Post removed

[Blasphemer]

114. I think everyone uses subjective micro-analyses when objective macro-analyses are more appropriate

NO ONE has done a rigorous analysis of the election. They cannot have done so. It's too soon. Right now, all we have is anecdotal, feeling-based ideas about why people lost (i.e. the attack ads said X, so that's why I lost). Everyone is forgetting that in 2018, the story was winning back in the suburbs with moderate candidates. What we really need is an in-depth long-range analysis of the 2016, 2018, and 2020 elections that takes into account all factors. Perhaps a meta-analysis of survey data. 2 years after Trump won, Huff post wrote about a survey that showed it had nothing to do with economic anxiety (as claimed by Bernie supporters) and more to do with racism and loss of power in a diversifying world. I agree that some combination of identity and tolerance is likely the story for all of the last few elections. It's tricky to be the party of tolerance when many fear it. However, I am not interested in ANY post-mortem without solid data. Anyone can make up any story about why any election went one way or the other. But, where's the data to back it up?