Great post, SM. My dad was a rehabilitation psychologist and, intellectually, an eclecticist. He introduced me to multifactorial causality and also to the notion that, in therapy, "Everything works for somebody, and nothing works for everyone."
So, I agree with your "Yes" to candidates and their conditions/political environment, and I add a"Yes" to a million other little variables that cut every which way. In this case, the net of all these variables was a D victory, in multiple locations and various circumstances. That victory was small in some places, large in others. Definitely significant in the statistical sense, but still new and unsettled in its long-term political effects.
It might be interesting to add as an addendum graphs that indicate the slope for each of the two states, as well as "in the aggregate" that you display. An interesting post and as a now-Virginia resident, it squares with my "on the foot" perspective of bouncing here to there changing politics in VA.
This is probably the most succinct and clearly presented summary of the election results I've seen so far, Professor. That first chart is quite striking. My takeaway is a rising tide helped every D candidate and if you happen to be a good candidate...it helped even more. Seems like a useful point to keep in mind.
Thank you for your quantitative analysis! I understand it is initial with caveats. Do you think there is a way to analyze the impact of No Kings day rallies? Even the qualitative analyses seem to ignore No Kings' impact on the turnout, which is surprising, because the turnout was high.
It’s plausible that had an impact. I suppose one could look at turnout or Dem vote share in counties/districts that had rallies and compare to others, although a lot of people undoubtedly traveled to those rallies.
Great post, SM. My dad was a rehabilitation psychologist and, intellectually, an eclecticist. He introduced me to multifactorial causality and also to the notion that, in therapy, "Everything works for somebody, and nothing works for everyone."
So, I agree with your "Yes" to candidates and their conditions/political environment, and I add a"Yes" to a million other little variables that cut every which way. In this case, the net of all these variables was a D victory, in multiple locations and various circumstances. That victory was small in some places, large in others. Definitely significant in the statistical sense, but still new and unsettled in its long-term political effects.
Thanks for this!
It might be interesting to add as an addendum graphs that indicate the slope for each of the two states, as well as "in the aggregate" that you display. An interesting post and as a now-Virginia resident, it squares with my "on the foot" perspective of bouncing here to there changing politics in VA.
I could add that but the slopes are almost identical.
This is probably the most succinct and clearly presented summary of the election results I've seen so far, Professor. That first chart is quite striking. My takeaway is a rising tide helped every D candidate and if you happen to be a good candidate...it helped even more. Seems like a useful point to keep in mind.
Thanks!
Thank you for your quantitative analysis! I understand it is initial with caveats. Do you think there is a way to analyze the impact of No Kings day rallies? Even the qualitative analyses seem to ignore No Kings' impact on the turnout, which is surprising, because the turnout was high.
It’s plausible that had an impact. I suppose one could look at turnout or Dem vote share in counties/districts that had rallies and compare to others, although a lot of people undoubtedly traveled to those rallies.