Progressives Chat

Friday, August 23, 2019

Can Bernie Sanders Win Texas?

Last week, Progressives Chat reader The_Fixer posted the following video by Graham Elwood:

Here is the the poll: New Poll Shows Bernie Sanders Beating Trump in Texas by Nearly 5 Points.

To answer the blog title’s question: It would depend on the outcomes.

First thing necessary is to win the 2020 Democratic nomination for president of the United States.

If that happens, next is that the presidency would have to flip from Republican to Democratic.

Since I perceive only Bernie Sanders and Tulsi Gabbard as the two capable 2020 Democratic candidates, that certainly makes sense.

Let’s suppose that happens.

Specifically for Bernie Sanders.

Following that would be this question: By how much would Bernie Sanders need to win the U.S. Popular Vote to be able to flip and carry the state of Texas?

The answer lies ahead in the following: In 2016, the U.S. Popular Vote margin was –2.09 for Republican pickup winner Donald Trump. Had Trump won the U.S. Popular Vote, his margin would have been, my estimate, between +2.15 to +2.64. Historical average, since at least 1932, is a net gain of +1 to +1.5 (more commonly closer to +1) state with each percentage point nationally shifted in the direction of a pickup winning Republican or Democrat. So, in 2020, the following are an estimate for a pickup winning Democrat to be able to go so far as to flip and carry Texas. And when beginning to read it, please keep in mind that 2016 losing Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton carried 20 states, plus District of Columbia, and an original 232 electoral votes.

MICHIGAN
• 2016 Result: Republican (pickup) +0.22 | Democratic –0.22
• 2016 Democratic Party’s Ranked State: No. 21
• 2020 Democratic Party’s Estimated Best State: No. 21
• 2020 Democrats’ Required U.S. Popular Vote Margin: +3
• 2020 Cumulative Electoral Vote: 248

PENNSYLVANIA
• 2016 Result: Republican (pickup) +0.72 | Democratic –0.72
• 2016 Democratic Party’s Ranked State: No. 22
• 2020 Democratic Party’s Estimated Best State: No. 22
• 2020 Democrats’ Required U.S. Popular Vote Margin: +3
• 2020 Cumulative Electoral Vote: 268

WISCONSIN
• 2016 Result: Republican (pickup) +0.76 | Democratic –0.76
• 2016 Democratic Party’s Ranked State (tipping point state): No. 23
• 2020 Democratic Party’s Estimated Best State (tipping point state): No. 23
• 2020 Democrats’ Required U.S. Popular Vote Margin: +4
• 2020 Cumulative Electoral Vote: 278

FLORIDA
• 2016 Result: Republican (pickup) +1.19 | Democratic –1.19
• 2016 Democratic Party’s Ranked State: No. 24
• 2020 Democratic Party’s Estimated Best State: No. 24
• 2020 Democrats’ Required U.S. Popular Vote Margin: +4
• 2020 Cumulative Electoral Vote: 307

[NEBRASKA #02]
• 2016 Result: Republican +2.23 | Democratic –2.23
• 2016 Democratic Party’s Ranked State: —
• 2020 Democratic Party’s Estimated Best State: —
• 2020 Democrats’ Required U.S. Popular Vote Margin: +4
• 2020 Cumulative Electoral Vote: 308

ARIZONA
• 2016 Result: Republican +3.50 | Democratic –3.50
• 2016 Democratic Party’s Ranked State: No. 25
• 2020 Democratic Party’s Estimated Best State: No. 25
• 2020 Democrats’ Required U.S. Popular Vote Margin: +4
• 2020 Cumulative Electoral Vote: 319

NORTH CAROLINA
• 2016 Result: Republican +3.66 | Democratic –3.66
• 2016 Democratic Party’s Ranked State: No. 26
• 2020 Democratic Party’s Estimated Best State: No. 26
• 2020 Democrats’ Required U.S. Popular Vote Margin: +4
• 2020 Cumulative Electoral Vote: 334

GEORGIA
• 2016 Result: Republican +5.10 | Democratic –5.10
• 2016 Democratic Party’s Ranked State: No. 27
• 2020 Democratic Party’s Estimated Best State: No. 27
• 2020 Democrats’ Required U.S. Popular Vote Margin: +5
• 2020 Cumulative Electoral Vote: 350

IOWA
• 2016 Result: Republican (pickup) +9.41 | Democratic –9.41
• 2016 Democratic Party’s Ranked State: No. 30
• 2020 Democratic Party’s Estimated Best State: No. 28
• 2020 Democrats’ Required U.S. Popular Vote Margin: +6
• 2020 Cumulative Electoral Vote: 356

[MAINE #02]
• 2016 Result: Republican (pickup) +10.28 | Democratic –10.28
• 2016 Democratic Party’s Ranked State: —
• 2020 Democratic Party’s Estimated Best State: —
• 2020 Democrats’ Required U.S. Popular Vote Margin: +6
• 2020 Cumulative Electoral Vote: 357

TEXAS
• 2016 Result: Republican +8.98 | Democratic –8.98
• 2016 Democratic Party’s Ranked State: No. 29
• 2020 Democratic Party’s Estimated Best State: No. 29
• 2020 Democrats’ Required U.S. Popular Vote Margin: +7
• 2020 Cumulative Electoral Vote: 395

OHIO
• 2016 Result: Republican (pickup) +8.07 | Democratic –8.07
• 2016 Democratic Party’s Ranked State: No. 28
• 2020 Democratic Party’s Estimated Best State: No. 30
• 2020 Democrats’ Required U.S. Popular Vote Margin: +8
• 2020 Cumulative Electoral Vote: 413

Why are Wisconsin through North Carolina listed as +4?

In 2016, Hillary Clinton carried California with 150 percent her raw-vote margin in the U.S. Popular Vote. She gained about 1 million votes, above 2012 re-elected Democratic incumbent Barack Obama, in an election in which Democrats had the White House and it flipped Republican. (It was an additional +7 percentage points. The opposite should have happened.) A presidential winner does not carry his party’s No. 1-ranked populous state with 100 percent or more his national margin. Barack Obama, in 2012, carried California with about 60 percent his national margin. 2004 re-elected Republican incumbent George W. Bush carried his home state Texas with approximately 55 percent his national margin.

The adjustment, from Wisconsin through North Carolina, keeps in mind a Republican shift in California to stabilize the level of Democratic support vs. the nation. It usually performs about 15 to 20 percent more Democratic vs. the nation. For Hillary Clinton, it was 32 points above. That is abnormal. In an election won by the Democrats, I can imagine California in excess of +20 to +25; but, not +30 or more.

This also keep in mind that there have been only three United States presidential elections—in 1824, 1960, and 1976—in which the winner carried less than half the nation’s participating states. So, I would estimate we will continue to see a majority count of states get carried by presidential winners. That, if the Democrats flip the presidency in 2020 (rather than wait for 2026), that pickup winner will carry at least 26 states. (It is also partly why my previous blog topic stated the needed popular-vote margin to be reached is +4.)

There is another pattern.

To estimate a states count, for a winning Republican or Democrat, figure +22 for a Democrat and +28 for a Republican. Since the 1990s, the range of carried states has been 26 (for Barack Obama in 2012) and 32 (for Bill Clinton in 1992). The average has been 29. If the U.S. Popular Vote has been won by +5 percentage points, a Democrat would carry 27 states and a Republican would carry 33 states. The Democrats are averaging 12 electoral votes per carried state. The Republicans are averaging 9 electoral votes per carried state. (Trump was at 10. But, Clinton and Obama hit 12 twice while Clinton, in 1992, was 11 and, in 1996, was 12. Obama, in 2008, averaged 13. The structural advantage is with the Democrats for higher electoral-vote scores; the states’ count advantage is with the Republicans.) A formula: a Democrat can carry 22 states, with average of 12 electoral votes, and garnered 264 but get to 270 with a remainder of 6 to reach 270; a Republican can carry 28 states, with average of 9 electoral votes, and garner 252 with a remainder of 18 to reach 270. (If one wants to see 40 states get carried, which hasn’t happened since the 1980s, Democrats have to win the U.S. Popular Vote by +18 while Republicans need +12. For the Democrats: 58 to 40 percent. For the Republicans: 55 to 43 percent.)

Had 2000 and 2016 Republican pickup winners George W. Bush and Donald Trump won the U.S. Popular Vote, their whole-number margins would have been +2. They both carried 30 states. So, for the math: 28 + 2 percentage-points margin = 30 carried states. (Bush, with re-election in 2004, won the U.S. Popular Vote by +2.46 percentage points and carried 31 states.)

With exception of 1992 Bill Clinton (with a margin of +5.56 and carriage of 32 states and District of Columbia), this formula has applied, although not perfectly, to the Democrats since the 1960s.
• 1960 John Kennedy: 22 + 0.16 percentage-points margin = 22 carried states
• 1964 Lyndon Johnson: 22 + 22.58 percentage-points margin = 44 carried states
• 1976 Jimmy Carter: 22 + 2.06 percentage-points margin = 24 carried states (Carter won 23)
• 1996 Bill Clinton: 22 + 8.52 percentage-points margin = 30 carried states (Clinton won 31)
• 2008 Barack Obama: 22 + 7.26 percentage-points margin = 29 carried states (Obama won 28 but also flipped and carried Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District—one-third that state’s vote)
• 2012 Barack Obama: 22 + 3.86 percentage-points margin = 25 carried states (Obama won 26)

If we see this pattern continues, and Bernie Sanders ends up the 2020 Democratic nominee for president of the United States, and he unseats Republican incumbent U.S. president Donald Trump, in order to flip and carry Texas, his margin in the U.S. Popular Vote would need to reach: +7.

To flip and carry the state of Texas, a 2020 Bernie Sanders would have to go from a 2016 Hillary Clinton’s 20 carried states to 29.

According to that video by Graham Elwood, Bernie Sanders polls at +5 in Texas. Well, if that were to actually happen, Sanders would win the U.S. Popular Vote by, say, +11—and that would also mean he would carry 32 or 33 states.

Since this thread’s title includes the word “Can,” this answers how it is mathematically possible for Bernie Sanders to “Win Texas.”

Monday, August 19, 2019

Election 2020: Democrats’ Target Margin +4

For at least a couple of months, there have been plenty of polls for both the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries and the general election.

When reporting percentage-points margins, especially for the general election, it does not good to look at numbers without picturing what it means for the nation—and that is getting at the electoral map.

Dating back to at least 1932, when the White House switched parties, the pickup winning Republican or Democrat tended to win an average net gain of +1 to +1.5 (usually closer to +1) states with each percentage point nationally shifted in his direction.

The last two Republican pickup winners, 2000 George W. Bush and 2016 Donald Trump, did not win likewise pickups of the U.S. Popular Vote.

Bush entered 2000 with 1996 losing Republican nominee Bob Dole’s popular-vote margin of –8.51 percentage points and 19 states (for 159 electoral votes). Bush flipped +11 states (combining for +112 electoral votes) to end up with 30 states (for 271 electoral votes). Had Bush won the U.S. Popular Vote, I estimate his margin would have been near +2.50 percentage points. (Bush’s margin was –0.51.)

Trump entered 2016 with 2012 losing Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s popular-vote margin of –3.86 percentage points and 24 states (for 206 electoral votes). Trump flipped +6 states and Maine’s 2nd Congressional District (which is half that state’s vote; combining for +100 electoral votes) to end up with 30 states (for an original 306 electoral votes). Had Trump won the U.S. Popular Vote, I estimate his margin would have been between +2.15 to +2.64. (Trump’s margin was –2.09.)

In between Bush and Trump was 2008 Democratic pickup winner Barack Obama. He entered 2008 with 2004 losing Democratic nominee John Kerry’s popular-vote margin of –2.46 and 19 states and District of Columbia (for a mathematical 252 electoral votes). Obama flipped +9 states and Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District (which is one-third that state’s vote; combining for +113 electoral votes). Obama prevailed on both counts—U.S. Popular Vote and Electoral College—with 28 states, Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District, District of Columbia, and 365 electoral votes. And his popular-vote margin went from Kerry’s –2.46 to +7.26, a national 2004-to-2008 shift of +9.72. Since he flipped +9 states, and Nebraska #02, that aligned with the average net gain of +1 state for each percentage point nationally shifted.

I am anticipating this historical pattern will play out the next time the presidency flips from the party which currently has the White House, the Republican Party, to the opposition party, the Democratic Party.

Just in case it happens in 2020 (rather than waiting for 2024), I adjust the 2016 popular-vote margin to work from not Hillary Clinton’s +2.09 but to –2.15 to –2.64.

I figure the 2020 Democrats, if they flip the presidency, and unseat Republican incumbent Donald Trump, will win the U.S. Popular Vote by at least +4 percentage points.

Supporting this estimate is the recent piece: How Trump could lose by 5 million votes and still win in 2020. David Wasserman writes, “The ultimate nightmare scenario for [2020] Democrats might look something like this: [Donald] Trump loses the [U.S Popular Vote] by more than 5 million [raw votes], and the Democratic nominee converts Michigan and Pennsylvania back to blue. But Trump wins re-election by two [electoral votes] by barely hanging onto Arizona, Florida, North Carolina, Wisconsin and Maine’s 2nd Congressional District—one of the whitest and least college-educated district in the country.”

In the United States presidential election of 2016, approximately 137 million votes were cast for U.S. president.

Hillary Clinton won a Democratic hold of the U.S. Popular Vote with a raw-vote margin of +2,868,518 and a percentage-points margin of +2.09.

Due to the fact that not every United States presidential election has the same number of votes—or millions of votes—cast for U.S. president, I prefer to focus most often on the percentage-points margins. This is especially the case with one comparable election cycle followed by the next. It is important to track shifts, from the prior cycle, because it helps to determine outcomes which deliver party switches.

Over the last three presidential cycles—2008, 2012, and 2016—there were 131 million, 128 million, and 137 million votes cast for U.S. president. If 2020 motivates more individual votes to vote for U.S. president, or part of it may be a rise in eligible voters, perhaps the estimate can be 140 million votes.

Losing the U.S. Popular Vote by –5 million votes, in 2020, with 140 million votes cast, will be losing by around –3.50 percentage points. In 2016, Trump finished with –2.09. So, this is suggesting a 2016-to-2020 Republican underperformance of around –1.50 as Trump still manages to win a second term.

Conclusion: The 2020 Democrats’ target margin, for winning the U.S. Popular Vote, and for being enough to win in the Electoral College, is +4.

Friday, August 16, 2019

Happy Birthday!

Friday, August 16, 2019 is my birthday.

I am 48 years old.

On this day, singer Madonna was born in 1958.

So, too, were actors Timothy Hutton (born in 1960, he won a 1980 Oscar for Ordinary People), Angela Bassett (1958), and Lesley–Ann Warren (1946) as well as singer–entertainer Steve Lawrence (1935).

Carol Mosley Braun, the first African–American woman in the history of the U.S. Senate, elected in 1992 from Illinois, was born on this day in 1947.

On this day, Elvis Presley died at age 42 in 1977 and Aretha Franklin died at age 76 in 2018.

As a gift to myself, I am refraining from having a topic related to this blog.

Monday, August 12, 2019

Videos: Joe Rogan Interviews Bernie Sanders … Kim Iversen on Elites’ Distraction of Racism

2020 Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders was interviewed by Joe Rogan (who turned 52 on Sunday, August 11). The video was published to YouTube on August 6. Progressives Chat reader The_Fixer already posted the full interview in the comments section. But, it deserves being a topic.

Following the most recent with Donald Trump, and the four progressive women of Congress—Alexandria Ocasio–Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, and Rashida Tlaib—the remarkable Kim Iversen explains why “Racism Is Being Used As A Distraction By The Elites.” (This video was published July 24. I meant to post it sooner; but, other issues came first.)

UPDATE: The video is gone. Either it was Kim Iversen or YouTube responsible for having removed it. I wrote this to publish for August 12. So, I will not change the title of the blog topic. I am sorry I did not post it sooner. My mistake.

Friday, August 9, 2019

‘Manson murders at 50: Prosecutor who sent Manson followers to prison looks back’

It was 50 years ago this week which marked the heinous murders of actress Sharon Tate, 26, who was married to film director Roman Polanski, and eight months pregnant; hair designer Jay Sebring, 35; coffee heiress Abigail Folger; screenwriter Wojciech Frykoswki; and an 18-year-old Steven Parent.

When I was growing up, during the 1970s and 1980s, some from my generation were fascinated. There was an Emmy-nominated CBS television movie, Helter Skelter. The power of the production may have had something to do with it. But, I think it was the fact that celebrities were murder victims. It is not too common. In July 1989, so it has been 30 years, was the murder of 21-year-old actress Rebecca Schaeffer, a rising star who played opposite Pam Dawber on the 1986–1988 CBS comedy series My Sister Sam.

Charles Manson, the ringleader of those 1969 murders, was a cult leader. He is a case example why, despite being progressive, I am not totally opposed to the death penalty. He was convicted, by famed prosecutor and author Vincent Bugliosi (1934–2015), in January 1971. Manson lived another 46 years, having died at age 83 in 2017. Also convicted were those Manson directed to commit the murders: Susan Atkins (1948–2009), Charles “Tex” Watson (b. 1945), and Patricia Krenwinkel (b. 1947).

A comedian who I liked, the late Sam Kinison (1953–1992), had a bit in which he touched on drugs—make that acid—explaining Manson. It was standup comedy. So, I did not take to it that Kinison was expressing 100-percent his thoughts on Manson. My take on Manson was that he was, along with being a con artist, a predator and a killer. He preyed on others to join his cult. He facilitated the murders of those celebrities, and non-celebrities, by getting his cult members to do his bidding. (Related to the murders of Tate, and her company, were the August 10, 1969 murders of supermarket executive Leno, 44, and his wife Rosemary LaBianca, 38.)

For years, the surviving members of Sharon Tate’s family made sure to help keep Charles Manson, and his fellow killers, in prison. Tate’s mother and one of her sisters died before Manson. But, fortunately, one of Tate’s sisters is alive—and continues to do her best to make sure none of the surviving members of Manson’s cult of killers can be freed from prison.

Following is an interview with one of the attorneys who successfully brought Manson and his “family” to conviction back in 1971.

Here is the article’s link:

Manson murders at 50: Prosecutor who sent Manson followers to prison looks back

Monday, August 5, 2019

‘Mark Blyth—Global Trumpism and the Future of the Global Economy’

The superb Mark Blyth, from Brown University, speaks for just over one hour and a half about globalism, its effects, the trajectory, and—at the mark of 01:19:50—the United States presidential election of 2020.

(For a video of this duration, I recommend streaming it to a device that plays on your television. That is, if this is an option for you.)

“Mark Blyth—Global Trumpism and the Future of the Global Economy” was published to YouTube on July 16, 2019.

Friday, August 2, 2019

2020 Democratic Debates from Detroit

On Tuesday and Wednesday, July 30 and 31, 2019 were the second round of 2020 Democratic presidential primaries debates on CNN.

CNN is garbage.

I have decided, rather than get bogged down into details, to just include some video clips for those who stood out on each night. But, I will list the candidates according to tiers.