Coronal Options

1 01 2017

USA

Me, November 10:

We were lectured in the current year that white evangelical/born-again voters would sour on Trump because of his personal life and his social issue liberalism.

In 2012, Romney carried 78% of them.  That matched the record for that group voting red, with Bush 2004.  That was important, because there was a fashionable theory that white evangelical/born-again voters soured on a Mormon, and this statistic refuted that.

That record is now gone.

Trump got 81% of them.

The Atlantic, three days ago:

Many of those 81 percent are accommodating cultural changes in America that are deeply problematic. Liberals have been trying to convince Americans, and evangelicals in particular, that America is not a Christian nation. The 2016 election was evangelicals saying, “Yeah, you’re right! We can’t expect to have someone who is Christian like us. We can’t expect to have someone with a perfect family life. What we can expect is someone who can look out for us, just like every other group in this country is looking for a candidate who will look out for them.”

An easier way to say this is that when the traditional Evangelical issue base is taken off the table, they won’t stay home, but instead fall back on populism and nationalism in other issues.  And that’s how you get to 81%.  This also means that the very people who have been demanding that these issues are taken off the table can’t turn right around and blame the people they wanted not to have this choice for not thinking about these things when casting their votes.  It was like:  “The social issues shouldn’t matter anymore” on the one hand, but “How could you vote for such a lecher like Trump?” on the other hand.





Medieval Scholastic Nitpicking

21 12 2016

Alexandria, Virginia

Aww, isn’t that cute?  He’s in the same line of work I am, (or at least I am for two more days), and he’s goosing a pseudo-scientific narrative around his and his firm’s ideological-professional interests!  They’re so cherubic when they do that!

The cynic in me (though I repeat myself) senses that this is far more a paid advertisement than a bona fide op-ed.

“But look but look but look!  Trump didn’t do as well as Romney south of Nashville and north of Columbus!”

That’s right, President Romney does have that to his credit.

Wait what?





A Few Screaming Foilheads

19 12 2016

Jefferson City

Couldn’t prevent Missouri’s ten electors from voting for Trump/Pence this morning at the Capitol.

“Respect the will of the people,” it says here that one protester yelled.

nyt-mo-results

That they did.





Turning Georgia Blue

14 12 2016

Atlanta

Or trying to.

Yeah, that’s what that was all about.





In Even More Stark Terms

9 12 2016

USA

A website called Rynerohla has, since about a week after Election Day, been compiling and adding red-blue maps of states by precinct.

It just added Illinois today.  Before you click, your browser will probably downscale this very large (7000 x 9280) image to fit your browser.  If you click on it to make it native size, it will take a few seconds to show.

Just looking at it, without knowing anything else, you wonder how Trump didn’t win it.  But then you come back to your senses and realize that there are a whole hell of a lot of people where all the blue is up in the upper right corner.





Demography Really Is Destiny

28 11 2016

Vista, California

Darrel Issa had to eke out a re-election win.

Let me repeat:

Darrel Issa.

His district includes southern Orange and northern San Diego County, some of the last red areas in SoCal.

Though since it also includes Camp Pendleton, and the Democrat is a retired Marine Colonel, that explains part of it.

Also, the scant few remaining Republican House members from SoCal won easily, including Duncan Hunter and someone on Trump’s short list for SoS, Dana Rohrabacher.

But, on the flip side, for the first time since the Depression, Orange County was not red in a Presidential election.





Thinking Cap

28 11 2016

Washington, D.C.

WaPo:

Donald Trump lost most of the American economy in this election

By Jim Tankersley

In the modern era of presidential politics, no candidate has ever won the popular vote by more than Hillary Clinton did this year, yet still managed to lose the electoral college. In that sense, 2016 was a historic split: Donald Trump won the presidency by as much as 74 electoral votes (depending on how Michigan ends up) while losing the nationwide vote to Clinton by 1.7 million votes and counting.

But there’s another divide exposed by the election, which researchers at the Brookings Institution recently discovered as they sifted the election returns. It has no bearing on the election outcome, but it tells us something important about the state of the country and its politics moving forward.

The divide is economic, and it is massive. According to the Brookings analysis, the less-than-500 counties that Clinton won nationwide combined to generate 64 percent of America’s economic activity in 2015. The more-than-2,600 counties that Trump won combined to generate 36 percent of the country’s economic activity last year.

(snip)

As Muro notes, many state legislatures are divided on similar grounds, between higher-output metro areas and lower-output rural ones. Often, that divide pushes governors of those states, even the ones who hail from cities, to push hard for economic development in lower-output areas.

Uh, Jim? That’s precisely why Trump won.

Think it through.