Deleted tweet detection is currently running at reduced
capacity due to changes to the Twitter API. Some tweets that have been
deleted by the tweet author may not be labeled as deleted in the PolitiTweet
interface.
Showing page 264 of 504.
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
I suppose I’d just challenge @NateSilver538 to come up w/ any scenario in which the 2020 Dem loses the popular vote but wins the EC. Think it’s pretty damn hard to do. cc: @Nate_Cohn — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
It’s true that Obama enjoyed an EC bonus, esp. b/c he did an impressive job of defining Romney negatively early w/ swing state-targeted ads. It’s also true that slight shifts could convert a large Trump EC bonus into a modest Dem EC bonus, but prob only w/ a substantial Dem win. — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
It’s a fair critique. The size of the gap b/t the nation and the “tipping point” depends on a lot of things we can’t know right now, foremost the identity of the D nominee. But demographic patterns suggest it’s widened since 2016, in Trump’s favor. — PolitiTweet.org
Nate Silver @NateSilver538
The reason is that I see this as being a fairly dynamic process. To be honest this is sort of my critique of the… https://t.co/7hxjA97Jf3
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
One often-overlooked thing: if Dems were to flip MI & PA back but Trump were to hold onto AZ, FL, NC & WI, Omaha’s #NE02 (Trump +2 in ‘16) would be much likelier to get Dems to a 269-269 tie than #ME02 (Trump +10 in ‘16). — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
If you were to tell me that AZ & WI were both essentially tied, that might line up pretty well w/ a scenario in which the Dem nominee is winning the popular vote by 4-5% nationally. — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
Translation: the 2020 Dem nominee might need to beat Trump by at least ~4% in the popular vote to defeat him in the Electoral College. — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
My latest: how Trump could lose by *5 million+* votes and still win reelection (guess @Nate_Cohn and I are thinking… https://t.co/erSONja6rS
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
I’d lean no...keep in mind that’d be like a 7 million vote margin (3 pts about 4 million) — PolitiTweet.org
John Michael Gonzalez @newdemrex
What a about a 5 point win @Redistrict https://t.co/xBmw8pg8lZ
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
fwiw I’d lean yes. — PolitiTweet.org
Nate Silver @NateSilver538
@Nate_Cohn Conditional on Democrats winning the popular vote by 3 points, would you bet on Trump winning the Electoral College?
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
RT @nathanlgonzales: Crap. Do all the Nathans have to be on this? It's Friday afternoon. https://t.co/ikkS6ZzZ9k — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
Hi, my *middle* name is Nathan...can I get in on this? — PolitiTweet.org
Nate Silver @NateSilver538
The fact that the results of people *actually voting* in the 2018 midterms implies a rather different takeaway than… https://t.co/fvyt9ZjNqJ
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
RT @NBCNews: Analysis: Hillary Clinton got 2.9M more votes than Donald Trump in the 2016 election, but Trump comfortably prevailed in the E… — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
@Nate_Cohn Not disagreeing w/ that. But the shift since '16 you're describing based on polls at least theoretically takes into account some non-white growth. If white shifts alone could take it to 5 million, i suppose non-white growth patterns could take it to 6+ million. — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
I might look at it the other way around: a net 2.7 million more eligible non-white voters in CA & TX (vs. no net white gain) would go a long way towards a 5 million vote gap - w/ shifting white patterns exacerbating that. Tough to quantify impact of each. — PolitiTweet.org
Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn
For what it's worth, I'd subtly differ here. The conditions for a 5 million vote gap exist--right now--primarily du… https://t.co/07IOlFN5qY
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
Why is AZ uniquely promising for Dems among Trump-won Sun Belt states? 1) very high suburban vs. rural vote ratio, esp. compared to FL/MI/PA/WI 2) third-fastest non-white growth, behind only NV/CA 3) young professionals moving to Phoenix/Tucson 4) Trump-skeptic LDS community https://t.co/hKZv1GDzvb — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
What you're describing: precisely what happened in '16. — PolitiTweet.org
Kevin Ken Remedio @binotblabla
@Redistrict @Nate_Cohn I think it's virtually impossible for the Dem nominee to gain 1.2 million votes in CA and sl… https://t.co/NuKq5yD5dS
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
The six states best-positioned to decide the 2020 outcome are still AZ, FL, MI, NC, PA & WI. But if I really had to narrow it down to the two most likely "tipping point" states, I'd say: Arizona and Wisconsin. — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
The one Sun Belt state where robust non-white growth & boom in suburban/young professionals bodes well for Dems in a tight Electoral College race: Arizona. — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
Meanwhile, despite its robust non-white growth, FL's trajectory is favorable to Trump b/c of 1) its above-average Hispanic support for GOP candidates and 2) migration of conservative Midwestern whites to its Gulf Coast - both factors that were on display in 2018. — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
@Nate_Cohn Besides CA & TX, the top 15 most rapidly-diversifying states include solidly blue states where Dems might receive millions more useless votes in 2020: CT, MD, MA NJ, NY, OR & WA. — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
@Nate_Cohn The 2020 nominee could expand Clinton's CA margin by 1.2 million votes & slash Trump's TX margin by 800,000 - and still not be rewarded with a single additional Electoral College vote. But the demographic transformation fueling Dems in those states isn't as present in MI/PA/WI. — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
@Nate_Cohn A big reason: the demographic change fueling Dems' national edge is most robust in the states that matter *the least* in the Electoral College - esp. CA & TX. https://t.co/nMd1o8sRoQ — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
My latest: how Trump could lose by *5 million+* votes and still win reelection (guess @Nate_Cohn and I are thinking alike today). https://t.co/IR6Ovxhwdu — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
RT @Nate_Cohn: Trump's Electoral College edge endures heading into 2020, and it could grow further--potentially allowing him to win the pre… — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
Plenty of parts of MA have more in common culturally w/ wide swaths of MI/WI than they have with, say, Cambridge or Amherst. — PolitiTweet.org
Josh @jflanlan
@Redistrict What does MA have in common with MI or WI? Why would they be related?
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
RT @CookPolitical: Both sides risk disaffecting suburban voters in 2020. NEW @amyewalter column: https://t.co/jYEHJqGxlM — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
@TopherSpiro interesting theory, but the evidence says... https://t.co/FpeZjSPbNe — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
Fact: in the 2018 "blue wave," Republicans lost 17% of their House seats but 32% of their foreign-born constituents. Democrats now represent 54% of all House seats but 76% of all foreign-born U.S. residents. — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
@TopherSpiro Huh? your original point was that home states sour on their sens b/c they get stale. Bernie/Markey/Leahy/Klobuchar have been in office for decades and are atop the list of the most popular senators in the nation — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
Whatever you'd like to believe... https://t.co/W1ANaSfrKC — PolitiTweet.org
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict
It's not just Elizabeth Warren's approval %s that are unimpressive. Fact: in *2018,* a blue wave year, she underperformed Clinton's 2016 share in 228/351 towns in Massachusetts. If you think that bodes well for her chances of outperforming Clinton in MI/PA/WI etc.... 🤷♂️🤷♀️ — PolitiTweet.org
