Thursday, November 09, 2017

All of Gillespie's losses relative to Trump came from outside DC suburbs

Trump lost the outer Swamp* 31.8%-68.2 to Clinton (in a two-way race). Gillespie lost the outer Swamp by a nearly identical 31.9%-68.1% to Northam. The outer Swamp represents nearly one-third of the state's total electorate.

Trump won the rest of the state by 6.6 points, 53.3%-46.7%. Gillespie won it by a narrower 2.4 points, 51.2%-48.8%.

How, if Gillespie kept an inch in front of Trump in the marshes and fell 3 points behind him in the rest of the state, do we get to the much reported on 4 point difference between Gillespie and Trump? 

A bit of the explanation is a consequence of a larger third-party presence in the presidential election than in the gubernatorial race. If we assume third-party votes would, if given instead to one of the two leading parties, split in the same way votes to the leading parties in the state among those who actually voted for a leading party did, then the greater the third-party share, the smaller the absolute gap between the two leading party candidates will be. 

The rest of the explanation comes from the fact that while turnout in the governor's race was down from the 2016 presidential election by 29% in the outer Swamp, it was down by 32% in the rest of the state.

Gillespie underperformed Trump because he couldn't get the state's rural and working-class whites out like Trump did. Gillespie failed to do that without compensating with better numbers among traditional Republicans than Trump managed.

The state's westernmost county, Lee, is illustrative. While Northam dropped just 300 of Clinton's voters, Gillespie dropped over 2,200 of Trump's--and this in a county where just 6,500 votes were cast this time around.

The veracious narrative, then, is that Gillespie lost relative to Trump not because motivated SWPLs and non-whites stormed the voting booths to stick it to Trump, but because R-Bugman Gillespie's campaign lacked Trumpism. Consequently, voters who weren't keen on voting for a Republican unless he espoused America First policies failed to activate for a globalist, establishment shill like Gillespie. The loss would've been even worse for Gillespie if not for the late stage ads attempting to pin support for sanctuary cities on Northam.

The Official Narrative will be the opposite of that. It will be that Gillespie's resort to xenophobia failed miserably, showing that Trump's 2016 victory was an aberration incapable of being repeated and that the GOP's answer in 2018 must be to return to the Principled Conservatism of Paul Ryan, running as many of his doppelgangers as possible.

It's not called the stupid party for nothing.

* Loudon, Fairfax, Prince William, Arlington, Manassas, Manassas Park, and Alexandria counties


Anonymous said...

I ran my own numbers.

64% of Trump's Franklin County voters in 2016 came out to vote for Gillespie in 2017.
Only 56% of Romney's Fairfax County voters in 2012 came out to vote for Gillespie in 2017.

Franklin County always votes for a Democrat in gubernatorial elections. They went for a Republican this time.

MAGA came out, but the swamp stayed home.

IHTG said...

Trump didn't win Virginia either, so you can't blame Gillespie for trying to chart an alternate route.

mark auld said...

Va.has turned from purple to blue thanks to the outer swamp. You also have the Bannon Moore effect; bugman is no trumpster.

Anonymous said...

Good work.
Bugmen GOP loses, Trumpers win.


Audacious Epigone said...


Trump outdid Gillespie (with Clinton/Northam votes factored in) in Franklin county by about the same margin as he did in the state as a whole. I don't dispute that the GOP, despite it's best efforts, has moved electorally in a Trumpian direction since Romney's disastrous run in 2012.


Agree. The demographics are such that VA isn't winnable for Republicans anymore. Florida will become reliably blue next, and then we'll start knocking on the door of the big one, Texas. To combat this, the GOP has to make the upper midwest resemble the rest of the midwest--make Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania lean Republican. Trumpism will do that. Gillespie's style of bugman chamber of commerce globalism most assuredly will not.

Mark Auld,

Right. The only reason to have wanted a Gillespie win--besides the hysterical rage it would've sent the left into--was for the purpose of playing up the illegal immigration angle (even though I'm surely not alone in assuming Gillespie had no intention of following up on any of it as governor).


Yep, that's the 2018 mid-term message.

Sid said...

"To combat this, the GOP has to make the upper midwest resemble the rest of the midwest--make Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania lean Republican."

Trump won handily in Ohio. If the Republican Party swings back hard to globalism, then Ohio will be back in play, but that state currently looks surprisingly safe.

I agree that further in roads need to be made into Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Also, New Hampshire and Minnesota are winnable.

Florida is the big worry. What's too bad is that Puerto Rico means the Democrats will be doing everything they can to suck up the remaining Puerto Ricans and offering them gibs.

I'm also concerned about North Carolina over the long haul. They may very well suffer from the same fate as Virginia, Colorado, and Nevada: a bunch of pozzed Californians can't live in their own state anymore, but don't understand what made their state unlivable in the first place and take down the metro areas of the states they move to.

There have been a few cases where I've discussed DACA with liberals in quite blunt terms. I say: I don't want your Dreamers because you guys denounce our country in front of them, telling them America is racist, and then you promise them all the social benefits you can think of. Of course they vote for you guys, which effectively makes America a one party state. But that process is as corrupt as anything the Russian Oligarchs, both those who supported and opposed Putin, ever did. And eventually, the country simply won't have it to dole out social benefits in perpetuity, leading to long term and irrevocable economic and social decline before the whole racket crashes down.

That doesn't change their convictions, their eyes just glitter from all the goodies I have just described for them!

Feryl said...

CA and Virginia are the greatest tragedies because, ya know, those places are livable without air conditioning and/or massive engineering of resources. Nevada was lightly populated for a long, long time; very few generations of anyone, white or otherwise, called the state home. Colorado is in a fairly similar vein, although the state has more resources than Nevada.

CA and Bos-Wash contain most of America's mega-elites, with the remainder being in Chicago, Atlanta, Austin, Denver, Seattle, etc. But by default, there just aren't that many of them. The average demographic profile of a white person in San Francisco or D.C. is worlds different than the typical white resident of say, Paducah, Kentucky. We only need so many lawyers, bureacrats, activists, journalists, hi-tech gurus, etc. And many whites have no willingness or ability, either in attitude or aptitude, to try and live the urban striver life. One of the biggest indicators of Trump support was life-long residency in the same region; ergo, much of the Western US, the Mid-East Coast, and trendy neighborhoods of large metro areas are full of transplants with globalist sympathies. A point I've made often is that much of the Western US outside of California lives in recently highly developed large metro areas; there are few wholesome and venerable small-mid sized cities compared to the part of America near or East of the Mississippi. And from where does much of the alt-right sphere originate? California, the South, the Midwest, and some of the Northeast esp. Pennsylvania. California became highly populated in the mid 20th century (long before other parts of the Western US) , and quite a few natives of the state feel like Adam Carolla or Steve Sailer; bitter that the state has been pissed away after a promising start.

It's interesting to see that Ellis Island lives on....and on.......and on, as the Mid-Atlantic (aside from the quite Scots-Irish parts of PA) and some parts of New England did show some heightened interest in Trump but otherwise seems intransigently stuck in "ethnic" identity and nostalgia, and thus refuses to align with the good white people of the Midwest, South, Appalachia, and Western US who considers themselves generically "white" not Jewish, Italian, Irish, Polish, or WASP. Agnostic once said that ur typical small town of New England or the Mid-Atlantic seems phonier and less charming than the Midwestern or Southern equivalent, what with Northeastern whites often being at odds with each other, not just with other races and people of other regions. Back in the more populist decades of the 70's and 80's, a lot of Northeastern whites threw their lot in with Reagan but in the 90's and since they've reverted back to the seedy Gilded Age and Depression era mentality, in which Northeastern whites aligned themselves by FOB identities and looked out for their ethnic niche first. Granted, non-white arrivals to America and their descendants have always done the same, but whatever gets in the way of a solid "White American" identity will only make it harder for us to win in the long run.

A recurring topic on Sailer is just how much ink has been wasted on making "ethnic" whites (and by extension, non-whites) feel better about themselves since the late 1800's. Our first big mistake was letting in massive number Catholics and Jews in the later 1800's.

Feryl said...

Excuse me, our biggest original mistake was letting in lots of blacks, and then not letting the plantation South secede. Ya want 'em, you can have 'em.

Audacious Epigone said...


Yes, good point regarding North Carolina. It's likely to go comfortably blue around the time Florida does.


our biggest original mistake was letting in lots of blacks, and then not letting the plantation South secede

Point 5 from Vox Day's 16 points of the Alt Right:

"The Alt Right is openly and avowedly nationalist. It supports all nationalisms and the right of all nations to exist, homogeneous and unadulterated by foreign invasion and immigration."

Feryl said...

Yeah, the Alt-Right ought to.....Wait for......Be empathetic to the confederacy. If the Deep South was not going to accept whites as the main serf class, we shoulda cut the region loose.