Speaker 1: Welcome back to a Numbers Game with Ryan Grodski. I
Speaker 1: am your host. Thank you all for being here again
Speaker 1: this week. This week is a solo episode because this
Speaker 1: is a number Game podcast and there was a ton
Speaker 1: of data that came out this week, and I thought,
Speaker 1: let's have a very autistic episode starring just me where
Speaker 1: I can give you everything that you're here for, and
Speaker 1: then we'll presume with a guest come next week. But
Speaker 1: there's three topics I want to get to on today's episode,
Speaker 1: which is the Trump whole bounce, what is going on
Speaker 1: in New York State that I think is super interesting,
Speaker 1: and then data that came out about the twenty twenty
Speaker 1: four election that is very, very vital. So let's start
Speaker 1: though with the Trump bounce. For those who don't know now,
Speaker 1: a month ago, right the media was loving it because
Speaker 1: Trump's numbers were down double digits in a number of
Speaker 1: very highly accredited public holes. Public polls are not usually
Speaker 1: as good as private polls, but they make cross tabs available,
Speaker 1: they work with media outlets, they get a lot of coverage.
Speaker 1: So these polls were coming out showing Trump's numbers in
Speaker 1: the dumps. It was right after Liberation Day and fears
Speaker 1: of recession were at a huge high, and since then,
Speaker 1: well we haven't had a recession. Actually, the numbers from
Speaker 1: the economy are doing pretty good. There was a reduction
Speaker 1: in prices in wholesale prices, wages are up over three percent,
Speaker 1: inflation is steady. Things are going well for the economy.
Speaker 1: The economy is fairly strong, and this has been very
Speaker 1: good news for Donald Trump. So I looked at the
Speaker 1: seven polls that had come out recently that also came
Speaker 1: out a month ago. They are Insider Advantage, Morning Consult,
Speaker 1: the Economists, the Daily Mail, who James Johnson, who came
Speaker 1: on this podcast a couple weeks ago, RMG Research, Quantus,
Speaker 1: and Emerson and Quantas was the third most accurate polster
Speaker 1: of the twenty twenty four election cycle, and I believe
Speaker 1: Insider Advantage was the second, and Emerson was probably the fourth.
Speaker 1: So highly accredited polling firms, but not the type of
Speaker 1: polling firms that get huge coverage like The New York
Speaker 1: Times does, or like NBC News does or whatnot, but
Speaker 1: good polls. Right, their overall net approval for Donald Trump
Speaker 1: in on four thirty was about negative four three point
Speaker 1: six Right, The Economist and the Daily Mail having double
Speaker 1: digit losses, and then RMG Research being at zero, Emerson
Speaker 1: being plus two instead of Vanage being plus two, but
Speaker 1: overall negative four. If you look at the average of
Speaker 1: those of those seven polling firms. Now Trump has a
Speaker 1: one point approval rating net approval rating that means people
Speaker 1: you know, if the providing is fifty forty nine percent
Speaker 1: the negative is forty eight percent right, and favorable rating
Speaker 1: of one point. He grew about four point one points
Speaker 1: in favorability over the last month. That is substantial. I
Speaker 1: did the deep dives in all the cross steps that
Speaker 1: were publicly available to me. A big part of the
Speaker 1: bump seems to be coming from one man men across
Speaker 1: the board, which would make sense if men felt like
Speaker 1: a recession was happening at any time, that it would
Speaker 1: be important to sit there into that they would have
Speaker 1: fears and they'd have worries, and that maybe their numbers
Speaker 1: would go down among men, but their backup Republicans are
Speaker 1: back up men across every racial line, by the way,
Speaker 1: saw a bounce which was very very important. But interestingly enough,
Speaker 1: the number among Democrats had increased, specifically minority Democrats, and
Speaker 1: what I wonder were those pollsters tracking black men and
Speaker 1: Hispanic men who are still Democrats, but they voted for Trump,
Speaker 1: and they were the ones having quasi buyers remorse for
Speaker 1: a period of time, and now they're back on the
Speaker 1: train because the recession that was the media said was
Speaker 1: going to happen just never happened. I also wonder, and
Speaker 1: this is part of my analyst media brain working, because
Speaker 1: the news of Joe Biden's health and the book that
Speaker 1: had come out with Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson called
Speaker 1: Original Sin was out. I wonder if the conversation being
Speaker 1: so heavily about Joe Biden is now feeding into people's
Speaker 1: like psyche. Oh yeah, this guy was in charge for
Speaker 1: four years and he was not only wrecking the economy
Speaker 1: causing runaway inflation the egg prices were going up, but
Speaker 1: also he was not mentally acute or had mental decline.
Speaker 1: According to some people, he could have had cancer. This
Speaker 1: entire time. Some doctors were on television sitting there and saying,
Speaker 1: there's no way this cancer diagnosis is recent. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm not a doctor. I barely pass high school biology.
Speaker 1: But this is I think part of the narrative because
Speaker 1: historically in the twenty sixteen election, in the twenty twenty election,
Speaker 1: and in the twenty twenty four election, when the focus
Speaker 1: has not been on Trump, when that heavy media obsession
Speaker 1: and gaze has not been so focused on Donald Trump
Speaker 1: to the point that they're wondering, if you know how
Speaker 1: many scoops of ice from he eats? Does he have
Speaker 1: the channel of the apes fighting? This was an old
Speaker 1: news headline. But when that focus is not on him
Speaker 1: to a ridiculous standpoint where he's, you know, a fascist
Speaker 1: who's going to end the world, people generally start thinking
Speaker 1: favorably of him. There's an unhealthy news cycle. So I
Speaker 1: think that that is when that is dimmed. Because we're
Speaker 1: focusing on Joe Biden's health so much, and the recession
Speaker 1: that was supposed to happen never did happen. Maybe people's
Speaker 1: feelings on Trump relaxed because the media fears never amounted
Speaker 1: to anything. That's what I think. If Trump can now
Speaker 1: come out in the next few weeks with a deal,
Speaker 1: a trade deal, because he's got a couple I guess
Speaker 1: in the works of the EU and several other countries,
Speaker 1: and if he's able to maybe broke or some kind
Speaker 1: of peace deal with either Iran or slow one of
Speaker 1: the wars down. Not that I don't think Americans cared
Speaker 1: that much about it, but it would be a nice
Speaker 1: news cycle if either the Ukraine or Israel stop fighting.
Speaker 1: That would be more positive praise in his direction. And
Speaker 1: improve upon it at a critical time. We'll see. But
Speaker 1: overall for Trump right now, he's had a very very
Speaker 1: good couple of weeks. Republicans need this improvement as they
Speaker 1: get their tax bill done, as they get the budget passed,
Speaker 1: and all the infighting around it kind of is very
Speaker 1: intense over spending limits and assault deductions and all the
Speaker 1: rest of it, and no tax on tip. But as
Speaker 1: they get those things through the finish line, to sit
Speaker 1: there and try to go to middle class voters, working
Speaker 1: class voters and say and senior citizens and say, look
Speaker 1: what we delivered for you, Please reelect us give us
Speaker 1: the House majority again, which is on the tipping point
Speaker 1: a number of polls. He needs not to seem like
Speaker 1: an essential threat. He needs people to be liking the
Speaker 1: job that he's doing, and right now they are, so
Speaker 1: this is a big win for him. The other thing
Speaker 1: that I wanted to talk about there was another poll
Speaker 1: that didn't get any publicity whatsoever that I thought was
Speaker 1: very interesting. It came out of Siena College. Sana College
Speaker 1: is a college in upstate New York. Never been there,
Speaker 1: but they do work with The New York Times a
Speaker 1: lot during the presidential cycles. They're considered a very accurate polster.
Speaker 1: I think they have got an A rating by most analysts.
Speaker 1: They produced a report on the election coming up for
Speaker 1: governor that wasn't very interesting. But in the election underneath,
Speaker 1: the election of vote them was all primary stuff. So
Speaker 1: Stephanic versus Lawlor for the Republican side and Kathy Helkel
Speaker 1: for the election. None of it was interesting. The interesting thing, though,
Speaker 1: was when and they asked them, as the New Yorkers,
Speaker 1: how they feel on several issues. Right, so like New
Speaker 1: Yorkers still hate congestion pricing, that didn't change. But the
Speaker 1: issues that were very interesting was this. They asked New
Speaker 1: York State residents right, New York State, Liberal Democratic state
Speaker 1: New York State residents if the state government under Governor
Speaker 1: Kathy Hochel should be assisting the Trump administration in deporting
Speaker 1: illegal immigrants. A plurality of New Yorkers said yes. Forty
Speaker 1: five percent of New Yorkers said that the state of
Speaker 1: New York under Governor Kathy Hochel should be working with
Speaker 1: Donald Trump to deport illegal immigrants. Thirty eight percent said no,
Speaker 1: they shouldn't. Twelve percent said they were somewhere in the middle,
Speaker 1: they didn't know how they felt about it. The interesting
Speaker 1: thing was not only was it basically universally yes among Republicans,
Speaker 1: twenty five percent of Democrats said they should be working
Speaker 1: with Trump to deported league immigrants, and a majority of
Speaker 1: Independence fifty one percent of Independence said yes. Other groups
Speaker 1: that had a huge number men fifty percent, not shocking,
Speaker 1: but women women were forty one forty three. They were
Speaker 1: evenly split, which says a lot. They also had almost
Speaker 1: majority of Union members. They had forty percent of residents
Speaker 1: of New York City. New York City I think went
Speaker 1: thirty percent for Trump, so ten points more than voted
Speaker 1: for him wanted his deportation to happen. Fifty percent of
Speaker 1: white residents, twenty seven percent of blacks, and among Hispanics
Speaker 1: it was tied. It was forty one forty three, which
Speaker 1: is tied in the marginal error, but forty one forty
Speaker 1: three said yes. Forty one percent of Latinos. This is
Speaker 1: once again wall two wall negative mainstream news coverage of
Speaker 1: the Maryland Man, of innocent people accidentally being arrested, of
Speaker 1: you know, and fear, and white liberals losing their mind
Speaker 1: each and every single day, and all the ethnic lobby
Speaker 1: coming out and sitting there and saying this is terrorism.
Speaker 1: This is I think. Governor Mike Waltz compared ICE agents
Speaker 1: to the Gestapo very very much, showing how much he
Speaker 1: supports law enforcement. Among Catholics in New York State, it
Speaker 1: was fifty four percent Jews. It was forty seven to
Speaker 1: forty two. They were one of the most liberal groups
Speaker 1: in New York, although the Hasidics and Orthodox are not.
Speaker 1: But the majority population though is pretty liberal. Protestants it
Speaker 1: was fifty five percent, fifty percent of middle income earners.
Speaker 1: That is wild. This is New York State. The other part,
Speaker 1: the other question that there was was would you see
Speaker 1: support a total outright ban on transgender students playing in
Speaker 1: any school and any girls' sport, transgender women being biological
Speaker 1: and playing in girl sports, a total ban in every school.
Speaker 1: Would you want the school districts to decide individually or
Speaker 1: would you want a total support like every school has
Speaker 1: to allow transgender, transgender girls biological men to play in
Speaker 1: girls sports. Right, this is what New York residents said.
Speaker 1: Forty six percent of New York residents wanted a full
Speaker 1: outright ban. They didn't want individual districts to decide. They
Speaker 1: wanted a straightforward ban, including a third of Democrats, fifty
Speaker 1: four percent of independence, fifty percent of men, forty four
Speaker 1: percent of women, which is the biggest plurality of that
Speaker 1: group of women. Right, A plurality of Democrats set a
Speaker 1: full outright ban. A third of Democrats that was higher
Speaker 1: than any other category, A third right, forty percent of
Speaker 1: people in New York City, which was the plurality of
Speaker 1: any of the other categories. Other groups, A majority of
Speaker 1: the people in the suburbs, a majority of the people
Speaker 1: in upstate, forty three percent of black residents. This was
Speaker 1: a majority of Catholics, a majority of Protestants, a plurality
Speaker 1: of Jews. I'm looking at the numbers right now. That
Speaker 1: is incredible in my mind. And here's why it is incredible.
Speaker 1: Those two questions in particular, New York State moved the
Speaker 1: most right of any state in the country in the
Speaker 1: last election. I have lived in New York basically my
Speaker 1: entire life. I know the state very well, I know
Speaker 1: residents very well. It is not that New York State
Speaker 1: is all of a sudden going to be a swing state,
Speaker 1: although I do believe it will continue to move several
Speaker 1: points to the right. If you look at all the
Speaker 1: other questions they asked about free lunches, about like more
Speaker 1: spending on social welfare policies, New Yorkers are overwhelmingly for
Speaker 1: it right. They have a left wing center left access
Speaker 1: to them that high lights why they vote so liberally. However,
Speaker 1: a big, big caveat is on these issues that people
Speaker 1: most associate with failed governance by the Democratic Party. Even
Speaker 1: twenty five to thirty percent of Democrats are willing to
Speaker 1: balk at them. A huge percentage of minorities are willing
Speaker 1: to sit there and say no. Catholics, who historically were
Speaker 1: very Democratic right, there's a lot of Hispanics in the
Speaker 1: Catholic Church in New York, but there's also a lot
Speaker 1: of ethnic Whites in the Catholic Church. New York Union members.
Speaker 1: These are people that should never be aligning with the
Speaker 1: Republican Party and on these issues that are the most
Speaker 1: identifiable with a single party and their governance. You have
Speaker 1: overwhelming numbers on the side of the Conservatives, which explains
Speaker 1: why these overall trends of working class, people, of middle class,
Speaker 1: people of some younger people of ethnic minorities are moving
Speaker 1: away from the Democratic Party even though the despite they
Speaker 1: probably agree with them on most economic issues. They feel
Speaker 1: uncomfortable with mass immigration, they feel uncomfortable with the illegal immigration,
Speaker 1: They feel uncomfortable with the transgender sports issue. There was
Speaker 1: another poll that came out earlier today. I'm recording this
Speaker 1: on Wednesday for the Thursday episode. It was from Wisconsin,
Speaker 1: and they asked would you support a full deportation of
Speaker 1: illegal immigrants? And sixty six percent said yes. This is
Speaker 1: after hyperbolic reactions from Democrats giving worst case scenarios over
Speaker 1: and over and over again, and yet Joe Biden so
Speaker 1: broke the back of the American people when it comes
Speaker 1: to the issue immigration. They do not care. The sympathy
Speaker 1: bank is completely empty. And there is something in our
Speaker 1: culture called how do I put this toxic empathy where
Speaker 1: you are to feel bad for someone who is doing
Speaker 1: you harm. That has been behind the main driver of
Speaker 1: many of our political decisions in our culture, which had
Speaker 1: been very bad for a very long time, and it
Speaker 1: was surrounding our immigration choices for a while, or allowing
Speaker 1: our immigration laws to be skirted for a while. That
Speaker 1: is completely run dry, so very interesting. If the Democratic
Speaker 1: Party continues to be associated with these bad governing policies,
Speaker 1: if they don't make an abrupt u turn like the
Speaker 1: Labor Party, as we mentioned in the last episode about
Speaker 1: what's going on in England right now, then I would
Speaker 1: expect places like New Jersey, California, and New York where
Speaker 1: these issues are front and center because Democrats refuse to
Speaker 1: change ways on it, to be moving more of their
Speaker 1: voters to the right. Maybe we'll make California or New
Speaker 1: York swing state. Maybe we'll make a few more distress competitive.
Speaker 1: It absolutely will be making New Jersey a swing state.
Speaker 1: And I think that's very interesting. There's one more data
Speaker 1: stuff that I want to talk about with you guys.
Speaker 1: It is a blockbuster. Not going to want to miss it.
Speaker 1: Stay tuned for these messages. All right, we are back.
Speaker 1: And the last thing that I wanted to bring up
Speaker 1: to you as far as the data goes, as far
Speaker 1: as my autistic my autistic marathon goes, is there is
Speaker 1: I know the election was like, you know, months and
Speaker 1: months ago, and everyone's kind of passed it. But there
Speaker 1: is three organizations that do post election reviews that are
Speaker 1: super insightful for describing and analyzing what actually happened, what
Speaker 1: actually went through. I mean, the exit polls came out,
Speaker 1: but like the exit polls are wrong most of the time.
Speaker 1: So there's three organizations. There's David Shore, who is, you know,
Speaker 1: very smart, but I think he's a liberal. I don't
Speaker 1: think he wants to be on with the Beeber guy,
Speaker 1: but who knows. I'm a big fan still. I think
Speaker 1: that he's a genius. His stuff came out a month ago.
Speaker 1: That's where I said that seventy five per according to
Speaker 1: his analysis, seventy five percent of eighteen to twenty one
Speaker 1: year old white men in this country voted for Trump.
Speaker 1: It was the large group that vote of a Trump
Speaker 1: of any demographic. That was his data that came in
Speaker 1: a few months ago. Then there's the Pew Research Center.
Speaker 1: It's coming out in a few weeks to months. I'm
Speaker 1: looking forward to that. I will talk about that. I
Speaker 1: know everyone will be done with it by that point,
Speaker 1: but I will talk about it because I can't get
Speaker 1: enough and then the last is an organization called Catalyst.
Speaker 1: Now they have been doing this since twenty twelve and
Speaker 1: they are out with their report. It came out on Monday.
Speaker 1: It is a blockbuster and it breaks apart a lot
Speaker 1: of what Democrats have excused for Kamala Harris's loss. So
Speaker 1: there's six points I want to go through. The first
Speaker 1: being Democrats said that they had a turnout problem. Right,
Speaker 1: you hear this over and over and over again. Oh,
Speaker 1: if Omar Billigs turned out, they would have he would
Speaker 1: have won. He would have won. Sure, So that was incorrect.
Speaker 1: What the Catalyst information says is that not only was turnout, yes,
Speaker 1: turnout was lower nationwide, but turnout was higher in the
Speaker 1: swing states. So he they you have the turnoff that
Speaker 1: they wanted in swing states. The swing state participation rate
Speaker 1: was over seventy percent, which was higher than the sixty
Speaker 1: four percent nationwide. So there was this excessive higher amount
Speaker 1: of turnout in places like Georgia and Arizona and Nevada
Speaker 1: where they wanted to have massive turnout. They got there,
Speaker 1: but it didn't matter because Trump had won over persuasion.
Speaker 1: People wanted him because they were persuaded to vote for
Speaker 1: him and they were not persuaded to vote for Kamalo. Secondly,
Speaker 1: turnout wasn't the same everywhere. This is something that Democrats
Speaker 1: are right about, but it's not super coherent. Turnout was
Speaker 1: down nationwide from twenty twenty to twenty twenty four, right,
Speaker 1: but it wasn't even across the board. Among white voters,
Speaker 1: it was down one percent. Among blacks, it was down
Speaker 1: five point six percent, among Latinos three percent, and among
Speaker 1: Asians six point seven percent. When you go into the
Speaker 1: Swing States, however, black turnout was down one point six percent,
Speaker 1: among black men two percent. Now, I want you to
Speaker 1: go back to old media interviews in your head if
Speaker 1: you remember them. Like there's Van Jones who was on
Speaker 1: CNN with a few times and he was a very
Speaker 1: nice person. I'm not behind the scenes, gentlemen, but he
Speaker 1: would say all the time that there is this push
Speaker 1: to get black men to support kamal law, to get
Speaker 1: the first woman across the finish line. The Charlemagne, the
Speaker 1: God did the same exact thing. They were all sitting
Speaker 1: there and saying there's this push to get black man.
Speaker 1: We're gonna get black men, We're gonna get black men.
Speaker 1: Didn't get black men In fact, in swing states, even
Speaker 1: where they did the souls, the polls everything, black male
Speaker 1: participation dropped two percent, But guess what black female participation
Speaker 1: dropped as well. Black female participation dropped by one percent
Speaker 1: in swing states. Now, aside from Wisconsin, one percent wouldn't
Speaker 1: have made up the difference. I don't e think what
Speaker 1: blackmen make up ten percent to make one percent, So
Speaker 1: it doesn't really matter. Black women weren't that interested in
Speaker 1: Kamala either. The narrative that Black Americans were not sold
Speaker 1: on Kammala as like being a brown a glass of shatterer,
Speaker 1: the same way they were over Obama. Let's say it's
Speaker 1: true Trump mentioned it, was called a racist for it,
Speaker 1: but even like Janet Jackson was saying it, people were
Speaker 1: saying it all over the all over that there was
Speaker 1: a large percentage of Black America who were not sold
Speaker 1: that she was part of their community and they were
Speaker 1: not needing to go vote for her. White support was
Speaker 1: up one point five percent, but it was mostly driven
Speaker 1: by white women. White women did show up in big numbers,
Speaker 1: it was up for white men as well. Latinos showed
Speaker 1: up and increased numbers as well. Okay, that's that's that's important.
Speaker 1: Second point of the entire thing, the racial breakdown, because
Speaker 1: the white number had decreased the lowest amount nationwide and
Speaker 1: increased the highest in swing states, was unchanged from twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: Now there's this constant notion that, oh, you know, whites
Speaker 1: are decreasing in every electorate. Didn't happen in twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: It didn't happen in twenty sixteen, Monch either. It was
Speaker 1: basically the same in twenty sixteen, but it'd not been
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty four. But the one thing that did
Speaker 1: happen with the racial and an education breakdown that is
Speaker 1: extremely important is for the very first time ever as
Speaker 1: far as I can go back, and this is especially
Speaker 1: of the Catalyst research, non college educated whites were no
Speaker 1: longer the largest voting block in the Democratic coalition. They
Speaker 1: have been surpassed by college educated whites. Believe it or not,
Speaker 1: even though the spokespeople for the Democratic Party absolutely hate
Speaker 1: non college educated white people and trash talk them constantly.
Speaker 1: They were still about a third of all Kamala voters,
Speaker 1: but they were almost forty percent. They were thirty seven
Speaker 1: percent of all guidance supporters versus twenty four percent sorry
Speaker 1: Biden Obama twenty twelve, they were almost They were thirty
Speaker 1: seven percent of all Obama voters and only thirty one
Speaker 1: percent of all Comma voters. Kamala and the Democratic Party,
Speaker 1: because of their aggressive attacks against working class white people,
Speaker 1: have sheed twenty percent of their non college educated white
Speaker 1: voting base, twenty percent of the largest single demographic in
Speaker 1: the country. So while they increase their numbers among college
Speaker 1: educated whites and lost a lot of non college educated whites,
Speaker 1: they've also lost a lot of black support over time
Speaker 1: because of declining participation rates, especially going back to Obama.
Speaker 1: And they're stagnant with the Latinos because as even the
Speaker 1: Latinos are growing in population, they are not increasing their
Speaker 1: size and support for the Democratic Party. It's gotten done
Speaker 1: significantly since Obama. One other caveat that I thought was
Speaker 1: really really interesting, twenty percent of people who voted for
Speaker 1: Trump were non white. That is the biggest single Republican
Speaker 1: candidacy ever as far as a minority constituency, one in five.
Speaker 1: That's never happened before, not even for George W. Bush.
Speaker 1: It is it is the multi racial working class that
Speaker 1: a lot of people have sat there and talked about okay.
Speaker 1: Third point, there is this big notion that like, white
Speaker 1: women are the end of the world, and they're all Karens.
Speaker 1: This is an ocean among like the right, it's all
Speaker 1: white women who are you know, the ones pushing all
Speaker 1: the progressive agenda and they are pushing the Democratic Party
Speaker 1: to the left. White women, however, voted more for Trump
Speaker 1: in this election than they voted for him in the
Speaker 1: last election. Trump won white women in this country. I
Speaker 1: fifty two to forty eight. We got the catalyst, probably
Speaker 1: gets rid of all the third party things, so they
Speaker 1: make it even fifty to fifty fifty two forty eight.
Speaker 1: Among college educated white women, Trump actually improved by one
Speaker 1: point from twenty twenty. He actually did better among college
Speaker 1: educated white women. After I don't know how many times
Speaker 1: I was on the CNN panel hearing about fascism and
Speaker 1: abortion rights and abortion rights and abortion rights and these
Speaker 1: were going to move all these women over. He did
Speaker 1: one point better. All of that rhetoric was nonsense. All
Speaker 1: of that rhetoric was complete and total nonsense. Among white men.
Speaker 1: Among white men without a college degree, Harris only got
Speaker 1: thirty percent of the vote. Now think about it, white
Speaker 1: men are white people are about sixty percent of the country.
Speaker 1: White men are thirty percent White to a college degree
Speaker 1: of twenty percent is the single largest block. Maybe white
Speaker 1: women without a college degree are also similar, but a
Speaker 1: twenty percent one in five voters. They've lost twenty percent
Speaker 1: of their support, more than twenty percent of their support
Speaker 1: with that voting base since twenty twelve, super significant in
Speaker 1: the white vote and why the white vote has The
Speaker 1: white vote has been basically flat though for the last
Speaker 1: couple of election cycles, at forty two percent support for
Speaker 1: demrik Rats. And that is because college college educated whites
Speaker 1: have typically been moving to the left, although in this
Speaker 1: last election they moved to the right. White men with
Speaker 1: a college degree moved six points to the right. I know,
Speaker 1: I'm three on a lot of numbers. I will try
Speaker 1: to rein it back and get back to the narrative. Okay,
Speaker 1: minority men, this is where the popular vote win happened, right,
Speaker 1: It wasn't just I mean, making a Republican president is
Speaker 1: like baking a cake. The batter is the white vote.
Speaker 1: You can't win with if you don't get large sport
Speaker 1: with the white vote. The minority vote is the cream
Speaker 1: filling the the I don't know what are you put
Speaker 1: on a cake? Everything, all the trimmings is the minority vote.
Speaker 1: You can have a cake, but you can't have the
Speaker 1: trimmings about the minority vote. Okay, So that's the popular
Speaker 1: vote win. Among black men, ninety five percent of whom
Speaker 1: voted for Barack Obama, almost one hundred percent universe. So
Speaker 1: ninety percent of Black men vote for Barack Obama. Nine
Speaker 1: percent voted for Kamala Harris inde nine percent. Among battleground
Speaker 1: Black voters it was eighty four. So they did do
Speaker 1: a better job in the battlegrounds where they spent more resources.
Speaker 1: But in the nation as a whole, seventy nine percent.
Speaker 1: If it's seventy nine percent, nation went as a whole,
Speaker 1: and you were taking out place like Georgia and North Carolina,
Speaker 1: in other places like Mississippi, Alabama, probably Texas as a
Speaker 1: decent black population. You're talking about, you know, New York.
Speaker 1: It's probably you know, maybe a third. Trump probably got
Speaker 1: a third of the black vote. If you take out
Speaker 1: that portion among black women, that vote was stagnant, That
Speaker 1: vote is very hardly cemented. It was ninety percent of
Speaker 1: the Black women voted for Trump this time ninety percent
Speaker 1: voted last time. Maybe he went maybe one by half
Speaker 1: a point or less than half a point, but it
Speaker 1: wasn't significant. Black men, though, it is a gigantic drop
Speaker 1: ninety five to seventy nine among black women from twenty
Speaker 1: twelve overs it's a seven point drop, but among black
Speaker 1: men sixteen points. It is substantial. Among black men under
Speaker 1: the age of thirty, it's seventy five percent. One in
Speaker 1: four Black men under the age of thirty voted for
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. That is not a small, insignificant, minor group
Speaker 1: of people. That is not a tiny fraction of a coalition.
Speaker 1: That's one in four of the Democratic Party's base. Among
Speaker 1: Black women under thirty, it was eighty eight percent. So
Speaker 1: it was so younger black people in general, but mostly
Speaker 1: younger Black men, one in four versus go back twenty
Speaker 1: years ago, go back ten years ago to Barack Obama,
Speaker 1: it was like one in twenty five, we're voting four
Speaker 1: for the Republican. Now it's one in four. This is
Speaker 1: a crazy, crazy, crazy shift. Okay, go to latinos now,
Speaker 1: because this is wild. Trump won. This is the second
Speaker 1: time that has been confirmed. But this is this proves it,
Speaker 1: This proves it to be true. Trump won Latino men.
Speaker 1: I think George W. Bush may have won it, but
Speaker 1: the exit polling was really really bad at the time,
Speaker 1: so you can't really trust it. But Trump won Latino
Speaker 1: men by six points. That is insane. He only lost
Speaker 1: the over all Latino vote by eight. This is a group.
Speaker 1: Once again. Hillary won them by forty in the overall
Speaker 1: head to head according to catalysts, she won them seventy thirty.
Speaker 1: Harris won them fifty four to forty six. And the
Speaker 1: craziest thing was they asked them across the ages. They said,
Speaker 1: among ages, right, how old are you? How are you voting?
Speaker 1: Among the ages, young Latinos, millennial Latinos, zoomer Latinos, fifty
Speaker 1: seven percent voted for Harris. It dips down to fifty
Speaker 1: two or Gen xers and early boomers, and then goes
Speaker 1: back up to fifty seven. When you get to late Jane, sorry,
Speaker 1: late boomers and silent generation. So old Latinos and young
Speaker 1: Latinos at fifty seven all the middle of fifty two.
Speaker 1: What does that show you? That shows you that the reconfiguration,
Speaker 1: the realignment of minorities is universal. Now, this isn't true
Speaker 1: for black voters. Black voters. There is a substantial drop
Speaker 1: when you get younger, right, you go to older Black voters,
Speaker 1: it's still over ninety percent. They're immovable. The only way
Speaker 1: Republicans will win those voters they can't. I'm just gonna
Speaker 1: say something else, but they can't. Those voters will be
Speaker 1: Democrats of the day they die. It is the all.
Speaker 1: It is their natural born inheritance. There is no moving
Speaker 1: older Black voters. We can just give up on trying
Speaker 1: to whoever we have is all we're going to have.
Speaker 1: Of the older group, But the younger group, it's like
Speaker 1: a thirteen point overall drop when you include men and women, right, Latinos,
Speaker 1: it's across the board. The only group that is getting
Speaker 1: substantially more democratic as the younger are Asians. And I
Speaker 1: want to it to Asians. In one second, among Asians
Speaker 1: still democratic support for among Asians among for Barack Obama
Speaker 1: twenty twelve, seventy one percent, support for Kamala Harris twenty
Speaker 1: twenty four fifty five percent, another sixteen point drop. This
Speaker 1: is a male revolution, it's a male driven revolution. So
Speaker 1: those are the important things that it's the racial breakdown
Speaker 1: I think is very important. It does substantiate shores earlier conversation.
Speaker 1: It's substantially is what we thought that this was a
Speaker 1: male dominated movement and that the women are moving. But
Speaker 1: it is. But you have to go with the context
Speaker 1: of it's not all white women. In fact, the majority
Speaker 1: of white women's still voter for Republicans, stale voter for
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, and there is increased support among non white
Speaker 1: women who are not black. Black women are just immovable
Speaker 1: in college educated women, college educated white women right. Other
Speaker 1: still moved towards Trump, although they gave the majority of
Speaker 1: their support to Kamala Harris let's I'm gonna, I'm gonna,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna land this plane very soon. I promised, stick
Speaker 1: with me if you're still with me. Right. They gave
Speaker 1: a demographic a demographic breakdown the only group two point
Speaker 1: two things one for the first time in my lifetime,
Speaker 1: first time Catalysts ever seen this. Not my lifetime, I'm
Speaker 1: kind of old now, but first time the Catalyst has
Speaker 1: reported this. Publicans won non college educated voters by double digits,
Speaker 1: first time ever. Right, huge among non college educated whites. Overall,
Speaker 1: they won them by twenty eight points. That's the same
Speaker 1: number he won them by in twenty sixteen. This is
Speaker 1: a general movement among a cementing of that base, non
Speaker 1: college educated white voters that you have to have to
Speaker 1: have to hear this point. It is so essential on
Speaker 1: college educated white voters were the only group in America demographically,
Speaker 1: education and race base right to give a majority of
Speaker 1: their support for Donald Trump. College educated whites didn't, Blacks
Speaker 1: didn't of any college education, Latinos didn't, Asians didn't, others didn't.
Speaker 1: It was solely, solely based on the vote of the
Speaker 1: non college educated white that gave a majority of their
Speaker 1: support to Donald Trump. I say that not because I
Speaker 1: want to emphasize that one group is better than the
Speaker 1: other or more loyal than the other. I want to
Speaker 1: say that because when we have conversations around what can
Speaker 1: the Republican Party do more for black voters or Latino voters,
Speaker 1: or this group or that group, or women or whatnot,
Speaker 1: I think it's very important to understand and to remind
Speaker 1: ourselves who is bringing home the votes to get a
Speaker 1: Republican elected. It is non college educated white voters. What
Speaker 1: is the Trump administration? What are Republicans? Congressional Republicans are they?
Speaker 1: What are the Republican governors? What are they doing for them?
Speaker 1: For all the analysts dribble, we have to hear constantly
Speaker 1: about what are we doing to sit there and shed
Speaker 1: one percentage more among black women? What are we doing
Speaker 1: to deliver support for our voters, whether that be tax cuts,
Speaker 1: whether that be opioid relief because their population has been
Speaker 1: deficit with the opioid effect, pro family stuff. What are
Speaker 1: we doing for those voters on all those issues? That
Speaker 1: should be the question Republicans should take from this as Wow,
Speaker 1: these are the only will give us a majority support?
Speaker 1: What are we doing for them? Has to be emphasized. Okay,
Speaker 1: landing the plane once again, back to the age range thing.
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris lost support among every single age range in
Speaker 1: the country. I had said this a while ago, that
Speaker 1: these polls were coming out New York Times, Sienna, especially
Speaker 1: where Harris seniors by like twenty points in Pennsylvania and
Speaker 1: Wisconsin and she was going to win the senior vote.
Speaker 1: The number of polls that said she was going to
Speaker 1: win the senior vote were were out of control. They
Speaker 1: were out of control. They were completely insane, and I
Speaker 1: didn't believe it for a second. Turns out it wasn't true.
Speaker 1: Senior citizens voted majority for Trump and actually increased their
Speaker 1: support for Donald Trump among Trump also won every age
Speaker 1: range of white voters. White voters between the age of
Speaker 1: eighteen to twenty nine voted for Trump by two points.
Speaker 1: This was a group that voted for Joe Biden. They
Speaker 1: had moved eight points to the right for Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: This is once again it goes back to what the
Speaker 1: David Shore was saying, where he said young people under
Speaker 1: twenty one who had lived during the worst of COVID
Speaker 1: were the most radical right wing. So maybe he was
Speaker 1: onto something right there. Double digit support and swing for
Speaker 1: Trump came from every bracket of Latino voters, over twenty
Speaker 1: points among young Latinos, double digits among Black voters under
Speaker 1: the age of forty five, and and a twenty point
Speaker 1: margin a twenty point swaying towards Trump among Asians in
Speaker 1: that category. That's also very important and why it's important
Speaker 1: one is seniors are changing, right people. People have come
Speaker 1: up to me a lot and say, what's going on
Speaker 1: with the senior But why are seniors becoming more liberal?
Speaker 1: They are not becoming more liberal. The seniors you have
Speaker 1: in your head as seniors are probably like your grandparents,
Speaker 1: or their friends who may or may not have passed away,
Speaker 1: right and increased likelihood. That's what comes with the age.
Speaker 1: It's sad. I'm not wishing anything, but that is what
Speaker 1: the truth is. Archie Bunker has passed away. Meathead is
Speaker 1: a senior. Henry Fonder Fonda has passed away. Jane Fonda
Speaker 1: is a senior. The liberal baby boomers are in their
Speaker 1: seventies and eighties, the greatest generation, the people who worked
Speaker 1: for Richard Nixon, the people who worked against the counter culturalists,
Speaker 1: the ones that you probably were seniors in your mind
Speaker 1: in the early two thousands, if you were like me,
Speaker 1: you're a millennial, and you know you watch little giants
Speaker 1: growing up. Those people, the World War II veterans that
Speaker 1: you see in the stands who are rooting on the
Speaker 1: pee football team, they're almost all gone. And it's the
Speaker 1: liberals who were middle aged at the time who are
Speaker 1: part of the counterculture that are like of the Joe
Speaker 1: Biden's era, or a little young or a little older,
Speaker 1: who are the ones who are seniors now. Nonetheless, and
Speaker 1: yet still they didn't know for a majority for Kamala Harris,
Speaker 1: which was a narrative the media was pushing endlessly. It's
Speaker 1: a narrative David Shup push which I disagreed with his data.
Speaker 1: I agree with the Kittle Catalyst data. Those are the
Speaker 1: narratives worth dispelling, worth breaking down. I had to go
Speaker 1: into it. I know that was long winded. I know
Speaker 1: that that was probably a lot for people to listen to.
Speaker 1: But thank you for hearing all the numbers because it's
Speaker 1: a numbers game. Okay, So this is the part of
Speaker 1: the podcast where I talk about I do you know
Speaker 1: questions I asked me anything segment? Ryant Email me Ryan
Speaker 1: at Numbers Game Podcast dot com, Ryan at Numbers Plural,
Speaker 1: Numbers gamepodcast dot com. You can tweet me. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: put a pin tweet where I'll take questions from Twitter.
Speaker 1: If you no one can take the time to email me,
Speaker 1: It's fine you guys send me questions. I love to
Speaker 1: answer them on literally anything. That's what I usually do.
Speaker 1: But this week I came across a piece of gossip
Speaker 1: that I have to tell you guys about. I haven't
Speaker 1: tweeted this, I haven't talked about it. I'm saving it
Speaker 1: specifically for you. It's about a member of Congress. It
Speaker 1: is some of the wildest stories I've ever heard it
Speaker 1: is George Santos on steroids. I'll be back with it
Speaker 1: after these messages. Okay, we are back for the final segment,
Speaker 1: which is usually where I ask take questions, and I
Speaker 1: want your questions. Email me Ryan at numbers Game dot
Speaker 1: com right Ryan at numbers Game podcast dot com. Sorry
Speaker 1: by that, guys. Okay, so there is a Republican member
Speaker 1: of Congress. Stories are in the works right now, so
Speaker 1: I don't want to burst anyone's but some have been
Speaker 1: published already. This is a member of Congress. I'm not
Speaker 1: going to say the name because it's going to come
Speaker 1: out publicly, but I will give you an offense where
Speaker 1: if you're in the know, you will know. This is
Speaker 1: somebody who was a police had shown up at his
Speaker 1: house because he was having a domestic with his girlfriend,
Speaker 1: even though at the time he had said he was
Speaker 1: married to another woman. This is a person who has
Speaker 1: said that he has over exaggerated his military service to
Speaker 1: the point where it could be possibly considered stolen valor
Speaker 1: if you're in the military. I'm not so I don't
Speaker 1: know what the record says for that are, but I've
Speaker 1: heard people in the military say it's the degree that
Speaker 1: it's stolen valor. I have heard, and I'm going to
Speaker 1: get the journalist on here who's been working on it.
Speaker 1: I have heard his dealings, his business dealings, or to
Speaker 1: the millions and millions of dollars of debt, millions of
Speaker 1: dollars of debt, that it's extremely shady and I'm not
Speaker 1: sure if the debtors, the people who are lending money
Speaker 1: are even American. This is somebody who has been trying
Speaker 1: to sleep with every single conservative influencer woman in the business,
Speaker 1: saying repeated lies over and over and over again. And
Speaker 1: then this was the craziest thing. Multiple of these women
Speaker 1: told me that he was trying to convert them to Islam. Now,
Speaker 1: this is not a reported Muslim. This is somebody who
Speaker 1: says that he's a Christian, who where is his religion
Speaker 1: on his sleeve? Stories had emerged that he was married
Speaker 1: by a very prominent in mom in a mosque by
Speaker 1: the unindicted co conspirator of the nineteen ninety three World
Speaker 1: Trades utder bombing, that all of his business dealings are
Speaker 1: extraordinarily shady and weird, that his military record is completely
Speaker 1: and totally f acated, if not fabricated, over exaggerated, and
Speaker 1: there are multiple women speaking constantly with each other that
Speaker 1: he has created lies about the state of one his
Speaker 1: marriage where he says he's divorced when he's when he
Speaker 1: wasn't at the time, or maybe now he's divorced, but
Speaker 1: he wasn't at the time. And then once he gets
Speaker 1: in these relationships with them, these precarious relationships, they find
Speaker 1: themselves in position where they feel like they are threatened,
Speaker 1: and he spends time to sit there and say, I
Speaker 1: think the exact quotes that he was saying to them
Speaker 1: is how Islam and Christianity were close to the same thing,
Speaker 1: even though I'm not a religious scholar, but I know
Speaker 1: that much they're not. And he was married by the
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety three World Trade Center conspirat, a co conspirator.
Speaker 1: I am going to give it to the journalist. I'm
Speaker 1: going to invite him up. When this story is up,
Speaker 1: and there's a woman to who's doing another story on this,
Speaker 1: I'm going to write them both to talk about this.
Speaker 1: I know this is not typically a numbers game. It
Speaker 1: is the craziest, most salacious, most interesting news story about
Speaker 1: a person. If Donald Trump was not an office right now.
Speaker 1: This would be the front page of every single newspaper.
Speaker 1: This would be George Sando's on crack. But you know
Speaker 1: the media can only focus on Trump. That is my
Speaker 1: dog snoring, by the way, Smory about that. That's that
Speaker 1: little yelp that you hear. That's not me. It is
Speaker 1: a wild story. Not many people are covering it. I'm
Speaker 1: going to when this comes out because people's heads are
Speaker 1: going to explode. It is crazy. That's my little piece
Speaker 1: of gossip. Send me your messages Ryan at numbers gamepodcast
Speaker 1: dot com. Please like and subscribe to this podcast and
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio app, Apple podcasts, wherever podcasts are we ever give
Speaker 1: your podcast. I have some incredible guests coming up next
Speaker 1: week and the week after. You will not want to
Speaker 1: miss it. Please like and subscribe, give me a five
Speaker 1: star review if you're feeling generous, and I will see
Speaker 1: you guys next week