bibibi.ccLoading…
The original text stated that several Democratic candidates in an unnamed county saw their leads turn into deficits, and argues that the current change mainly comes from turnout and other areas.
Gore won this county by 5, Kerry by 7, and Obama by 7 & 5. Hillary lost it by 6, Biden by 12, and Harris by 15.
Translation: this wave is not occurring bc Dems are fully winning back the Obama Trump voters, but because of turnout and gains elsewhere.
The original text stated that Gore led in the county 5, Kerry led 7, and Obama led by 7 and 5。
The original text stated that Hillary trailed in the county 6, Biden trailed 12, and Harris trailed 15。
The original text argues that this wave of change is not because Democrats broadly won back “Obama Trump voters,” but because of turnout and growth in other areas.
The following is analysis, separate from reported facts. Verify important claims independently.
Using several sets of winning-margin figures for an unnamed county, the poster illustrates that the county shifted from Democratic candidate leads to deficits. Therefore, the poster argues that the current “wave” should not be understood as Democrats broadly winning back voters who once supported Obama and later supported Trump, but rather in terms of changes in turnout and other areas.
If these data are accurate, they would affect judgments about the source of electoral change: the change may not be occurring primarily among this type of voter, but may instead be related to voter turnout and performance in other areas.
Beginners should distinguish between “the candidates' winning margins” and “the author's explanation for those margins”; the former still lacks verifiable information, while the latter is opinion.
Loading event timeline…
This term is not in the glossary yet. Browse related concepts in the glossary.
View glossary →This term is not in the glossary yet. Browse related concepts in the glossary.
View glossary →