The one big problem with random samplings of non-voters is that it may not be safe to extrapolate the results of such sampling to modern get out the vote efforts. Mr. Cohn knows this. And neglects to discuss it at any length. That's just bad journalism.
Modern get out the vote efforts are highly sophisticated micro-targeting campaigns that draw upon vast arrays of demographic and behavioral data not only to identify specific non-voters for outreach, but also to custom tailor messaging specifically designed to appeal to those voters.
In key battleground states where total margins in the last general election were in the tens of thousands, it is not scientifically valid to conclude that carefully designed voter outreach could not play a very significant role in the next general election.
So the salient question must then become, what kinds of messages and candidates are most capable of activating non-voters when they are being targeted in that kind of modern voter outreach campaign?
3
Another shockingly misleading article on the NYT wrapped in the trappings of open-minded expertise. The headline refers to "non-voters" before Nate Cohn quickly pivots to "registered voters who stayed home in 2016 and 2018." This excludes eligible voters who are not currently registered - which includes the 7 million young people who have become eligible since 2016, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of voters that Republican state governments are purging on a routine basis.
Registered voters who have not voted recently tend to have stable addresses, skew older, and be more conservative. No wonder Mr. Cohn's survey data tends to show mixed results from this highly skewed sample. Maybe Mr. Cohn is unaware of the difference between non-voters and stay-at-home registered voters - in which case he is woefully unqualified for his current job.
More likely Mr. Cohn is highly cognizant of the distinction and is willfully contributing to the establishment class' meltdown over the prospect of a truly progressive, transformative president. Let's present some impressive numbers and charts - all based on incomplete, skewed data - to reassure the "serious"-minded citizen that "The age of Big Government" should not be exhumed and/or "Yes we can" (nibble around the edges of the problem). Perhaps Nate Cohn and other "centrists" should invoke Margaret Thatcher's famous slogan, "There is no alternative!"
3
Poll driven speculation today about voting behavior a year hence is speculation only. Things get serious when the candidates are known, parties energize around their standard bearer, and people begin to take serious notice. So refuse to be encouraged or discouraged by reporting such as this. Do however, begin to hone your message to your neighbors and friends about the importance of returning sanity to the White House.
1
Nonvoters, why do your not vote?
Are you too busy? Do you not like a candidate? Are they the same? Maybe you think your vote doesn’t count?
Let’s look at it this way. Many veterans, hundreds of thousands, made the ultimate sacrifice so that you may vote. It is not my intention to guilt you, it’s just that they, those who died, would encourage you to vote because they would. That’s one reason to vote.
They understand that too many, way too many countries in this world do not give you that option. And if they did, it wouldn’t matter what your vote was. That’s another reason.
Naturally your participation could be crucial. One more reason to vote.
I want you to vote because I want universal healthcare. Other countries have cheaper healthcare, but we don’t. We went to the moon and they didn’t. What gives? Healthcare is a right. Cheaper healthcare is a better right.
So is preschool education. And daycare. And a bunch of other things.
Now you can vote for Trump. That’s fine. But isn’t it better if your leader was someone who had virtue? A person who pays respect to those who died, or were prisoner, so that he/she may vote? A leader who is able to acknowledge the sacrifice of others? Maybe the ultimate sacrifice?
Maybe you and I will pray for the vets. Maybe you and I will look for a ‘sliver of honor’ in our next candidate. And maybe we’ll vote.
I consider duty an honor and a duty. It is little to ask citizens to participate in this sole way, whether they want to do anything else for the US. I understand some suffer from voter suppression, etc but for those who choose never to vote .....
@Geraldine Conra. Why would you want people so disinterested they won't even vote? They're almost certainly poorly educated on the issues. I personally favor requiring everyone pass the same sort of civics class that immigrants must past to become citizens. You should have to pass that to register.
1
Nonvoters are the likeliest group of Democratic leaners to oppose an assault weapons ban or to support reducing legal immigration to the United States. They’re likeliest to agree that discrimination against whites is as big a problem as discrimination against minorities, even though the group is only 50 percent white. They’re also likeliest to agree that political correctness has gone too far.
And there are also Dem and independent voters that would feel the same. Many I know don't like Trump, but will vote for him to vote against the new Dem party of open borders, reparations, anti-white diversity programs that are now embedded at most colleges, free college tuition for all, and debt forgiveness. Mention giving people government jobs, or pay them anyway if they don't want to work, and you have another 4 years of Trump.
People that voted for Trump in 2016 were for the most part, voting against Hillary. Millennials close to me, including my own educated kids, didn't vote. In part, because they thought the Dems were a shoe-in, so why bother. They'd have voted Dem, but thought their vote wasn't necessary. The next day they were beside themselves. Votes matter - please do not lump non-voters into one basket of uneducated whites. That is more than an insult.
3
@Ma Your kids were not properly educated if they didn't vote.
1
Having lived in 5 states I understand how registering to vote can vary from state to state, but I never thought it too onerous to fail to participate.
As a first generation citizen I witnessed my parents frustration as they felt like leaves at the mercy of the whim of politicians and voters. Finally, when they could take no more, did they renounce their allegiance to the place of their birth where all of mine and their extended family live, to have a voice.
Not voting, for whatever reason, makes no sense to me. To vote is a right, yes, but also a civic duty in a democracy. Otherwise you may as well live in a despotic state with no say at all.
Perhaps that why these people are not the saviors the Democratic Party thought they were.
1
I carry voter registration cards and hand them out to recently moved, non voters, party changers etc. Some non voters say they don’t want to get on jury duty lists which are drawn from many other sources. So many excuses. Non voters are such lame people that I no longer invite them to my social and creative events and let them know why!
@Richard good start but kind of bizzare last sentence.
1
Here in North Carolina, we have more Independents than Republicans. Some of them stayed home in 2016 as did many Democrats who were disgusted with the campaign. Both Wake and Durham counties voted Democratic. If those who stayed home had voted, North Carolina’s electoral college would have been for Hillary. These are the votes Democrats need and a far-left agenda won’t cut it. The same thing played out in some other key states, as well.
1
Why should I - as a hpothetical non-voter - go voting, if I am convinced of neither candidate of the major parties, or the third-party-candidate I prefer has no chance of winning?
Just avoiding the worse candidate is, in my opinion, no sufficient reason for voting. Also the lesser unfit of two candidates is still unfit and might cause harm if he or she is elected. I need to be positively convinced of a candidate before I go voting.
1
Here's some real-life info on non-voters:
I worked on the local election last week in Reading, Pa. Population 85,000, 65% Latino (mostly Puerto Rican) heavily Democratic.
Less than 10% of the population voted, electing the first Latino mayor in Pennsylvania.
Why such a poor turnout ? Most people felt that it was "already in the bag" and many people were not registered.
When a town is composed of 60% rental units, where people move frequently, interest in local elections is not a priority.
HOWEVER, I was told many times that "I'm gonna vote against that sinverguenza ( person without shame) Trump next year."
If the Democrats do the door-to-door registration and g.o.t.v. work we can add thousands of voters here in PA
In any election campaign, an important goal is TARGETED “Get out the Vote!” efforts.
Long term organizing is different. It’s about building relationships.
In the heat of an election campaign most of us, no matter how well or ill informed, are very likely to dig in.
Long term organizing is different. It’s about building relationships. It’s also about building context, background, and understanding of the forces (cultural, historical and economic) that have shaped our situations and which are shaping our future.
In the heat of an election campaign (or an impeachment proceeding), tribal affiliations and simplistic thinking dominate. Despite the best of intentions, they dominate ALL sides of the argument.
Long term organizing can be different. Tribal affiliations are linked to all kinds of cultural symbols and traditions that most of us can respect, even if we cannot fully share them—EVEN if we cannot always celebrate or admire them.
Timing is everything.
In any election campaign, an important goal is TARGETED “Get out the Vote!” efforts. Long term organizing is different.
The polls asked the wrong question. The default action of nonvoters is not voting. So they will have zero influence on the outcome. So the question should have been: if X is candidate in the next presidential elections would you invest the time to go voting for him/her?
3
Here’s what dooms Democrats: 17% of voters describe themselves as very liberal.
The 25% of the country that are registered Democrats who vote in the primaries determine their nominee. If 2/3 of them are “very liberal” and Warren or Sanders gets the nomination, the majority of the country in the general election will vote overwhelmingly against them (see 1972 George McGovern vs Richard Nixon).
Bloomberg entering the race would change the dynamic in the general election. But with a growing progressiveness of the Party, will the self destructing Democrats allow a moderate Democratic candidate get the nomination?
2
The premise that this survey shows that increasing turnout is ineffective is wrong. Candidates aim to drive turnout among voters who may support them, not cast a vote against them.
It is nonsensical to presume that the marginal voter Bernie Sanders convinces to go to the polls has the same proclivities as the marginal Trump voter.
4
Asking non-voters who they would vote for is like asking my wife who should win the Super Bowl. When you pay absolutely no attention to the game, you have no idea who should win, or why you should choose one team over the other.
5
Let’s not forget that if Republicans didn’t use the many legal and nefarious methods of suppressing the vote where ever it’s important for them, they’d lose. That’s why strengthening voting rights sits atop most of the Dem contenders.
7
It's great to finally see some focus on the largest voting bloc in America:
66 million voted for Clinton
63 million voted for Trump
100 million did not vote
And I completely disagree with the thesis that nonvoters are the same as voters. Hogwash.
Democrats need to send an Army of volunteers to knock on every door in Detroit, Philadelphia, Miami, Orlando, Jacksonville and Milwaukee. The path to defeat Trump is crystal clear.
4
I loathe Trump but I didn’t vote in 2016...Why? Because I live in New York City and I knew Hillary would win NY...Stop making a big deal about non voters...I’m moving to Florida soon and I will vote because it will matter...Stop picking on rational Americans who don’t vote in national elections because they know which way their states will lean...Only a few states are swing states ...Wasting time standing in line to vote in most states in an exercise in futility...
1
@Hair Club For Guys
A lot of folks in Michigan, Wisconsin and elsewhere “knew” Clinton would win until she didn’t.
A lot of members of the military, civil rights leaders, women’s suffrage protesters, journalists and others have died or suffered greatly for your and my right to vote. Cherish that and vote to honor them if nothing else.
3
@Hair Club For Guys There are other elections on the ballot, ya know. Too hard for you? People like you are part of the reason Trump is president.
3
If you disrespect people who have achieved success through hard work and suggest that they owe their success to others over and above the high taxes they already pay, you shouldn’t be excited if people other than those you promise to give handouts aren’t too terribly excited about your policies. Let us save all of us a lot of time and agree that this means four more years of Trump.
2
@Michael Speaking as someone who built a $1 million business out of nothing, I know for an absolute fact that my success is based on many, many things beyond my control. We stand on the backs of giants. These billionaires do to, as told to me by a man who gives more away in a year than I make and whose purpose in life is to give away the fortune he amassed.
This confirms my belief that Bernie would've beaten Trump had he gotten the nomination, and that he's still the best hope for Dems to pull back voters from Trump.
That said, that may not be the most important quality the Democratic candidate should possess. They also need to be able to pull in the rank and file Democrats, as well as attract new voters. In looking at these qualities, Sanders apparently suffers among moderates and centrists (as does Warren), but Biden - who is strong in this group - doesn't do as well as Sanders with Trump voters and non-voters, and not as well with new voters and younger voters.
I'm a Sanders guy, though I could easily vote for Warren, but I don't think she can pull the voters from Trump or the non-voters. She may be able to offset that with other groups however. I believe Biden has reached his saturation point, and cannot pull enough voters overall to beat Trump.
Bottom line: I'm still for Sanders, but Warren would be a good choice too. But either way, I think the Democrats have to be bold and run on massive change to the System, something Biden will never support.
1
Surprise, surprise, as Gomer Pyle used to proclaim......
Non voters are not particularly partisan or ideological,
Isn't that obvious? If they were ideological or partisan, they would be voters, and not non-voters.
Sounds about as obvious as finding that people who cannot swim seldom go into deep water at the ocean.
5
This judicial settlement out of New York this afternoon ought to be a Democratic poster from now until the end of the election cycle in 2020:
Donald Trump ADMITS 'personally misusing' his charitable foundation and will pay $2 million to non-profits in settlement after New York court case.
And this is just the beginning of Trump's admissions...wait until the accounting firm, Mazar's USA LLP, discloses 8 years of Trump's tax returns to satisfy NY District Attorney Cyrus Vance's subpoena. And the unraveling begins!
3
I hypothesize that the Democratic leaning non-voters will get launched off their keisters by the risk of another Trump term and the Republican leaning non-voters will find the comfort of the couch more compelling than casting a vote for Trump to prevent a liberal president from winning.
1
@James Connell Think again. Both bases are highly motivated. Republicans have the advantage that their base counts for disproportionately more in the EC.
The US needs to institute mandatory voting with onerous fines for non-compliance.
4
@Mexico Mike
Why would you want the votes of informed and motivated people diluted by votes of people who are only there to avoid paying a fine?
2
@RM
If you don't get it I can't help you.
1
Too bad they would want to support those with the me first and general me attitude, as it is the opposite of what is commanded in the Bible. Everyone is supposed to work for the betterment of all not their personal pocket yet that is what many do. It is supposed to be widely prevalent in the time of the end and it clearly shows.
@DG why on earth would you expect people to work for the benefit of others? If I knew that others would work for me, I have no incentive to work. Similarly, if I knew that benefits from my work would be averaged over the general population, I will sit at home. If a large enough number of people think this way, you end up with the Soviet Union.
4
@DG - I don't care what the Bible says about civic affairs because we live in a secular republic.
I pay taxes and vote and I expect elected officials to support ALL Americans - to paraphrase Tulsi Gabbard: I don't see Deplorables, I see fellow citizens who should be listened to instead of being dismissed.
No vote...no complaints.
1
Throw in Faux News and FB's cash cow of unfettered and sophisticated lies paid for by Putin and his Republican surrogates and that will do the trick for naive voters. Oh and let us not forget the archaic electoral college.
1
Milwaukee is in Wisconsin a battleground state. The Democratic Party has lost voters over the past decades as they have turned from representing workers and unions, to corporations. This article from this paper ishows how these black voters were turned off from the party, but could be won back if things were done to help their lives.
* Nov. 20, 2016 “Many in Milwaukee Neighborhood Didn’t Vote — and Don’t Regret It”
“MILWAUKEE
“They admitted that they could not complain too much: Only two of them had voted. But there were no regrets.
“I don’t feel bad,” Mr. Fleming said, trimming a mustache. “Milwaukee is tired. Both of them were terrible. They never do anything for us anyway.”
“As Democrats pick through the wreckage of the campaign, one lesson is clear: The election was notable as much for the people who did not show up, as for those who did. Nationally, about half of eligible voters did not cast ballots.”
“Barack Obama. Mr. Obama’s elections infused many here with a feeling of connection to national politics they had never before experienced. But their lives have not gotten appreciably better, and sourness has set in.”
““We went to the beach,” said Maanaan Sabir, 38, owner of the Juice Kitchen, a brightly painted shop a few blocks down West North Avenue, using a metaphor to describe the emotion after Mr. Obama’s election. “And then eight years happened.”
Well, well, well. First, we see an article about how Sanders will reach out to new voters with his huge cash haul via TV ad buys.
Hot on the heels of that, comes Totally Just About The Numbers and Ideology-Free Nate Cohn, our Delphic oracle, to throw as much flak at the notion underpinning Sanders' move (no different from his usual M.O. since forever, of course).
He starts with the phrase "article of faith." Off to the races from there. He has to agree that a strong case for Sanders could be "stitched together" from such data.
Good thing he's all about the numbers, free from ideology or even any bias--Apollo that he is, and allergic to any rhetoric of any kind.
An interesting analysis, should be sobering for Democrats as was Cohn's last published study. There will be no easy path to victory.
2
Hope is not a course of action. Democrats always seems to forget this every 2-4 years
While the the Republicans are generally incompetent at running the government, Democrats seem to be incompetent at winning elections outside of the deep blue areas.
I’m hoping that the dems aren’t thinking nonvoters is how we’re gonna beat Trump. Then again, hope is not a course of action.
There is only one Dem candidate, the one who caususes with the Dems big is a registered independent, who can win crossover votes and enthuse the non-voters.
The one your report reveals leads Trump by the largest margin in the polls. The same
one who has consistently led Trump in the polls since 2015.
The one who has galvanized the Dems and has set forth their agenda. The one who has become, in essence, the de facto leader of the Dem party. The one who MSM doesn’t like to mention so they can help suppress support for him. Can you guess who that is;)?
1
If you don't vote you don't count.
Donald Trump won the votes of 58% of the white voting majority including 62% of white men and 54% of white women in 2016.
Hillary Clinton won 92% of the black voting minority including 88% of black men and 95% of black women.
But the 4 million more votes that Hillary Clinton won in California didn't count nor matter in any other state in allocating meaningful Electoral College majority votes.
Along with the Electoral College, the Senate, the Cabinet and the Supreme Court of the United States are bulwarks against democracy in America.
America is a very peculiar kind of republic. A divided limited different power constitutional republic of united states where the people are the nominal ultimate sovereign over their elected and selected hired help.
1
@Blackmamba The United States of America is not a democracy, it is a republic, if we can keep it. You say "if you don't vote, you don't count," but our founders say "if you're not a sovereign state in our federation you don't count." Small states are protected from the tyranny of the majority in the entire nation by the Senate. Regional and rural/urban and other cultural differences are protected by the electoral college and the division of authority between courts, congress and the executive. Democracies don't last, and while failing they disregard justice in favor of mob fads, nor do they protect minorities.
maybe we just need to leave them alone. Their apathy alone says a lot about them- that they don't care about their communities, country or the world and planet.
@JA Per the Constitution, the U.S. is a democracy. However, since the GOP no longer recognizes the Constitution's existence, we won't remain a democracy unless the Democrats take the White House and/or the Senate in 2020.
Moderate Unicorns all day but nary a liberal to be found. Electability, around the edges, status quo, party unity... We must choose a candidate that republicans want because the electoral college demands it.
What I find interesting is that among Democrats, 27% of nonvoters and 31% of nonvoters support "a bold progressive agenda", 42% and 51% want to "fundamentally change America," and 68% and 70% "support single-payer healthcare".
All of these terms could conceivably mean the same thing. Single-payer healthcare tends to be part of any particular "bold progressive agenda" and would arguably be a "fundamental change" for America.
Single-payer healthcare does seem to be the major issue that separates "progressive" candidates from "moderate" candidates. So it doesn't make a lot of sense that people wouldn't like a progressive agenda as much as they like single-payer healthcare. And it makes even less sense that they like the idea of a "progressive agenda" less than they like the idea of "fundamentally chang[ing]" America. I don't imagine any of them would be Democrats if they wanted a big change rightward.
Maybe it's a problem with the word "progressive".
4
@Joe
When 61% of Democratic voters and 68% of Democratic non-voters say political correctness has gone too far, I can't figure out what's in their minds. 'Political correctness' is not policy. Okay, maybe 'political correctness' aggravates them. Sometimes, I must admit, I get aggravated, but I don't support or not support policy based on that.
So, I suggest that maybe they are associating 'political correctness' with a 'progressive agenda.' That's the only thing that makes sense--that voting/non-voting Democrats want all sorts of changes in America, including such things as single payer, as long as they have nothing to do with political correctness.
Yes, I think the word 'progressive' could be causing problems.
3
I would think that the Democrats would benefit from a strong turnout in Milwaukee, Detroit, and Philadelphia and the surrounding suburbs. In Milwaukee the Democrats will probably be hindered by Wisconsin's voter ID law that was implemented by Scott Walker to reduce the black vote. In Michigan and Pennsylvania and several other states I would expect whites without college degrees to be heavily targeted on social media by Russia as well as by domestic sources of disinformation. With presidential elections determined by voters in only a dozen or so states it is now possible with social media to target individual voters with misleading information which is certainly something Trump will be counting heavily on. The Democrats are going to need an all out effort to combat the type of disinformation campaigns that are now possible. Social media has changed the game and it has changed it to favor authoritarian candidates who don't play by the normal rules of politics.
1
@Bob Do black people not have ID? Why would Democrats be hindered if voters have to show who they are at the polls?
Isn't this a really small sample?
And aren't a lot of people who haven't voted recently not even registered to begin with?
Maybe the issue is more who can be registered in time to vote (?)
1
The only way Democrats are going to win (and given swing stage polls, the path is incredibly narrow) is by appealing to a wide swath of the electorate, not marching farther and farther to the woke left by proposing the most outlandish possible progressive pipe dreams.
Buttigieg and Biden are the only ones with any sense of where most Americans actually land in the issues. And they are the only responsible choices for the nominee.
10
Why is it “outlandish “ to think Americans can have what citizens of every other first world nation have had for decades?
1
Agreed. As a conservative who can’t stand the corruption, racism, ignorance, incompetence, and leadership style of Trump, I’m open to voting Democrat this time around. However, I’m not going to vote for Warren or Sanders who advocate a vision of America that is anathema to me. If they are nominated, I’ll vote for a third party or write in a candidate, as I did in 2016.
I would gladly, however, canvas and vote for Biden or Pete, neither of whom calls for a radical change to America. (In fact, I already donated a bit to both).
My fellow millennials may love a major change in America, but many won’t vote. The few fellow millennial moderates and conservatives I know, however, share my dedication to voting in every local, state, and nationwide election as well as my eagerness first return some rationality to the White House.
This is another warning that a further left progressive agenda is unlikely to succeed for the Democrats disconnected from who the candidate is. In other words, because the non-voters tend to be less ideological, they won't be brought to the pools unless they really like the candidate. I am not sure either Sanders or Warren is a messenger who can get across the line, regardless of how compelling their messages are to progressives. In that case, we need to get there with the opposite strategy of nominating a competent center-left candidate people will like. But who is that??
3
American families need Medicare for All and free community college or vocational education. Why can’t Americans have what citizens of every other first world nation have had for decades? Why can’t we invest our tax dollars in our health care and in our children’s education? Instead of throwing more trillions at our bloated military industrial complex?
1
I live in a two income household with benefits and a pension. We save, we are in our fifties and most of these policies won’t benefit us- but I vote straight blue in every election because my conscience and morals and ethics are with the democrats. This year I was a poll worker and it was obvious in my district that the voters who made the effort to vote were republican - the Dems stayed home. With this corrupt administration, we shouldn’t need to beg people to vote - their house is in fire and their votes are the only way to put it out. I am getting angry at those that can’t be bothered - why am I working so hard for them?
18
@Deirdre
Maybe you realize that most of us are just a bad break or two away from needing things like guaranteed health coverage that doesn't depend on your employer. Or that Republicans have a long history of blowing up the economy for average people, including savers and investors, leaving Democrats to clean up the mess.
1
@Deirdre
I appreciate and thank you for your conscience and moral ethics!
1
When it comes to the candidates, Mr. Sanders shows relative strength among nonvoters: He has a 41 percent “very favorable” rating in the group, compared with 33 percent for Mr. Biden and 30 percent for Ms. Warren. This is at least in part because of Mr. Sanders’s longtime appeal to young voters.
Not only is Mr. Sanders’s favorability rating the best of these three candidates, but he is also the only Democrat whose favorability rating is stronger among nonvoting Democratic leaners than among those who have voted before. His outsider status and promise of fundamental change, without much focus on cultural issues, might offer at least one clue for how Democrats might appeal to these nonvoters, though it need not be the only one.
So Sanders has good appeal with non-partisan voters in RED STATES. That actually makes sense.
Hey moderates. Going to jump on the Bernie wagon because the red states in the electoral college picked him?
8
It may be more complicated than simple aggregate statistics about the groups.
Perhaps the people who could be moved from nonvoter to voter have different demographics from nonvoters at large.
Polling previous non-voters seems a lot like asking a group that does not drink soda pop whether they prefer Coke or Pepsi. Why should their answers be relevant? Put differently, why not ask a serious of questions designed to find out what would cause them to change their minds and start voting? Separately, did the survey double-check to make sure that the respondents did or did not vote in 2016 and 2018 -- or did the survey just take the respondent's word for whether she or he had voted?
1
Very confusing choices on the chart "On the Issues, Nonvoting Democrats Resemble Democrats Who Vote." Sometimes 'Voters' is above 'Nonvoters,' but other times the reverse. Makes it very hard to read.
The charts are devastating for democrats. Republicans have highly effective dog whistles that appeal to the nonvoter - particularly the uneducated whites.
The task for democrats seem somewhat clarified after this study. Dems are called to explore and understand the multiple segments among non-voters. Clearly, the republicans have effective dog whistles that can appeal to the white uneducated nonvoter. Democrats do not; they are simply fighting the regressive force of disengagement.
If dems understood the causes of apathy and disengagement, and how that shapes the micro segments among non-voters, they could selectively identify non-voters likely to vote for progressive causes. This may well be beyond anyone's skill set at this time. Hence, this is devastating news.
3
@Kalidan
Exactly correct. It's difficult to fight emotionally potent dog whistles with nuanced policies and rational thought.
Democrats don't have to sink down to the GOP's level, but they do have to find simple, clear and effective ways to communicate how their policies will benefit the average voter.
Trump will lose the popular vote again. However he may win the electoral college. Recent polls in the 6 key swing states show that these undecideds and the possible cross overs have two things that will stop them from voting Dem.
First, they find a woman candidate such as Warren , "unattractive, mean, cold" and basically do not want a women President. This included many women.
Second, they do not want a radical leftist candidate. They want a moderate middle of the road person to go back to "normal"
Dems need to recognize this.
11
@Richard Head
Yes I understand. Republicans want a weak democrat that lets them do whatever they want. We heard you.
2
It is not simply "non-voters." It is non-voters among specific demographic groups. For Democrats to win, they must concentrate turnout efforts. First, African American non-voters (and to a lesser degree, Latinos, because they have lower density in battleground states.) In Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Ohio a significant increase in African American turnout swings elections. Second, unmarried women are a reliable Democratic voting bloc. Third, young people tend toward Democrats and tend towards non-voting. Getting their attention at all is the first hurdle. There is an emphasis on the four year college attending youth. There is a huge swath of young potential voters in the workforce, who attend community or technical college. Finally, non-college educated whites. The media fascination with theses voters is misplaced. There is, however, 20% to 30% of this demographic that vote Democratic. Build on and motivate these orphans of the electorate--working class white male Democrats--both to make sure they turn out, and give them some gravity to pull in and turn out the like-minded but weakly motivated. Even a few percentage points matters. On issues, it is not very difficult to find common ground among these four groups. On the flip side, Trump motivated white exurban/rural voters, and depressed and suppressed the vote among Democratic leaning demographics. The Democrats need to play the same way to win. They need to generate the same excitement as does Trump.
3
Recent battleground polls showing Bernie Sanders beating Trump with nonvoters by one point more than Biden, while Warren loses to Trump with nonvoters, cannot be interpreted as nonvoters rejecting progressive politicians, since the Sanders and Warren platforms are so similarly progressive.
They can be interpreted as a rejection of a woman candidate, even when her policy proposals are roughly interchangeable with those of a male candidate and colleague.
23
@Anima Maybe it is not a rejection of a 'woman candidate' but rather a rejection of a specific candidate, Elizabeth Warren, who happens to be a woman. There is a big difference.
15
@Anima I hate to say it, but it may well be that there is still a bias against voting for a woman for President with a large percentage of the voters. In Mr. Cohn's article the other day, where he reported on similar poll numbers there was a low favorability rating for Warren and Hillary that were very close - somewhere around 28%. At the time it made me stop and wonder if there isn't in fact a gender bias at work. I find it hard to believe in this day and age, and don't want to believe it, but I think it's a fair question that ought to be explored by the pollsters.
2
@Anima Couldn't agree more. Warren presents more detailed and more carefully thought-out plans than Sanders, yet somehow she is less "likeable" or "electable" or whatever word people would like to use to be in denial of their own gender bias.
4
Yes, I have seen studies like this over and over my whole life.
Non voters are usually likely to vote (if they did) like people who voted.
If the democrats want an advantage and of course it would be political, start drives of non voters in big cities.
Better still if the democrats want to beat Trump in 2020, do not run an identity/social engineering neo con zealot, elect me because I am a woman like Hillary.
Run moderate progressive candidates outside of big liberal districts who can appeal to all people like they did sweeping the House in 2018.
7
All Americans struggle to pay medical bills and high interest student debt. Medicare for All and free community college or vocational education would help Americans.
1
@Zejee That you for your reply.
1-Only people who don't have health insurance or are under insured struggle to pay medical bills. At any one time that could be up to 50 million Americans. Only students pay de facto criminal student debt. Just a technical correction.
2-Yes medicare for all and free community college is certainly going in the right direction but it is how you frame it. Frame the new national health plan as a mix of private with govt regulation. It will sell better to moderate conservatives which you need to pass it. Also all public colleges or vocational training should be low cost not free. If you make it free you open it up to abuse.
1
alas, Warren's effect here in rural flyover country is one of not connecting with likely democratic voters and it shows in the polling numbers against Trump in the battleground states. She is suffering from the Clinton hangover as well.
2
@tom
misogyny strikes again
1
Okay. So nonvoters don’t really lean Democratic. Good to know. But...
“One exception to this general pattern is among Hispanic nonvoters, who tend to be just as Democratic as their nonvoting counterparts, or even more so.”
Are you listening Democrats? Sounds like boosting Hispanic turnout in Arizona and other states should be a key element of our strategy to defeat Trump in 2020.
21
Democrats keep thinking everyone supports them and they don't.
I understand the why of not liking them.
8
@Randy L.,
as a democrats, there are folks- like yourself- that I don't care to be liked by.
1
Yeah. Because you like paying high monthly premiums, high copays, high deductibles and the highest cost of drugs in the world. You want your children to graduate college with high interest student debt. Americans can never have what citizens of every other first world nation have had for decades. Tax cuts for the rich!
2
Democrats have "sources of hope" while Republicans do everything possible, fair and foul, to ensure that they limit the voting pool to probable supporters and exclude, disenfranchise or gerrymander probable opponents.
A small voting pool along with other barriers such as cumbersome registration, insufficient polling places in certain areas, Election Day being a work day for most, etc. -- are no accident. The system is designed this way so that it is easier to manipulate results.
18
The aim is to get the people who'd vote for your candidate to vote, so I don't see how it's relevant that not the entirety of the non-voting group is in that category.
4
Hi! Non-voter here. Well, for elections in the USA, but not Canada. Being a dual national gives me an interesting perspective. In Canada elections are run by... yes, you guessed it! Elections Canada, a government agency.
Elections Canada have followed me every time I moved, ensuring that I am registered to vote and that I know where and when to go. It’s easy, you can show up on the same day if you didn’t register (one form that is simple and available on line).
Registering to vote in the US is a pain, and at that I vote in California. They want everything short of a DNA sample. So I don’t bother. Besides, I already have single payer, effectively free medications, and gun control; no Republicans either (that is the best part of not living in the homeland); it’s called freedom folks, you should try it sometime.
38
@KxS
Excellent post. Not to be presumptuous but what you mean is not "free medications" but that the taxes you pay go towards benefiting YOU, the taxpaying citizen, instead of down some military rathole or corporate giveaway.
Many here in America don't seem to understand that taxes can actually be used to benefit the taxpayer, which may be why they oppose them so vehemently.
9
no Republicans, jealous!!
@Pat
I'd say half or more of Americans don't understand that taxes can actually benefit them!
2