Trebek: For $1000, blacks, liberals, and Democrats were more likely to vote for Donald Trump and less likely to vote for Hillary Clinton than this group of people.
Trebek: Yes, Pepe?
Pepe: Who are residents of Washington DC?
Trebek: That is correct.
While I couldn't stay until the joyous end, watching the mood change over the course of the evening at a DC bar was delightful.
However we shall own the Reckoning.
See this chart? The dollar is a Derivative based currency.Bet stands at $148T for USD, $544T for derivatives overall.
This problem doesn't go away.
It was fun to watch them shift from totally unjustified smug self-assurance to despair and then to the line that no one predicted this… except for Michael Moore! Moore got a piece of it correct, but he was a late comer and offered a partial explanation. There are tons of people on our side who saw it coming from a lot farther in the distance and for a host of reasons. The DC crowd is apparently incapable of expanding their own intellectual Overton windows. It just redounds to our benefit.
Until the 23rd amendment to the constitution was passed in 1961, the residents of the District of Columbia did not have the right to vote in presidential elections. I've always had my doubts about this – the District is a totally artificial bubble, unlike anywhere else in the country. It exists entirely off the federal dole. Of course, now the residents of this happy island want representation in Congress (their license plates proclaim, "Taxation Without Representation." Well, tough noogies. Given the current Republican dominance of both Houses of Congress and the state legislatures, this turkey isn't going anywhere but into the roaster.
Can anyone name another country (present or historical) where the residents of the seat of government are so perfectly aligned against the party in power?
Republican Congressmen really should bring their own trust staffs from back home and avoid hiring anyone local.
It's not an invalid point. My assumption is that those 11k votes are people employed as Republicans and their families and no one else.
Heartiste linked to that comment, Dan. Nice insight!
It would be interesting to see how DC compares with other hyper concentrated SWPL-topias or protected class havens vis vote %s: Portland(ME), Portland(OR), Boston/Cambridge, Providence, Seattle, San Fran, Arlington/Alexandria/McLean(VA). Surely these places are v close to DC in voting extremes? They essentially exist as bubbles where a sort of soft totalitariarism is dabbled with. DC is of most concern tho as per the bureaucracies will to subvert Trump's agenda.
DC was one of just a handful of "states" that went more blue versus 2012 (Democrat candidate had a better margin of victory). The other two being Massachusetts and California (CA was D+30 this year, versus D+23 in 2012).
In 2012, 27 states (including DC under that term) voted for Obama. In this election, 21 of those states moved closer to red (and in the case of MI, WI, IA, PA, OH, and FL, went red). Washington, Virginia, and Colorado had essentially the same margin as 2012.
Of the 24 states that voted for Romney, 18 of them moved even further red this year. The 3 red states that moved appreciably closer to blue were Texas, Arizona, and Georgia, which was expected. Utah had a closer margin due to the anomalous McMuffin candidacy, while Wyoming and Kansas had insignificant 1 to 2 point shifts blue-ward, while still retaining huge overall margins for the Republicans.
Overall, 40 states trended red-ward versus 2012, while 11 states (including DC) trended blue-ward. The inclusion of California in the popular vote truly does mask the fact that this election was a blowout.
Is there an easy way to get those returns without having to cobble together several–as in thousands–of precincts? San Francisco county–which is the city proper–was still more than twice as supportive of Trump as DC was. I don't know that there is even a major city that was as pro-Hillary and anti-Trump as DC.
How much do you attribute that to a Dem-Dem Senate race? Did Cali really move in a different direction than most of the rest of the country? The absolute turnout in 2012 was higher there than it was this year.
That could be it.
According to the exit polls for CA, Trump did about as well with 18-29 voters in CA as Romney did, but did terribly with middle aged and older voters. In 2012, Romney won 65+ voters in CA, Trump lost them by 25%.
Trump actually did better with Independents in CA than Romney, but a large number of Republicans in CA (13%) crossed-over for Hillary.
It also appears that the white percentage of the total vote in CA plunged from 55% in 2012 to 48% this year. The Hispanic percentage increased from 22% to 31%. In raw numbers, that's an increase of 1 million Hispanics turning out to vote in just four years. Surely though, none of those voters were illegal immigrants.
Basically, it just confirms that CA is a huge cuck state being overrun by illegal immigrants. They have crossed the critical threshhold where the majority of their voters (not just their population) are now non-white. It is notable that Texas is moving in that direction, as they moved from Republican +16 to Republican +9 in just one election.
Note that if you breakdown Hillary's coalition of voters by ethnicity, almost half (but not quite) of her voters are non-white. By 2020, it is likely that the coalition of voters that vote for a Democratic Presidential nominee will be majority non-white.
After a closer look at some SWPL-topias, I will concede that DC is well and truly in a category all by itself. Well into banana republic territory where vote patterns are as much about being brain washed or terrified into submission. It would be interesting to compare DC vote %s to results of Cuban or Zimbabwe "elections".Even block voting zones like The Bronx gave Trump 9.6%, & in Baltimore 10.9% & greater Boston 16.5%. I suppose if you were GOP in DC, you might ask, why bother voting? Better to go to the bar for happy hour.There probably isn't another jurisdiction in the entire developed world where the main opposition party can't even break 4.5% of the vote.
So I wore my MAGA hat on the DC metro yesterday, hoping to rile up the locals, with a dress shirt, tie, and briefcase.
But on the yellow line found myself surrounded by 15 young people from Texas who were mostly Trump fans. What?
It turns out that they were in DC for some kind of 4H ceremony.
I feel like most of the places where Trump underperformed in relation to Romney had Republican establishment leading the charge against him.
California had Governor Schwarzenegger going against Trump. Utah and Nevada had the renegade Mormons led by Romney and Glenn Beck. DC and Northern Virginia had the all the NeverTrump(tm) beltway establishment. Colorado and Texas were Cruz territory.
Since history is now being written here are some credits:(1) The NRA went hell-for-leather in the swing states.(2) Evangelicals got it done. Franklin Graham did a 50 state Pray-for-America tour that and Christians across America fasted before the election. Exit polls showed they broke 100 to 0 for Trump (only slight exaggeration). Pence was the right choice of running mate.(3) Trump's vocal pro-life words at the end were key. Catholics shifted hard to Trump at the last minute.
I think Trump's success with evangelicals goes a long way to explaining the East-West divide as well, the west being non-churchgoing.
We have to be careful with exit polling data since the figures are rounded and the estimation techniques imprecise.
That said, it looks like the entire increase in Hispanic turnout compared to 2012 came from the state of California. Nationally, it goes from 10% to 11% (an increase of ~10%). In Cali, it goes from 22% to 31% (an increase of ~40%). California has 25% of the nation's Hispanics.
1-in-10 (San Fran) is uncommon but not hard to find in a group. 1-in-25, like DC, is really sparse though. It wouldn't be that uncommon to take a random group of 50 DC residents and find that not a single one of them voted for Trump (13% likelihood).
I still wear mine everywhere when I'm not in a work setting. Haven't decided if I'll continue to do so post-inauguration. I still see the occasional person (black) wearing a shirt with Obama on it and my republican (small-R) sensibilities are repulsed.
Missed on my part to not include the religiosity divide in the post on polling predictions. Great point.
I don't think its necessarily best if too-loudly religious folks run the show. That said, I think folks like Lion of the Blogosphere ought to be a little more less scornful and more appreciative of the group that gets it done at the ballot box.
LOTB's demographic, HBD-aware atheist Jews for Trump is about the smallest constituency in America.
"There probably isn't another jurisdiction in the entire developed world where the main opposition party can't even break 4.5% of the vote."
But the Republican party is not merely some opposition party. They control the presidency, both houses of congress, and totally dominate governorships and statehouses. They are the ruling party, on paper anyway.
This situation is absolutely bizarre. It is a good thing that effete modern leftists are not like the leftists of old, who enjoyed lots and lots of killing.
Pence is also a good choice to protect Trump because what's the one thing they think is worse than Trump? Someone who believes in Traditional Marriage is LITERALLY, ACTUALLY Hitler, even more so than Trump (who is still Hitler, but not as bad as homophobe Hitler).
LotB and his old self, Half Sigma, are the only two members of that very exclusive constituency.
Ha, the fifty different shades of Hitler.
In many ways, Trump has built a coalition of the core to compete with the left's coalition of the fringes. It includes tradcons, the religious right, anti-interventionist libertarians, the alt-right, anti-taxers, and populists and nationalists of various stripes.
Comments are closed.