A somewhat more complicated map to digest than the 2008 “reddening and bluing of the map”, where that “red streak” in a sea of blue portented the future problems for Obama.  (Analyzed simply as the congruence of dying industry alongside the most concentrated “racial backlash” — and we know it’ll bleed outward.)  And a tad misleading — because, okay, Hillary Clinton fell off most places from Obama (though what’d be blue portents the future demise of the Republican Party in the same way the red of 2008 did the future demise of the Democratic Party.) — but the matter is the heavy flipping instead of the slow erosion…

  This is an interesting premise.  Effectively, we have an analysis for Pennsylvania that Clinton showed up well in Suburbia and the Urban city, but in the rural communities…

… where it had seemed the Democrats had hit bottom already, so why bother?

… They found a new bottom.

What happened is that where Obama lost the smaller more rural counties in the 70-30 range, Clinton lost them in closer to an 80-20 range.

I like the comments analysis here.  Clinton lost due to Sandy Hook, which effectively put gun control back on the map as a Democratic cause.  (Cynically possible.)  Email did it!  (Bubble-ocracy).  Maybe we should legalize heroin?   (Hm…)

A bit of stupidity emits here, your “neener neener neener” lobbed at Nate Silver and 538, under-cutting bursts of reality that intrude as Trump begins to “make due” on his campaign promises into the real world.

I wonder if this is as accurate as your forecast models.

ow many are there 538? Your statistical modeling definitely nailed the election – BWHAAAHAAA\

In the weekend before the election, Silver’s forecasting had Trump a “routine polling error” behind Hillary Clinton.  And so he was.  He had Donald Trump’s chances of beating Hillary Clinton above those of Mitt Romney against Barack Obama, and had given the indicators (watch the polls for New Hampshire) for where you’d spot a “Trump Comeback”.  It was such that on one occasion — maybe two — I had linked Nate Silver’s pessimistic cold water as a counter-point to Larry Sabato’s more optimistic idea (The Huffington Post’s I never took seriously).

I suppose where the “statistical modeling” fell apart was on election day, as returns came in and his snake had Nevada out in the red behind the rust belt states that turned red — which looked incredibly off to me at the time because the states that match Nevada’s demographic profile — Colorado — was sticking to roughly where it was four years ago.   THAT is something I’d like explained.

But a 30 percent chance of winning the election is not a zero percent chance.

Contemplating political positioning in the wake of the Trump victory…  Because.  Sure.  Welcome to the new Republican Party, old Republicans..

I’m really curious about Marco Rubio.  His point in running for the Senate was to have a place to run for president in four years.

Speculating that Tim Scott would run for South Carolina governor, aiming for the president.  That assumes the path to the presidency is in traditional politics these days.

Ben Sasse has this to say.
We are not North Koreans, swearing a loyalty oath to the ‘Dear Leader.’ Nor are we the French Resistance, plotting against the new regime from day one. Rather, we should hope for his personal flourishing and his wisdom, and we should simultaneously vigorously debate his ideas.
Yeah.  Speak for yourself.

Meantime, making their way into the establishment, and things get scary and wacky.  Yes, there’s Steve Bannon — who — will really take it to the “Establishment” (who is — um?) … and into a new media universe with… the suddenly mainstream, Alex Jones.  Now in a position not before conceivable — one that will makes it a deal harder to consider the next terrorist or other tragic act of violence a “false flag”.

It does appear the incoming president lacks many deep convictions.  I suppose, if you follow through on that which got him elected… reworking trade deals and immigration restriction…

Either watered down now or made more cost effective into the big “fence“.

Health Care?  No biggie.

On Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace grilled Trump’s campaign manager over Donald’s apparent flip flop on Obamacare, saying he may amend the healthcare law instead of repealing it and Kellyanne Conway replied, “We don’t know.”
Days before the election, during a speech in Philadelphia, Donald Trump said this about Obamacare, “If we don’t repeal and replace Obamacare, we will destroy American health care forever.”
Chris Wallace responded to Trump’s interview with the WSJ, where he said he’s open to keeping two signature parts of the ACA intact.

What happened appears to be that he was just coming out from speaking with Obama, who suggested that whatever Trump does… please consider keeping them.  Likewise, Trump’s emphasis on infrastructure — “big time jobs” — not only harking over to “what he knows”, but it too has to be what Obama just suggested to him, echoing as it does what Obama has been saying Hillary Clinton can accomplish that he couldn’t.

Not to say too much.  Mark Pence is either going to be the most powerful vice-president in the United States history, tied as such, or narrowly second – competing with Dick Cheney.  But at such, any Democrat or liberal (or the UAW getting him to make do on his trade agreements) trying to influence policy would be wise to arrange a meeting, make the suggestions, and get Trump onto a television camera immediately before Pence can dump it.

Hm.  Trump is still tweeting.  Something to do with my experience of sitting on a public bus on a bridge as one grouplet overwhelms the streets.

Just had a very open and successful presidential election. Now professional protesters, incited by the media, are protesting. Very unfair!

The phrase “Professional protesters” has that ring of Breitbart logic to it.  There is, I suppose, a sort of truth in it — I muse that they come across as the “Committee to Re-elect the Next President”, and some swarths of them do have the concept of starting a national mass strike at the point of Fascism.
“Incited by the media” has us back at another odd canard — No.  They’re their own thing.

But then again, they’re just following Trump’s tweeting suggestion from 4 years ago.  There’s enough hypocrisy swarthing in every direction on this one.

Trump then changes his mind.

Love the fact that the small groups of protesters last night have passion for our great country. We will all come together and be proud!

It’ll be an interesting four years.

I got the feeling last October, when I largely but not entirely defended them, that these kids in Montana had a satirical idea, humor in bad taste as opposed to bad humor, which — as a matter of course — dumped Trump in there as a signifier — speaking to his support amongst various hate groups.

Now elected, we get to this.

Two students from Silverton High School have been suspended, accused of intimidating and threatening behavior at a pro-Trump demonstration at the school on Tuesday.
Before classes and during both the school’s lunches, 30 to 40 students gathered on and around their trucks, waving Trump signs and American flags.
At least one student was waving a Confederate flag, but took it down after the school’s principal, Justin Lieuallen, spoke to him.
Lieuallen said the students were expressing their own views, but there were a couple of incidents where students overstepped their bounds.
Witnesses reported phrases such as “Pack your bags, you’re leaving tomorrow” and “Tell your family good-bye” being shouted at Hispanic students.

It is that dilemma in “teaching the kids” respectful reverence to your country’s next leader who cited an Eisenhower era dragnet program to deal with illegal immigration, while keeping a politically neutral stance on free assembly.