Jump to content
The Political Lounge

Interesting 2020 Facts from the book Divided We Stand


vcczar
 Share

Recommended Posts

Here's some random interesting facts about the 2020 election from Divided We Stand

  • Biden's raw popular vote total was the largest in US history.
  • Biden's % of the aggregate popular vote was the highest for a challenger since FDR in 1932!
  • Biden won a larger share of the popular vote than Trump in 2016, Bush in 2004 or 2000, Clinton in 1996 or 1992, Reagan in 1980, Carter in 1976, Nixon in 1968, JFK in 1960, and Truman in 1948. 
  • Biden was the first challenger to beat an incumbent in about three decades, when Bill Clinton beat GHW Bush
  • Trump was the first president since Benjamin Harrison in 1892 to lose the popular vote twice in a row.
  • Despite Biden's huge popular vote victory, about 49% of the electorate voted against Joe BIden, by voting for either Trump or 3rd party. 
  • Biden's support was tightly concentrated, winning only 1 out of 6 counties, the fewest counties ever by a winning nominee. 
  • California accounted for 3/4 of Biden's popular vote margin.
  • Aside from the 1930s and 1940, Democrats have not had a broad, stable base of support in presidential elections. In the history of the US, only two non-Southern Democrats have won 52% or more of the aggregate popular vote: FDR in all four elections and Obama in 2008.
  • Despite a victory with a large PV lead, Biden's party lost seats in the House and barely took control of the Senate. In all, this is the third smallest House majority in 90 years.
  • In 2020, 58% of counties were landslide counties--voting strongly for Biden or Trump. By comparison, in 1976, we had only 26% landslide counties.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Here's some random interesting facts about the 2020 election from Divided We Stand

  • Biden's raw popular vote total was the largest in US history.
  • Biden's % of the aggregate popular vote was the highest for a challenger since FDR in 1932!
  • Biden won a larger share of the popular vote than Trump in 2016, Bush in 2004 or 2000, Clinton in 1996 or 1992, Reagan in 1980, Carter in 1976, Nixon in 1968, JFK in 1960, and Truman in 1948. 
  • Biden was the first challenger to beat an incumbent in about three decades, when Bill Clinton beat GHW Bush
  • Trump was the first president since Benjamin Harrison in 1892 to lose the popular vote twice in a row.
  • Despite Biden's huge popular vote victory, about 49% of the electorate voted against Joe BIden, by voting for either Trump or 3rd party. 
  • Biden's support was tightly concentrated, winning only 1 out of 6 counties, the fewest counties ever by a winning nominee. 
  • California accounted for 3/4 of Biden's popular vote margin.
  • Aside from the 1930s and 1940, Democrats have not had a broad, stable base of support in presidential elections. In the history of the US, only two non-Southern Democrats have won 52% or more of the aggregate popular vote: FDR in all four elections and Obama in 2008.
  • Despite a victory with a large PV lead, Biden's party lost seats in the House and barely took control of the Senate. In all, this is the third smallest House majority in 90 years.
  • In 2020, 58% of counties were landslide counties--voting strongly for Biden or Trump. By comparison, in 1976, we had only 26% landslide counties.

The bellweather counties going mostly for Trump and Biden winning so few counties is what astonishes me. But the divide is increasingly becoming Urban & Suburban vs Rural. Although suburbs tend to be where the battle is decided. 

Here's a comparison from the 2020 county map to 2008. Which was the last time a Democrat won quite a lot, but not the most, of the counties. Along with the bellweather counties.

2020: 2020_United_States_presidential_election_results_map_by_county_svg.thumb.png.9c43017c4d6d7eaee77aee298acf129d.png

2008: 2008_United_States_presidential_election_results_map_by_county_svg.thumb.png.6a14c432e2df3be13630910a8689d531.png

 

Lots of more "Lean" or "close" counties in 08. Just a trend of the hyperpartisanship we're witnessing nowadays I suppose. Rural becoming super solidly Republican. Urban and suburban becoming super solidly Democrat. Kinda sad at times lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pringles said:

The bellweather counties going mostly for Trump and Biden winning so few counties is what astonishes me. But the divide is increasingly becoming Urban & Suburban vs Rural. Although suburbs tend to be where the battle is decided. 

Here's a comparison from the 2020 county map to 2008. Which was the last time a Democrat won quite a lot, but not the most, of the counties. Along with the bellweather counties.

2020: 2020_United_States_presidential_election_results_map_by_county_svg.thumb.png.9c43017c4d6d7eaee77aee298acf129d.png

2008: 2008_United_States_presidential_election_results_map_by_county_svg.thumb.png.6a14c432e2df3be13630910a8689d531.png

 

Lots of more "Lean" or "close" counties in 08. Just a trend of the hyperpartisanship we're witnessing nowadays I suppose. Rural becoming super solidly Republican. Urban and suburban becoming super solidly Democrat. Kinda sad at times lol. 

I remember when @DakotaHale was keeping track of bellwether counties. I forgot if I told him this, but I was at least thinking it, that the bellwether counties weren't going to matter in this election. I was keeping close look at the election with my algorithm, which is why I was able to predict the election with almost 100% accuracy, missing only ME-2. 

In regards to suburbans. Those are changing to as they're filling up and kind of becoming more urban as a result. I think it's more accurate to say the pieces are these:

  • Rural -- heavily Republican
  • Sub-rural -- suburbs bordering rural areas -- heavily Republican
  • Sub-urban -- suburbs linked to major cities -- Probably disproportionately independent who currently lean Democrat, but historically lean Republican.
  • Urban -- heavily Democrat
  • Small Towns (Non-Academic) -- Republican, but not necessarily heavily. 
  • Small Towns (College or otherwise academic) -- Democrat, but not necessarily heavily.

There are outliers in about all of these categories. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, pilight said:

The Democrats have become much more of a regional party

Explain? They're West Coast, Mid-Atlantic, New England, got a Deep State, a few Mountain States and Southwest states, Midwest. Seems pretty national to me. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I remember when @DakotaHale was keeping track of bellwether counties. I forgot if I told him this, but I was at least thinking it, that the bellwether counties weren't going to matter in this election. I was keeping close look at the election with my algorithm, which is why I was able to predict the election with almost 100% accuracy, missing only ME-2. 

In regards to suburbans. Those are changing to as they're filling up and kind of becoming more urban as a result. I think it's more accurate to say the pieces are these:

  • Rural -- heavily Republican
  • Sub-rural -- suburbs bordering rural areas -- heavily Republican
  • Sub-urban -- suburbs linked to major cities -- Probably disproportionately independent who currently lean Democrat, but historically lean Republican.
  • Urban -- heavily Democrat
  • Small Towns (Non-Academic) -- Republican, but not necessarily heavily. 
  • Small Towns (College or otherwise academic) -- Democrat, but not necessarily heavily.

There are outliers in about all of these categories. 

 

 

Yeah, Republicans losing the traditional Sub-urban areas is what's gonna keep hurting. Sub-rural areas are mostly heavily Republican. However I can see some of them wavering on either side as well. If you compare the maps I provided, take a look at the light red county in 2020 towards the top left of South Carolina. Greenville County to be exact.

This is home to Greenville City, good chunk of suburbs, and the outskirts are rural. In 2008, against Obama and a catastrophic Republican defeat, it was still solid red. 

Come 2020, it's now becoming a lean red. Bad news for SC Republicans in my opinion. I'm excited that Joe Cunningham is running for Governor of SC as I think he's the only man who can win this county and at least get more support than Democrats have ever gotten in the North West of my state. 

I just hope Democrats give him the freedom to run his campaign how he wants and don't make him some boy wonder like Jaime Harrison haha. 

Edited by Pringles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Pringles said:

The bellweather counties going mostly for Trump and Biden winning so few counties is what astonishes me. But the divide is increasingly becoming Urban & Suburban vs Rural. Although suburbs tend to be where the battle is decided. 

Here's a comparison from the 2020 county map to 2008. Which was the last time a Democrat won quite a lot, but not the most, of the counties. Along with the bellweather counties.

2020: 2020_United_States_presidential_election_results_map_by_county_svg.thumb.png.9c43017c4d6d7eaee77aee298acf129d.png

2008: 2008_United_States_presidential_election_results_map_by_county_svg.thumb.png.6a14c432e2df3be13630910a8689d531.png

 

Lots of more "Lean" or "close" counties in 08. Just a trend of the hyperpartisanship we're witnessing nowadays I suppose. Rural becoming super solidly Republican. Urban and suburban becoming super solidly Democrat. Kinda sad at times lol. 

Alaska seems to be the only state which is noticable more blue in 2020.

Edited by ConservativeElector2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Patine said:

Of course, by nature, this statistic is a dubious achievement compared to predecessors. Case and point - Narendi Modi's government mandate, in 2014 and 2019, has a far higher raw popular vote total than any other elected leader in the world before, or since, to date.

The others are interesting, I admit, but must be taken in their own context. The California statistic is notably interesting, though.

"US History" 😛 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Patine said:

You're obviously also bad at understanding points that use analogs to illustrate that may be only be tangentially related, but nonetheless make a clear point. And I'm not the one worthy of being laughed at or pitied for such a failing...

I don't think you are capable of detecting light humor. Perhaps you don't experience it a lot in life and that's why you seem angry at me right now. 

Calm down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Patine said:

I am capable, if it's, "funny." Call me a bit old school, but humour in popular media (and the biggest influence on most forums like this) from shortly after the turn of the 21st Century took a nose dive in quality and levity, and turned to utter dreck...

I also don't appreciate the "personal attack" by sarcastically suggesting I'm bad at understanding your points and comparing me to Political Pundit. But I'm not the only one you've done it to of course, and I'm not really one to bring it up because I quite frankly don't care what's said to me over the internet. Maybe you need to bring some of your "old school" supposed maturity back. Instead of lecturin' the youngins.  

Or just go out and have a beer. 😛 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For which concerns others countries like India the scene is different, the country is enjoying a massive economic growth plus there is covid boost. For example Jacinda in New Zeland has got one of the biggest landslides ever in terms of votes in New Zeland, not the greatest re-election but more than that, the best result of her party since the end of the Second World War while Biden was not the incumbent but the opposition 🙂.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Patine said:

I'm not the only guilty of nasty and mean-spirited debating of late. You've been fairly caustic quite a few times, and a few others here have bad habits and behaviours, especially when debates get heated. Do not even start to pretend I'm, "unique," in this, or that you are, "innocent and without blame."

And I don't drink.

Oh believe me, you're pretty unique my friend. 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Patine said:

I see this discussion will have no productive resolution, because you have a blatant denial of any fundamental part where fault falls on you, or anyone but me. We'll discuss this again after you've, "looked in the mirror," if you will.

Fair enough, and I implore you not look in the mirror. But look around you. 🙂❤️ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@vcczar While it’s of course true that 2020 Biden received more Presidential votes than any other candidate in US history...

Do you know who received the second most Presidential votes in US history?

2020 Donald Trump.

Im not sure if this is because voting was made easier due to covid (mail in), or because it was the most divisive in US history, or because (for better or worse) more people CARE enough on both sides to vote now, or what.  Probably a bit of all of the above.

But that was my takeaway.  Despite Biden winning by a large margin, 2020 Trump still had the second most of any candidate in US history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

@vcczar While it’s of course true that 2020 Biden received more Presidential votes than any other candidate in US history...

Do you know who received the second most Presidential votes in US history?

2020 Donald Trump.

Im not sure if this is because voting was made easier due to covid (mail in), or because it was the most divisive in US history, or because (for better or worse) more people CARE enough on both sides to vote now, or what.  Probably a bit of all of the above.

But that was my takeaway.  Despite Biden winning by a large margin, 2020 Trump still had the second most of any candidate in US history.

It's just because the population increased, but it helps that turnout was also high. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, vcczar said:

It's just because the population increased, but it helps that turnout was also high. 

While it’s true population increased, you can go back and look at previous election data for comparison.  Vote totals don’t just steadily increase with population.  There’s major jumps and crashes, presumably a combination of current events and strength of one or more candidates.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...