The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Democrats and Republicans: We Will Win
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

That people overwhelmingly think the general election candidate they support is going to be the one who wins the presidency raises some interesting questions, as Hypnotoad666 notes:

1. Do people support candidate X because they believe he will win, or do they convince themselves he will win because they support him?

2. Do people think candidate X is objectively best and assume others have to be able to see this as well?

3. Do people think candidate X will win because once they start to like him they only seek out bias confirming information?

4. Do people think candidate X will win because in their peer group everyone else supports candidate X, so they can’t imagine who could be voting for the other guy? (E.g., Pauline Kael’s semi-apocryphal quote: “I can’t believe Nixon won. I don’t know anyone who voted for him.”)

It also sheds light on other aspects of American democracy, like why third parties are perpetually hopeless and why ‘momentum’ is a real thing.

Though the phenomenon doesn’t appear to be as strong* at the congressional level as it is at the presidential level, most people think they’ll be on the winning team, even when the odds say they’re wrong. Percentages, by partisan affiliation, who think Democrats will take control of the Senate in the 2020 elections (the current market probability of this happening is 30%):

Percentages, by partisan affiliation, who think Republicans will take control of the House in the 2020 elections (the current market probability of this happening is also 30%):

* Voters are more likely to vote outside of their party affiliation at the congressional level than they are at the presidential level, so the minority of Democrats who think Republicans will win and the minority of Republicans who think Democrats will win presumably comprise a not insubstantial number of each who will be voting against their parties at the congressional level in November.

 
• Category: Culture/Society, Ideology • Tags: Election 2020, Polling 
Hide 17 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. anon[372] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s like football – you have to believe your team can win or it’s no fun watching the game. And the team itself has to believe it will win or it won’t play hard.
    You can’t admit defeat until your are down by 3 scores after the 2 minute warning.

    • Agree: Ash Williams
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  2. Nodwink says:

    I don’t think this is irrational, just people expecting a return on their emotional investment.

    When it comes to the presidential election, it really is a two-horse race. Now, if you conceive of it as a literal two-horse race, and convert the emotional investment into a monetary one, it’s easier to understand why everyone is convinced they’ll win — especially if those two horses have nearly identical race records. Everyone at the track thinks they hold a winning ticket when the starting gates fly open.

  3. This election will be an interesting test case. Most sober-minded people know that by 2024, demographic math will be such that the Dems could dig up the decaying corpse of Trayvon Martin, run it for president, and it will win by a substantial margin simply because (D). In just a few short years, GOP is perma-toast.

    On that day, the Jewish gloating and end-zone dancing and ritual MSM denunciations of old white goy people will be so loud, you could hear them on the rings of Saturn. And the loudness and viciousness of the gloating, the final tearing off of the mask, will be the wake up call which White America should have heard back in the days of the traitorous monster GWB, may his torments in Hell be multiplied.

    This will lead to a temporary Permanent Dem/POC Ascendancy (the Jews are already long ascendant), followed by a Dem/Jewish/POC Red Terror Part Two, followed by a backlash from the White kulaks. White America at last will have its Dublin GPO/Easter 1916 moment, when the public’s horror at the sheer hate and fury of the POC-Jewish coalition will cause Whites to give up Hopeful Accomodationism: they will switch from Daniel O’Connell to Michael Collins, because the question will have been forced. Then we get to the real issues like partition and separation, and the dear knows how that will end up.

    What’s interesting in 2020 is just the state of the math: Trump is an incumbent, and he’s still charismatic, and he still has an alliance of true-blue believers and please-God-anything-but-a-Democrat types. The Dems have unbelievably, inexplicably weak candidates.

    In theory, in a sane world, Trump would win given these conditions. But perhaps the Dems already have the numbers and the vote fraud machine, to elect the corpse of Trayvon Martin, or their idiot psychopath of choice. Guess we’ll see.

    But 2020 is more or less irrelevant; time to start laying the moral, intellectual, rhetorical, theoretical and practical groundwork for the post-2024 partition.

    • Agree: Hail
    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  4. Viewed as a template, there was an interesting exchange in the California Legislature several years ago, between a Latino Democrat and a White Republican. Wish I could recall the names and the details.

    But it basically went like this. The Latino Democrat said: “Here’s where we are. If I win, I get to take your money. If you win, all you get to do is keep your money. There doesn’t exist a third option where if you win, you get to take my money.”

    That will be all politics post-2024 (or maybe even post-2020): the POC Democrat will always win, will always take your money, you will never win, and on the sideline, the Jews will figure out a loophole where they secretly get to keep their money, but not you.

    • Agree: Hail
  5. Or it could simply be:

    5. Do people say candidate X will win because their answer is not the requested prediction, but the expression of a wish?

    Q: Will your team win the Super Bowl?
    A: For sure! Go team go!

    In this era of social network feedback, prophecies become ever more self-fulfilling. If enough people say they will win, that may actually make them win. So pure expressions of opinion are less and less likely to be found.

  6. onebornfree says: • Website

    “The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy….Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.” Carroll Quigley

    “Governments are based pincipally on force and deception. Democratic governments are based chiefly on deception, other governments on force. And democratic governments, if you get too uppity, give up on the deception and resort to brute force, as a lot of us found out in the sixites. Those who didn’t find out in the sixites will find out in the near future because we’re going to have a rerun.”
    Robert Anton Wilson

    “Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very cores, 100% corrupt  criminal scams which cannot be “reformed”or “improved”,simply because of their innate criminal nature.”   onebornfree

    Regards, onebornfree

  7. @Nodwink

    Expecting something to happen merely because we want it to happen, or because all our friends and family want it to happen, is the epitome of irrational.

    A “return on emotional investment” is a wonderful phrase you’ve coined, though, and should be used to describe this phenomenon.

  8. zatt says:

    Any way to tell whether this tendency has changed over time?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  9. All the Democrats have to do to win in 2020 is not be loony.

    That’s a mighty high bar.

  10. @The Germ Theory of Disease

    The Dems have unbelievably, inexplicably weak candidates.

    This really is the heart of the matter. The Democrats have been unable to rustle up a candidate that can at least appear to be sane or somewhat normal. (Waiting for Charles Pewitt to bang out a 20 paragraph stream of consciousness on Gabbard) Each one has their fringe appeal, but no working/middle class, generational voting Democrat can look upon this crowd and see an individual that relates to them.

    Trump is not a strong incumbent, he should have been pretty easy to defeat with a relatively young, Clintonesque straight white guy. But the D’s are going all in on either weirdos or dinosaurs.

    • Agree: AnotherDad
  11. 1. Do people support candidate X because they believe he will win, or do they convince themselves he will win because they support him?

    I will answer for myself. Based on policy to issues, even policy may not personally benefit me — in accordance with our principles and Constitution

    2. Do people think candidate X is objectively best and assume others have to be able to see this as well?

    I would need some clarification about what is meant by objective. The candidate I voted for thinks same relational marriage is just dandy —

    But he also appears to understand that it is one thing to go in debt for ourselves verse for the sake of other countries.

    3. Do people think candidate X will win because once they start to like him they only seek out bias confirming information?

    That all depends. Currently the candidate of my choosing will win because of two major view
    a. while he can be uppity he also leans positive
    b. the agenda remains even if he has strayed
    c. the opposition has created an environment that is unsettling to most citizens
    d. the current slate of candidates in my view — have untenable positions and worse they don;t know how to contend for the issues they have.

    4. Do people think candidate X will win because in their peer group everyone else supports candidate X, so they can’t imagine who could be voting for the other guy? (E.g., Pauline Kael’s semi-apocryphal quote: “I can’t believe Nixon won. I don’t know anyone who voted for him.”)

    By way of the example of Miss Kael I would pivot back up yo my c. the democrats in that period created a very unsettling environment – Those who voted for Pres Nixon – the unsettled, the silent majority – though today not as silent as the opposition would like.

  12. The people behind the system, that both D and R represent and serve, will be the winners. Just as they always have been, since the day they landed on Plymouth Rock as a chartered (incorporated in the City of London) profit seeking venture with a grant from the King, based on a Papal decree, to take any and all non-Christian lands and people as their property.

    They expend a lot of energy and effort to maintain the illusion that voting actually matters in the Potemkin Republic of America.

    Make America Great For Real. MAGFR.

  13. It also sheds light on other aspects of American democracy, like why third parties are perpetually hopeless and why ‘momentum’ is a real thing.

    We have political parties within political parties just like we have nations within the nation of the USA.

    The first-past-the-post electoral system in the USA guarantees the creation of a two-party system.

    Alternative political parties in the USA are not “perpetually hopeless” because these alternative political parties have had a big impact in politically volatile times like before the Civil War. We are in the beginnings of Civil War II and the only thing holding the JEW/WASP ruling class in power is the monetary extremism — balance sheet expansion, quantitative easing, asset purchases, dollar swaps…etc. — put in place by the privately-controlled Federal Reserve Bank.

    “Momentum” is too vague to bother with, but, if we must use that term, then I’ll say Trump has lost considerable momentum with both Whites With College Degrees and Whites Without College Degrees in the run up to the general election. Trump will lose to Biden in November and the Republican Party will be obliterated by the new political party called White Core America.

    Trump refuses to advance the interests of Whites as Whites and Trump refuses to advance the interests of the European Christian ancestral core of the USA. Trump refuses to protect and advance the interests of the historic American nation.

    Trump puts the interests of Israel over and above the interests of the USA. That is TREASON from Trump.

    I wrote this in March of 2019 about the two-party system and the political parties within the Republican Party:

    Let’s start politically with first past the post two-party partitionism. The English winner takes all, first past the post electoral system produces a two-party system. I think it was John O’Sullivan who suggested that the GOP could have 5 or so partitioned political parties within the GOP.

    My fast description of 5 parties within GOP:

    1) Sam Francis Founding Father political party that explicitly recognizes the United States as a British Protestant or European Christian nation and features Buchananite economic patriotism. White Core American Patriots would take over the electronic currency(money) and the electronic propaganda and the electronic command and control of the various weapons systems of the US military and the US signals intelligence apparatus. America First in all matters, especially foreign policy.

    2) George W Bush GOP of rich WASP turds who only have money-grubbing and national dissolution on their minds. Israel First foreign policy.

    3) John Kasich GOP globalizer and mass legal immigration and monetary extremism and upper middle class greed covered up by fake concern for lower middle class and working class. Israel First foreign policy.

    4) John McCain and Mitt Romney GOP of American Empire and mass legal immigration and trade deal scams and nostalgia for 50 years ago. Israel First foreign policy.

    5) Trump GOP of slavish devotion to Jew donors such as Adelson and Singer and mass legal immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens and keeping the asset bubbles in stocks, bonds and real estate pumped up by monetary extremism. Israel First foreign policy.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/jpod-deletes-his-account/#comment-3106703

  14. Trump needs the numerous amounts of Romney to Other/Non-voters to come for him who didn’t (its sizeable looking at CCES and ANES). In the CCES Cruz voters only gave him 89%, Rubio 70%, and kasich 50%

  15. @anon

    And even then, if you turn the game off, you turn it back on five minutes later… just in case!

  16. @zatt

    Probably would be worth looking into. It’s not a question I recall seeing in previous election cycles, but that may have been because I wasn’t looking for it.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS