Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Rachel Bitecofer sounded somewhat optimistic. (Original Post) elleng Nov 2022 OP
Context? vercetti2021 Nov 2022 #1
More info, please... secondwind Nov 2022 #2
? masmdu Nov 2022 #3
Maybe Rhiannon will post NJCher Nov 2022 #4
Hope so! elleng Nov 2022 #6
thanks for the context vercetti2021 Nov 2022 #5
Not waiting for that, so went back to Bourdain on cooking channel elleng Nov 2022 #7
Many Don't Know Bitecofer But if She's Optimistic It Means Something Indykatie Nov 2022 #8
I'm with you! Interesting stuff below: elleng Nov 2022 #9

elleng

(131,054 posts)
7. Not waiting for that, so went back to Bourdain on cooking channel
Tue Nov 1, 2022, 11:56 PM
Nov 2022

(and my own chocolate and oranges.)

Indykatie

(3,697 posts)
8. Many Don't Know Bitecofer But if She's Optimistic It Means Something
Wed Nov 2, 2022, 12:26 AM
Nov 2022

Check her history for the 2018 mid terms. I bet we hold the House and shock the world.

elleng

(131,054 posts)
9. I'm with you! Interesting stuff below:
Wed Nov 2, 2022, 12:32 AM
Nov 2022

Many here learned about during the 2018 midterms.

*Bitecofer was recognized for predicting the size of the "Blue Wave" in the 2018 United States midterm elections much earlier than other forecasters.[2] She first predicted that Democrats would pick up 42 seats in the House of Representatives in September 2018,[7] revising her forecast to 45 seats in November,[8] just days before the election even as others were revising their estimates downwards.[2] Democrats ultimately gained 41 seats in the House election, making her prediction one of the most accurate of that cycle.[9] She then used the same theory to anticipate that Democrats would recapture the presidency more than a year out from the election.[10]

Following the work of Alan Abramowitz on a concept called "negative partisanship" Bitecofer's main thesis is that modern elections are not decided merely by the swing vote, but rather, what she calls "coalitional turnout" for each party. Negative partisanship, which argues voters are increasingly motivated by dislike, hate, and fear of the other party prioritizes defeating the other side over any specific policy objective.[2] Under this theory, shifts in voter turnout between cycles are critically important to each party's success. Along with a small swing each cycle among "pure" independents (independents that do not "lean" towards either party, another important and overlooked "swing" is what Bitecofer dubbed the "turnout swing" which comes from whether voters decide to vote at all rather than deciding who to vote for. This view has been criticized by other political analysts like David Wasserman of The Cook Political Report, with others such as Kyle Kondik of The Crystal Ball and Sam Wang offering more support.

Bitecofer argues that instead of ideology, Democratic candidates should "lean in" to being Democrats and abandon the preference of Democrats to nominate unobtrusive, "Blue Dogs" who run against their own party's brand. The fact that progressive favorites like Stacey Abrams and Beto O'Rourke often came much closer to winning their races in red states in 2018 than Blue Dog moderates who tried to ingratiate themselves with Trump has been held as validation for her theory.[2] As has the successful campaigns of Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff in Georgia[11] and Mark Kelly in Arizona.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Bitecofer

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Rachel Bitecofer sounded ...