Hillary "I am Winning" Candidate Hands Over White House to Orange Mutant.

[evildevil]

Queen Hillary Blames Ghost of Ronald Regan for Losing Election.It is now becoming clear that Clinton’s ground game - the watchword for defenders of her alleged competence - was actually under-resourced and poorly executed. Like so much else in this election, her field strategy was hostage to the colossal arrogance and consequent incompetence of the

Comments

[meadowphoenix]

Well, actually what this says is that given a reasonable campaign for minority and marginalized voters, white "blue-collar" voters, could in fact be sidelined. Like the conclusion I would take from here is that if you're lazy you need more white people, but if you're efficient you probably don't.

So I talked to my mother about it, because she's tangentially involved in local politics at the Kentucky/Ohio border (aka has a lot of friends who are really involved), and she says it definitely wasn't the same as in 2012, her activist friends weren't pleased and even aside from Clinton, the people who organized GOTV in previous years weren't involved like before.

[blackjedii]

Idk man. That also assumes all minorities will vote the same which, as we saw with Hispanics, is not true.

I actually think it is a good question with regards to the limits of data-driven directions. Because data never tells the whole story.

[meadowphoenix]

I mean, no it doesn't. Outreach to minorities, and not being lazy about it, would take into consideration that latinos aren't a monolith of nationalities, let alone feelings, and some nationalities lean more conservative than others. Same with Asians. If the data said that all the nationalities were split, I might agree, but I sincerely doubt it actually said that. I think it treated Latinos as a group. (538 did treat latinos as a group, which I questioned at the time, but they didn't do so with Asians and it lead to interesting results).

Data always tells the whole story if you ask it the right questions. Usually people don't because people have biases starting out and don't try to dig deeper if their data confirms their original bias.

[blackjedii]

Data always tells the whole story if you ask it the right questions. Usually people don't because people have biases starting out and don't try to dig deeper if their data confirms their original bias.

This is a good way to explain it. Perhaps I should phrase it as singular data and not expanded like what's the word.... arrays? Same thing with race and gender breakdown without looking at incomes or religious status or family vs. single adult type questions.

Which reminds me I -just- got a call about next year's governor race in VA. And the questions were simple yes/no repub / lib types. Hate the yes-no part.

[meadowphoenix]

I would agree with that, that people you do need to check for nuance, and people usually don't. It really did annoy me that none of the millennial data I saw in the primaries wasn't broken down by race and economic standing. You had to infer a bunch. I think there's a Yes, Minister on surveys and how they are easily manipulable which I found hilarious.

Oh god, these ads for Virginia are never going to stop are they?

[blackjedii]

maan there was a Gallup survey I did a few years ago on Obamacare and I outright said to the pollster "Well I don't think it goes far enough..." and they had to say "It's yes or no ma'am, do you like it or not" which was very migraine-inducing.

Buaha! We in Virginia never get a break! Ever! It was probably a worrying sign that we didn't get a single political ad up until the very last two weeks of the election and it was on and on hard.

[lollycunt]

I've heard that the GOTV efforts in PA were sending the canvassers to Trump voters a lot of the time. Whatever their partisan algorithm was, it was off for this cycle. It's true that data always tell the whole story, it's just in this case they didn't listen to data from people on the ground that told them that they were identifying the wrong people.

[sintitulo]

take into consideration that latinos aren't a monolith of nationalities, let alone feelings, and some nationalities lean more conservative than others

lol thank you. i've been reading through a lot of articles and it bothers me that this isn't taken into account. like, ppl get surprised when cuban-americans or 3rd+ generation mexican-americans somewhere deep in texas are much more conservative than, say, recent dominican or central american immigrants in northeast cities.