!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
Now that we have final numbers. It appears that Harris had all the white & black support she needed for an EC victory. But Trump outright flipping Latino men and making huge gains with Latino women seems to have made all the difference.
What do you think?
First image is 2024, second is 2020.
Whole thread full of people blaming an entire race and sex whether that's Latinos, Latino men, Whites, or White men. You ask a stupid question and you get stupid answers.
White people are so obsessed with blaming an optgroup like what about all the white guys that voted for him
Please be careful whenever you ask these questions. It's so easy to blame one single minority group for a widespread failure. Of course analysis of individual voting groups is legitimate, as long as you properly frame what you're doing.
This is a serious issue both because of the connection with racism (i.e., it's the Latinos' fault) and abdication of responsibility (i.e., we bear no responsibility).
Someone pointed out that a lot of Latinos are effectively white, like Cruz and Rubio.
If that lasr column is population, latino men are 1/7 compared to white men. So the larger difference is much smaller than it appears. And how did there get to be so many more latino women than men.
Don't forget all the people who voted for Biden in 2020 and didn't fucking vote in 2024
15 million of them. That is a staggering number.
15 million of them. That is a staggering number.
It's also not an accurate number. The official count for Biden in 2020 was about 81.3 million (found many places online, but the official one is a good choice) and the unofficial count for Harris by AP so far is about 74.3 million. That's about 7 million, which is less than half of what you claimed.
People have got to stop just posting straight up false information. If you don't know, don't post.
It would be more appropriate to say outdated. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2024/11/13/20-million-votes-election-harris-trump-fact-check/76136743007/ As of November 6th 16 million less votes than the year before had been counted.
No, if you said it a week ago it would be outdated. The fact that you're still saying it is what makes it false. As you point it out new information is available. You're just using old information still.
By comparison if I wrote a book in the 1600s about the medical necessity of leaching, that would be outdated today. If I wrote a book about the medical necessity of leaching in 2024 that would just be false.
I didn't write a book or claim to be an authority on the subject. I stated what I remember on a subject I had read an article about 2 weeks ago.
We both know the reasonable way to interpret your post, and the way nearly everybody would interpret it, is that that's the current or final count. It's also outdated to say 74 million fewer people voted for Harris, but at one point, that was in fact the count. But it's more than outdated - it's misleading to the point of being factually inaccurate to any observer.
I can't believe instead of being like "oh shit, I made a mistake, my bad, I better think for a second about this in the future" you're going to try to justify it. Whatever, that's social media at this point I guess. Surely I'm not the problem, says everybody feeding misinformation in a giant circle. I thought Lemmy might be better, but it's just not. Thank you for convincing me to finally give all social media up.
I didn't know it was outdated at the time. I don't constantly check and double things I read in passing to see if it has been updated. I am not a professional in the field.
As a data analyst, the way the two graphs are setup terribly. There's really not enough information to come up with any conclusions from the charts.
Also, first, there's not enough information from the graphs to determine the situation since it's only by percentages and not population. Second, our system is based on the winners of each state and used by the electoral votes. So overall popular vote isn't going to determine who got elected, even if the chart showed all blue for all demographics.
A functional, coherent working class policy would've ticked some of those numbers in the campaign's favor across the board without even having to divide by race or gender.
After Donald Trump called every stripe of Latino, rapists and murderers, publicly, often and loudly, More Latinos voted for Donald Trump in this past election than have ever voted for any Republican candidate in any American election ever. Spin it any way you like.
I used to joke that America is a terrible place, full of narcisists, liars, and assholes.
Trump isn't the cause of this. He's just exposed how much those jokes are based on reality, and are no longer jokes.
He's brought to the forefront our worst qualities, and confirmed the fact that no matter how much progress America has made, we're all still just a bunch of racists and assholes. And this time it's not a joke. It's confirmed.
It appears that’s what won him the election. Yes turnout was down, but the demo percentages from 2020 to 2024 are not that much different outside of Latino voters.
And I must ask? How did Trump pull this off? And would Kamala have won without the Latino rightward shift?
Donald Trump doubled (+100%) the black vote he received in 2020. Across the board minorities saw change in putting Trump back in the big seat, as apposed to the disaster he will bring to them, and their families. People went through the pandemic, only to be hit with what's felt like the largest peacetime inflation, which was not handled by the Biden administration. Normal people don't care about economic numbers when their paying 30-50% more for milk, eggs, bread, and rent. When faced with more of the same with no real enumerated plan to get better, and back patting, they voted for different, come what may. You know which minority group didn't break right, Jews (+5% 3.5% being the margin of error).
Biden handled Trump's inflation expertly though. Everyone in 2021 said we would go through a recession, and we got a soft landing instead. And groceries are not 30% more expensive. They are around 15% above 2019 prices, not even that far out from historical inflation rates.
Trump won because of economic gaslighting and you and half the people on the internet still repeat these lies.
Trump gained 2% of black men, and lost 2% of black women. He made virtually no gains with black voters.
He gained literally 1% of them. I don’t know where this narrative of trump making massive gains with black people is coming from. All the data suggest at best, a very small gain from 2020 compared to the enormous gains he received with Latinos.
Because it's easy to lie to the half informed with statistics.
True
Is 2% of black men equal to 2% of black women in raw numbers?
I think white men and white women bear more of the blame here purely by population size.
With how thin our election margins are, I wonder if literally just misogynists can swing the election. Would 1 in 100 Americans refuse to vote for a woman for president? I think maybe yes.
It's hard to separate out the factors. Would a man have also struggled with a campaign starting so late (and doing so poorly in a previous primary). Would a white women? How can we separate out the influence of race, sex and the less than ideal running circumstances.
Given who she is, and running when she had to, she actually did pretty damn well.
Tbh looking for blame beyond Biden seems pointless to me. She has every sign of having been able to win over more people had she been prepped as the nominee from the start..
Agreed. Despite all the nuances (which are important, too)... Judging by this table, the biggest total blame is on white men, followed by white women and latino men, though there aren't that many of them. But I feel i need to say this doesn't have anything to do with ethnicity. You could also make a chart of city vs rural areas or several other factors and you'd probably also find interesting correlations and shifts in opinion.
Latines now make up 20% of the U.S. population, making them the largest minority group. Among the under-18 demographic, that number climbs to nearly 30%. If current population trends hold, Latines are poised to become the largest ethnic group in the country within about 25 years—that’s just three presidential terms away.
While Latines are a minority ethnicity, they are the largest one and the second-fastest growing, trailing only Asians. Asians, despite having one of the lowest birth rates, experience the highest proportional rate of immigration. Notably, Trump gained 12% of the Asian vote in the most recent election, a trend across these growing demographics that, if sustained, could spell significant gains for Republicans in the future.
However, let’s not overlook the broader electoral picture. Black, Asian, and Latine men and women combined make up about 29% of the voting public in presidential elections, while white women alone account for a staggering 37-38%. For context, Latino men represent just 5-6% of voters. White women are, by far, the largest voting demographic.
Interestingly, Trump increased his share of all women by 7% compared to when he ran against Biden and has increased his support from women each time he's ran. The devastating thing, I think, is that Trump won 13% more of the 18-29-year-olds, 5% more of 30-44-year-olds, and continues to capture "Boomer Lite," aka Gen X, a majority of whom he has won each time he's ran, but he increased his share by 9% this time.
Edit: corrected an earlier data error.
Dude where are you getting your data? Trump won white women by 52% in 2016.
If he had lost white women like you posted, he would’ve lost the election.
Hmm. An article quoting Pew: "a majority of white women (53 percent) did vote for Trump in the 2024 presidential election, up from 44 percent in 2020 and 39 percent in 2016 per Pew."
but I think you're right, those numbers sound like all women. I'll edit the post.
As another White Dude for Harris, I concur entirely. It's definitely an issue with white dudes.
Your narrative is that Latinos "shifted right" but I think this is a false framing- it was the Biden/Harris administration that shifted hard right on its proposed immigration policies and it left many Latino voters feeling politically abandoned.
Look at the Democrats' 2024 immigration bill- it is deportations, immigration quotas, and building the wall - while including nothing "left of center" such as amnesty. It is literally a Trump 2016 wishlist.
wow, you answer one question about abortion by saying immigrants are rapists and suddenly people feel abandoned. tsk tsk.
I think you're trying to force a narrative on to this that doesn't exist. You're assuming that many of these Latino voters are against harder immigration policy. Polls are telling us the opposite. Poles are telling us that a lot of these Latinos that voted for Trump want this. They didn't think Biden was too strong on immigration they thought he was too weak.
So the solution to not liking the democrat shift right is to join in with the side off the scale right? I'm not following the logic there...
I'm not proposing a "solution" here, but the logic is obvious: as the Democratic Party moves to the right, their traditional base becomes more alienated and less incentivized to vote.
I didn't mean that you where, but if the Latino population shifted their votes more R this year it seems an odd explanation that they where offended by the democrats shifting right on policies. If that was the case then why would they go in with people who are even more to the right?
I think this whole question needs another field to it for the turnout difference. It may be (not to keep picking on Latinos but) they made up 5% in 2020 and 6% in 2024, but is that of all eligible voters, or of those that actually showed up? If 1/2 showed up last time and 1/3 did this time, but the ones who showed up where the more conservative portion then it would look like they 'shifted' right, but it wouldn't be real.
Populist messaging is popular because it acknowledges that people are suffering and offers easy "solutions" to it.
Most folks don't actually want to hear the details, they're both busy and don't fucking understand it without the benefits of a educational system that has been systemically destroyed for decades.
Trump said he'll fix the economy and blamed Biden, Harris wanted to pretend that the lines went up so things were good because she was effectively burdened as an incumbent candidate.
Harris decentivized her base of support by chasing Lucy's football of Republicans that aren't fucking fascists, going after the Cheney votes of all fucking things, Trump siphoned votes from people that don't quite know how to fix the problem but know there is a problem.
You can point to Harris's specific policies all you want, the people you need to get to the polls and vote for you don't know about them because they're boring.
A lot of Latinos are fairly conservative people, a lot of them are strongly Catholic with all of the baggage that comes with it, etc.
Basically the only major policy reason they ever leaned towards the democrats is immigration, so with the Dems going further right on immigration it makes a lot of sense for some of them to be jumping ship
"Are we out of touch with our core voters?"
"No, it's the voters who are wrong".
This will probably be how the Democrats regroup after the loss.
Need some titles on those columns. I'm guessing red/blue are the usual party colors, but what is the 3rd?
The biggest factor really is disengagement. There where millions who where involved in 2020 that just skipped out this time.
The fact that any group aside from white men voted for trumpism is the issue. The disconnect was the complicit main stream media sane washing the craziness. They put racism/homophobia/fascism on the same level as Harris' policies.
Idk, white folks voting for Trump is an issue if you ask me, a white guy. Too many white folks sane washing his shit. Morning Joe went from "he's a fascist" to "let's put out differences aside". Other whities need to realize this is a grift that will likely kill your own.
White Dude for Harris here. I am sad face
To actually answer the post title you'd have to go state by state in the swing states to see if she could flip enough of them to make a difference. I suspect the bigger problem is still lack of turnout rather than any specific demographic.