2020 Presidential Election Results by Top 50 MSA

[DCReid]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

It's going to be weird and awkward when the GOP actually has to begin pandering/catering to a growing Latino voting coalition. That's their path forward. Convince conservative Latinos/Hispanics who vote Dem to vote for them instead because of conservative ideals and traditions.

The white share of the population is dropping and soon, you won't be able to win on white voters alone. Sub-50% non-hispanic white in 20 years or so(it's slowdown a bit under Trump because immigration has slowed down).

I don't think it's an impossible task for the GOP, but it's going to require some introspection. Also, I think black males(especially uneducated, lower income) are a potential demographic the GOP can target in 10 years or so. Trump made an attempt and cut down their support for Biden quite a bit, but that could just be "strongman" Trump rather than anything else.

They may also start to target the Asian-American populations, like Indian-Americans, and Asians from former communist countries like Vietnam...

[Chef]

The deeper issue is that most of our political discourse is about culture rather than economics. Ever since Bill Clinton, the Democrats have more or less run on diet Reganism as their economic policy and played up the cultural leftism to keep the left placated - it is the only part of the left agenda that is also acceptable to the Democrats corporate backers. Our current electoral map has its origins in the 2000 election and is probably the product of this political paradigm.

If either party were to follow a course of legitimate economic populism and pro working class economics it would almost certainly end this era of the politics of culture and create an entirely new political map due to new political coalitions. Currently our party system is oriented along racial and cultural lines. We shouldn't take for granted that it will always be like that. Historically in western democracies a lot of politics has been oriented around class and economic divides. The FDR coalition was a lot more class driven than culture driven.

[badrunner]

Agreed for the most part but the two parties still have tangible differences in policy when it comes to things like minimum wage and affordable healthcare. There's no question which party actually tries to help the working class.

Democrats = coalition of elites + working class voting in their economic self interest.
Republicans = coalition of elites + working class voting against their economic self interest (identity politics and culture war issues being the motivator).

[M II A II R II K]

Where Did All The Bellwether Counties Go?

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...r-counties-go/

.....

- Arguably, it was 2016 and not 2020 when bellwether counties first showed signs of falling by the wayside, given their dramatic swing to the right in that election. A total of 35 counties voted for the winner of each presidential election from 1980 through 2012. Nineteen of these counties continued their streak in 2016 by voting for Trump, but the remaining 16 counties ended their bellwether streak by voting for Hillary Clinton. In other words, only 54 percent of bellwether counties from 1980 to 2012 kept their status in 2016. And notably, the 16 counties that lost their bellwether status in 2016 are more racially diverse.

- The average bellwether county from 1980 to 2016 voted 18.2 points to the right of the nation. Ultimately, of course, Trump’s strong performance in these counties didn’t matter because of Biden’s gains in the more highly educated suburbs of Milwaukee, Grand Rapids and Philadelphia. But it’s not just demographic trends driving the loss of bellwether status. Increased political polarization is another reason why fewer counties are consistently indicative of presidential results in recent years. — The fact that there are fewer swing counties means that there are fewer potential bellwether counties.

.....

[TexasPlaya]

Originally Posted by Chef

The deeper issue is that most of our political discourse is about culture rather than economics. Ever since Bill Clinton, the Democrats have more or less run on diet Reganism as their economic policy and played up the cultural leftism to keep the left placated - it is the only part of the left agenda that is also acceptable to the Democrats corporate backers. Our current electoral map has its origins in the 2000 election and is probably the product of this political paradigm.

If either party were to follow a course of legitimate economic populism and pro working class economics it would almost certainly end this era of the politics of culture and create an entirely new political map due to new political coalitions. Currently our party system is oriented along racial and cultural lines. We shouldn't take for granted that it will always be like that. Historically in western democracies a lot of politics has been oriented around class and economic divides. The FDR coalition was a lot more class driven than culture driven.

I disagree..... culture war gets more clicks and eyeballs than economics.

Democrats and progressives are routinely routed when it comes to economic issues due to poor messaging and losing the narrative battle. Clearly there's a big gulf between M4A polling well and actually put into action. Would have been nice for Bernie to have become outspoken in a meaningful way before the 2016 election.

[M II A II R II K]

An Extremely Detailed Map of the 2020 Election Interactive:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ction-map.html

[memph]

Originally Posted by badrunner

Agreed for the most part but the two parties still have tangible differences in policy when it comes to things like minimum wage and affordable healthcare. There's no question which party actually tries to help the working class.

Democrats = coalition of elites + working class voting in their economic self interest.
Republicans = coalition of elites + working class voting against their economic self interest (identity politics and culture war issues being the motivator).

Maybe the Republican working class voters are still a bit higher income so they don't stand to benefit as much from Democrat policies? Like not so much minimum wage workers, but more small business owners, skilled trades workers, etc.

[Crawford]

Per that NYT map, it looks like the some of the Trumpiest tracts in the U.S. are Hasidic Jewish.

I see a tract that voted 98% Trump. Wow.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Per that NYT map, it looks like the some of the Trumpiest tracts in the U.S. are Hasidic Jewish.

I see a tract that voted 98% Trump. Wow.

Is that just due to Israel bullshit?

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Is that just due to Israel bullshit?

It's due to communities voting according to edicts from their religious leaders.

In fact the Trumpiest Hasidic tracts are anti-Israel. The Satmar Jews of South Williamburg and Kiryas Joel are ultra anti-Zionist.

But looking at modern Orthodox communities, which are very pro-Israel and pro-Bibi, their support for Trump increased from 2016-2020. Places like Far Rockaway and Five Towns. Some of those tracts are 90% Trump, which is crazy.

[Manitopiaaa]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

An Extremely Detailed Map of the 2020 Election Interactive:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ction-map.html

Are they going to fill in the rest? I'm very mad about Virginia. We can't even do precinct level analysis because all of the absentee votes were pooled into a "Central Absentee Precinct" instead of being assigned to their actual precinct.

So county is the best we'll get.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

An Extremely Detailed Map of the 2020 Election Interactive:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ction-map.html

hmm, I wonder where the cops live

[AviationGuy]

Originally Posted by Manitopiaaa

Are they going to fill in the rest? I'm very mad about Virginia. We can't even do precinct level analysis because all of the absentee votes were pooled into a "Central Absentee Precinct" instead of being assigned to their actual precinct.

So county is the best we'll get.

Hopefully, as the map will fill in, we'll get a more complete map at the same URL. Here's the URL for the 2016 map. Hmm...looks like you have to subscribe the the NYT. I subscribed online (without charge) and I can see the map.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/.../36.12/-119.41

[pip]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

hmm, I wonder where the cops live

not in Canaryville nor the near SW side much if you are going for stereotypes. That was unexpected voting there. Also I think you will find cop/firefighters in many different areas with of course concentrations. That band on the near SW side is basically a big mix of peoples.

[SIGSEGV]

I was more talking about the Trump +30 Mt. Greenwood precincts.

[SamInTheLoop]

^ Yep, that's right. That's Copland (I understand the politics of it of course - much of it 'shockingly' race-based), but it's still quite ironic that the most hostile President and administration to the rule of law in (at least) modern history engendered such embarrassing, slavish support and enthusiasm from law enforcement.

The only other smaller pockets of precincts on the entire south side that also beclowned themselves by voting majority for Trump were in Canaryville and Bridgeport - that's less Copland than 'Shamelessland', if you will (think "Milkovich"). Those areas, though, are changing demographically - and I expect that change to accelerate rapidly this decade.

Not seen on the map, but to the far N/NW side of the city there was also another notable pocket of precinct(s) that went majority Trump. Correct if wrong, but I believe that's also Copland.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by Manitopiaaa

Are they going to fill in the rest? I'm very mad about Virginia. We can't even do precinct level analysis because all of the absentee votes were pooled into a "Central Absentee Precinct" instead of being assigned to their actual precinct.

So county is the best we'll get.

Yep - I think they have maybe somewhere around half of counties completed, and will progressively add them all.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

Not seen on the map, but to the far N/NW side of the city there was also another notable pocket of precinct(s) that went majority Trump. Correct if wrong, but I believe that's also Copland.

100% correct.

cops and firemen.

loads of 'em out there.

it's interesting how they coalesced to the most extreme NW and SW points within city limits.... almost like they just wanna suck off the city teet, but not actually live here

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by Crawford

It's due to communities voting according to edicts from their religious leaders.

In fact the Trumpiest Hasidic tracts are anti-Israel. The Satmar Jews of South Williamburg and Kiryas Joel are ultra anti-Zionist.

But looking at modern Orthodox communities, which are very pro-Israel and pro-Bibi, their support for Trump increased from 2016-2020. Places like Far Rockaway and Five Towns. Some of those tracts are 90% Trump, which is crazy.

the orthodox trump vote increased, they bought what he was selling, but those neighborhoods have always been republican president voters.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by mrnyc

the orthodox trump vote increased, they bought what he was selling, but those neighborhoods have always been republican president voters.

Hasidic voters vote for whomever their religious leaders tell them to vote for. They definitely voted Dem for POTUS until recently, and their local/state representation is Dem. But they voted very, very Trumpist, in both 2016 and 2020.

Modern Orthodox, it's probably more of a mixed picture, as they're not voting as a collective. I don't think the traditional Orthodox enclaves, such as Five Towns, Kew Garden Hills and Teaneck, voted GOP pre-Trump. But it's hard to get a clear picture, because all these enclaves have shifted from secular to Orthodox over time, so how do you parse out the Orthodox vote? Five Towns has been mostly Jewish for 60 years, but mostly Orthodox for maybe 20.