tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265427772024-03-13T09:25:37.290-07:00Divided We Stand - United We FallDivided government is better government. The objective of careful, limited, fiscally responsible federal government can be accomplished at the ballot box. Not by voting exclusively Republican, Democrat or 3rd party, but by voting consistently for Divided Government.mwhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11181222537529037359noreply@blogger.comBlogger57315tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26542777.post-57750128685086648332022-11-06T14:31:00.011-08:002022-11-07T17:03:03.243-08:002022 Midterms - Overreaching Democrats vs Overreaching Trumplicans<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuBjt1p_XlLeBDQhREZJFm2IX77NrRisaW2HVczc-Zou3adRuoHDtXiNdv87WBbAsHF7kD3FGHncjCt1jvXV4Zzx2semZl4UJi1eE6JmH9LnMLuQfMXuZxQTRse1PRmfvJCjCIgsXS6lWlh3CuVXy_1ds-AwYpapE6czeVUYc6DL7MVpOcOrM/s751/2022%20Midterm%20Dividist%20%20PACMAN%20Georgia%20Biden.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="475" data-original-width="751" height="405" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuBjt1p_XlLeBDQhREZJFm2IX77NrRisaW2HVczc-Zou3adRuoHDtXiNdv87WBbAsHF7kD3FGHncjCt1jvXV4Zzx2semZl4UJi1eE6JmH9LnMLuQfMXuZxQTRse1PRmfvJCjCIgsXS6lWlh3CuVXy_1ds-AwYpapE6czeVUYc6DL7MVpOcOrM/w640-h405/2022%20Midterm%20Dividist%20%20PACMAN%20Georgia%20Biden.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i><b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Divided Government Is Coming... But How Divided?</span></b></i></td></tr></tbody></table><p style="text-align: justify;">After a two year hiatus, the Dividist blog is back. Our <a href="https://www.dividist.com/2020/12/georgia-on-my-two-minds-preference.html" target="_blank">last post</a> was after the 2020 Presidential election but before the inauguration, before the January 6th Capitol Hill insurrection, and before the Georgia runoff. In that post we discussed and analyzed how the Georgia results would determine partisan control of the Senate and the consequences in future elections. </p><p style="text-align: justify;">Here we are, two years later, days before the midterm election, and we are again discussing and analyzing how the Georgia results will determine partisan control of the Senate and the consequences for future elections. <i>It's "Deja Vu all over again."</i> </p><p style="text-align: justify;">Strap in. We've got a lot to catch up on. We'll be pulling from relevant past work and predicting the future. This will be a long post. <span></span></p><a name='more'></a><p></p><p><u><b>That Was Then. This Is Now.<br /></b></u>Let's start with some excerpts from that December 30, 2020 post: <i><a href="Georgia on my (two) mind(s)... Preference & Prediction" target="_blank"><b>Georgia On My Mind - Preference & Prediction</b></a></i>:</p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, FreeSerif, serif; font-size: 18px;"></p><blockquote><p style="background-color: white; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, FreeSerif, serif;"><i>"The three possible outcomes stack ranked in order of Dividist preference:</i></p><p style="background-color: white; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, FreeSerif, serif;"></p><ol style="background-color: white; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, FreeSerif, serif;"><li style="margin: 0px 0px 0.25em; padding: 0px;"><i>Divided Government with a 1 seat GOP Senate majority.</i></li><li style="margin: 0px 0px 0.25em; padding: 0px;"><i>Divided Government with a 2 seat GOP Senate majority. </i></li><li style="margin: 0px 0px 0.25em; padding: 0px;"><i>50-50 Unified One Party Rule Democratic Government with VP Harris tiebreaker..."</i></li></ol></blockquote>While the actual result of the election was the Dividist's 3rd choice of the 3 possibilities, the Dividist was nonplussed by that possible outcome:<blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"><i>"The Dividist will not be too upset if the Democrats take both seats and have a 50/50 + VP Harris tiebreaker majority for the next two years. In that eventuality, West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin will be the swing vote. Despite pressure from the <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/12/02/aoc-takes-swipe-at-joe-manchin-amid-escalating-twitter-feud/">progressive fringe</a>, Manchin will <a href="https://www.rollcall.com/2020/11/09/joe-manchin-kills-dreams-of-expanding-supreme-court-eliminating-the-filibuster/">keep the Democrats in line</a>:</i></div><p style="background-color: white; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, FreeSerif, serif;"></p><blockquote style="background-color: white; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, FreeSerif, serif; text-align: justify;"><i>"West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin III wants to make clear that he will not be the 50th vote in favor of eliminating the legislative filibuster or expanding the size of the Supreme Court in a potential 50-50 Senate."</i></blockquote><div style="background-color: white; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, FreeSerif, serif; text-align: justify;"><i>Senator Joe Manchin has credibility on these questions. As we've <a href="https://dividist.medium.com/cognitive-madisonianism-part-deux-e61e47091ed7" style="color: #1c5f1c; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">noted before</a>, Manchin is the only current sitting Democrat in the Senate who voted against Harry Reid nuking the judicial filibuster in 2013. That was the very vote that started us down this slippery slope in the Senate. Unlike 2013, this time Manchin's vote is enough to make a difference. And if Schumer tries to take the Democrats too far afield, Manchin could improve his reelection chances in West Virginia by switching parties and putting McConnell and the Republicans back into the majority. It's just that kind of balance that appeals to the Dividist."</i></div></blockquote><div style="background-color: white; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, FreeSerif, serif; font-size: 18px; text-align: justify;"></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, FreeSerif, serif; text-align: justify;">Not a bad prediction, although the Dividist's prognostication about the Georgia outcome in that post was, shall we say, flawed. We didn't think there was any way Georgians would vote for two Democratic Senators. But, thanks to Trump and the election denier clown car he drove down to Georgia, they did. The conclusion of that 2020 post also included a prediction for 2022. The Dividist explained how that Georgia outcome and partisan makeup would impact the 2022 midterms:</div><div style="background-color: white; text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, Times, FreeSerif, serif;"><span></span></span><blockquote><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, Times, FreeSerif, serif;"><span>"It's worth noting that the biggest impact of the 2020 Georgia special election may be in 2022. As we've explained before, in the entire 164 year history of Republicans and Democrats competing for electoral dominance, <b>the House of Representatives has never flipped against a divided government in a midterm election.</b> Never. Not even once. If the Republicans retain the Senate and divided government, history says the Democrats will retain the House in 2022. But, <b>if the Democrats take both Georgia Senate seats and unified control of the government, it is very possible, even likely, they will lose their narrow majority in the House in the midterms... </b></span></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, FreeSerif, serif;">we'll leave the 2022 predictions to a future post.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, FreeSerif, serif;">"</span></blockquote><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, FreeSerif, serif; font-size: 18px;"></span></i></div><div style="text-align: left;"><b><u>2022 Midterm Prediction - Republicans Will Win The House Majority</u></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The future is now. In 2020 the Democrats swept the two Georgia seats, were elected to a unified one party rule government and, now in 2022, the piper will be paid. Losing the House majority was a virtual inevitable consequence of the 2020 elections. Look no further than the history of Unified One Party Governments over the last 30 years. Trump was elected with Republican one party rule, and lost the House in 2018. Obama was elected with Democratic one party rule and lost the House in 2010. Bush was re-elected with Republican one party rule and lost the House in 2006. Clinton was elected with Democratic one party rule and lost the House in 1994. Biden was elected with Democratic one party rule and Republicans need only a net gain of 5 seats to claim the majority in the House. History says divided government will be restored in this election. The GOP does not even need a "Red Wave" to make that happen. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">While history predicts a GOP House, it doesn't explain why that happens with such inevitability. After all, incumbent House seats are among the most secure elected jobs in the Federal government with a ~<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/reelection-rates" target="_blank">95% reelection rate.</a> And didn't Tip O'Neill teach us that <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_politics_is_local" target="_blank"><b>"All Politics Is Local"</b></a></i>?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span><b>U.S. House Reelection Rates, 1964-2020<br /></b></span><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjoPN4EDun-5zHitT1yBCnseEfwbmDzYi-AhJ8imi4jTHBGUtO46NE9BSAO0NfeX5Yzz-Oo0CJVRH7-hv2gVzjHNG6WnbQj9VikQOM9lTvgBTXpyOoeAGmbSlLVBLQtUPdOUci6sWDC-5ixU43RB-6c6ijSWyosMt2RvHV3nzsHzJcGUzVEBls/s716/House%20Reelection%20Rates%201964-2020.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="US House of Representative Reelection Rates" border="0" data-original-height="400" data-original-width="716" height="224" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjoPN4EDun-5zHitT1yBCnseEfwbmDzYi-AhJ8imi4jTHBGUtO46NE9BSAO0NfeX5Yzz-Oo0CJVRH7-hv2gVzjHNG6WnbQj9VikQOM9lTvgBTXpyOoeAGmbSlLVBLQtUPdOUci6sWDC-5ixU43RB-6c6ijSWyosMt2RvHV3nzsHzJcGUzVEBls/w400-h224/House%20Reelection%20Rates%201964-2020.jpg" title="All Politics is local. Except when it's not." width="400" /></a></div>Over the life of this blog, the Dividist has <a href="http://www.dividist.com/2014/05/why-do-americans-vote-for-divided.html" target="_blank">explored this question frequently</a>, most recently when we invoked history to predict the <i><b><a href="https://www.dividist.com/2018/01/2018-election-house-rules-oneill.html" target="_blank">"2018 Election - House Rules & The O'Neill Exception"</a></b></i>: <div style="text-align: justify;"><div><i><blockquote>"In the 2018 midterms the Democrats are facing a unified one party rule Republican government, and the "O'Neill Exception" has their back. Above and beyond <b>the necessary condition of running against a Unified Government</b> to nationalize the election, history offers additional conditions common to prior House flips that must sufficiently offend the electorate to vote against the party in power. In short, <b>the unified party in power has to cooperate by demonstrating some combination of egregious legislative overreach, blatant corruption, and/or arrogant abuse of power</b>."</blockquote></i></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the 2022 midterms the GOP are facing a unified one party rule Democratic government, so the necessary condition to nationalize the House vote is met. The remaining question is whether enough of the independent electorate consider Biden's one party governmental actions like: increased taxation, student debt forgiveness, energy policy, expanded climate spending, IRS expansion, Medicare drug expansion, Judicial nominations, Afghanistan withdrawal, gun regulation and Ukraine military support meet the sufficient condition of legislative overreach and abuse of Presidential power. The answer is a qualified yes. It's certainly sufficient overreach to lose the House. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><u>A GOP House Majority Does Not Necessarily Mean a Red Wave. </u></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Is it enough for a Red Wave? In the 1994 House flip the GOP took a net 54 seats. In the 2006 House flip the Democrats took a net 33 seats. In the 2010 House flip the GOP took a net of 63 seats. In the 2018 House flip the the Democrats took a net of 41 seats. All of these were considered Wave elections. <i><b>If </b></i>the Republicans win less than a 20 seat majority (as currently indicated by respected pollsters like <a href="https://www.cookpolitical.com/ratings/house-race-ratings" target="_blank">Cook</a> and <a href="https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/2022-house/" target="_blank">Sabato</a>) and fail to retake the Senate, <i><b>then</b></i> it would represent a severe underperformance by the GOP in a midterm against a Unified One Party Democratic Rule government and <b><i>not</i></b> a Red Wave by historical standards. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Why might this happen? First, let's review the reason why every Unified One Party Rule government since 1992 has lost the House majority. <b>Simply put, there is one party in power, and the party out of power is nationalized in opposition to to the perception of overreach by the party in power.</b> As indicated earlier, Biden and the Democrats have given the GOP all the overreach ammunition they need with: inflation driven in part by anti-drilling and anti-fracking energy policy; excessive spending led by student debt forgiveness; and foreign policy missteps like the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><br /></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>But it's different this time and the difference is this: The overreach of the Trump administration is still with us and in the headlines every day.</b> Voters are living with the overreach of three Trump Supreme Court nominees and the consequent Dobbs decision overturning Roe v Wade on abortion. In addition, in an astonishing unforced error, two years later, the GOP has continued to put the 2020 overreach of election denialism, the January 6th attempt to overturn the election, and the continuing embrace of Trumpism in the forefront of voter's minds. This motivates Democratic voters and is showing up with <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/first-read/nbc-news-poll-democrats-catch-gop-enthusiasm-rcna55859" target="_blank">partisan enthusiasm parity</a> - unusual for the party in power in the midterms.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><span style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/26542777/5775012868508664833#" target="_blank"><img alt="High Enthusiasm = Voter Turnout" border="0" data-original-height="984" data-original-width="1654" height="238" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlliaHLPuEArb_9fnPWL7lS1_pv2YBhHpQqoynKU8boJjaiY4vyRhODjZm2mrd3GfKwgCsc2Fe9Cn3WAX_5Iz1x3xDOYj7I6KVg1lZ1kXQeRY4udFwNAg2zO5UODz3w8bQv72lpw2WAieQGHylPiBTwIf9S6EIB42Z8c806zTVYMTeVcYAT4Y/w400-h238/2022%20MIdterm%20Final%20Enthusiasm%20Poll.jpg" title="Everyone is pissed off" width="400" /></a></span></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/26542777/5775012868508664833#" target="_blank">High Interest = High Enthusiasm = Voter Turnout</a></b></span></i></td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">Is this overreach standoff enough to blunt the GOP advantage in 2022? The Dividist says it does. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As for my Democratic friends who are apoplectic about a narrow GOP majority in the House - don't worry. The GOP House caucus is unmanageable and, to state the obvious, Kevin McCarthy is no Nancy Pelosi. Neither he nor any other GOP member in the House can control that caucus. Ask <a href="https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/6874/Which-party-will-control-the-Senate-after-2022-election" target="_blank">John Boehner</a>. Ask <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/11/ryan-in-interview-im-done-seeking-elected-office-515678" target="_blank">Paul Ryan</a>. Yes, the House will be a partisan shit show. But, with a narrow majority, all that Republicans will be able to do is constrain Democratic Party overreach and beclown themselves with performative meaningless investigations - <i><b>if </b></i>the Democrats hold the Senate.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="https://www.cnbc.com/video/2022/11/01/university-of-virginias-larry-sabato-handicaps-the-midterm-election-races.html" target="_blank">Larry Sabato sets the stage</a>:<br /><br /></div>
<center><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="349" mozallowfullscreen="" msallowfullscreen="" oallowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" src="https://player.cnbc.com/p/gZWlPC/cnbc_global?playertype=synd&byGuid=7000271067" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="560"></iframe></center>
<div style="text-align: justify;">In this clip Sabato agrees that gridlock is inevitable as the GOP is virtually certain to take the House. But when it comes to the Senate, he points to close races in Pennsylvania, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio and Georgia, says we should expect upsets, and concludes it's a crap shoot with a good chance that we will again be waiting on a Georgia runoff to determine control of the Senate. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The Prediction Future Markets show the <a href="https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/6874/Which-party-will-control-the-Senate-after-2022-election" target="_blank">GOP heavily favored to win the Senate</a>, giving the Democrats less than a 33% chance of holding the Senate. However, it's worth remembering that in 2016 the Prediction Markets gave Donald Trump less than a 14% of winning the Presidency. So there's that. The Dividist is going against the betting markets with his Senate prognostications. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><u>2022 Midterm Prediction (and preference) - Democrats Maintain Senate Majority</u></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The Senate is a much tougher call than the House. With only 1/3 of the Senate up for election each cycle, the electoral map is the single most important indicator of electoral success. In 2022 there are 36 Senate seats contested. 14 are held by Democrats and 22 by Republicans. With fewer seats to defend, advantage Democrats. All they need do to maintain their 50-50 +VP tiebreaker majority status quo is hold serve on the seats they already hold. If they can take a seat in close races like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, or North Carolina, they could actually increase their majority (or offset a loss of incumbent seats in Nevada or Georgia). </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><u>Clown Candidates Can Trump The Senate Map</u></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Another key factor in Senate elections is whether one party nominates fringe and/or clown candidates in competitive seats. There are several recent historical precedents for clown candidates trumping the Senate map. <b>In 2010</b> there were 37 seats up for election including 3 special elections filling vacant incomplete terms. Democrats were defending 19 seats, Republicans 18 - an even playing field. Despite 2010 being the Reddest of Red Waves, with the GOP taking a net 61 seats and the majority in the House, they failed to win the Senate. Why? 2010 was the year of GOP primary clown winners and general election losers like <a href="http://www.dividist.com/2010/10/taiwanese-animation-christine-odonnell.html" target="_blank">Christine <i>"Not A Witch"</i> O'Donnell</a>, <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2010/10/buck-stands-by-controversial-remarks-043716" target="_blank">Ken <i>"Buyer's Remorse"</i> Buck</a>, and <a href="http://www.ctmirror.org/story/6554/mcmahons-new-ad-features-wrestling-call-shake-things" target="_blank">Linda <i>"WWE"</i> McMahon</a>. <b>In 2012</b> there were 33 Senate seats up for election. The Democrats were defending 23 seats, the Republicans only 10 - a crushing advantage for the Republicans. But 2012 was also the year of GOP primary clown winners and general election losers like <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2012/08/akin-legitimate-rape-victims-dont-get-pregnant-079864" target="_blank">Todd <i>"Legitimate Rape"</i> Akins</a>, <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2012/10/mourdock-rape-pregnancy-and-gods-plan-082795" target="_blank">Richard <i>"God Intended"</i> Mourdock</a>, and again <a href="https://www.latimes.com/sports/la-xpm-2012-nov-07-la-sp-sn-linda-mcmahon-20121107-story.html" target="_blank">Linda <i>"WWE"</i> McMahon</a>. Somehow the Democrats increased their Senate majority in 2012. Sometimes they just don't learn.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As we look to 2022, who am I to disagree with <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/20/politics/senate-midterm-election-mitch-mcconnell-facebook" target="_blank">Mitch McConnell</a>?:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote><i>"I think there’s probably a greater likelihood the House flips than the Senate. Senate races are just different," the GOP leader said. <b>"Candidate quality has a lot to do with the outcome."</b></i></blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Since McConnell made that statement in August the Senate races have tightened considerably. That said, in 2022, we're still talking about <a href="https://twitter.com/JimmyKimmelLive/status/1588023720722898944?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1588023720722898944%7Ctwgr%5Ed51517ae104ec920aed0115f7b0fa92c50b573ac%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedailybeast.com%2Fkimmel-writer-blaire-erskine-nails-herschel-walker-with-brutal-abortion-ad%3Fsource%3Darticlesvia%3Drss" target="_blank">Herschel <i>"Abortions For Me Not Thee"</i> Walker</a>, <a href="https://youtu.be/Fne9P6rfpq0" target="_blank">Mehmet <i>"Snake Oil"</i> Oz</a>, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/12/politics/blake-master-2020-election-donald-trump" target="_blank">Blake <i>"Election Denier"</i> Masters</a> and <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/adam-laxalt-walks-rigged-election-tightrope-nevada-senate-campaign-rcna14609" target="_blank">Adam <i>"Trump Won"</i> Laxalt.</a> Clowns, one and all. They're not all going to win. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><u>Place Your Bets</u></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For the 2022 midterm election, the Dividist is betting on divided government with a narrow GOP majority in the House, betting on a partisan overreach standoff, betting against the MAGAT clown candidates, and betting on Democrats retaining the Senate*:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span><a href="https://www.predictit.org/" target="_blank"><img alt="Dividist Say: GOP House / Democrat Senate" border="0" data-original-height="217" data-original-width="916" height="152" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEia6_QUgeYxhb26bdj1FYDamfZnqAvwPCQFDLBaA2S6yu_2hZs585p6vpM_Z6IJqprav_gVb3z5f9qU84juEUIIzZ2t4RwpV3bGNdLbcrO7lnqLwuLPsfNfKCJDvJ3YN485ljEzemEY984ZXvremb-bC0cYcbFnt3EoHiNIYuOyz17rx_f6jSs/w640-h152/Balance%20of%20Power%20after%202022%20Election%20on%20PredictIt.jpg" title="Your mileage may very." width="640" /></a></span></div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i><b>*</b>Your mileage may vary. Past performance does not predict future results. All predictions subject to change without notice. Some assembly required. Avoid alcoholic beverages while using these predictions. Fasten your seat belt. Elections are closer than they appear. If you have an erection lasting more than four hours call a doctor.</i></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i><br /></i></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="https://dividist.medium.com/overreaching-democrats-vs-overreaching-trumplicans-849453f83020?sk=10f0e9f8e0111aa916c9c70cbea6e27f" target="_blank"><b><i>Cross-Posted on Medium</i></b></a></span></div>Dividisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17028140223133400783noreply@blogger.com0First St SE, Washington, DC 20004, USA38.8899389 -77.009050510.579705063821152 -112.1653005 67.200172736178843 -41.8528005tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26542777.post-75843191679837157182020-12-30T15:18:00.015-08:002021-01-02T14:21:08.678-08:00Georgia on my (two) mind(s)... Preference & Prediction<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-LNvwfCOxTBc/X-xBqFHiiYI/AAAAAAAAClI/MV_D7J2J2-sUH3eG-XnU8qPouwF-XjRmwCLcBGAsYHQ/s751/2020%2BDividist%2B%2BPACMAN%2BGeorgia%2BSenate%2BRunoff%2Bwith%2BAbrams.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="Georgia Senate Runoff" border="0" data-original-height="475" data-original-width="751" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-LNvwfCOxTBc/X-xBqFHiiYI/AAAAAAAAClI/MV_D7J2J2-sUH3eG-XnU8qPouwF-XjRmwCLcBGAsYHQ/w400-h253/2020%2BDividist%2B%2BPACMAN%2BGeorgia%2BSenate%2BRunoff%2Bwith%2BAbrams.jpg" title="Georgia, No peace I find..." width="500" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i> "Other arms reach out to me..." </i></td></tr></tbody></table><p style="text-align: justify;">Apologies in advance for utilizing the same overused <i>"Georgia On My Mind"</i> cliché title used by <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=georgia+on+my+mind&rlz=1C1CHBD_enUS918US920&biw=1920&bih=937&sxsrf=ALeKk03G2Y6XiSbUVC-I9uDv5SYPpaH9KA%3A1609310244016&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A12%2F1%2F2020%2Ccd_max%3A&tbm=nws" target="_blank">everyone else</a> opining on the Georgia election. But, to paraphrase Yossarian in Catch-22, "<i>If everyone else is doing it, I'd be a damn fool to do anything else." </i></p><p style="text-align: justify;">We're less than a week until the Georgia Senate runoff. No telling how long before we know the results. The election will determine partisan control of the Senate and whether we will have a Divided Government or a Unified One Party Rule Democratic Government for the next two years. <b>The Dividist prognosticates and the Dividist has preferences.</b> Sometimes they align. Sometimes they don't. First our preference... <span></span></p><a name='more'></a><p></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><b>Dividist Georgia Runoff Preference:</b></p><p style="text-align: justify;">There are three possible 2021-22 federal government outcomes for the Georgia Senate runoffs. Our preference has not changed since our <a href="https://www.dividist.com/2020/11/just-vote-dividist-2020-closing.html" target="_blank">election eve endorsement</a>: </p><p><i></i></p><blockquote style="text-align: justify;"><i>"<b>The Dividist Endorsement:</b> Vote for Joe Biden and/or if you're a Republican who can't quite get there, vote #NeverTrump for a return to normalcy. <b>Vote to retain a GOP Senate majority for the oversight and legislative restraint that only a divided government can provide.</b> Vote to protect the legislative filibuster, prevent expansion of the Supreme Court, and defend the Biden Administration's left flank from the moonbat fringe." </i></blockquote><p></p><p>The three possible outcomes stack ranked in order of Dividist preference:</p><p></p><ol style="text-align: left;"><li><b>Divided Government with a 1 seat GOP Senate majority.</b></li><li><b>Divided Government with a 2 seat GOP Senate majority. </b></li><li><b>50-50 Unified One Party Rule Democratic Government with VP Harris tiebreaker.</b></li></ol><p></p><div><div style="text-align: justify;">We prefer divided government for all the <a href="https://www.dividist.com/p/voting-by-objective.html" target="_blank">usual reasons</a>. <b>We'd like to see Georgia voters split the two seats</b>, leave Mitch McConnell with a one seat majority and <b>Utah Senator Mitt Romney the swing vote</b> in the Senate. With a one seat majority McConnell would also need to worry about any "centrish" Senator (Romney? Collins? Murkowski?) switching to Independent and caucusing with the Democrats. That should keep Mitch treading lightly.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Our second choice is for the GOP to hold both seats, again because <b>we always prefer divided government</b>, but that outcome is less good because it doesn't put McConnell on enough of a knife edge.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">All that said, the Dividist will not be too upset <b>if the Democrats take both seats</b> and have a 50/50 + VP Harris tiebreaker majority for the next two years. In that eventuality, <b>West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin will be the swing vote</b>. Despite pressure from the <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/12/02/aoc-takes-swipe-at-joe-manchin-amid-escalating-twitter-feud/" target="_blank">progressive fringe</a>, Manchin will <a href="https://www.rollcall.com/2020/11/09/joe-manchin-kills-dreams-of-expanding-supreme-court-eliminating-the-filibuster/">keep the Democrats in line</a>:</div><p></p><blockquote style="text-align: justify;"><i>"West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin III wants to make clear that <b>he will not be the 50th vote in favor of eliminating the legislative filibuster or expanding the size of the Supreme Court</b> in a potential 50-50 Senate."</i></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Senator Joe Manchin has credibility on these questions. As we've <a href="https://dividist.medium.com/cognitive-madisonianism-part-deux-e61e47091ed7" target="_blank">noted before</a>, Manchin is the only current sitting Democrat in the Senate who voted against Harry Reid nuking the judicial filibuster in 2013. That was the vote that started us down this slippery slope in the Senate. Unlike 2013, this time Manchin's vote is enough to make the difference. And if Schumer tries to take the Democrats too far afield, Manchin could improve his reelection chances in West Virginia by switching parties and putting McConnell and the Republicans back into the majority. It's just that kind of balance that appeals to the Dividist.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Which goes to say that, while we have a preference, we're not going to be exercised regardless of how it turns out. The fact is, despite the hysterical hyperbole of both parties, this is not a critically important election. As such, the Dividist will take sympathy on the abused voters of Georgia and not contribute to the <a href="https://www.ajc.com/politics/georgians-get-scrooged-by-campaign-ads/UGT6KM3MVVGNPBCL7IVCJURWGA/" target="_blank">political advertising madness</a> unfolding in that state right now. We recommend everyone else do the same. You're welcome, Georgia. On to the predictions:</div><p><b>Dividist Georgia Runoff Prediction:</b></p><div style="text-align: justify;">Some caveats. The Dividist predictions have been pretty darn good this cycle. We have receipts. Now that it's legal, the Dividist opened a Prediction Market account on PredictIt and placed a few bets before the election. So far so good:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-F-M3naXK5Ws/X-wb2MUKaXI/AAAAAAAACk8/v4nYosLCF_0GDtuZChx6p9pEzELdHQUxACLcBGAsYHQ/s992/DivididstPredictItAtEC2.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Dividist Predicts Election Outcomes" border="0" data-original-height="465" data-original-width="992" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-F-M3naXK5Ws/X-wb2MUKaXI/AAAAAAAACk8/v4nYosLCF_0GDtuZChx6p9pEzELdHQUxACLcBGAsYHQ/w400-h188/DivididstPredictItAtEC2.jpg" title="So much winning!" width="500" /></a></div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">We've already collected on Biden winning POTUS, Harris winning VP (not shown), and we're winning the "Balance of Power" (D POTUS, D House, R Senate), and "Net Change in Senate Seats" (D plus 2) predictions. We also placed a longshot prediction that Trump will not finish his term, betting that he would resign to get a pardon from Pence. That one is not looking so good, but we still have 3 weeks to go. TBD. </div><p>Also, this is the electoral map we predicted on election eve:</p>
<center><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p dir="ltr" lang="en">I am comforted by this map. Biden can lose Florida and Pennsylvania and still hit 270 on the number. <a href="https://t.co/IMurD81dX8">pic.twitter.com/IMurD81dX8</a></p>— (((The Dividist))) (@Dividist) <a href="https://twitter.com/Dividist/status/1323337186373115904?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 2, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script></center>
The reader will note that the Dividist got every state right, except Georgia. That did not stop us from doubling down on Georgia a short time later:
<center><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p dir="ltr" lang="en">I gave up on Georgia.</p>— (((The Dividist))) (@Dividist) <a href="https://twitter.com/Dividist/status/1323922217235697664?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 4, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script></center>
So let's just stipulate right here and now that the Dividist does not have any fucking idea what he is talking about when it comes to Georgia politics. And with that disclosure we'll make our prediction.<p><b>We think the Republicans are likely to take both seats.</b> Here's why:</p><p>In the <b>regular Senate election</b> there were 3 candidates on the ballot....</p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>David Perdue<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>R<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>2,462,617<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>49.7%</li><li>Jon Ossoff<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>D<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>2,374,519<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>47.9%</li><li>Shane Hazel<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>L<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span> 115,039<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>2.3%</li></ul><p></p></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">... and there are two candidates still standing. If we split that Libertarian vote 60/40 for Republican Perdue (based on libertarians preferring divided government), then <b>Perdue beats Ossoff by 111,000 votes - 51.1% to 48.9%.*</b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For the <b>special Senate election</b> we have a bit more complexity, as there were 6 Republicans, 8 Democrats, 4 Independents, and 1 each Green and Libertarian running in the race. So we'll give Loeffler the total Republican vote, half the Independents and again 60% of the Libertarians. We'll give Warnock the Democrats, the Greens, half the Indies, and 40% of the Libertarians. <b>Loeffler beats Warnock by 39,601 votes - 50.4% to 49.6%*</b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Obviously, that margin is razor thin. If it's that close, we'll probably get another recount and more drama. But, there are many reasons to believe it could go the other way and Warnock could win. Among them: The President and his "legal" team are seemingly trying to <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/03/maga-georgia-civil-war-trump-senate-republicans-442776">depress GOP turnout support</a>; Libertarians and Independents just might not show up; We may see <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-21/georgia-senate-elections-draw-nearly-1-5-million-early-voters" target="_blank">greater turnout</a> and support for Warnock by the African American vote; and there is the simple fact that Loeffler is just a <a href="https://www.theatlantavoice.com/articles/election2020-loeffler-warnock-ga-debate/">piss-poor, unlikable candidate.</a> </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Nate Silver also suggests that our simple arithmetic approach is<a href="https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1343970514809843713?s=20"> not the best way to analyze the election</a>. In an exhaustive <i>on this hand... on the other hand... on the other other hand... </i>analysis, he explains <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-a-split-verdict-in-georgia-isnt-that-crazy/" target="_blank"><i><b>"Why A Split Verdict in Georgia Isn't That Crazy"</b></i></a>:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote><i>Even with many prestigious pollsters <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/videos/why-many-pollsters-are-sitting-out-the-georgia-runoffs/" target="_blank">sitting the Georgia runoffs out</a>, there have been <a href="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/georgia-senate-polls/" target="_blank">plenty of polls</a> of the two U.S. Senate runoffs and they continue to show an exceptionally close race. As of Tuesday afternoon, Democrat Raphael Warnock had a nominal lead of 0.5 percentage points over Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler in the special Senate election, while Republican Sen. David Perdue had an equally slim 0.4-point lead over Democrat Jon Ossoff in the regular Senate election. We aren’t planning to make probabilistic forecasts in Georgia, but it’s safe to say that a “polls-only” view of the runoffs would put each race at about 50:50.</i></blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">So flip a coin. Then flip it twice and it could easily come up heads <i>and</i> tails. Meaning - there is a reasonable chance for Georgians to split this vote, and for the Dividist to get the prediction wrong but realize his preferred outcome. It could happen. Regardless, there is enough Centrist ballast in the Senate to keep the ship of state stable for the next two years. On January 5th the Dividist will have his feet up and popcorn ready. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Finally, it's worth noting that the bigger impact of the Georgia special election may very well may be in 2022. As <a href="https://www.dividist.com/2018/01/2018-election-house-rules-oneill.html">we've explained before</a>, in the entire 164 year history of Republicans and Democrats competing for electoral dominance, the House of Representatives has <b><i>never</i></b> flipped against a divided government in a midterm election. Never. Not even once. If the Republicans retain the Senate and divided government, history says the Democrats will retain the House in 2022. But, if the Democrats take both Georgia Senate seats and unified control of the government, it is very possible, even likely, that they will lose their narrow 9 seat majority in the House in the midterms. 'Nuff said. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">We'll leave the 2022 predictions to a future post and wrap this up with a <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/georgia-on-my-mind-broadway-runoff-elections-1103450/" target="_blank">musical interlude</a>:</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="225" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EAHNIGOaHck" width="400"></iframe></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div><span><blockquote style="font-size: small; text-align: justify;">* Your mileage may vary. Past performance does not necessarily predict future results. All predictions subject to change without notice. Some assembly required. Avoid alcoholic beverages while using these predictions. Fasten your seat belt. Elections are closer than they appear. Maintain social media distancing and wear a mask. If you have an erection lasting more than four hours call a doctor.</blockquote><p><a href="https://dividist.medium.com/georgia-on-my-two-mind-s-f90e34c170ae?sk=24e734531e83a2c67cfa41cffc9805cb" target="_blank"><b><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Cross posted on Medium </span></b></a></p></span></div></div>Dividisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17028140223133400783noreply@blogger.com0Atlanta, GA, USA33.7489954 -84.38798245.4387615638211528 -119.5442324 62.059229236178844 -49.2317324tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26542777.post-58810185307619939102020-11-02T20:35:00.022-08:002020-12-30T15:22:00.874-08:00Just Vote Dividist - 2020 Closing Argument Edition - The Chaos vs. Normalcy Election<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CV2Hscog8CU/X6BYUcSIU0I/AAAAAAAACig/A5r66yK1UFg35liDq9wTk9QWRx52vb6YgCLcBGAsYHQ/s592/Biden%2B2020%2BSANE%2Band%2BDividist%2BHope.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="Joe Biden and Divided Government" border="0" data-original-height="466" data-original-width="592" height="504" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CV2Hscog8CU/X6BYUcSIU0I/AAAAAAAACig/A5r66yK1UFg35liDq9wTk9QWRx52vb6YgCLcBGAsYHQ/w640-h504/Biden%2B2020%2BSANE%2Band%2BDividist%2BHope.jpg" title="Vote for Normalcy" width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><i><b> Never Trump & Divided Government FTW </b></i></span><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Welcome to our eighth election eve "<a href="https://www.dividist.com/search/label/Just%20Vote%20Dividist">Just Vote Dividist</a>" post. This blog <a href="http://www.dividist.com/2006/11/just-vote-divided.html" target="_blank">started in 2006</a> to advocate a <a href="https://www.blogger.com/#">divided government voting heuristic</a>. Every election eve since, the Dividist has published a Divided Government voting recommendation (see addendum below). This could be the last of this series as, thanks to COVID-19, our country's voting dynamic has changed dramatically and possibly permanently. As the Dividist writes this, somewhere close to <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/almost-94-million-americans-have-cast-early-votes-nearly-doubling-n1245750" target="_blank">100 million votes have already been cast</a> through mail-in ballots or early voting. This compares to approximately 130 million total votes cast in the 2016 presidential election. Which begs the question: <i>What's the point of doing an election eve closing argument if 70% of the vote is already counted?</i> And the answer is: <i>The Dividist has no friggin' idea. </i>So we'll do this out of tradition tonight and figure it out next time.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><div style="text-align: justify;">There are even more cries, lamentations, rending of garments and gnashing of teeth than usual this cycle. Partisans insist on characterizing this <i>"most important election of our lifetime"</i> as the <i><a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/stable-genius-donald-trump-goes-full-fascist" target="_blank">Fascism</a> vs. <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-trojan-horse-socialism-tammy-bruce" target="_blank">Socialism</a></i> election. Both partisan tribes are in rare agreement that if the other tribe wins it will be <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/01/democracy-fascism-global-trump-biden-election" target="_blank"><i>The End of Democracy In America.</i></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Spoiler Alert:</b> We won't fall into fascism or socialism no matter who wins. Moreover, our democracy will be fine regardless of the outcome. You're welcome.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Additional Spoiler Alert:</b> In previous editions, we've teased the Dividist recommendation and buried our preference deep in the post. But everyone has already voted, so WTF? Here it is:<span><a name='more'></a></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>The Dividist Endorsement:</b> Vote for Joe Biden and/or if you're a Republican who can't quite get there, vote #NeverTrump for a return to normalcy. Vote to <a href="https://www.dividist.com/2020/08/cognitive-madisonianism-part-deux.html">retain a GOP Senate majority for the oversight and legislative restraint</a> that only a divided government can provide. Vote to protect the legislative filibuster, prevent expansion of the Supreme Court, and defend the Biden Administration's left flank from the moonbat fringe. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">In previous election eve editions we've painstakingly summarized and recycled our previous votes, general arguments, and voting heuristic for divided government. We'll include that material again, but in an addendum at the bottom of this post. Before getting to the rationale for the realistic 2020 divided government options and the Dividist endorsement, please indulge us as we review an elementary civics lesson that far too many Americans fail to appreciate.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>The President of the United States is not the government of the United States. </b></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The President of the United States is not even necessarily the leader of the government of the United States. The executive branch is one of three co-equal branches of government. The actual government of the United States is led by the Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader representing their respective democratic institutions in concert with the President of the United States. The personalities, interpersonal relationships, communication skills, ideological motivation, partisan loyalties, personal ambitions, institutional obligations and dynamic interactions between those three leaders determine the domestic policy and international posture that governs the United States.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Co-Equal Means Co-Equal</b></div><div style="text-align: justify;">While the President is <i>not</i> the leader of the government, he/she usually <i>is</i> considered the leader of a political party. In a unified one party government, the President <i>may</i> function as the unitary leader of the United States government <i><b>if</b></i> the president's party in Congress put partisan discipline and loyalty above their constitutional responsibilities. Which they usually do. When we have a divided government, leadership of the United States government is just as likely to reside in the Congress as it is in the Executive branch.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Did I Mention The POTUS Is Not The Government Of The United States?</b></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This is not to minimize the role of the President. The President is the putative <i>"Leader of the Free World"</i> and <i>"Commander in Chief"</i> of the most powerful military in the history of the world. The <a href="http://www.dividist.com/search/label/Unitary%20Executive" target="_blank">"Unitary Executive"</a> has extraordinary, almost monarchical latitude over United States foreign policy. However, United States domestic policy is forged primarily in Congress, <a href="http://wwnorton.com/college/polisci/american-government12/core/ch/06/outline.aspx" target="_blank">by design</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>In Divided Government - The Speaker of the House Calls the Domestic Shots</b></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The "People's House" - the most democratic of our government branches, is where the Framer's intended and expected domestic policy to be created and shaped. This is why the House is the first branch codified in the first article of the Constitution. This is why the Speaker of the House is second only to the Vice President in succession to the Presidency. The Senate - representing the semi-sovereign state governments - was intended by the Framers to be a moderating influence over both the majoritarian domestic policies of the House and the foreign polices of the President.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>A Co-equal Triumvirate Governs The United States.</b></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This structure is unique. This structure is exactly what the framers intended. This structure is <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4580812/scalia-gridlock" target="_blank">what makes our system exceptional</a>. The point is this - given that this power sharing triad is the essence of our elected government, perhaps <b>we - as voters - should focus less on the singular office of the President and more on the combination of leaders that will run our government. </b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: left;">With that in mind, we are pleased to present the four actual, realistic 2021-2022 United States Government choices, stack ranked by Dividist preference. We've made one simplifying assumption for 2020. There is no realistic possibility of the Democrats losing the House majority this cycle. One of the following four options will be elected to govern the United States for the next two years.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span><!--more--></span><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: left;"></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-family: times; font-size: x-large;">The Only Four Realistic 2020 United States Government Options</span></b></div><div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b>1 - 2020 DIVIDED GOVERNMENT FIRST CHOICE:</b></div><b><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: blue;">Democratic President</span>, <span style="color: red;">Republican Senate, </span><span style="color: #2b00fe;">Democratic House</span>. </b></div></b><blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BLRZedTD63k/X59vPBEgYZI/AAAAAAAAChg/TBYNa3Jn8x4zfUBfVtUXawmvCMEgvIE6QCLcBGAsYHQ/s789/Dem%2BPOTUS%2BGOP%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="257" data-original-width="789" height="130" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BLRZedTD63k/X59vPBEgYZI/AAAAAAAAChg/TBYNa3Jn8x4zfUBfVtUXawmvCMEgvIE6QCLcBGAsYHQ/w400-h130/Dem%2BPOTUS%2BGOP%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="text-align: justify;">This is the Dividist's Endorsement / preferred outcome. Democratic President and at least one branch of Congress with GOP majority control. Some analysts even suggest </span><a href="http://www.dividist.com/2016/10/investors-love-divided-government-algo.html" style="text-align: justify;" target="_blank">this configuration is best for the economy and stock market</a><span style="text-align: justify;">. Your mileage may vary. </span></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: center;">_________________</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>2 - 2020 UNIFIED DEMOCRATIC ONE PARTY RULE GOVERNMENT:</b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span>Democratic President, Democratic Senate,</span> Democratic<span> House</span></span>. </b></div><blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FCPBqmAi4NM/X59x2uv4YhI/AAAAAAAAChs/H4m2vAv1Of0mWn00fxKAOrqDOcBL8wZLgCLcBGAsYHQ/s789/Dem%2BPOTUS%2BDem%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2BUnified%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="257" data-original-width="789" height="130" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FCPBqmAi4NM/X59x2uv4YhI/AAAAAAAAChs/H4m2vAv1Of0mWn00fxKAOrqDOcBL8wZLgCLcBGAsYHQ/w400-h130/Dem%2BPOTUS%2BDem%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2BUnified%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>This is the first time in the 14 year history of this blog, the Dividist ranked <i>any </i>Unified One Party Rule Government ahead of <i>any</i> Divided Government scenario. The reasons are two-fold.<span style="text-align: left;"> </span></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">First, given the recent polls, we <a href="https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/21320/" target="_blank">do not believe Donald Trump can win</a> this election. Yeah, we said that Trump could not win in 2016. <a href="https://www.dividist.com/2020/09/but-but-2016-one-poll-and-six-pundits.html" target="_blank">This is not 2016</a>. We are including two additional potential divided government outcomes where Trump wins, but don't believe either are likely. The realistic choice for voters selecting our 2021-2022 government is the choice of option 1 or 2.<span style="text-align: left;"> </span></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">The second reason we are ignoring options 3 or 4 is - <b>Because Trump</b>. Never Trump means Never Trump and the Dividist has been a <a href="https://www.dividist.com/2016/09/trump-or-clinton-you-wont-believe-who_6.html" target="_blank">committed Never Trumper</a> since 2015. If the Democrats also take the Senate, it's certain that Biden will not be able to resist the moonbat wing of his party, the Democrats will invoke the "nuclear option" to kill the filibuster, expand the Supreme Court, and wildly overreach on legislation. That would set up a probable loss of both Houses of Congress in 2022, and potentially the White House again in 2024. This is a better scenario than keeping Trump in the White House, but worse for the country, the Biden administration, and the long term prospects of the Democratic Party.<span style="text-align: left;"> </span></blockquote>
<b><div style="text-align: center;">_________________</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>3 - 2020 DIVIDED GOVERNMENT LEAST WORST CHOICE:</b></div></b><b><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red;">Republican President</span>,<span style="color: #2b00fe;"> <span>Democratic Senate</span>, <span>Democratic House</span></span>.</b></div></b><blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Zwtyfo1qhgE/X590nwsW84I/AAAAAAAACiI/ajpVXp4Rs68llrXav-yudSAUc0zA9y4bACLcBGAsYHQ/s789/GOP%2BPOTUS%2B%2BDem%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="257" data-original-width="789" height="130" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Zwtyfo1qhgE/X590nwsW84I/AAAAAAAACiI/ajpVXp4Rs68llrXav-yudSAUc0zA9y4bACLcBGAsYHQ/w400-h130/GOP%2BPOTUS%2B%2BDem%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>Again, this list is a preference not a prediction. We don't think Donald Trump can win re-election. But should he win, we can only hope the Democrats take the Senate majority in order to provide additional divided government congressional oversight, further constrain his narcissistic corruption and authoritarian instincts. At minimum, in this scenario we will get a more dispositive and useful trial in the Senate for the inevitable second impeachment. This is a possible, but highly improbable outcome, as a Donald Trump win would indicate he had sufficient coattails for the Republicans to maintain a narrow Senate majority. Which brings us to....</blockquote><b><div style="text-align: center;">_________________</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>4 - 2020 DIVIDED GOVERNMENT WORST CHOICE:</b></div></b><b><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="color: red;">Republican President, Republican Senate, </span><span style="color: #2b00fe;">Democratic House</span></b></div></b><blockquote class="tr_bq" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Ezp4noT6y0Y/X593xijYlEI/AAAAAAAACiU/ks1mTWaLbKUWPL9MELsfFR8ZdCa5QIAQQCLcBGAsYHQ/s789/GOP%2BPOTUS%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2B%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="257" data-original-width="789" height="130" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Ezp4noT6y0Y/X593xijYlEI/AAAAAAAACiU/ks1mTWaLbKUWPL9MELsfFR8ZdCa5QIAQQCLcBGAsYHQ/w400-h130/GOP%2BPOTUS%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2B%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Status Fucking Quo. Two more year of what we had the last two. This would represent the worst of all possible worlds except for Unified Republican One Party Rule Government. This status quo divided government is survivable, but it would be so much better if we just swap out the Executive Branch. We don't need to comment further on this scenario. If you liked the last two years you can vote for it again.</div></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Finally, even though we're not including it as plausible outcome of this election cycle, we'll leave on a few words on the worst conceivable outcome - a Unified One Party Republican Rule. Fortunately, there is no likelihood of that happening. Per <a href="https://www.dividist.com/2018/01/2018-election-house-rules-oneill.html" target="_blank">"The O'Neill Exception"</a>, the House has never flipped against a divided government (as we have now) in the modern era. It last happened in 1948 when the electorate thought that Dewey would defeat Truman. Nancy Pelosi will be the Speaker for the next two years. </div></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Donald Trump is the<a href="https://www.dividist.com/2017/12/debt-deficits-divided-government-and.html" target="_blank"> biggest of big spending, big government, big deficit Republicans</a>. We're already on the road to fiscal insolvency under his administration. Another lapdog Congress in a One Party Republican Rule unified government would be the final nail in the coffin. <a href="https://www.dividist.com/2017/12/debt-deficits-divided-government-and.html">Been there. Done that</a>. </div></blockquote><p><a href="https://dividist.medium.com/the-2020-election-eve-divided-government-closing-argument-5521baed6c24?sk=ec05924c8dfa4af8a4e6e0bd9d06fa5c" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b><i>Cross-posted on Medium </i></b></span></a></p><div style="text-align: center;">_________________</div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>ADDENDUM</b></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Why You Should Vote For Divided Government</b></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">We advocate voting for divided government because scholarship from historians, economists, and political scientists have documented predictable policy outcomes that occur during periods of divided government as compared to periods of unified partisan government. We find those policy outcomes to be consistent with objectives we support. To whit:</div></div><blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;"><i>"Federal government should be limited in scope, provide for common defense, protect and respect individual rights, spend and tax in a fiscally responsible manner, resist military adventurism, provide strong and effective oversight of elected and appointed representatives, legislate carefully and slowly, and pass only laws that are tempered in the fire of partisan debate."</i></blockquote><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><b>If</b></i> you agree with those policy objectives, <i><b>then</b></i> you should vote for divided government. If you disagree with those policy objectives, then vote for the partisan policies you prefer.</div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">Elsewhere on this blog we outline elements of this voting philosophy in detail, including:</div></div><ul><li style="text-align: justify;"><i><a href="http://www.dividist.com/p/voting-by-objective.html" target="_blank">Why to vote for divided government</a>.</i></li><li style="text-align: justify;"><i><a href="http://www.dividist.com/p/blog-page.html" target="_blank">Why Indies and Libertarians should vote for divided government</a>.</i></li><li style="text-align: justify;"><i><a href="http://www.dividist.com/p/chapter-9-how-to-vote-for-divided.html" target="_blank">How to vote for divided government</a>.</i></li><li style="text-align: justify;"><i><a href="http://www.dividist.com/p/dividist-studies.html" target="_blank">Scholarship supporting the argument</a>.</i> </li></ul><div><div style="text-align: justify;">In each federal election we recommend the easiest, simplest, most probable vote to maintain a divided government state.</div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>How the Dividist voted i</b><b>n...</b></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><ul><li><a href="http://westanddivided.blogspot.com/2006/11/just-vote-divided.html"><b>2006</b> we advocated a straight ticket Democratic vote</a> to break the four year stranglehold of One Party Republican Rule. </li><li><a href="http://westanddivided.blogspot.com/2008/11/just-vote-divided.html"><b>2008</b> we advocated a vote for John McCain</a> to avoid a return to the fiscal irresponsibility, inadequate oversight, and bad legislation endemic to One Party Rule. </li><li><a href="http://www.dividist.com/2010/11/just-vote-divided.html" target="_blank"><b>2010</b> we argued for a straight ticket Republican vote</a> to restore divided government and begin to undo the damage from One Party Democratic Rule of the prior two years. </li><li><a href="http://www.dividist.com/2012/11/obamas-been-terrible-president-i-voted.html" target="_blank"><b>2012</b> Dividists voted for the reelection of President Obama</a>. Not because we thought he was a good president. Just because there was no realistic chance for Democrats to retake the House, and there was a small but realistic chance that Romney could win with sufficient coattails to take the Senate and restore One Party Republican Rule. </li><li><a href="http://www.dividist.com/2014/11/just-vote-divided.html" target="_blank"><b>2014</b> the divided government vote was again for a straight ticket Republican vote</a> and the electorate delivered in a big way. A Republican wave flipped 9 contested Senate seats and gave the GOP both control of the Senate and their biggest majority in the House of Representatives since World War II. </li><li><a href="http://www.dividist.com/2016/11/just-vote-dividist-2016-election-edition.html"><b>2016</b> this happened</a>. <a href="http://www.dividist.com/2016/04/no-gop-will-not-lose-house-not-even-if.html" target="_blank">The House was a lock for the GOP</a>. <a href="http://www.dividist.com/2016/08/cognitive-madisonianism-splitting.html" target="_blank">The Senate majority was a coin-flip</a>. <a href="http://www.dividist.com/2016/09/trump-or-clinton-you-wont-believe-who_6.html" target="_blank">Hillary Clinton was the least worst choice for President of the United States</a> and all we had to do was elect her to keep the government happily divided for another 4 years. <a href="http://www.dividist.com/2017/04/six-pundits-and-one-poll-that-got.html">Whatever</a>. </li><li><a href="https://www.dividist.com/2018/11/just-vote-dividist-2018-closing.html" target="_blank"><b>2018</b> we advocated a straight Democratic vote</a> and were rewarded with a happily restored divided government providing some limited oversight of President Trump and the GOP's worst impulses.</li></ul></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Which brings us to Election Eve 2020</b>. The House is a lock for the Democrats and Nancy Pelosi. Vote for Joe Biden and/or #NeverTrump for a return to normalcy. Vote to retain a GOP Senate majority for the oversight and moderation only a divided government can provide. Choose wisely. </div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tnRWvbEu8-o/X6DcuEttK3I/AAAAAAAACis/TNGQMWkrsncaGJ2iGLHWukqiHnYf8ezkgCLcBGAsYHQ/s2100/bumper%2BSticker%2Bhope%2Bambition.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="700" data-original-width="2100" height="214" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tnRWvbEu8-o/X6DcuEttK3I/AAAAAAAACis/TNGQMWkrsncaGJ2iGLHWukqiHnYf8ezkgCLcBGAsYHQ/w640-h214/bumper%2BSticker%2Bhope%2Bambition.jpg" title="James Madison - Federalist 10" width="640" /></a></div></div></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div>Dividisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17028140223133400783noreply@blogger.com0First St SE, Washington, DC 20004, USA38.8899389 -77.009050524.471677183590881 -94.5871755 53.30820061640911 -59.4309255tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26542777.post-92135241842857375622020-10-28T09:28:00.011-07:002020-10-31T19:51:42.311-07:00Gallup Poll Asks Voters The Wrong Question About Divided Government (again) and Arrives at a Wrong Conclusion About Voter Attitudes Toward Divided Government (again)<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Vk72awvP9Kw/X5iuLIexLKI/AAAAAAAACfY/9zqwK2kzX_8IwurtDevh0UlDWNYmw5KrACLcBGAsYHQ/s1051/2020%2BGallup%2BAsks%2Bthe%2Bwrong%2Bquestion.JPG" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="2020 Gallup Poll on divided government" border="0" data-original-height="520" data-original-width="1051" height="317" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Vk72awvP9Kw/X5iuLIexLKI/AAAAAAAACfY/9zqwK2kzX_8IwurtDevh0UlDWNYmw5KrACLcBGAsYHQ/w640-h317/2020%2BGallup%2BAsks%2Bthe%2Bwrong%2Bquestion.JPG" title="Garbage In Garbage Out" width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Graphic Credit: <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/321158/new-high-favors-one-party-control-federal-government.aspx" target="_blank">Gallup</a></span><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div>This is becoming an election year tradition at <i><a href="https://www.dividist.com/search/label/Gallup" target="_blank">The Dividist Papers</a></i>. Every year Gallup publishes this poll and every election cycle the Dividist explains why there is far less than meets the eye in any conclusion based on this poll. The latest iteration is the absurd headline/conclusion in the 2020 edition of this Gallup Poll - <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/321158/new-high-favors-one-party-control-federal-government.aspx" target="_blank"><b><i>"New High Favors One-Party Control of U.S. Federal Government":</i></b></a></div><div><blockquote class="tr_bq"><b><i>"</i></b><b><i>STORY HIGHLIGHTS</i></b></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"><b><i>41% of Americans favor unified control of federal government</i></b></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"><b><i>23% want divided control</i></b></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"><b><i>52% of Republicans, 43% of Democrats favor one-party control"</i></b></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"><i style="text-align: justify;">"WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A new high of 41% of U.S. adults say it is better to have a president and Congress from the same political party. Twenty-three percent would rather have one party control the presidency and the other control Congress, while 32% say it makes no difference to them."</i><i></i><br /><i></i></blockquote><div>Here is the problem. Since there is no realistic possibility of the GOP establishing unified one-party control of the government this cycle, the only realistic choice in 2020 is between divided government and unified Democratic one-party control of the government.</div><div><br /></div><div>The Dividist is sympathetic to their plight. Gallup's intent is to use the same poll question year after year in order to divine trends over many election cycles. To do that, they obviously must ask the identical question every time. The problem is that the question they've asked every year since 2002 is deeply flawed as it has absolutely nothing to do with the actual choice facing American voters when they go to the polls.<br /><b><br /></b></div><div><b>As <a href="https://www.dividist.com/2018/11/quantifying-decisive-quantum-of-voters.html" target="_blank">explained</a> in the last election cycle (paraphrased):<span><a name='more'></a></span></b></div><div>Gallup will always struggle to find a meaningful conclusion in this poll for the simple reason they have been asking the wrong question for 18 years. This is the question that Gallup asks:</div><div><blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;"><i>"Do you think it is better for the country to have a president from the same political party that controls Congress does it make no difference either way or do you think it is better to have a president from one political party and Congress controlled by another?" </i></blockquote>The question poses a choice that does not exist. The question poses a non-existent, non-partisan, apolitical unified government alternative to divided government. It's kind of like asking <i>"Do you prefer divided government or The Council of Elrond?" </i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9kpfhi4ZpcE/X5ji_ARMHfI/AAAAAAAACgQ/6NMwUSJohEY-JQoqM6jHMYI-0bRIBivMwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1116/council%2Bof%2Belrond.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="1116" height="179" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9kpfhi4ZpcE/X5ji_ARMHfI/AAAAAAAACgQ/6NMwUSJohEY-JQoqM6jHMYI-0bRIBivMwCLcBGAsYHQ/w400-h179/council%2Bof%2Belrond.jpg" title="The Council of Elrond is not a viable alternative to Divided Government" width="400" /></a></div><div><br /></div><div>The question poses a fantasy apolitical alternative to divided government that is <i><b>never</b> </i>found on a real-world ballot. </div><div><br /></div><b><u>The Right Question</u></b><br />A better question to understand the dividist <i><a href="https://www.dividist.com/2018/11/quantifying-decisive-quantum-of-voters.html" target="_blank">quantum of voters in the middle</a></i> would be to offer the actual real-world choice that Americans find in the voting booth. To whit, <i style="text-align: justify;"><b>"Do you think it is better for the country to have...</b></i><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq"><b>A) <i>Divided Government</i><br />B) <i>Unified One Party Democratic Government</i><br />C) <i>Unified One Party Republican Government</i><br />D) <i>Don't Care / No Preference</i></b></blockquote>In this election, like most elections, not all of the alternatives to divided government are realistic. In 2020, the only realistic choice for voters is between Divided Government and Unified Democratic One Party Rule Government. As explained elsewhere on <a href="https://www.dividist.com/2020/08/cognitive-madisonianism-part-deux.html" target="_blank">this blog</a> (and confirmed by <a href="https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/final-forecast-results-from-two-methods-of-predicting-the-2020-presidential-election/" target="_blank">recent polling</a>) the House majority is a lock for the Democrats (per the <a href="http://www.dividist.com/2018/01/2018-election-house-rules-oneill.html" target="_blank">"O'Neill Exception"</a> the House almost never flips against a divided government), while the Senate is a coin flip. Unified One Party Republican government is simply not a realistic possibility this cycle. So in 2020, we would expect the quantum of committed dividist voters to align with partisan Republicans in opposition to the potential Unified Democratic One Party Rule Government. </div><div><br /></div><div>That still leaves three feasible iterations of divided government on the ballot. But this cycle the <a href="http://www.dividist.com/p/voting-by-objective.html" target="_blank">voting heuristic</a> is made more complex for <a href="http://www.dividist.com/2018/09/hello-my-name-is-tds-dividist-i-have.html" target="_blank">Never Trumpers (like the Dividis</a>t), as that eliminates two of the three feasible divided government outcomes. </div><div><div><br /></div>Below are the only reasonably probable outcomes for 2020 voters when choosing between divided government and Unified Democratic One Party Rule Government. One of these <b><i>will</i></b> be our 2021 federal government:<br /><br /></div></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><div><div style="text-align: left;"><b>A) Divided Government 1: <span style="color: #2b00fe;">D President</span>, <span style="color: red;">R Senate</span>, <span style="color: #2b00fe;">D House</span></b></div></div></blockquote><div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UE2jHhBtFeE/X5jOCojEXhI/AAAAAAAACfk/SIzmHv7d3H01wJcf6YtrcqO1XUthFi_CwCLcBGAsYHQ/s789/Dem%2BPOTUS%2BGOP%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Plausible 2020 Divided Government Outcome" border="0" data-original-height="257" data-original-width="789" height="104" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UE2jHhBtFeE/X5jOCojEXhI/AAAAAAAACfk/SIzmHv7d3H01wJcf6YtrcqO1XUthFi_CwCLcBGAsYHQ/w320-h104/Dem%2BPOTUS%2BGOP%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" title="Preferred Dividist Outcome" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div></div></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><div><div style="text-align: left;"><b>B) Unified Democratic Party Rule: <span style="color: #2b00fe;">D President</span>, <span style="color: #2b00fe;">D Senate</span>, <span style="color: #2b00fe;">D<span> House</span></span></b></div></div></blockquote><div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-da1zgoN1u54/X5jQy-IuV_I/AAAAAAAACf4/mq4tdQVWrPsM6KlKWOAK-bR1WnGhQcbkgCLcBGAsYHQ/s789/Dem%2BPOTUS%2BDem%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2BUnified%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg"><img alt="Potential 2020 Unified One-Party Rule Government Outcome" border="0" data-original-height="257" data-original-width="789" height="104" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-da1zgoN1u54/X5jQy-IuV_I/AAAAAAAACf4/mq4tdQVWrPsM6KlKWOAK-bR1WnGhQcbkgCLcBGAsYHQ/w320-h104/Dem%2BPOTUS%2BDem%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2BUnified%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" title="Divided Government is Better Government" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><b></b></div></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><div><div style="text-align: left;"><b>C) Divided Government 2: <span style="color: red;">R President</span>, <span style="color: #2b00fe;">D Senate</span>, <span style="color: #2b00fe;">D House</span></b></div></div></blockquote><div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kGPM4jT0kT4/X5jQEWwpYhI/AAAAAAAACfw/7unPDVTAWCM3PHbTRHytBYexbw7go8Y3ACLcBGAsYHQ/s789/GOP%2BPOTUS%2B%2BDem%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Potential 2020 Divided Government Outcome" border="0" data-original-height="257" data-original-width="789" height="104" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kGPM4jT0kT4/X5jQEWwpYhI/AAAAAAAACfw/7unPDVTAWCM3PHbTRHytBYexbw7go8Y3ACLcBGAsYHQ/w320-h104/GOP%2BPOTUS%2B%2BDem%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" title="#NeverTrump" width="320" /></a></div><br /></div></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><div><div style="text-align: left;"><b>D) Divided Government 3 (Status Quo): <span style="color: red;">R President</span>, <span style="color: red;">R Senate</span>, <span style="color: #2b00fe;">D House</span></b></div></div></blockquote><div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-wiRHZNrsPyY/X5jRvaJAFXI/AAAAAAAACgE/9mWUO7yntwQCHsbvPmqtTNXawc-rWJwLACLcBGAsYHQ/s789/GOP%2BPOTUS%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2B%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Potential 2020 Divided Government Outcome" border="0" data-original-height="257" data-original-width="789" height="104" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-wiRHZNrsPyY/X5jRvaJAFXI/AAAAAAAACgE/9mWUO7yntwQCHsbvPmqtTNXawc-rWJwLACLcBGAsYHQ/w320-h104/GOP%2BPOTUS%2BSenate%2BDem%2BHouse%2B%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2B2020.jpg" title="#NeverTrump" width="320" /></a></div></div><div><b><br /></b></div></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><div><div style="text-align: left;"><b>E) Not On The Ballot: Gandalf - POTUS, Elrond - Senate Leader, Frodo - Speaker </b></div></div></blockquote><div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BhbugPIymMI/V_UDkFN4mTI/AAAAAAAABbU/XxTzWzL0KWMpgvYCDC1b_nRCg9iwcbuEwCLcB/s1600/US%2BGov%2BGandalf%2BElrond%2BFrodo.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="98" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BhbugPIymMI/V_UDkFN4mTI/AAAAAAAABbU/XxTzWzL0KWMpgvYCDC1b_nRCg9iwcbuEwCLcB/w320-h98/US%2BGov%2BGandalf%2BElrond%2BFrodo.JPG" title="Did not qualify for the ballot" width="320" /></a></div><br />The point is this: "E" is not an option. Voters in 2020 are not choosing between divided government and the Council of Elrond. <b>If you are a "Never Trumper" the choice is between A or B.</b> Given that <a href="https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/final-forecast-results-from-two-methods-of-predicting-the-2020-presidential-election/" target="_blank">current polling indicates</a> that Joe Biden will likely win the presidency (<a href="http://www.dividist.com/2020/09/but-but-2016-one-poll-and-six-pundits.html" target="_blank">2016 notwithstanding</a>), we would expect independent dividists (those who prefer divided government) to support and vote with partisan Republicans to maintain a narrow GOP Senate majority as opposed to Unified Democratic One Party Rule Government. <b>Option A is the <a href="http://www.dividist.com/2020/08/cognitive-madisonianism-part-deux.html" target="_blank">Dividist's preferred outcome</a>.</b><br /><br /><a href="https://www.gallup.com/people/item.aspx?a=100180" target="_blank"><b>Jeffrey Jones</b></a> almost arrives at the right conclusion in <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/321158/new-high-favors-one-party-control-federal-government.aspx" target="_blank">his summary of the Gallup poll</a>:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq"><div style="text-align: justify;"><i>"As such, when Republican Presidents George W. Bush (2001-2008) and Trump (2017-2020) have been in office, Republican Party supporters were more likely than Democratic Party supporters to favor one-party government. When Democrat Barack Obama was in the White House, Democrats were generally more likely to favor one-party control of the federal government.</i><span style="text-align: left;"> </span></div></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"><div style="text-align: justify;"><i>In nearly every year, independents have been less likely than both Republicans and Democrats to want the same party to control the White House and Congress. And while the typical pattern holds this year, the 32% of independents wanting one-party control is the highest measured for that group to date."</i></div></blockquote>So close. This graphic almost gets to the point. If Gallup identified which <i>"unified one-party rule"</i> the respondents prefer, they'd see that a clear plurality of Americans have a preference for divided government over Unified One Party Republican Rule, and a different plurality of Americans have a clear preference for divided government over Unified One Party Democratic Rule. </div><div><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oW6DfEPc3yU/X5kHKRieeHI/AAAAAAAACgc/3OKgs2D91QEaeGVFlEXeR1VvWuXdrnS1QCLcBGAsYHQ/s720/Gallup%2B2020%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2BPoll%2Bby%2BParty%2BAffiliation.png" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="Gallup Poll Divided Government Trends" border="0" data-original-height="395" data-original-width="720" height="352" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oW6DfEPc3yU/X5kHKRieeHI/AAAAAAAACgc/3OKgs2D91QEaeGVFlEXeR1VvWuXdrnS1QCLcBGAsYHQ/w640-h352/Gallup%2B2020%2BDivided%2BGovernment%2BPoll%2Bby%2BParty%2BAffiliation.png" title="Kind of important to know which single-party government they want" width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Graphic Credit: </span><a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/321158/new-high-favors-one-party-control-federal-government.aspx" style="font-size: x-small;" target="_blank">Gallup</a></td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div>Which is to say there is a <a href="https://www.dividist.com/2018/11/quantifying-decisive-quantum-of-voters.html" target="_blank">small independent dividist minority vote</a> that swings elections on a consistent basis to maintain a divided government state more often than not. Asking the question correctly would always show a plurality preferring divided government to either unified republican or unified democratic party government in almost every election. That explains <a href="http://www.dividist.com/2014/05/why-do-americans-vote-for-divided.html" target="_blank">why Americans vote so consistently for divided government </a>in the modern era despite their frustration with the accompanying partisan wrangling and gridlock. </div><div><br /></div><div>Look at that gray "Independent" line. That is the only relevant line in this graph and it's mostly irrelevant. It shows a remarkably consistent baseline of about 30% Independent voters who prefer single party government. But it does not show which party they prefer to run everything. That's kind of important. More interesting would be a graphic showing the trend and breakdown of the <b>70% who do not think unified one-party rule is a good idea. </b> It would be useful to see a trend of how many don't care, and how many think divided government is always preferable. That quantum of voters are the ones that determine whether the government is divided. That trend should be the "lede" headline and conclusion about this poll. </div><div><br /></div><div>Whether or not that independent <a href="http://www.dividist.com/2014/05/why-do-americans-vote-for-divided.html" target="_blank">dividist voting block is making the divided government choice consciously</a> is a separate question. Making the case that some of us should always vote for divided government is the <a href="http://www.dividist.com/p/voting-by-objective.html" target="_blank"><i>raison d'être</i> for this blog</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://dividist.medium.com/gallup-poll-asks-americans-the-wrong-question-about-divided-government-again-ff5a5f273e61?sk=a8cfad28ecaf4058cf82b15b4a39629c" target="_blank"><b><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Cross-posted on Medium</span></b></a><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_dcneSO5vKw/X5knXW4aiFI/AAAAAAAACgo/vnsjP0adYpEW4o61U7_SfAoBbrOtU_IogCLcBGAsYHQ/s2058/bumper%2BSticker%2BLOGO%2BDivided%2BLimited%2BBetter%2BGov%2Bnarrower.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="590" data-original-width="2058" height="115" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_dcneSO5vKw/X5knXW4aiFI/AAAAAAAACgo/vnsjP0adYpEW4o61U7_SfAoBbrOtU_IogCLcBGAsYHQ/w400-h115/bumper%2BSticker%2BLOGO%2BDivided%2BLimited%2BBetter%2BGov%2Bnarrower.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br /></div>Dividisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17028140223133400783noreply@blogger.com0Washington, DC, USA38.9071923 -77.036870710.596958463821153 -112.1931207 67.217426136178844 -41.880620699999994tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26542777.post-65280149100078406552020-09-29T23:05:00.081-07:002020-10-01T12:12:29.877-07:00Biden vs. Trump - The First Debate Shitshow Live blogging the live bloggers. But not really.<p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-x0hpmZgC6w0/X3YYN9wnV0I/AAAAAAAACeg/I5UUFWXi1PAJ7uP1CcGNtQc3-psQ8leTgCLcBGAsYHQ/s566/First%2BDebate%2BBiden%2BTrump-ANIMATION.gif" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="First 2020 Presidential Debate Preview" border="0" data-original-height="402" data-original-width="566" height="284" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-x0hpmZgC6w0/X3YYN9wnV0I/AAAAAAAACeg/I5UUFWXi1PAJ7uP1CcGNtQc3-psQ8leTgCLcBGAsYHQ/w400-h284/First%2BDebate%2BBiden%2BTrump-ANIMATION.gif" title="Is shit show one word or two." width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><i><b> Try to keep up. </b></i></span><br /></td></tr></tbody></table>Welcome to the The First Presidential Debate of the 2020 General Election and the latest edition in the<a href="http://westanddivided.blogspot.com/search/label/live%20blogging%20the%20live%20bloggers"> continuing saga</a> of <span style="font-style: italic;">"Live Blogging the Live Bloggers blogging the Debates!" </span>The Dividist fondly recalls when he first conceived this series to cover the 2008 <a href="http://westanddivided.blogspot.com/2007/05/live-blogging-live-bloggers-republican.html">Republican debate</a> and asked the question:<p></p><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span style="background-color: #fff9f6; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, FreeSerif, serif; font-size: 15px; font-style: italic; line-height: 21px;">"There are plenty of live-bloggers covering the debate tonight, but who is covering the live bloggers? The Dividist rushes in where other, more sensible bloggers, fear to tread."</span></blockquote><div>Problem being, this blog grew up in the heyday of political blogs which is roughly analogous to the Jurassic period of life on earth. In the social media era, blogs are considered a quaint throwback and not as immediate, entertaining, snarky, disingenuous, mean-spirited, polarizing, hateful, or a useful disinformation platform for amplifying Russian propaganda. For that we need Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, Podcasts, Zoom, whatever. </div><div><br /></div><div>Nevertheless, we persist. We find it useful to frenetically attempt to track and post multiple sources as the debate proceeds real time. It helps extend our limited twitter-fueled attention span and pace our drinking during the long 90 minute debate. </div><br />Historically we select a variety of bloggers from across the political spectrum and attempt to cut/paste their live blog insights. Really, no idea how this will work in the current frenetic, fractured, social media environment. We'll just pick a few favorites - Twitter is our platform of choice, so <a href="https://thebulwark.com/the-president-is-a-sociopath-and-60-million-americans-like-it/" target="_blank">#NeverTrumpers</a> like <a href="https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1311103191250087937?s=20" target="_blank">Tom Nichols</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/TheRickWilson/status/1311106570067927041?s=20" target="_blank">Rick Wilson</a> should figure prominently, as well as p<a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/videos/what-to-watch-for-during-the-first-presidential-debate/" target="_blank">olling sites</a>, <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/first-presidential-debate-preview-bret-baier" target="_blank">cable news</a>, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/29/commentary-biden-trump-first-presidential-debate/" target="_blank">newspapers</a>, and others TBD. <div><br /></div><div>Tonight's debate was organized by <a href="https://www.debates.org/2020/09/22/moderator-announces-topics-for-first-presidential-debate-2/" target="_blank">The Commission on Presidential Debate</a>s and will be moderated by <a href="https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2020-09-28/who-is-chris-wallace-presidential-debate-moderator-fox-news" target="_blank">Chris Wallace of Fox News</a>. Wallace selected the topics for the debate: </div><div><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><b>The Trump and Biden Records</b></li><li><b>The Supreme Court</b></li><li><b>Covid-19</b></li><li><b>The Economy</b></li><li><b>Race and Violence in our Cities</b></li><li><b>The Integrity of the Election</b></li></ul></div><div>We'll use these topics as an organizing structure for the responses we find that enlighten, inform, or otherwise amuse us. <br /><br />If past is prologue we will guess wrong about what to monitor and will be scrambling once things get started. Refresh your browsers for latest content once the debate is underway. Because of the derivative nature of this enterprise, I do run quite a bit behind the actual debate. Just setting expectations to lower the bar. Setting expectations is always important. Set your expectations very, very low. <a href="https://youtu.be/KdJ8SDOFrdw" target="_blank">Here we go</a>...</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;">[<b>UPDATE (10/01/20): </b>We did not set our own expectations low enough. The thing about not being able to look away from a car wreck, is that you can't look away from a car wreck. The Dividist was unable to look away from the 90 minute car wreck as it unfolded. So, almost none of this post happened real-time, and there was no "live-blogging" to speak of. Most of this </span><span style="font-size: small;">commentary </span><span style="font-size: small;">was updated (and will continue to be updated) well after the debate.]</span></div><div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;">======</div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span><span style="font-weight: bold;">PREGAME</span><br /><br /></div><b><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/2020/08/14/presidential-debates/" target="_blank">Washington Post</a>:</b> <i>"In an interview before the first debate with Fox News Radio, Trump tried to lower expectations for his performance. He expressed concern that he would get tough questions by Wallace, a Fox News host who grilled the president in a TV interview in July: “It’ll be unfair, I have no doubt about it,” Trump said. “But he’ll be controlled by the radical left.” </i><span style="font-style: italic;">Wallace is not expected to fact-check the candidates live on stage, focusing instead on asking his questions and keeping the debate running smoothly. </span><i>After downplaying Biden for weeks as an incoherent messenger, Trump said he thinks Biden will have the advantage in this debate because the vice president is more politically experienced: “No, I think I’m the one without experience, I’ve just been doing this for a few years, he’s been doing it for 47 years plus.<i><i>"</i></i></i><i><br /></i><br /><b><a href="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-biden-debate-poll/" target="_blank">538</a></b>: <i>"</i><i>When asked how likely they were to vote for each candidate on a scale from 0 to 10, most respondents seemed very sure of their vote: The overwhelming majority gave one candidate a 10 and the other a 0. On average, Biden received a score of 5 out of 10, and Trump a score of 3.8, reflecting <a href="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/" target="_blank">Biden’s lead in the polls</a>."</i><i></i><br /><i><br /></i><b><a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/what-debate-prep-heres-how-trumps-really-getting-ready-for-biden?source=twitter&via=desktop" target="_blank">Rick Wilson</a>: </b><i><i>"</i>Debate preparation is one of the ancient rituals of political campaigns, a necessary moment of rehearsal for a consequential inflection point. Imagine, if you will, a room full of rabid monkeys hurling their feces at high velocity. </i><i>Which is, of course, why the president spent part of his weekend and Monday tweeting about Joe Biden taking a drug test before the debate... Trump's attention span is notoriously short. We're talking sub-millisecond short. He flits from idea to idea like a springtime insect feeding on the waste pool outside the local meth factory." </i></div><div>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p dir="ltr" lang="en" style="text-align: center;">What does all the Trump earpiece and drug test demand Trump world horseshit tell you? <a href="https://t.co/ACxBDe3xdq">pic.twitter.com/ACxBDe3xdq</a></p><div style="text-align: center;">— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) <a href="https://twitter.com/TheRickWilson/status/1311006899874086912?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 29, 2020</a></div></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<div><br /></div><b><a href="https://morningshots.thebulwark.com/p/the-presidential-thunderdome" target="_blank">The Bulwark - Charlie Sykes</a>:</b><i> <i>"</i><i> Trump knows he is losing. So, no matter how well prepared Biden is, debating Trump will be like trying to conjugate Latin verbs in the midst of a hurricane of bullshit — insults, smears, lies, and shameless fabulism. Biden can’t possibly fact-check all of the disinformation or try to match Trump insult for insult."</i></i></div><div><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: center;">======</div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold; text-align: left;">The Trump and Biden Records</span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; text-align: left;"><br /></span></div><div><div><div><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/29/commentary-biden-trump-first-presidential-debate/" target="_blank"><b>Alexandra Petri:</b></a> <i>"Andrews Jackson and Johnson are quivering somewhere at Biden's casually wiping them out of Worst President Ever contention."</i></div><div><br /></div><div><div><b><a href="https://twitter.com/sullydish/status/1311121042614738946?s=20" target="_blank">Andrew Sullivan:</a></b> <i>"I’ve never seen Biden seem so old or so weak. He can’t land a strong blow. He’s being successfully heckled. I want to look away.... Trump is dominating. That’s the brutal truth. It’s painful. So far... This is excruciating in ways I didn’t even know I could be excruciated."</i></div></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b>======</b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>The Supreme Court</b></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><br /></b></div><div><a href="https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1311110946878873601?s=20" target="_blank"><b>Tom Nichols</b></a>: <i>"Biden takes the supreme court question and goes right at the Obamacare issue; Says the nominee seems like a very nice person but she’s going to strike down the ACA"</i></div></div><div><br /></div><div><div><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/29/commentary-biden-trump-first-presidential-debate/" target="_blank"><b>WaPo - David Byler:</b></a> <i>"Wrote about this <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/22/trumps-supreme-court-pick-would-be-risk-himself-country/" target="_blank">recently</a>: the American public is on Biden's side on this one. Polls vary based on language, but it seems like the consensus is that Americans would prefer to wait until after the election. But Trump can get Barrett through the process, so he likely will."</i></div></div><div><br /></div><div><div><div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>======</b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>COVID-19</b></div></div></div><div><div><br /></div><div><b><a href="https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1311114333183766528?s=20" target="_blank">Tom Nichols</a>: <i>"</i></b><i>Biden just reciting the Trump record on coronavirus, and it’s just body blows over and over again. Joe Biden: “It is what it is, because you are who you are.”</i></div></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><div><b><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/29/commentary-biden-trump-first-presidential-debate/" target="_blank">WaPo - Megan McArdle:</a> "</b><span style="font-style: italic;">Democrats have to stop trying to score political points by implying that Trump is going to set up an October Surprise with a vaccine announcement. If they tell their voters that vaccines overseen by the Trump administration are suspect, there's some chance they enter office in January with an already-approved vaccine--that their constituents won't take. This is simply too important to play political games with.(Obviously, that goes for Trump, too, but I've given up hoping he'll be responsible.)"</span></div></div><div><br /></div><div><span><div><b><a href="https://twitter.com/evansiegfried/status/1311118282427109376?s=20" target="_blank">Evan Siegfried:</a></b><i> “So far we’ve had no problem [Trump on Covid at his rallies].”Herman Cain unavailable for comment"</i></div></span></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://thebulwark.com/just-shut-up-man/" target="_blank"><b>Amanda Carpenter:</b></a> <i>"This is our country on Trump. We are constantly assailed by belligerent bullshit from our Manbaby-in-Chief... As Biden said in exasperation to Trump, “Just shut up, man.” Let’s end this farce of a presidency. Let’s all shut up and vote."</i></div><div><br /></div><div><div><b><a href="https://twitter.com/TheDailyShow/status/1311140054367174658?s=20" target="_blank">The Daily Show</a>:</b></div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p dir="ltr" lang="en">"Shut the f**k up, Donny" <a href="https://t.co/lBJNUJuUUY">pic.twitter.com/lBJNUJuUUY</a></p>— The Daily Show (@TheDailyShow) <a href="https://twitter.com/TheDailyShow/status/1311140054367174658?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 30, 2020</a></blockquote><script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script><div><span style="font-style: italic;"><br /></span></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>======</b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>The Economy</b><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><br /><div><div><a href="https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1311119671144349696?s=20" target="_blank"><b>Tom Nichols:</b></a> <i>"Wallace directly asks how much Trump paid in taxes. Trump says millions of dollars. Trump now blaming Biden for passing a tax bill that lets guys like trump get away with tax evasion. This is crazy."</i></div></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><div><b><a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-biden-face-off-in-first-presidential-debate-live-blog-2020-09-29" target="_blank">MarketWatch - Rob Schroeder:</a></b><i> On the economy, Trump is reverting to his familiar line that he built the "greatest economy in history", only to have it affected by the coronavirus, which he calls the "China plague," in a nod to its origin in Wuhan, China. He accuses Biden of wanting to shut the economy down </i><span style="font-style: italic;">Biden's retort is that Trump's economy has helped millionaires and billionaires, and that Trump thinks only about the stock market.</span></div></div><div><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>======</b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>Race and Violence in our Cities</b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><br /></b><div style="text-align: left;"><a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/30/politics/trump-biden-first-debate-takeaways/index.html" target="_blank"><b>CNN:</b></a> <i>"The section ended with Trump flatly refusing to condemn White supremacy when asked to do so by Wallace and Biden. "Stand back and stand by," he said to the white supremacist militia group Proud Boys, in a moment reminiscent of his response to White supremacists' march in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017." The commander in chief refused to condemn White supremacy on the global stage in front of my children, in front of everybody's families, and he was given the opportunity multiple times to condemn White supremacy and he gave a wink and a nod to a racist, Nazi, murderous organization," said Van Jones, the CNN political commentator."</i><br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"><b><a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/30/media/fox-and-friends-debate-coach/index.html">Fox News - Brian Kilmeade:</a> </b><i>"Donald Trump blew the biggest layup in the history of debates by not condemning white supremacists," co-host Brian Kilmeade said, referring to the moment in which Trump refused to condemn white supremacists after being asked if he would be willing to do so by debate moderator Chris Wallace. "I don't know if he didn't hear it, but he's got to clarify that right away," Kilmeade added."</i></div><div style="text-align: left;"><div><br /></div></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><div style="text-align: center;"><b>======</b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>The Integrity of the Election</b><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://twitter.com/garywhitta/status/1311145513392062464?s=20" target="_blank"><b>Gary Whitta:</b></a> <i>"Eugene Robinson with the great point that election integrity should not have been a section of this debate. It’s not a real issue, we’re only talking about it because Trump flooded the channel with shit to obfuscate and confuse. And this helped him continue to do that."</i></div></div><div><br /></div><div><div><b><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/29/commentary-biden-trump-first-presidential-debate/" target="_blank">Charles Lane:</a></b> <i>"The president of the United States just said it's going to be "a rigged election." I just don't know what we are supposed to do with this. It is just bizarre and dangerous. And it is legally illiterate to expect the Supreme Court to evaluate the ballots."</i></div></div><div><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>======</b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>Conclusions</b><br /><div style="text-align: left;">Dana Bash net's it out.<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p dir="ltr" lang="en">The pundits’ opinions are in: “That was a shitshow”<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Debates2020?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Debates2020</a> <a href="https://t.co/c1b4mTDywR">pic.twitter.com/c1b4mTDywR</a></p>— The Recount (@therecount) <a href="https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1311153903816323072?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 30, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script><div><br /></div><div><b><a href="https://thebulwark.com/biden-won-the-debate-america-lost/" target="_blank">The Bulwark -<i> Biden Won the Debate. America Lost</i></a></b><br /><blockquote style="text-align: justify;"><i>"Most of all, Biden won because no person whose judgment isn’t warped by hate and fear could watch Trump and see a normal person they would want for a neighbor, coworker, or friend—let alone as a president to whom they would entrust with the future of their family or their country."</i></blockquote></div><div><b><a href="https://twitter.com/SteveSchmidtSES/status/1311131359730184194?s=20" target="_blank">Steve Schmidt</a></b></div><div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;"><i>"Trump’s stooges will lie to him and tell him he won. His cult may be ecstatic as they celebrate his unhinged behavior, lying, lack of control and facial contortions. His Presidency is over. We will vote him out. He is crazy, paranoid and unfit. Trump is incoherent. He is a liar."</i></blockquote></div><div><b><a href="https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1311124848509419522?s=20" target="_blank">538 - Nate Silver</a></b></div><div><div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;"><i>"I'm not sure why trying to fight the debate to a messy, unwatchable draw is supposed to be a good strategy for Trump when he's 7 points behind in the polls."</i></blockquote></div></div><div><div><b><a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/09/29/nation/scorecard-grading-debate-performances-donald-trump-joe-biden/" target="_blank">Boston Globe - <i>"Scorecard: Grading the debate performances of Donald Trump & Joe Biden</i></a><i>"</i></b></div><div><b><i></i></b></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><i>Former vice president Joe Biden, Democrat Grade: C</i></b></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><b>President Donald Trump, Republican </b><b>Grade: F</b></i></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i>"Biden had to do two things in this debate. First, he had to project that he could do the most stressful, complicated, and important job in the world. Second, he had to make sure that this debate didn’t change his significant lead over Trump. On the first point, Biden wasn’t able to instill confidence that he is up for the job. Some of this wasn’t his fault: Trump kept interrupting Biden so much that he couldn’t speak. But some of this was Biden’s fault. While he didn’t get rattled, the former vice president often struggled to find his own lines throughout the debate. He seemed tired and unsure what to do. He was not crisp."</i></div></blockquote><div><i></i></div></div><div><a href="https://reason.com/2020/09/30/last-nights-debate-was-a-disaster-thats-exactly-why-there-should-be-more-of-them/" target="_blank"><b>Reason - Eric Boehm</b></a></div><div><div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;"><i>"The first debate between President Donald Trump and former vice president Joe Biden was, for the most part, an unwatchable disaster. We should have more debates between these two men... Every time Biden and Trump speak, they undermine the rotting system that put them in front of the cameras, so they should be invited to speak, literally ad nauseum, until we can't take it anymore."</i></blockquote></div></div><div><div><a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1311297684540620801?s=20" target="_blank"><b>Donald Trump</b></a></div><div><i><blockquote>"Nobody wants Sleepy Joe as a leader, including the Radical Left (which he lost last night!). He disrespected Bernie, effectively calling him a loser!"</blockquote></i></div></div><div><b><u>Dividist</u></b></div><div><div>The oddest conclusion from Trump's blustering self-congratulation on his debate performance was the claim that Biden lost <i>"the radical left" (above)</i>. This nonsense was subsequently echoed by Trump supporters and proxies like Kelly Anne Conway. </div>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p dir="ltr" lang="en">True. The <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/GreenNewDeal?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#GreenNewDeal</a> was not in the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Biden?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Biden</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Democratic?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Democratic</a> platform, and he spoke against it & <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/M4A?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#M4A</a> during the primary debates. Why do you think this hurts him?<br /><br />This only helps him with <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Independents?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Independents</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Centrists?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Centrists</a> & <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Moderates?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Moderates</a> in states that will decide the election: <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/PA?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#PA</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MI?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MI</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/WI?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#WI</a>. <a href="https://t.co/KcXbVrjKLr">https://t.co/KcXbVrjKLr</a></p>— (((The Dividist))) (@Dividist) <a href="https://twitter.com/Dividist/status/1311320686657380353?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 30, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<div>This makes no sense whatsoever. There is a clear path to electoral victory for the Democrats over Donald Trump. That path is only available to a center-left candidate like Joe Biden and closed to a far left candidate like Bernie Sanders. As we discussed <a href="https://www.dividist.com/2020/03/on-voting-in-california-primary-early.html" target="_blank">in a post on the eve of Super Tuesday</a>, :</div><div><div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;"><i>"The difference between the 2012 and 2016 elections are six states and one congressional district - Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa and Maine’s 2nd district. That's it. That is the only path. To win the White House the Democratic Ticket must hold all of the 2016 Blue States and take back enough of the six states lost to Trump to win the Electoral College."</i></blockquote></div></div><div>Minimally Sanders would lose Florida because of his <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/02/24/sanders-support-cuba-policies-may-sink-his-chances-florida/4856649002/" target="_blank">comments on Castro</a>, lose Pennsylvania due to <a href="https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-shaw/2020/02/03/sanders-proposed-fracking-ban-cost-pennsylvania-probably-election/" target="_blank">his anti-fracking stance</a>, and probably other Midwest states with his embrace of "Democratic Socialism". </div><div><br /></div><div>The Democratic Party wisely decided to make Joe Biden their nominee and consequently put all those states in play. The decision is validated in current polls and by the Trumplican Party continuing to insist on running a campaign as if they are running against Sanders. They really wanted Sanders or Warren as opposition. The notion that Biden is under the sway of the <i>"Radical Left" </i>is laughable. Biden beat them in the primaries and none of their favorite high profile programs ("Green New Deal", "Medicare For All", "Defund the Police") made into his platform. </div><div><br /></div><div>Biden is leading in the national polls and the battleground states specifically because he separated himself from the "Radical Left". And - again - what are Trump and Company crowing about after the debate? That they separated Biden from the radical left. I don't get it. Biden should send them a thank you card. <br /><br />So - Who won? From my biased perspective, Trump looked like a raving lunatic and Biden looked like a President wondering why he was on a stage debating a raving lunatic. But, that's just my opinion. Lets see what the post debate polls show. These graphs from <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_biden-6247.html" target="_blank">Real Clear Politics</a> and <a href="https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/3698/Who-will-win-the-2020-US-presidential-election" target="_blank">PredictIt</a> provide a pre-debate baseline. </div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GwEu6u7M9t0/X3UpJCaAh5I/AAAAAAAACeI/vdzxAxu9SpYG7nPBhKZSHAcaKnHamL6rwCLcBGAsYHQ/s772/9-30%2BPre-Debate%2BPolling%2BAverage.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="524" data-original-width="772" height="271" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GwEu6u7M9t0/X3UpJCaAh5I/AAAAAAAACeI/vdzxAxu9SpYG7nPBhKZSHAcaKnHamL6rwCLcBGAsYHQ/w400-h271/9-30%2BPre-Debate%2BPolling%2BAverage.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div>The polls have been remarkably stable for months. It's almost as if everyone has already made up their mind.</div><div style="text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="402" data-original-width="784" height="103" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5vnW2AyZuVg/X3UpJOzU3cI/AAAAAAAACeE/edysIC3fqk8a7roxVxJZ0zk7cu_GOy-IwCLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h103/9-30%2BPre-Debate%2BPolls.jpg" width="200" /> <img border="0" data-original-height="535" data-original-width="672" height="159" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3T6CWsOzv9M/X3UpJAWhCCI/AAAAAAAACeM/wTCiKSxin7c549oyrcWBzrmC_qHvIYJCwCLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h159/9-30%2BPre-Debate%2BPredicition%2BMarket.jpg" width="200" /></div><div> </div><div> In a week or so, we'll know if the debate gave anyone a reason to change their mind. The Dividist doubts it. </div></div><div><br /></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><i><i></i></i></div><i></i></div></div>Dividisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17028140223133400783noreply@blogger.com09500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA41.502823 -81.62172199999999113.192589163821154 -116.77797199999999 69.813056836178845 -46.465471999999991