• TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m not following. The only people here are you and me.

      Like I’ve mantained, I don’t think the popular vote is important to electoral college. I also think this ten million voter deficit is an allusion to not enough Democrats came out. And if they did, Harris would have won. This assume many things. Worst of all is that the Democrats are owed votes. Doing the actual exercise will only move people towards being more specific about which voter group they blame for the loss. This is wrong.

      But if I were to investigate more closely, I’d look at votes for Dems and Republicans in 2020 and 2024 in swing states and compare. If that picture is confusing, I’d expand it to states where turnout was down from 2020 by a significant amount. Significant would be a greater percentage drop in that state from 2020 to 2024 compared to the national percentage drop.

      • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        The crux of our argument is that I believe the 10 million Dems who voted in 2020 and not in 2024 were enough to have elected Kamala Harris had they shown up, and you see no merit in this idea. That’s fine.

        • TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Devoid of state level analysis, it is meritless.

          The only possibility to rescue a modicum of merit is to look at the swing states. Even in succeeding to rescue some merit, it is not singular in explaining the outcome. It must be contextualized into the choices of voters without seeing it as just “these Democrats stayed home.” It will be messy because disengaged voters are vibe based not party based.