Monday, July 27, 2020

Shy Trump Voters And Not So Shy Black Voters

Larry Schweikart has an interesting article at undercoverdc, but I'm going to link to it also at FR, because I found it easier to read at FR--see which suits you best:

Ignore The Polls? These are Important

The article is obviously is obviously about the polls, and it basically covers two topics (plus a bit more). Some of this has been touched on previously, but Schweikart goes into a fair amount of--readable--detail.

The first topic is how much weight to give the polls in light of the by now well recognized phenomenon of "shy" Trump voters--the extreme reluctance of Trump voters to level with pollsters. Can the polls be simply ignored? Schweikart argues that ignoring the polls is realistic:

I think the key answer is Donald Trump. There is growing evidence that Trump voters are more committed than ever to casting a vote for Trump, yet far more reluctant to tell anyone their intention. In 2016, Trafalgar solved that with the question, “Who do you think your neighbor will vote for?” vs “Who do you plan to vote for?” But the experts at Trafalgar say even that question is not revealing the larger numbers of Trump supporters—some of whom will tell the pollster at the beginning of the interview they plan to vote for Trump but won’t say so on record. 
In other words, dismissing the head-to-head polls is realistic given the incredible difficulty the pollsters are having getting the Trump supporters to “come out of the closet.”

But the "shy" Trump voters is more of a side show in the article, which is largely devoted to the remarkable shift in Trump's favorability among black voters--who by contrast to whites have not been at all shy in expressing their favorable attitudes toward Trump to the pollsters. Schweikart approaches the question of how this could affect the 2020 election not only with numbers drawn from 2016 to the present but also with some historical research that I think you'll find fascinating.

I won't try to paste it all in--check it out. Here are two teasers:

A rule of thumb has been that Democrats need at least 90% of the black vote to win. If that’s the case, Biden isn’t even in the same zip code as a victory.
Because if [the black Trump vote] is even remotely in that ballpark [Trump's approval among blacks], there aren’t enough suburban Karens in the world to save the Democrat Party in November.

Oh, the extra topic, barely touched on, is that Trump is doing very well among Hispanics, as well.


  1. "there aren’t enough suburban Karens in the world to save" the Democrats.
    Provided that it's only one *citizen*, one vote.

    And, provided that it's physically possible for *regular* GOP voters to cast votes.
    It'll be the job of antiFa etc., to prevent such votes from being cast, by *all* available means, e.g. spreading viruses into known GOP hoods.
    (Refuse Fascism has already been vocal about this.)

    1. They'll definitely have to take care of that aspect.

    2. OTOH, my bet is that Barr etc. will indeed move big, so I advise working to “prep” your pals, so that, when he moves, your friends know enough to be effective at explaining the real score to their friends, esp. those who are in position to heavily influence crucial others.
      I'll bet that, even in the DS, there are key folks who actually give a damn about the rule of law, and who, if Barr can rub their faces in the scale of the criminality, will thereby face music, that SparkleFart's regime was as criminal, as what DJT has been charging for years.
      (The sooner Barr makes splashes that are all-but impossible to hide from, the more time will be available, for us to overcome the MSM’s spin.)

    3. Yeah, I hafta believe that Barr will have DoJ involved.

    4. My guess is, if Durham can nail even two of the following big names(or have them in trials ongoing on 3 Nov.), DJT will be mega-vindicated, and the Dems will be in deep dodo:
      Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Lynch, McCabe, Mueller, Rice, Rosey, Schiff, Yates, Weissmann, or any Senator.

      Busts of peons below those brats won't mean as much.

    5. Actually something much easier and more proven than trying to spread the ChiCom Croup would be for Antifa, and their Sein Finnesque BLM allies, to threaten to show up at polling places and assault MAGA people. The threat of random concentrated violence could be a very effective "fleet in being" type deterrent for many people.

    6. Yeah, to show up at polling places and assault MAGA people, or to block polling place access.

  2. What do you think of a poll being framed as I’ve laid out below?

    /begin poll question

    Choose which one of the following options best describes how you feel about the presidential candidates Joe Biden and Donald Trump with respect to the upcoming presidential election:

    - I’ll definitely vote for Joe Biden
    - I’ll probably vote for Joe Biden
    - I’ll maybe vote for Joe Biden
    - I’ll probably not vote for Joe Biden
    - I’ll definitely not vote for Joe Biden

    - I’ll definitely vote for Donald Trump
    - I’ll probably vote for Donald Trump
    - I’ll maybe vote for Donald Trump
    - I’ll probably not vote for Donald Trump
    - I’ll definitely not vote for Donald Trump


    I’m not certain this would give Trump voters and leaners a much easier way out than having to say affirmatively they’ll vote for Trump, but I imagine you can see where it might. I’m thinking more people would say either definitely for Trump or definitely not for Biden than would say the opposite, and this would be telling, imo.

    I also think very few choices of “maybe for Biden” would become a Biden vote in reality, and that probably holds for the most part even with “probably for Biden.” In stark contrast, anything on Trump’s side short of “probably not” (and perhaps even many of those) is a probable Trump vote.

    Anyway, just a thought.

  3. Here's a previous link I shared in the July 23rd Pollster article brought to you by Rasmussen... good read...