DiscoverVox's The WeedsTrumpocalypse Now

Trumpocalypse Now

Update: 2016-11-09
Share

Description

Sarah, Ezra, and Matt look at the causes and consequences of Donald Trump's shocking win.

Following script is auto-generated by Speech to Text Technology:

the following podcast contains explicit language is taught from an Idaho especially this a good talk Low welcome to another episode of the weeds boxes policy podcast and apparently network I met you Gracie is joined by a very tired Ezra Klein an answer class I don't look too pretty it's surprisingly chipper given how little we were up late last time I do not feel like I looked chipper at all I told told to make my toddler has a way that you know we should he should feel free to sleep in after Election Day come and add to it to work a little late but he a m He was up bright an early wanted to get they get to take so I know I'm I'm very tired he was a Bernie guy line and had a lot of sort of a giddy I told you so attitude this morning that I found frankly a little two year old man so there was an election last night as you all know by now Donald Trump won the Republican Party one Democrats got devastated as far as we can tell it every level I want to talk about a couple of things today we want to start by talking about how the election that was predicted so wrongly and how all the forecasting models as far as we know got a wrong all of the polls got it wrong there's no quantitative thread of evidence leading into the selection save maybe one which we'll discuss which came out looking good at all we also want to talk about the immediate policy consequences of the selection things are going to change for many people in ways that are going to do irreparable harm to their lives I think that it is easy sometimes look at this kind of thing as red team versus Blue team that is not what this is things are going to change very quickly and health insurance in whose light to stay in this country in climate change a lot of people will be most terribly affected by this election have not been born yet it did not get a chance to vote so will discuss at a bit say tuned for the cheery discussion but you want to start here by talking about them that happened box a couple of months ago we had wanted as part of our election coverage to build a forecasting model along the lines of light five thirty eight in the option of us have done but we wanted to find a way to do something to add value to the conversation and so we Matthews and Sarah took a lead in us but we work with some political scientists to do something called an ensemble model using political science forecasting and what the political scientists had there basically was a way to waste a bunch of different fundamentals based political science models models that took into account things like the state of the economy and the president's approval rating and can make a prediction far in advance took into account the past performance and band at the polls into them to await them a little bit to current information and when we built our model the thing that happened is that despite polling showing Clinton that was way ahead and had always been had and seemed to be in no danger of losing that lead and teach really didn't ever lose that lead over the course of the primaries that model kept telling us Donald Trump went in and we didn't believe it was very like to give you a behind the scenes look at Vox we were quite a challenge by the same unit of rethinking yeah we do we work or journalism around what our model is telling us we reworked the model we work them I want to be careful to get them on the to the journalism citizen journalism became about the divergent yes yes I mean the model does not Trump attacks the divergence between what the model said the public will get into pretty sure the vote and where Trump was the point of the model called this correctly the model predicted the side edge for Trump in the popular vote which he did not have but what I do want to say what I think is interesting about it is that it gives you different baseline for thinking about what happened here we are working off of polling I think you're going for the best information we had inflation is usually quite good I thought this was Clinton's to lose and how could she lose that what this model said was actually what you would expect it to happen in the selection is the Republican one and sure enough in this election the Republican one one bite somewhat less the modern project ready it's it's it's if you start with the expectation driven by the model that the Republican will probably weigh in and then you add in that you're sort of intuitive sense that Donald Trump is worse than your average candidate and that even if you think Hillary Clinton is worse than your average candidate to the Donald Trump is you know in head to head that like he's worse that is reflected in the popular vote like he underperformed what a fundamentals based model said he would do but the fundamentals based model said he would win so that is context but then the contact the shop ur information stream it we're all operating in and I was here and this by the way this point about the model is to say not something we got write very much something wrong right none of us here this table believe this model all of us said this is ridiculous and indeed some of the political scientists who built the models that were working inside this ensemble said absolutely not Alabama What's who had the time for change model which was the most accurate of the models which showed a true victory said I don't believe my own model this year we had a good piece like an interview with Obama lets in which he was not saying listen to my model by model is great all the pulling all the other models which will really be some pulling it should Trump and this was just a huge mess it was a huge mess across the board and in a way and I think you've had some good insight on this in a way that wasn't just the effect it wasn't just did that on election day people were surprised but that for quite a long time before the election both in terms of political campaign strategy and journalism a lot of mistakes are made yeah I mean I just put one thing is I was joking around with a couple other journalists who cover similar issues to me and we were kidding around about how all of our big feature pieces about the left's Plan to Win the Clinton transition and like alter American economic policy and more populist direction are all going to have to be canned like a ton of publications were working on this and I think add that the New York area even ran its one before the election by Malcolm Gillis it's a pretty good article but a lot of not just you know journalists are working on this important story but like progressive groups were spending a lot of time and energy during an election season on a political strategy that assume Hillary Clinton was going to win the election rather than trying to get Hillary Clinton to win the election and that journalists I think you know consistently cover and Donald Trump as a fascinating episode in American politics and Hillary Clinton as the likely next president of United stated to be investigated and vetted yeah some conservative was obviously like quite critical of Clinton and indeed was somewhat less supportive of Donald Trump they would be of most Republicans but you know people a lot of journalists news outlets that of any logically positioned to Clinton's laughed who if the race was perceived as close or Trump being up might have been in their emotional energy is still like Oh my God don't come is really bad where instead of like OK we've got to like hold Hillary accountable and mainstream organizations and you really see this in in the New York Times's coverage which was quite deep on both candidates and had a lot of good don't Trump investigations as well as lot of good clean investigations like what on the front page what got covered again and again what did they sort of hassle the campaigns about he was toward we're scrutinizing Hillary Clinton and I think the reason was I mean it's true right is much more important to scrutinize the next president then like some dude who's lagging in the polls because he's a buffoon but if you had known if the polls have been saying he was up you would have a whole different attitude toward it to me one of the most striking stories of Election Day was George W and Laura Bush who had been sort of quietly against Donald Trump I mean it was known that they were against on Trump they weren't doing anything about it right saying on Election Day finally revealing that they were not going to vote for Donald Trump and they were going to leave their ballots blank and they were going to support Republicans up and down the ticket I don't have deep insider knowledge of of the Bush camp basically they're thinking is pretty clear like they didn't like Donald Trump than one dollars M to be president they made it perfectly clear through sort of normal channels of that so they felt they also assumed he was going to lose and their conservative Republicans so what they were working on was making sure there wasn't a huge Democratic wave election the question of oh my god what should I like actually do this morning to make Donald Trump not become president did not seem significant to them or to John K sick and many other anti Trump Republicans because they felt that he was going to lose and that they were taking a personally risky courageous step by refusing to endorse them and they weren't like asking like am I doing enough because they thought they were doing and they thought nothing more needed to be done in years the media side of it in the campaign side of it where you have a campaign you to campaigns that actually thought they're operating in a world where Hillary Clinton was very much leading in the pause the Trump campaign has been quite clear that they didn't have any kind of secret polls that really showed this inside lead for Trump that they were getting the same kind of numbers all of us have been saying for the past few months EC like now was saying so much work being put into this transition and that's where the energy goes is you have Hillary Clinton have a thinking out what her White House looks like and who's going to staff it and the energy of doesn't as much go into the ground game and I think weddings I am unclear on is how to think and whether they were going to crap alot with his A A is the role of campaigns and whether they matter we do know that it's very true true that Hillary Clinton at a much more significant campaign jet infrastructure of a campaign that we typically expect candidates will Trump really really didn't have that as much and one of things yea I don't think we have the answer to and this is something we're going to really see traveled with in coming years is it so I do think it's true that the Clinton campaign operated under the assumption that Hillary Clinton is going to win and build a campaign around that it's unfair to me how much campaigns matter at this point in want to say well they would have ended differently if they'd known that if the polls and more accurately represented where things are going they would get a better campaign and maybe that would have changed how things work on the other hand if you're pretty clear evidence that campaigns may not be that meaningful that all this work that Clinton did to build this infrastructure this huge advantage that she had really it's hard to know what role they play different kind of it may be made that run when less big than it would've been otherwise I think is the way think about right now but I'm also at this point very open to having my views changed on this is why I feel like we are going to need to study this more but I feel like we do have some evidence that the Clinton campaign's ground game did work and that it was mis positioned right so Kelly made some very aggressive essentially party building swayed she had field offices in Arizona a field office in El Paso field office in San Antonio and if you look at the election results white like Clinton did worse than Obama nationally she did much worse than Obama in key Midwestern swing states which is why she lost but he better than Obama in Georgia she better than Obama in Texas she did better than Obama in Arizona she better than Obama in that which is to say this big Democratic Party effort to like build field infrastructure to connect with Hispanics and turn out the Latino vote it appears to have worked right he just he didn't put them over the top in Florida and in the list of states where it could plausibly have put you over the top is only Florida and Nevada the huge share of Latino population lives in California Texas y Clinton won the popular vote right she didn't mobilize all these new Hispanic voters and if you could relocate El Paso and San Diego to fish again like she won the election but she didn't and we never saw you go look back at an election in which you won the popular about but you lost the electoral College which you had field offices in Texas but not in Michigan and where you are scrambling at the very last minute to get everybody on the plane to Detroit in which you never visited Wisconsin you know and you say OK we made some aggressive strategic moves to try to expand the map I mean it was a point where she took some of her fund raising right and plowed into a down ballot races and an infrastructure rather than into defensive moves in blue states because she thought she was when I do think a couple things here that are interesting though that they were pulling out from the exit polls and it goes to this point one lesson I've taken from this is that Get Out the Vote is a additive to enthusiasm gets there it is just very very very difficult to get out the vote for candidate that the electorate the you're trying to mobilize is fundamentally not that enthusiastic about this was a very low turnout election fewer people voted for from the numbers I've seen as of this morning fewer people voted for something good for Mitt Romney and many fewer voted for Hillary Clinton obvious in for Brock Obama this was the lowest turnout election since two thousand which I think is not what people expected is not what you're hearing anecdotally by the way on Election Day among the things that happened what was going on so the Texas examples interesting here because I think that the one thing we did see it wasn't as big as people expected but there were certainly places where Hispanic voters were exceptionally mobilized even compared to where they'd been before and so there I think some of the field game really did matter is happening in California it happen in Texas but it did not happen as much in Wisconsin I thought one of the really interesting things he began hearing I Nate Cohn at the New York Times made this point there Thompson made this point and Thompson put it in a tree I thought in a way that was smart which was maybe the thing we learned last night is it in a majority nation every ethnic group votes like a minority and really one of the striking things about the selection is you see the Asian vote for Clinton sixty five percent Hispanic vote for Clinton with sixty five percent the black vote for Clinton was eighty eight percent and the white vote for Trump is fifty eight percent right now fifty days obviously less than sixty five but it isn't so much less whites really voted like an ethnic group last night due to some degree and could only got thirty seven percent of that vote by the way this a substantial third party got there and that really in some ways decided this election the electorate was broken into recently low turnout race sliced pieces and that and Donald Trump had the biggest one of them and they want to make a point on here one thing that you're hearing a fair amount of his will how can this event about race and and demographics if it was in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and Michigan which are places that went four for Brock a bomb in another time and this is something that you know buoy at slate has said and others have said that but I do kind of want to emphasize it because I think it's correct nothing is one thing I don't think this is all races I think just a lot of the baseline voting here in both parties vicious partisanship most people who voted for Donald Trump did so because they were Republican Mitt Romney and John McCain did not run elections about race they ran elections in which to some degree wall there were some that dimensions of racial resentment there their and elections to large extent I think in which it was not considered proper to be litigated of whether we should have descended white nationalism in this country knowledge of created a permission structure and an eye and an engagement and enthusiasm strategy based around we storing white nationalism to the center of the Republican Party and to the center of American politics and that I think the evidence is that excite a lot of rural white voters that they turned out and that that was something that they connected to and they did not have a corresponding mobilizing effect on on the Democratic side but I do think that's important but what we should but that the Democrats in that regard I think I think some of the The takes on as you say we're a little bit glib right and that like the key point is that politicized ideological racial voting is not the same thing as or even necessarily all that related to personal prejudice right I think some of these takes are like well if you would vote for Barack Obama you can't be racist because he must not have like some huge gut level problem with black people and I think that's a hundred percent true write a different question is when Brock Obama ran for president he very much ran as not the black and right which is very different from how say um when when Marion Berry ran for mayor in Washington D C He ran as the black candidate right because he was winning a majority black city and was trying to mobilize racial support for him to overcome significant political disadvantages Obama knew it there very few African Americans in the United States and he wanted to win the election so he was not running as the candidate of black empowerment except to the extent that all Democrats have run that way since Lyndon Johnson and you know a lot of ways sort of used the fact that he's African American to play themes of racial transcendence and unity he said things that I think a white Democrat would actually have trouble getting away with at times after twenty two while right there was a shift in the outgoing rhetoric of the Democratic Party ride there was a lot more talk about the Like Obama coalition of diversity and ascendancy right and a lot more emphasis on the party's debt to Latino groups and the need to like front load immigration reform type questions when they were blocked in Congress from pursuing immigration reform legislation that they wanted Obama made the decision that it was such an overriding priority of his political coalition to deliver protection from deportation for long settled undocumented families that he was going to do it in a way that really broke with the precedents of Kiki had some legal basis for doing a sort of broad protection from deportation but what he did with the Dhaka order was not the same as what previous presidents who did people knew it wasn't the same it was a big deal there was some critical columns about apron by Ezra Klein you know and the decision was made inside the White House that this was an important legacy item for Obama that he could not let this aside then when Hillary Clinton was winning in the primaries against Bernie Sanders right she really ran as the Black and Brown can even though she's what I write like her argument was really lead into the idea that like one major problem with Bernie Sanders is vision of social democracy is that it was excessively a spa and right and that you needed for his apology is needed like explicit race conscious element that she was going to interject and she talked about intersection malady I can speeches she said that white Americans need to confront systemic racism which is not something I think Brock Obama has ever set right any cast the Democratic Party in a different light as this like new party of this multi culture and it was also a constant drumbeat of attention to the United States becoming a majority minority nation right so I think both Donald Trump was opening up a kind of white nationalist politics that Republicans had previously put on the table but also Democrats were kind of like flashing these warning signs that white people like we're no longer asking you to accommodate minorities were asking you to like except the end of white hegemony in the United States there's a lot to that and I want to bring into things here one is a conversation that became part of the Democratic Party but in begin it which is the Black Lives matter conversation which obviously was headlined Who's all around the country the structured a lot of discourse for some time and I think created a priming effect it was in a different way than Donald Trump suggesting that there was more of a conflict happening here that had been before right that was not a post racial moment as people think about this I think they should think about a strain of research known as priming there is a lot of evidence that people will hold different political opinions even if they are exposed to very small amount of diversity there's a study doing this from memory so I'll get the exact numbers and quantities wrong but there's a study where they would ask people got on a bus about their political opinions white men who caught a bus about their political opinions and in some set of the cases they would sit them next to two men speaking Spanish and when they got off the bus their political opinions to be significantly more demographic we can serve it to put it lightly and there are a lot of cities like that out there so when you have an election year when you have two years in which what is happening is that you are priming it in this case all Americans right in different ways this is also something happening in different ways in Hispanic community the African American community but in this case and in the white community when you're priming people to think about this as he rationalized election as a question of who is on top and who is on bottom as a question of the relative status of of different races in this country and as a question of whether or not their primacy is under threat you're going to get different political opinions then at a time when you've not primed them to be thinking about it that way Mitt Romney and Barack Obama concluded in two thousand and twelve to create the election was about taxes and financial regulation and Obamacare and so a lot of people were looking at the said Yeah I don't like the rich guys like Mitt Romney I want somebody who care about people like me and they chose Obama on that metric in this case Heller Clinton doll trunk looted to say this is a question of racial identity in this country of some degree which which races which demographic coalition hold the most power of sexism and sure enough you got a different result this stuff that I think it also I mean it grows out of Obama policy as well right where you have and think more than we often recognize Obama doing a lot of work to reduce inequality in ways that is very beneficial to a minority is if you look at the stats on Obamacare for example use it at a disproportionate effect on reducing the uninsured rate of Hispanics of of African Americans largely because these are groups that have just not had insurance in the past that you've seen redistribution toward these groups that actually shows up in policy that there is an actual underpinning to his view that these people are rising up more and that is that's the goal of the administration to reduce inequality to provide these programs to marginalize groups that haven't had it before so I think Amy is partially rhetoric saying you know hearing about black lives matter but there's also something tangible to point to as well that this was Ivy's the VA CA at the foot Book Air Act was not passed as you know welfare program for African Americans or welfare is not in the law itself written as a positive benefit minority populations but that is a lot of the work that it's doing and I think a lot of Democrat to be quite happy with that so I think he is both the threat of the hearing but also grows out in reaction to the way the owner's vision is as governor into and I don't know if that was usin it could be changed or not or how how how else they felt they could have played out is one thing to do things on a on a non racial angle that what I think has gotten a little bit oddly under played in like stories about Donald Trump and the white working class which is that not only shifted Republican Party positioning trade policy shift in Republican policy positioning on Social Security and Medicare which I feel like if it did come about in a different context and people would have legitimately recognized as like a political earthquake yeah I like more Rubio has said it way like in just a few just ask someone like abstract Lee in twenty fourteen like what's a good issue for a Democrat who needs to get like a wavering older white working class person who lives in the Iron Range of Minnesota and in fact has been a Democrat all his life but has been gravitating a little bit away from alike increasingly Baroque political party is like you would you want a message to him about fighting for social security Medicare right are like ghosts are like the good Democratic issues for that audience why you don't want a message to them about how black lives matter and to message them about the importance of a Medicaid expansion in Alabama like it's relevant to their lives was like fighting for social security Medicare is like the thing that Democrats like say they have to offer too old or middle class people in the United States and when under under Paul Ryan Mitt Romney was an effort by Republicans a semi successful efforts and finesse it with this like ten year phase out proposal but they would still be saying and then we're going to devastate the programs I don't um I don't know if this will be implemented when he becomes president but he in his campaign statements genuinely pivot away from Republican proposals for entitlement program cuts a Lot of Stuff trumped it like I'm working on a big piece about Trump and financial regulation was like pure or hide the ball kind man stuff when you look at the policies Trump endorsed it is lavish giveaway to head for managers and international banks with whom Donald Trump has giant personal conflicts of interest and he just like smoke screen versus bite by knocking Hillary Clinton like on the entitlement programs like he does not have there's no have been all over that website there is no secret place where Trump like signs the Blood pact with Paul Ryan to privatize Medicare maybe he will anyway I mean I don't know people sometimes lie but as someone who believes that politicians mostly follow through with their promises like I do think Trump is going to sit down with wine to be like you had a lot of policy initiatives their man like we just leave this one unpopular one like on the table and go forward with this a great segue way to talking about policy but I want to make one last just kind of macro point before we shipped over from this this discussion this election came down to let's say one point five two percentage points of the vote in Wisconsin in Pennsylvania and Michigan it also is an election which Oakland won the popular vote so you could have had now come today Clinton won the popular vote where there was a slight swaying I just really a geographical redistribution of where she was strong and where she was weak and you want and the only reason I bring that up is that one thing that you hear us do in the coming days that you want the you'll see everybody do in the coming days is Make Cheyenne sweeping statements about what happened here what the ideological content of the selection was mean and I I intend to go right at this point about racial priming how it effects people that people's votes but it's also the case that there's a little bit of a butterfly flaps it's wings of the effect here now you might say that's not true though the question is Why was this not a sixty forty election for Clinton I think that's a different and also reasonable question but I do think here that is one thing that it's all she's worth keeping in mind is a couple of things go a little bit differently pretty because who can indeed win the popular vote so it's not like were saying like John Kerry come to know for the well of Ohio have been different he won the electoral college and I so would've won the popular vote
Comments
loading
In Channel

Trump's art of the sabotage

01:04:562017-09-06

Deferred action podcasting

01:14:422017-09-01

Statue limitations

00:56:342017-08-181

A very meritorious podcast

01:05:502017-08-16

A deep dive on basic income

00:55:362017-07-21

Trumpism and travel bans

01:00:512017-07-05

Meet Sprinklecare

01:07:562017-06-08

CB--Oh, this bill stinks

00:53:382017-05-26

The wall in our hearts

01:03:292017-05-10

AHCApocalypse III

00:58:332017-05-05

High-Risk Podcasting

00:59:362017-05-03

AHCApocalypse II

00:59:252017-04-28

Weeds Live!

01:30:432017-04-19

The World's Worst Club

00:55:172017-04-12

Nuclear Winter

00:57:012017-04-05

CB-uh oh!

01:10:162017-03-15

AHCApalooza

01:09:272017-03-08

Privet, Amerika!

01:07:192017-02-15

Inauguration Special

00:43:172017-01-21

Happy New Year

00:50:492017-01-04

Year-End Spectacular

01:02:462016-12-28

The Trump Agenda

00:55:412016-11-16

Trumpocalypse Now

00:53:082016-11-09

Is Obamacare Failing?

01:04:512016-10-26

Final Debate Special

00:55:172016-10-20

Interview with Atul Gawande

01:35:212016-08-03

DNC-Palooza

00:58:102016-07-28

5uper Tue5day

00:55:592016-06-10

Download from Google Play
Download from App Store
00:00
00:00

Trumpocalypse Now