HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » CajunBlazer » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Alabama
Home country: USA
Member since: Sat Jun 13, 2015, 04:35 PM
Number of posts: 5,648

Journal Archives

Are Ultra Progressives Responsible for Trumps Victory?

You know the type – after the Democratic primary they were the ultra progressive Bernie Sanders supporters who vowed never to vote for Hillary Clinton. That boisterous group that loudly claimed that they would either vote for Green Party candidate Jill Stein or, since their conscious would not let them vote for either Clinton or Trump, they would simply stay at home election day. While their numbers shrank, especially in battle ground states, as the polls tightened near election day, they still had a major effect on the election results and may well have cost Hillary the White House.

In each battleground state there were several third party candidates, the most prominent being Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party and Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate. It is difficult to analyze the votes which went to Gary Johnson because no one knows which of the major party candidates his supporters might have voted for had the Libertarian Party not had a candidate, or if they would have voted at all. The same is true for most of the other 3rd Party candidates. However, we are reasonably sure that those individuals who voted for Jill Stein are very progressive so their choices were probably limited to Stein and Hillary Clinton or not voting. I think it would be interesting to investigate if the results of the election would have been affected if the Stein voters in three of the largest swing states, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania (all parts of the former Blue Wall) had they voted for Clinton instead.

However, let me first point out that Hillary won the popular vote and given her strong support in California, when the millions of uncounted votes in that state are added in, her victory in the popular vote will be substantial. According to the New York Times: “By the time all the ballots are counted, she seems likely to be ahead by more than 2 million votes and more than 1.5 percentage points, according to my Times colleague Nate Cohn. She will have won by a wider percentage margin than not only Al Gore in 2000, but also Richard Nixon in 1968 and John F. Kennedy in 1960.” And while Trump electoral vote margin appears to be significant – 306 to 232 - it was possible only because of his very narrow victories in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.

You might think that because Jill Stein receive less than 1% of the vote in each of those three states, her votes could not have affected the results, but you would be wrong. Let’s take a close look at the state by state results:

Wisconsin – 10 electoral votes:

Trump: 1,409,467

Clinton: 1,382,210

Difference: 27,257

Stein: 30,980

Obviously if the Stein voters had voted for Hillary Clinton, Wisconsin and its 10 electoral votes would have been added to Hillary’s column and subtracted from Trump’s. In addition, this is not taking into consideration those progressives who were turned off by all of their choices and decided not to vote.

Rest of article with analysis of Michigan, and Pennsylvania here:

Are Ultra Progressives Responsible for Trump’s Victory?

Poll - Pick Hillary's margin of victory in the Electoral College

Pick the range which includes your final prediction for a Hillary victory.

(Sorry the poll set up only gave me ten choice options, so I had to improvise.)
Go to Page: 1