re: #109 Belafon

I don’t think it was Democrats fighting against each other that was the issue. We do that all the time. What I think happened back then is that we had far too many people thinking that Clinton was not going to lose and so they went off and protest voted or stayed home.
If there’s a group of people I worry about right now, it’s those that think that Trump will lose and decide they can either protest vote or stay home. It will be a smaller group than in 2016, but no one should not vote for the Democratic nominee.

I don’t know how many people really stayed home in 2016. Sure there were some protest votes (I was undecided even in the booth and considered leaving it blank - I’m in California so it wouldn’t have mattered), but I think most of those hurt Trump as much as they hurt Clinton. The turnout question is a more interesting one, though.

Trump managed to out perform Romney nationally by 2 million votes. Clinton underperformed Obama in 2012 by about 80,000 votes. But in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania the numbers are even worse.

In Wisconsin, Trump actually got a couple thousand FEWER votes than Romney did. Unfortunately, Clinton got 350,000 fewer votes than Obama did in 2012. In Michigan, Trump got 164,000 more votes than Romney did, Clinton lost 300,000 votes from Obama’s turnout in 2012. Same story in Pennsylvania, Trump got 240,000 more votes than Romney, but Clinton actually lost 68,000 votes from Obama’s 2012 figures. In each case, had Clinton been able to simply hold Obama’s numbers from 2012 in those three states, she’d be president.

(all numbers from the wikipedia pages on the elections)