okay, firstly you have to understand that I have been following US elections ever since Jug Suriya's Dubyaman started being published, so you can be sure I know how US elections work.
Thirdly, you have to understand that "educated" doesn't mean they represent only one or two parts of the US geography. They are everywhere. My point here is they are not the average stupid Republican supporter or the "intellectual" Democrat supporters and minorities who almost always vote Democrat. They are educated and have enough of it to not show party loyalty.
Okay, lemme ask you one thing first, what do you mean by "educated". I have seen you use this term in three posts. What do you mean by this? I asked this before but lets settle this. What do you mean by "educated", specifically?
Clinton won the popularity vote for the same reason all Democrats almost always win the popularity vote, too few people in certains areas of the country with too many electoral votes and vice versa, which ends up favouring the Democrats.
Errr... In this very thread, time and again I have seen you make mistake on understanding the nature of US election and make factual mistakes.
Okay, lemme ask you one thing first, what do you mean by "educated". I have seen you use this term in three posts. What do you mean by this? I asked this before but lets settle this. What do you mean by "educated", specifically?
Educated means understanding what a president is offering and what they need and not simply showing blind faith towards the colour they are wearing. Such people understand what a democracy is and how it works. I'm not referring to someone holding a masters degree in something or the other. That's a different kind of education. A PhD in mathematics doesn't necessarily make you educated in civics.
Voting for your own party no matter what is not what democracy is about. And you require a proper understanding of the political system to be an independent voter.
You are referring to the ages gone, where swing states with the structure like today didn't exist and the economy and job market were different, while not facing as much immigration as today, which has changed demographics and the job market.
The media is still talking about uneducated factory workers who lost jobs a generation ago like it matters today.
But lest they get too excited, campaign veterans warn that a wave of Republican votes is coming on Election Day.
www.politico.com
As of Tuesday, Democrats accounted for almost 51 percent of the nearly 1.8 million ballots cast so far. Republicans had cast about 520,000 ballots, or about 29 percent of the total.
The remaining 20 percent of the ballots mailed in so far have been cast by independent voters who have no party affiliation or belong to minor third parties.
There are plenty of these "independent voters" all over the country, not just in Florida, and it's only in the "swing states" that they are in enough numbers to matter.
An independent voter, often also called an unaffiliated voter in the United States, is a voter who does not align themselves with a political party. An independent is variously defined as a voter who votes for candidates on issues rather than on the basis of a political ideology or partisanship; a voter who does not have long-standing loyalty to, or identification with, a political party; a voter who does not usually vote for the same political party from election to election; or a voter who self-describes as an independent.
The 2016 election showed how undeniably retarded the concept of party loyalty is. The independent voters were educated enough to understand what Trump offered, and to his credit he did deliver what he promised in terms of economy. To his bad luck, Trump ended up facing the pandemic during election year, and he ended up demonstrating that he can become unhinged during a crisis, which the independent voters identified easily, as they usually do.
Ellen Kirschner is no cheerleader for Donald Trump, but the retired Florida letter carrier also feels unsure about voting for a Democrat in next year's presidential election.
Educated means understanding what a president is offering and what they need and not simply showing blind faith towards the colour they are wearing. Such people understand what a democracy is and how it works. I'm not referring to someone holding a masters degree in something or the other. That's a different kind of education. A PhD in mathematics doesn't necessarily make you educated in civics.
Voting for your own party no matter what is not what democracy is about. And you require a proper understanding of the political system to be an independent voter.
You are referring to the ages gone, where swing states with the structure like today didn't exist and the economy and job market were different, while not facing as much immigration as today, which has changed demographics and the job market.
The media is still talking about uneducated factory workers who lost jobs a generation ago like it matters today.
But lest they get too excited, campaign veterans warn that a wave of Republican votes is coming on Election Day.
www.politico.com
As of Tuesday, Democrats accounted for almost 51 percent of the nearly 1.8 million ballots cast so far. Republicans had cast about 520,000 ballots, or about 29 percent of the total.
The remaining 20 percent of the ballots mailed in so far have been cast by independent voters who have no party affiliation or belong to minor third parties.
There are plenty of these "independent voters" all over the country, not just in Florida, and it's only in the "swing states" that they are in enough numbers to matter.
An independent voter, often also called an unaffiliated voter in the United States, is a voter who does not align themselves with a political party. An independent is variously defined as a voter who votes for candidates on issues rather than on the basis of a political ideology or partisanship; a voter who does not have long-standing loyalty to, or identification with, a political party; a voter who does not usually vote for the same political party from election to election; or a voter who self-describes as an independent.
The 2016 election showed how undeniably retarded the concept of party loyalty is. The independent voters were educated enough to understand what Trump offered, and to his credit he did deliver what he promised in terms of economy. To his bad luck, Trump ended up facing the pandemic during election year, and he ended up demonstrating that he can become unhinged during a crisis, which the independent voters identified easily, as they usually do.
Ellen Kirschner is no cheerleader for Donald Trump, but the retired Florida letter carrier also feels unsure about voting for a Democrat in next year's presidential election.
I feel the corona virus reasoning is overblown. There's no way Biden gets this many votes without some foul play. Trump actually let the states handle the epidemic as they wanted. Which resulted in dem states performing badly because they enforced the lockdown and republican states performing decently. He only focused on distribution. The media obviously hijacked it and made it all about him. And no way do independent voters vote for Biden after all the hunter email leaks were covered.
Trumps failure due to his handling of Covid seems like bad Analysis and everybody has been repeating it unfortunately..
I feel the corona virus reasoning is overblown. There's no way Biden gets this many votes without some foul play. Trump actually let the states handle the epidemic as they wanted. Which resulted in dem states performing badly because they enforced the lockdown and republican states performing decently. He only focused on distribution. The media obviously hijacked it and made it all about him. And no way do independent voters vote for Biden after all the hunter email leaks were covered.
Trumps failure due to his handling of Covid seems like bad Analysis and everybody has been repeating it unfortunately..
Educated means understanding what a president is offering and what they need and not simply showing blind faith towards the colour they are wearing. Such people understand what a democracy is and how it works. I'm not referring to someone holding a masters degree in something or the other. That's a different kind of education. A PhD in mathematics doesn't necessarily make you educated in civics.
Voting for your own party no matter what is not what democracy is about. And you require a proper understanding of the political system to be an independent voter.
Well, that is not the typical definition of "educated", it is typically called a "wise" voter. I will even call such folks as "ideal" or "perfect" voters as they vote after deep analysis of candidates (sitting presidents or not).
Trouble is, it is HARD to estimate how many such folks exist. I don't know of any study which has tried to ascertain that or even estimate that. To do that with even on single person will require you to interview them and check their knowledge of US democracy AND their intentions.
The remaining 20 percent of the ballots mailed in so far have been cast by independent voters who have no party affiliation or belong to minor third parties.
Being un-registered does not mean being "wise" voter. It just means being un-registered and nothing more. At best you can call some of them "undecided" voters. These are not exactly the kind of voters that you are alluding to. Just because someone is not affiliated with any party, it does not mean s/he is a voter who does a deep consideration of actions and messages of both candidates.
They could, for instance, be someone who are unhappy with either parties as either kind of government failed to improve their conditions -- eg. someone whose job disappeared due to globalization or automation. Neither side can do anything to help their employment situation. Many voters in Michigan are like that.
BTW, another rather interesting characteristic of "wise" voters is that they end up voting for third parties like Green Party or independent candidates because it is easier to find your niche of thinking among independent and/or third party voters. Green Party for instance caters to those who have a strong urge to protect the environment.
Its hard to ascertain how much pull such "wise" voters have on actual election results. It even harder to ascertain their numbers.
Well, that is not the typical definition of "educated", it is typically called a "wise" voter. I will even call such folks as "ideal" or "perfect" voters as they vote after deep analysis of candidates (sitting presidents or not).
Trouble is, it is HARD to estimate how many such folks exist. I don't know of any study which has tried to ascertain that or even estimate that. To do that with even on single person will require you to interview them and check their knowledge of US democracy AND their intentions.
Being un-registered does not mean being "wise" voter. It just means being un-registered and nothing more. At best you can call some of them "undecided" voters. These are not exactly the kind of voters that you are alluding to. Just because someone is not affiliated with any party, it does not mean s/he is a voter who does a deep consideration of actions and messages of both candidates.
They could, for instance, be someone who are unhappy with either parties as either kind of government failed to improve their conditions -- eg. someone whose job disappeared due to globalization or automation. Neither side can do anything to help their employment situation. Many voters in Michigan are like that.
BTW, another rather interesting characteristic of "wise" voters is that they end up voting for third parties like Green Party or independent candidates because it is easier to find your niche of thinking among independent and/or third party voters. Green Party for instance caters to those who have a strong urge to protect the environment.
Its hard to ascertain how much pull such "wise" voters have on actual election results. It even harder to ascertain their numbers.
Anyway, that's the problem. Nobody knows how many there are and who they are. They simply exist and they are the ones who tilt the election in favour of a particular candidate. They decide the election. There's nothing more to it. They simply don't care about Democrats or Republicans.
Call them wise or educated, they know how the system works and they make calculated decisions. So if Trump attacks the Supreme Court, he loses all subsequent elections he takes part in. It's that simple.
They simply exist and they are the ones who tilt the election in favour of a particular candidate. They decide the election. There's nothing more to it.
Call them wise or educated, they know how the system works and they make calculated decisions. So if Trump attacks the Supreme Court, he loses all subsequent elections he takes part in. It's that simple.
No, we don't know how many of them are wise ones like the one person that article mentioned. We just know that a significant number of people are undecided. We don't know anything more than that. Heck we don't even know if they vote or not.
As I said, in Michigan (the article I linked to shows that) has many former factory workers who used to vote for Democrats and now they vote for republicans at times and at times they don't vote at all and from the looks of it, they voted for Biden in some number this time.
To claim that they know the system well, you need evidence for that. Not one or two people but a proper evidence, we don't have that.
So, your claim that these folks "will judge Trump" does not hold water. BTW, looking at what he is doing, it seems his swan song is going to be interesting to say the least.
[An American] is probably the most unhappy citizen in the history of the world.
He has no power to get anything but money, and his money inflates like a balloon and drifts away, subject to historical circumstances and the power of others. From morning to night, he touches nothing of what he has produced himself that he can be proud of.
In spite of all his leisure time, he feels bad, he looks bad, he is overweight, his health is bad. His air, water and food are all known to contain poisons. There is a good chance he will die of asphyxiation. He suspects that his love life is not as satisfying as that of others.
He wishes he had been born sooner or later. He doesn't know why his children are the way they are. He doesn't understand what they are saying. He doesn't care much and doesn't know why he doesn't care. He doesn't know what his wife wants or what he wants.
Some advertisements and pictures in magazines make him suspect that he is fundamentally unattractive. He feels that all his possessions are under threat of looting. He doesn't know what he would do if he lost his job, if the economy collapsed, if public utilities went bankrupt, if the police went on strike, if truckers went on strike, if his wife left him, if his children ran away, if it was discovered that he was incurably ill.
And for these anxieties, of course, he consults approved experts, who in turn consult approved experts about their anxieties.
Wendell Berry, The unsettling of America (1977) quoted by Jeremy Rifkin, Entropy (1980)
[An American] is probably the most unhappy citizen in the history of the world.
He has no power to get anything but money, and his money inflates like a balloon and drifts away, subject to historical circumstances and the power of others. From morning to night, he touches nothing of what he has produced himself that he can be proud of.
In spite of all his leisure time, he feels bad, he looks bad, he is overweight, his health is bad. His air, water and food are all known to contain poisons. There is a good chance he will die of asphyxiation. He suspects that his love life is not as satisfying as that of others.
He wishes he had been born sooner or later. He doesn't know why his children are the way they are. He doesn't understand what they are saying. He doesn't care much and doesn't know why he doesn't care. He doesn't know what his wife wants or what he wants.
Some advertisements and pictures in magazines make him suspect that he is fundamentally unattractive. He feels that all his possessions are under threat of looting. He doesn't know what he would do if he lost his job, if the economy collapsed, if public utilities went bankrupt, if the police went on strike, if truckers went on strike, if his wife left him, if his children ran away, if it was discovered that he was incurably ill.
And for these anxieties, of course, he consults approved experts, who in turn consult approved experts about their anxieties.
Wendell Berry, The unsettling of America (1977) quoted by Jeremy Rifkin, Entropy (1980)
