Nate Cohn

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@KBAndersen new york has a lot of democratic-leaning absentee ballots left to count. this could change a lot — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

The 2016-2020 swing is barely even worth mention on the 2012-2016 scale, at least outside of heavily Latino areas and ATL/DAL. If we narrow the scale to tease out this cycle's subtler shifts, suburban movement stands out a bit more but still isn't always overwhelming https://t.co/TnseCxrhAl — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Most of this swing occurs from 2012-2016, with relative stability between 2016 and 2020 https://t.co/czD4zfOKiE — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Biden now leads by 3.86 points nationwide, per @Redistrict popular vote tracker, matching Obama's 3.86 pt win in 2012. He'll exceed it soon. They won by similar amounts in very different ways. Here's the shift in presidential results between 2012 and 2020 https://t.co/XjNsqOLfkd — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@tbonier @DanRosenheck i agree, and said the same thing in 2016. but it's worse this time. this was a higher turnout election and you got the exact same black turnout. maybe the city's in bigger population decline than the census says, but otherwise that's a real disappointment for democrats — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@tbonier @DanRosenheck (and for a similar reason, i do disagree with your tweet about DET from earlier. dems weren't happy with the turnout in detroit in 2016; some even thought it cost them the state. i don't see how another '16 turnout should now make Dems pleased!) — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@tbonier @DanRosenheck i don't think of it as an indictment of black turnout. i do think it's an indictment of a strategy of winning GA (or for that matter, MI/PA/WI/NC) by increasing the black share of the electorate, which was a real hope for progressives post-2016, and which just didn't happen — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@tbonier @DanRosenheck but i don't think your characterization here on the unknowns is accurate: your above contention isn't simply that it deflates the share that's black--you're saying the black share actually went up, if i understand you right. and i don't see the case for that at all — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@tbonier @DanRosenheck but i don't think that characterization of your critique on the unknowns is accurate. your contention isn't simply that it deflates the share that's black--you're saying the black share actually went up, if i understand you right. and i don't see the case for that at all — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@tbonier @DanRosenheck i definitely think i should have said the same of white voters (did on twitter), and intended to do so in the piece. it was part of a section focused on latino/asian voters that i decided to cut (because of unknowns) and i wound up taking the baby out with the bathwater on it — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@aaronhuertas @tbonier @DanRosenheck you're following correctly, but the decline in the black share of the voters exceeds the decline in their share of registrants--so the increase in 'unknown' would only upset the finding if they're disproportionately black — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@tbonier @DanRosenheck I might have missed something but no I don’t think i disagree with their finding at all — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@tbonier @DanRosenheck all of the evidence at my disposal suggests the 'unknown' aren't disproportionately black, let alone by enough to complicate the finding — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@AnonVAPerson @tbonier @DanRosenheck it's just leaving it blank. people of all races do it — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@tbonier @DanRosenheck i really couldn't possibly have less respect for it! i'll be brief, since you obviously aren't interested. but for the others: all of the evidence at my disposal suggests the 'unknown' aren't disproportionately black, let alone by enough to complicate the finding — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@tbonier @DanRosenheck lol you don't get to subtweet like that and then be upset when someone offers the subtweeted an opportunity to reply! — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

This time though, I'm not sure the Democrats can blame themselves. This was a referendum on Trump, and even if Clinton/Dem weaknesses created the opening for him four years ago he's now cemented these as strengths of his own. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Many of the challenges identified for Democrats in their 2016 post-mortem still hold today: the Trump-Obama vote; something less than the turnout they wanted/assumed; and now the added issue of relative weakness among nonwhite voters — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

As a result, Biden's gains came in many of the same places that Clinton surged in four years ago: traditionally Republican, well-educated suburbs, and often with limited coat-tails for downballot Democrats — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Instead, Biden wound up winning in a way that I think many post-2016 post-mortems allowed as a possibility, but that I think had relatively few advocates: more-or-less run the Clinton playbook, but with a less polarizing candidate — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

And most of all, this theory assumed--implicitly--that all Dems needed to do was win 2016, as the president had maxed out his support, hadn't won any new converts, and couldn't compete in a higher turnout election. That assumption was wrong — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

The evidence never really matched this theory IMO, but it looks even worse today. The black share of the electorate did not increase, and quite possibly dropped. The voter file data we have so far suggests that the partisan turnout balance was unchanged or even *better* for Rs — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

A second theory was that Trump won because of a bad progressive, youth, and nonwhite (but especially Black) turnout. To win, all Democrats needed was to recreate the Obama turnout, win some Jill Stein votes, etc. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

A lot of the data preelection suggested Biden did have some success there, but it's really, really hard to see the case for it now. In fact, many Obama-->Trump counties swung even *more* toward Trump in WI, OH, IA, etc. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

One theory was that Trump won by flipping white, working class Obama voters, and therefore Dems needed to lure them back--maybe with a populist economic pitch. I think that explanation for Trump's win was accurate, but Biden had very, very limited success with Obama-Trump vote — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

There were basically two major diagnoses for Clinton's win--and two main arguments for how Dems should win going forward. Neither is how Biden pulled it off — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

One interesting thing about this election is the extent that the 2016 post-mortems and subsequent arguments for how Democrats should win--by basically everyone!--don't necessarily look great in retrospect. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

RT @xenocryptsite: But Michigan as a whole cast 115% of its 2016 vote or so, and it's not like Clinton's raw margin in Detroit was anything… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

RT @davidshor: @The73million @mattyglesias It’s weird that “The hispanic vote is not a monolith” has been the mantra in response to an ele… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

True, this would eliminate 'dumps,' but it would give rise to a new set of conspiracy theories. At a certain point, if you want to reject an election result you'll contrive a way to do it. The 'dumps' argument make it clear we're in that category https://t.co/4cz3s2tTvE — PolitiTweet.org