Election 2020: Review and Final Thoughts

 Election 2020 is pretty much over and it was quite historic for multiple reasons:

• Highest voter turnout in American history - over 150 million votes

• Most mail in ballots in American history

• First time since 1992 where the winner of the Presidential contest (I'm 98% certain it's Joe Biden) in Florida lost the Electoral College

• Both Joe Biden (over 78 million votes) and Donald Trump (over 72 million votes) are the greatest Democratic and GOP Presidential vote getters in American history by well over 10% more than the previous record

To be frank, I was surprised by the result.  Although I did not vote for Trump (not this year or in 2016), I did expect him to win based on the criteria I spoke about in my prediction blog.  While there is litigation pending, I am 98% certain that Joe Biden will be formally ratified as President on Jan 6, 2021.  I will say that Trump has the right to pursue the litigation he seeks, but I just want that litigation to be adjudicated as quickly as possible to bring closure to this election in a way that is transparent and brings confidence to the election process.  

  

I confess I underestimated the effects of mail in balloting in helping Biden in swing states such as PA, GA, AZ and MI.  I will say that what concerns me about that is the lack of transparency regarding mail in balloting.  That goes from the chain of custody to secure the ballots to actually knowing how many of them are there to count. I believe the former can be addressed using the template used in states that have secured systems for mail in balloting such as Oregon, Colorado and Florida. The latter I think we actually need some federal standards for states to abide by in regards to counting the number of ballots sent out and counting how many have returned by Election Day.  I don't think it's unreasonable to expect all the votes to be counted by the day after Election Day, since most states are currently able to do that.  As one who does generally vote early, I think there should be a shortened window when a person can start to vote early and Election Day.  Those are my myopic thoughts.

Regarding the results of the election, outside of the final result of the Presidential race, my prediction was pretty accurate in my opinion.

• Trump increased his share of support from Hispanics and Blacks by a notable margin.  Hence that's why he was able to win FL quite easily.

• It was a high turnout election, about 150 million votes, I said 155 million

• Trump's late surge did help GOP in the Senate races.  Currently the GOP holds 50 seats with 2 pending.  I predicted that the GOP would win 52.

• Trump's late surge also helped the GOP in the House, especially in swing districts in CA and NY, netting probably around 10-12 seats.  I predicted the GOP would gain 12 seats.

If the GOP wins one of the GA runoffs, which I think is a 50/50 shot, I think the Biden Presidency will be one of great gridlock with no major policy changes.  Biden's greatest impacts would be in the regulatory and national security areas at that point.  I also think there's a 25% chance we won't see Biden finish his term.  When you pass the average lifespan for a male like Biden has, it's a real possibility.

So there is a high probability that after Thanksgiving we'll be speculating what will Trump do after January 20.  Well, in my myopic opinion, knowing how Trump is not one to shy away from attention as his marketing skills, we will not hear the end of him.  In fact, there's a decent chance we may have extended his influence an extra four years.  With the current apparatus he has in loyal supporters, I could see Trump basically becoming the chief critic of not only Biden, but the establishment "Swamp" in DC from both parties.  He could immediately say he's likely to try to run again in 2024, although I think that's unlikely initially.  But Trump will likely use his media acumen to keep himself in public view.  Whether that's through rallies he'll continue to hold or media channels he can control.   Throughout it all, he can act as chief critic and provocateur to his opposition.  If he does that, he can then use those channels as a testing ground on whether he'd try to pull off a Grover Cleveland type feat and run again to win in 2024.

I appreciate all of you who have followed my posts over the last couple months.  Hopefully you've found them insightful.  Please drop a line to keep in touch.  I'd appreciate hearing from you.  But I wish you a Happy Thanksgiving and a Blessed Christmas.  It is what it is.

Election 2020: Final Projections

Election 2020 is about over.  I am sure we all just want our lives back to normal.  But before then, we have to go through Election day (week, etc).  I have presented my projection maps throughout the campaign, with varying levels of interests.  I will start out with the admission that while I thought that Trump was surging in 2016, I didn't quite see him winning.  Well, 4 years later, I see Trump again surging over the last three weeks, as he has become much more focused and disciplined in delivering his message, just like he was the last 3 weeks of the 2016 election.  With that in mind, here's my final projection map.

Some observations:

• Trump's campaign appears to have solidified much of their 2016 coalition, especially white, working-class males and seniors.  Trump has increased enthusiasm among these groups, largely through talking about several of his policies (tariffs, immigration, trade) as well as the greatest persuasion tactic, fear.  Such enthusiasm is the best Get Out To Vote (GOTV) asset any campaign can have.  Although Trump appears weaker in the suburbs, particularly suburban women, in most battlegrounds (perhaps outside Wisconsin),  he has been able to make the gap there with increasing his support among Hispanics and Blacks, particularly working class Black men. When the likes of Black influences like Lil Wayne, 50 Cent and Charlamagne the God are either endorsing Trump or giving strong reasons not to vote for Biden, it makes a difference.  Joe Biden's appeal was suppose to be able to gain much of that lost working class support back to the Democrats.  It doesn't look like he really succeeded in accomplishing that goal.  

• Talking about GOTV, one of the reasons why I see Trump win swing states such as PA, MI, WI, NH and MN is that Trump's campaign has spent much more of their resources on strategic, pavement pounding GOTV while the Biden campaign has spent most of their resources on tv ads.  I feel folks generally get tired after a while seeing the same TV/radio ad over and over again.  Trump's campaign has been less frequent on those ads and have invested more in strategic door knocking.  Plus, Trump's campaign use the rallies, which have been large, for the duel purpose of finding new contacts as well as volunteers to do the door knocking. Thus, the rallies allow Trump to find enthused new voters as well as enthused volunteers.   Nevertheless, all this is to say that Trump's campaign have more folks/resources to make sure that their vote comes to the polls, especially on Election Day.  I feel that will make the difference in several of these close battleground states where Trump appears to be surging.  In short, more interactive contact + high enthusiasm > passive contact + lower enthusiasm. 

• This will be a high turnout election, I am projecting 155 million votes.

• I feel with Trump's apparent surge, the Republicans in Senate fortunes have also improved, especially in NC, ME, GA, MN, MI, AZ and IA.  I project the GOP will win 52 seats (net loss of 1).

• Regarding the House,  Trump's surge in swing states such as MN, IA and PA will help the GOP win several swing districts in those areas.  Whether or not the GOP wins back control of the House, the GOP needs a net gain of 17 seats, depends on the results in swing districts in CA and NY.  I'm sensing a big issue in these areas are law enforcement and Covid.  I will say the GOP will gain 12 seats, which could ironically split the Democratic House Caucus between the moderates and progressives.

After we have a winner, I'll put together my post-mortem analysis.  Until then, it is what it is.

Election 2020 - Election Night Guide

 As we head toward the final stretch to Election Day, I want to share what I'll be looking for on Election Night.  I'm going to base this off when the polls are closing.

6 PM: New Hampshire/Florida/Georgia/North Carolina -  We should be seeing trends fairly early on how long the night will be. 

New Hampshire should be one of the first to show a trend and perhaps the first to make a call.  If Biden wins New Hampshire,  I will be looking to Florida to see if it's truly going to be a long night.  If Trump wins New Hampshire, it would be a signal that his Get Out To Vote (GOTV) operation is working well, plus it's likely that NH's GOP Governor Chris Sununu has been re-elected.   

Florida is has been the bellweather state that in the winner of Florida has won last 6 Presidential elections.  In fact, the only winner of FL that has not won the Electoral College since 1960 is Bill Clinton in 1992.  So FL is quite the strong predictive result.  I think it's so predictive because FL has so many migrates from the Midwest and the Rust Belt, so it's a reflection of that whole region. So it's obvious the winner will be the overwhelming favorite to win the election.  There are three areas of Florida I will be looking for trends:

• Miami-Dade/Broward/Palm Beach Counties (SE FL): these areas are where Biden needs to run up about 2 to 1 margins to have any chance to win.  If it's 55/45 Biden coming out of these counties, we're likely to see an earlier call as usual for Florida for Trump.  Trump has actively tried to make inroads with Cubans/Venezuelans preaching freedom from Socialism to close the gap with Hispanics in that area.  The success Trump has in that area will largely be dependent on the GOTV of these Hispanics.

• I-4 Corridor: These are the counties along the I-4, which stretches from Daytona Beach to Tampa. The counties are a combination of strong democratic areas around Orlando surrounded by GOP tilting areas.  It's an area that has a lot of votes.  By default, Biden should be the favorite here since Orlando is a large population center to pile up votes.  However, Biden needs to win 53% of the vote there, along with his 2-1 margin in SE FL to feel good about winning the state.  If Trump wins here outright, it's likely he's going to win FL by at least 2%, a comfortable margin in recent Presidential election history for FL.

• Gainesville/Jacksonville (NE FL): NE FL is an area close to my heart, since I consider it my home away from home.  It combines liberal Gainesville (home to the University of Florida) surrounded by conservative areas and moderate GOP tilting Jacksonville.  Whoever wins these areas will demonstrate who clearly has the stronger GOTV effort.

The candidate who wins two out of three of these areas will likely win FL.  If the candidates draw in the combined vote in these areas, Trump will likely win as the FL Panhandle (i.e. Southern Alabama) will come in largely for him.

If Biden wins FL, the election is over and it's probably going to be a short night.  If Trump wins FL, he's likely going to win NC and GA and it's on to the 7 pm poll closings.  Historically, the margin of the victory in FL is predictive of results in states such as MI and PA.

But for this guide's sake, let's assume Trump wins FL to lead through the rest of this guide. 

7 pm :  Michigan/Pennsylvania: Assuming Trump wins FL/NC/GA, it's on to the Rust Belt.

Pennsylvania: I will look for three different areas in PA:

• Bucks County (Philly Suburbs): Trump needs to split here to have a chance.  He'll have to do it by winning working class voters in the north side of the county and hold his own with the working professionals on the southern half bordering Philly. 

• Erie County (NW PA):  A working class county on the shores of Lake Erie, it's been a Democratic leaning county for decades, voting for the Democratic Presidential candidate from 1984 until Trump won it in 2016.  If Trump wins this county again, it would show that he's getting his low-intensity blue collar base out to the polls here and would signal good things ahead for him.  if Biden wins Erie by 5 percent or more, he's likely going to win PA.

• Luzerne County (NE PA):  Another working class county that's been Democratic leaning for decades.  In 2016, Trump was the first GOP Presidential candidate to win Luzerne since 1988 with 58% of the vote, the largest since Richard Nixon in 1972.   A big issue in this area is energy and fracking, a pillar of its local economy.  Hence, this area will be telling if Biden's recent statements on "transitioning" out of oil and gas has strongly worked against him.

If Trump wins these three counties, he's probably going to win PA.  If Biden wins Bucks or Luzerne by 15% or more, he's probably going to win PA.  It is really that simple.  

Michigan: I really just look at two different areas in Michigan:

Detroit/Ann Arbor:  This is really where Biden needs to run up the score to win.  He needs to get his minority vote, particularly Blacks, postgraduates and Zoomers out to the polls. Hillary Clinton failed to do so in 2016 and we all know who won Michigan (hint: it wasn't Hillary Clinton).

Macomb County: a populist leaning Detroit suburb, this will simply be a barometer if the enthusiasm for Trump is enough to bring his supporters to the polls. He won Macomb in 2016 he'll need to win it again by over 10% (he won by 11% in 2016) to win the state again.

At this point in the evening, if either candidate has won FL and one of these states, the election is probably over. But if we have any more suspense, it's on to the 8 pm poll closings.

8 pm: Wisconsin and Minnesota 

These two states, both worth 10 electoral votes, will probably be quite tight and perhaps will be the deciding states in a very close EC race. 

Wisconsin:  The key to reading Wisconsin is based on ability for Trump to maximize his vote in the WOW counties ( Waukesha, Ozaukee, and Washington) that surround Milwaukee and the blue collar vote in NW Wisconsin against Biden's ability to maximize his vote in Dane county (University of WI) and Milwaukee (especially the Black vote). Whoever gains a greater share will likely win Wisconsin.

Minnesota: Republicans have not won MN at the Presidential level since Richard Nixon in 1972. But like Nixon, if any Republican is going to win MN, it's anti-war populist like Trump. But it'll be a tough haul. Biden has an inherit advantage in that more than 60 percent of state population is in the Minneapolis/St Paul metro area. So for Trump to win MN, he'd have to maximize his vote on the I-94 corridor between Minneapolis to St Cloud, sweep western and southern MN and most importantly increase his margins in NE MN from 2016 (he won the 8th Congressional District by 18%). The way he increases his margins in NE MN is to improve his results in St Louis County, where I grew up. Hillary Clinton won St Louis County by 12% in 2016. Trump will need to flip St Louis County if he wants to win MN. He may be well on his way to doing so, as 6 Democratic mayors in the blue collar Iron Range have endorsed Trump, which is unheard of in my lifetime. If Trump wins the MN CD 8th district by 25 or more points, he'll probably be in good shape to flip the state.

Anecdotally, I wanted to see if there was actually the enthusiasm and effort in the GOPs efforts to win Minnesota. Hence I attended a pre-debate rally last Thursday in Prior Lake, MN. Here's the proof I attended (trust me, I took the photo).

The site was packed in a way that certainly didn't fit Governor Walz's desire for social distancing. Multiple speeches and pep talks. I heard an interesting dialogue with MN GOP chair Jennifer Carnahan, who proclaimed that their GOTV is to contact 3 million voters to hit a goal of 1.6 million votes for Trump, which would be about 225K more votes than Trump had in 2016. I came away from that rally convinced there is certainly enthusiasm. We will see if it's enough.

At this point of the evening, we should be well aware where the election is trending.  It may take a couple days, but it should be somewhat clear who will win the election.  Frankly, I think it'll be a pretty clear win the way things are trending.

On to my map with a week to go:

I added Pennsylvania to Trump based on trends that I'm seeing:  

• Biden's public flip flopping on fracking and doubling down on "transitioning" out of fossil fuels added fuel to the enthusiasm to Trump's base in northern PA and areas around Pittsburgh.

• Trump is investing much time there, with large crowds and growing enthusiasm. He's drawing a great contrast to Biden in demonstrating greater vigor, alertness and likability. Additionally, have the local news coverage at these rallies provides a social acceptability channel for "shy" supporters who have been intimidated from showing their support for Trump, motivating them to be bolder in their support enough to come to the polls.

• Biden has been going to areas where he should have had high enthusiasm already, including Bucks County.  In fact, he brought Jon Bon Jovi to a rally there, with not very encouraging attendance or results. 

Joe Biden just called those who don’t vote for him “chumps” and then coughed into his hand in the middle of a pandemic pic.twitter.com/jWyadSj9QP

— Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) October 24, 2020

 I don't think recent riot activity in Philly has helped enthuse his base either.

Over the weekend, I'll provide my final map as well as some final comments.   Until then, it is what it is.

Election 2020 - Last Presidential Debate

The final Presidential Debate of 2020 has happened.  In fact, it is very likely the final electoral debate we'll see both Donald Trump and Joe Biden have in their lives.  Compared to the first debate, this debate had a much more civil tone.  However, in my myopic opinion, this debate will have a much more defining impact in this race. Why?  Because there are multiple defining moments that I think voters will remember from this debate.  So let's go through them, shall we?

Coronavirus - If it was not for the Coronavirus, I think Trump would be headed to a typical comfortable Presidential re-election,  especially after his electoral standing actually improved after his Impeachment (a la President Bill Clinton). But the Coronavirus has cast great doubt from many on Trump's ability to lead through crisis.  Hence, Trump has always been reactionary regarding criticism of his leadership here and it has cast a dark cloud on his Presidency.  However, in my view Trump had the strongest defense of his leadership on Coronavirus.  Trump recognized the seriousness of the issue, talking about the progress being made in finding vaccine/therapeutics, protecting vulnerable populations and expressing optimism of getting the pandemic behind us.  Biden, as expected, blamed Trump for the unfortunate malaise that has resulted the pandemic, saying that it's time to change leaders with someone with a real plan instead of a naive cheerleader like Trump.  Trump was able to fight off the charges to what believe a draw by saying that Biden's plan is basically his plan, that Biden is doing Monday morning quarterbacking regarding initial reaction to the virus and illuminating Biden's failed leadership fighting the H1Ni swine flu.  He also brought up the economic and social damage lockdowns have brought to NY. Biden, in a rebuttal I think he regrets, cited NY as a model on how to address the virus.  Trump, seeing this teed up opportunity, brings up that NY has highest number of Covid-19 deaths in the nation.  

However, the following was the defining statements of this section of the debate:

In short, Biden is advocating a cautious, reactionary strategy against the virus.  A strategy that advocates to restrain behavior.  That would be a strategy where the government dictates liberties in one's behavior based on "expert" opinion.   Trump, on the other hand, is advocating a more risky, aggressive strategy against the virus.  A strategy to develop a 'new normal' in the way we live as they find ways to attack the virus.  It is clear nowadays that there is a growing number of individuals experiencing "Covid fatigue" and want pandemic live to just be over.  They want  a life where they can gather together, work (the opportunity to work) and travel freely and be able to have solid life structure with their kids in school without being excoriated by their government.  I think Trump's defense and strategy here may actually stemmed the bleeding he had on this issue.

Race - Trump had, by far, the best defense of his record on racial relations by emphasizing his accomplishments to help open up opportunities for blacks while demonstrating that Biden has actually closed opportunities for blacks.  By talking about his accomplishments in criminal justice reform, minority economic opportunity, investment in Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) Trump clearly demonstrated he has more tangible affirmative accomplishments in the advancement of minority opportunity than any President in multiple decades.  Additionally, he emphasized Biden's only major accomplishment that affected race relations, criminal justice reform in 1994, actually put more young blacks in jail due to its harsh penalties on minor drug offenses.  Biden did not a a strong rebuttal on this point, only vaguely saying he tried to reform the drug offense penalties.  He was more interested in attacking Trump's personality and attitude regarding race, saying he "pours gasoline" on racial dialogue. However, I think the fact Biden called Abe Lincoln a "the most racist President in modern history" referring to Donald's comparison to Abe Lincoln showed he really had no substantive answer on how he would try to improve racial relations outside of having a more meek personality.  In short, this section showed a great contrast between Trump, a man attempting and accomplishing moves for positive action, against  Biden, who can only criticize but doesn't really have answers himself.

 

Hunter Biden's emails - Actually one of the most memorable moments of this debate happened before the debate.  Just like in 2016, Trump hosted a guest that cast doubt on the character of his opponent.  This time that guest was Tony Bobulinski, a former business associate of Hunter Biden.  Bobulinski testifies that the Hunter Biden's emails regarding questionable business activities with a Chinese company are authentic, plus he has more first-hand evidence himself to provide that supports the idea that the Biden family participated in multiple illegal schemes. At the debate, Trump pressed Biden about these emails.  Biden says he did nothing unethical and eventually went on to say the whole charge is based on "Russian disinformation."  This is an odd defense to make an hour after someone directly alleged they were real and they have the receipts to prove it.  How much this hurts Biden remains to be seen, but it could be easily seen how this hurts Biden's "better character" argument by raising his unfavorables.

Insider vs. Outsider - One of the most memorable moments of the whole debate was when Trump drew the contrast between him and Biden in regards to getting things done.  The video in the tweet below demonstrates that contrast.

President @realDonaldTrump: I ran because Joe Biden and Barack Obama did a horrible job#Debates2020 pic.twitter.com/RZLP8s9qb3

— Team Trump (Text VOTE to 88022) (@TeamTrump) October 23, 2020

As a viewer, I immediately saw how Trump succinctly made a successful argument that Biden was a politician that gives many promises, but has delivered few results. This happened after about hour of Trump touting his accomplishments in a number of areas. A very shrewd move by Trump that was highly effective.

Body Language - In the first debate, Trump went very aggressive in both his approach, constantly interrupting Biden when he was trying to answer.  While such an approach may have been effective in some ways, many came away thinking Trump just cannot control himself from imposing his strong personality to intimidate his opponents.  

Hence, in this debate, Trump took a much more mellow approach.  He was much more respectful in both engaging in his dialogue as well as his body language when listening to Biden's responses.  Occasionally he would give that a look of disapproval, but it was a vast contrast from the first debate.  I thought that was quite effective because it demonstrated that Trump can in fact control his emotions and personality to act more "Presidential."  

Biden, however, acted quite the opposite.  When he disagreed with something, his reactions were very visible.  When he was defensive, he had that "deer in the headlights" look or visible disgust (oh G*d).  However, it was clear Trump was wearing out Biden throughout the debate after I saw this:

The last Presidential candidate that looked at his watch during the debate was President George HW Bush (Bush 41).  Let's just say that election didn't end well for him.

Fracking - No issue has hurt Biden more than fracking.  Biden, who like his running mate, Kamala Harris, said during the primary that he would eradicate fossil fuels and fracking.  Has during the general election stated he wouldn't ban fracking.  With that in mind, the following clip has put some doubt in the sincerity of that pledge.

Joe Biden says he would “transition away from the oil industry”#Debates2020 pic.twitter.com/ZfIS3WNGgH

— Team Trump (Text VOTE to 88022) (@TeamTrump) October 23, 2020

Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas.... I think many voters in those states saw him say that.  I'll just leave it there.

So in the end, I think Trump didn't hurt himself through this debate and perhaps helped himself by demonstrating memorable contrasts with Biden.  However, we will see how much, if any, effect this debate has on the final outcome.  If we know anything, a week is a long time in politics.

In my next blog, I will provide a guide of what I'll be looking for during Election Night as well as where my electoral map is currently.  Until then, it is what it is....

Election 2020: Lightning Striking Twice?

 So we are about two weeks away from the election and closer we get to it the more things seem like 2016.  I was told we'd never have an election like that one.  But again, who predicted we'd have 2020 like we have either.  

Think about the last couple weeks:

• About a month before the 2016 election, Donald Trump gets blindsided by the "Access Hollywood" videotape where he jokingly explains sexual assault to Billy Bush.  Trump's polls tank and it looks like Hillary Clinton is about to cruise to a 350+ electoral vote victory.  Now think about 2 weeks ago where Trump contracts Covid-19, the communication of his condition as he works through it is a bit opaque and inconsistent and he comes out of it looking like he's bragging that he recovered quickly and folks should not worry about Covid-19.  This negative news cycle causes the national polls to tank in favor of Joe Biden, who about 10 days ago looked to be heading to a 400 EV victory.  However, one thing was consistent between those two situations.  Trump, who looked to be down and out, starts to show great discipline and tenacity in the consistency of his message as well as the vast increase in the number of rallies. Both times also the rallies were both very large and showed high energy.

• About two weeks before the 2016 election, Clinton was blindsided by the revelation that an inquiry was opened regarding new emails connecting her to alleged felonious activity that showed up on former Rep. Anthony Weiner's laptop that was seized by the FBI as part of a sexting scandal Weiner was being investigated.  This created great uproar from Donald's supporters and enthused his base, as well as further raise Clinton's already high unfavorables. In this past week, again about two weeks before the 2020 election, we have learned that Biden's son, Hunter, has a laptop now sent into the FBI that included emails connecting alleged felonious business dealings where Hunter leverage access to Joe with businessmen in Ukraine, Russia and China.  The additional twist here is that after the NY Post broke the story, Twitter and Facebook were quite aggressive in censoring its distribution, including suspending the Twitter account of the White House Press Secretary.  As with Clinton, this news has further enthused Donald's supporters as well as probably raised Biden's unfavorables, which are at a lower level than Hillary's were at this relative part of the election cycle.  

So the question is whether the large momentum swing that these events resulted in 2016 to lead to a Trump victory can be replicated in 2020.  While we wait to see what happens, I will break it down this way: there are two main elements to Trump's campaign strategy. 

• Maximize the enthusiasm of his base.  It was clear in 2016 he was able to do that as his supporters drowned out Clinton's on Election Day 2016.  He was able to motivate new voters, specifically white-working class voters and evangelicals to unite provide him votes with impressive unity. I am seeing signs of that in 2020 with the size and energy of his rallies as well as the Amy Coney Barrett SCOTUS nomination as key drivers to that enthusiasm.  One advantage that Trump does have in 2020 than 2016 is since the party registration numbers in key battleground states are much more favorable to him (read more about that from last week's post), he has a larger poll of potential voters and more possible votes to gain.

• Maximize his opponent's unfavorables. In 2016, Trump focused a large part of his campaign on increasing Clinton's unfavorables by trying to define her as a corrupt political grifter (remember "Crooked Hillary"). The Weiner laptop incident only poured more gasoline into those efforts and they largely worked.  Evidence of that is the increase in working class voters that don't have significant college and graduate education as well as the lack of enthusiasm in Clinton's base, especially amongst Black voters.  Together, this depressed Clinton's votes in urban centers like Detroit that allowed Trump to eek out slim margins in winning states such as MI, PA and WI.  The issues Joe Biden is starting to have with his base are starting to reveal themselves, as he's trying to hold events that will enthuse the votes in urban centers like Detroit and Miami.  We'll see where this story goes.

I've made a couple notable changes on the map:

As you can see, I moved New Hampshire back to Biden and Michigan to Trump, which would allow him to be re-elected.  The New Hampshire change is just a fleeting hunch as that state is hard to read.  However, I haven't seen Trump appear to make any visits there in recent weeks or talk about his chances there.  So I'm wondering if it's a place of focus currently.

Michigan, in my opinion, is starting to trend more strongly towards Donald.  Early voting figures there are very good for Donald and Biden's decision to break his protocol against larger campaign events to do a "voter motivation" event in Detroit as well as do interviews with Detroit radio stations provides some evidence than Biden is quite worried there.  In addition, Michigan has a strong GOP Senate candidate, John James, that should help pour more outside money to support the GOP, aka Trump's, side.  So I am feeling that Trump is strongly trending positive there.

Next week, I'll provide a review of the final debate (if it happens) as well as a preview of what keys I'm watching for on Election Night.  But until next time, it is what it is.

Election 2020: What About Those Polls?

We are about three weeks from Election Day and when I thought 2016 was a unique election, 2020 is a chaotic one.  Every week we have a new headline.  Over the past month, the news cycles has gone from President Trump accused of vituperating against dead soldiers, not paying his fair share of taxes, to being in Walter Reed hospital with Covid-19.    Now we're seeing Trump recovering quickly from Covid-19 with the help of experimental medication, but the next debate canceled.  These are interesting times.

Quickly, I still don't have any changes in how I see the electoral map in terms of electoral votes, but I've become more solid on FL as a state becoming safer for Trump.

I just want to make some comments about the public polling we're seeing currently in this race.  Since Trump's Covid-19 diagnosis as well as his public reactions to it, including a SUV ride to wave at supporters while still at Walter Reed, his public poll numbers have plummeted nationally.  Here are some of the changes we've seen:

• NBC\Wall Street Journal: Biden +8 Sep to Biden +14 Oct;
• Fox News: Biden +5 Sept to Biden +10 Oct;
• CNN: Biden +8 Sept to Biden +16 Oct;

On the face of it, it looks like the bottom is falling out on Trump's support.  In fact, at these spreads, Biden would probably be well on his way to 400 electoral votes.  However, while I can see that Trump's support has taken a hit over the past week through the combination of a negative news cycle of Trump catching Covid-19, his Administration botched communication surrounding it and that Covid-19 is Trump's weakest issue, I remain skeptical the change is that large.   There are several reasons I am skeptical.

• There are several polls that have not seen much of a change at all:
• The Hill/HarrisX: Biden +7 to Biden +5
• Economist/YouGov: Biden +8 to Biden +9
• IBD/TIPP: Biden +6 to Biden +3
• Additionally, the RealClearPolitics average in battleground states (PA/MI/WI/FL/NC/etc) Trump is running 0.5% ahead where he was in 2016.

• If Biden is so far ahead nationally, why is he still traveling to these battleground states and not typically safer GOP states such as Texas and Georgia?

•  In quite a few of these polls, they ask the question who they think will win the election/who their neighbors are voting for.  The results are quite striking:
• Fox News Oct: Trump 48%/Biden 39%
• Economist/YouGov: Biden 40%/Trump 37% (23% unsure)
• Gallup: Trump 56%/ Biden 40%

• Finally, one way to actually measure enthusiasm and trend with real data is to measure voter registration for states that register by party.  Voter registration by party shows the pool of available voters that a candidate should have to turn out (bigger pool=more available votes). Looking at several battleground states, The results are again quite revealing:
• North Carolina (Trump win 2016): 2016: Dems had 646K advantage/ 2020: Dems hold 400K advantage
• Florida (Trump win 2016): 2016 Dems had 330K advantage/2020: Dems hold 136K advantage
• Pennsylvania (Trump win 2016): 2016 Dems had 936K advantage/ 2020: Dems hold 717K advantage.

In summary, while national polls feed a media narrative of a widening Biden lead, voter sentiment of their thoughts of the race, voter registrations and battleground state polling suggest a very competitive race. 

Why would this be the case?  My thought is that the the polls have a wide variance because the methods they use and the distribution of respondents the pollsters receive from those methods.  

• Most polls use live callers as the way to receive responses.  They call folks and if the respondent agrees, have them answer 60+ questions.  While this method was fine 10-15 years ago when smartphone use wasn't as widespread, it is a relatively high cost for the respondent now.  Folks that are most likely to affirmatively participate in such polls generally pay higher attention to politics than the normal person, have time on his/her hands to answer all those questions and/or have adverse incentives to participate (i.e. paid survey taker).   

• Also, in an age where telemarketers are face great skepticism from respondents regarding the respondents privacy, it's not unreasonable to think that the responses would be what they think is the most socially acceptable, not what they really think.  For example, how socially acceptable was it in June to call Black Lives Matter a Marxist group?  Following the news not very acceptable.  Respondents therefore may tell the pollsters they approve. Hence, the poll responses are more of a reflection of what the respondent thinks the pollster wants to hear, not what they really think.  

• Live caller as the sole method also is very biased towards more white collar tilt in their distribution, which would tend to be more urban.  While a 30-ish old professional who keeps on top of the news is motivated to complete the survey, someone like my mother, who has no college education and works long hours, does not think too much of talking to a cold caller for 40 minutes on the phone.  Your truly has marked these cold calls as "Potential Spam" on my phone. Hence, a class bias is generally not accounted for in live caller polls.  

• In my professional life, I worked as a consultant that had to collect individual opinions on specific topics.  To gain those opinions, I used multiple methods of calls/emails/text to gain survey responses.  One way to address the respondent distribution and social intimation biases is to give respondents multiple options to respond with a shorter survey.  Reducing the cost of completing the poll survey will lead to a more inclusive respondent pool and more likely one that accurately reflects the electorate.

So there you have it, my thoughts on how to read the polls these days.  Just like in my professional life, I'm going to look at multiple metrics to assess this race, not just the polls.

Until next time, it is what it is. 

Election 2020: First Debate Reaction

 Well, I guess we can say that like it or not, the first 2020 Presidential Debate between Trump and Biden actually did happen.  So if you're not bored or disgusted by commentary of last night's debate, here's a few myopic observations:

• It didn't take long for this debate to fall off conventional script.  Chris Wallace, a journalist that I respect, made it known at question 2 that folks had to fit into their two minute boxes, When it was clear that Wallace was particularly forceful in trying to enforce that rule on Trump after Biden made a point, it was clear that Trump changed strategies on the fly and decided to use Wallace as a conduit to it.  Through creating adversarial interactions with Wallace, Trump got to control the situation and feeding his base's (as well as a notable amount of the general public) strong skepticism of the media.  It made me think that Trump wants to continue to enthuse his base by showing he's a bully that's fighting against the mainstream media and the Swamp in general.

• Trump and Biden's dialogue was anything but civil.  It was clear after Trump changed tactics that he wanted to force the strength of his presence and personality on Biden to manipulate Biden to lose his temper and make mistakes.  Biden, to avoid that, tried to avoid eye contact with Trump through much of the beginning of the debate.  But after the tenor of the dialogue turned into a food fight, Biden glanced over more often, but more to mock than engage.  

• How effective were Trump's tactics?  I think it was mixed bag.  
• Biden's temper did start to flare up multiple times as he called Trump as 'racist', 'clown' and said 'man' more often as the debate went on as the debate became more petty.  If one came into this debate thinking Biden was the more decent man with a better disposition to be President, I would think such actions would bring doubt to that assertion.  

• However, in pressing so hard, Trump missed several big opportunities to actually create distinctions with Biden and extol his accomplishments.  For example, on the race question, Trump went right to law and order and the economy, but not to his historic funding of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU); or the fact that while he commuted Alice Johnson's sentence for drug trafficking, Biden was a lead sponsor of the law that sentenced her to lifetime imprisonment.  Trump was pressing so hard that while he said 'sure' on the question on denouncing White Supremacists, it was not a very clear response.

• Another consequence in Trump's pressing so hard is that we really didn't get to feel the effect of Biden's answers.  For example, Trump asked Biden about a police union that has publicly endorsed him as Trump brags about the number of police unions endorsing him.  As Biden muttered weakly, Trump goes ahead continues to press.  If Trump just was silent for 10 more seconds, it would have exposed the effect that Biden couldn't think of a police union endorsement he received.  This happened multiple times on issues regarding Hunter Biden, packing the Supreme Court, law enforcement, etc.  If Trump had a few more pregnant pauses, he probably could have exposed more of Biden's lack of conviction in his positions.

• So why did Trump pursue such tactics? There are several reasons, but three in particular.  
• One, as my first point stated, it was to enthuse his base by using Wallace as his foil.  A key to Trump strategy is to maximize his base's enthusiasm.  One main tenant of Trump's strategy is to maximize enthusiasm so they will go out to vote.   The 'us against the establishment' game has worked quite well for Trump in that aspect and using Wallace as that establishment was very convenient.

• Two, Trump wants to raise Biden's unfavorability.  This is the another main tenet of Trump strategy.  In 2016, Trump was successfully able to raise Hillary Clinton's favorability to levels close if not higher than Trump's. So far he hasn't really been successful in raising Biden's favorability largely because Biden has largely been out in the public while spending large sums of money on ads presenting a positive image of him.  In the debate, Trump wanted to rattle Biden so Biden would lose his composure and make mistakes.  In that area, Trump was largely successful as stated above, Biden did call Trump names, as well as the worst president in US history (James Buchanan, anyone?).  By calling Trump names as well as showing obvious irritation, Biden's attempt to show himself as a return to decency in terms of temperament took a real hit. In addition, in doing that Biden also showed his age in his feeble retorts compared to Trump's strong personality. 

• Three, while Trump wants to enthuse his base, he also wanted to depress enthusiasm in Biden's base.  In regards to this goal, Trump had some success.  He got Biden to say he's not for defunding the police (accusing Trump of doing so), wouldn't say if he'd pack the Supreme Court and stated he wasn't for the Green New Deal (where his staff needed to correct he was for afterwards).  These types of statements won't really fire up the liberals in his party, especially those under 30 who have spent much of the year either flooding the streets or supporting those flooding the streets for various social causes.  In fact, it'll leave them more skeptical of Biden's authenticity and depress their enthusiasm.  Like him or not, Trump generally comes off as authentic, which makes it easier for him to create enthusiasm.  Biden still has a gap to fill to show voters he's authentic enough for their vote. Changing positions on the fly does not help there.

•  One last item I do want to address is the optics of Trump's pressing of Biden.  
• The general feeling I get from many folks and the news is that it shows that Trump just can't help himself from being a bully and it's quite untoward for a President to act that way.  Well, I can see their point.  However, most of the folks that I hear that are either/or college educated, white collar, and/or suburban in their background.  I don't think Trump was going after their vote, especially since they are a shrinking portion of the "swingable" electorate.  The appeal to suburban voters apparently went away with current Senator Mitt Romney, who won independents by still got crushed in his Presidential run. Trump's strongman tactics appeal to working-class and rural voters, which has more support from than the normal GOPer. 

• While currently much of Trump's base is White, Hispanics and Blacks (especially males) can relate to Trump's tactics, which is how Trump can expand his base.  Folks, just as much as working class folks like my father could relate to Trump's word salads,  Hispanics and Blacks in large part can relate to the multiple interruptions and bullying tactics of Trump's style in the debate.   In many a movie with Hispanics or Blacks featured in it as well as conversations I've heard on the street, their tone of debate/argument often goes the same way Trump pressed on his the debate.  They don't go into the argument trying to listen for two minute before a rebuttal.  They will inject when they see error and try to bury their debate opponent until their either get them to surrender or look very weak.  Strength and force is treasured in such conflicts and I don't find it odd when a Spanish-speaking Telemundo poll says nearly 2/3 of their voters say Trump won the debate, largely because they can relate to him and his tactics.

I will pass on a electoral map this week since I want to see the effects of this debate for a couple more days before coming to conclusions.  But don't worry, I will present one quite soon.

Until next time, it is what it is.