The 2020 Blade Election: Analysis


This is Naked Capitalism Fundraising Week. 1,327 donors have invested in our efforts to fight corruption and predatory behavior, especially in the financial sector.Please join us and participate through our Donation page, Which shows how to donate via check, credit card, debit card, or PayPal.read Why we do this fundraising event, What we achieved last year, And our current goals, More original reports.

Here comes Yves. This is Tom Ferguson and his accomplices’ long-awaited analysis of the 2020 election. The reason why it has been so long is because Ferguson has kept the largest and most carefully developed election database for a long time, and it takes time to clean up, mine, and test the results.

Authors: Thomas Ferguson, Professor Emeritus at the University of Massachusetts Boston; Paul Jorgensen, Associate Professor and Director of Environmental Studies at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley; and Jie Chen, a statistician at the University of Massachusetts.Originally published on New Economic Thinking Institute website

The 2020 election is very much like the famous opening of Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony: Almost everyone can hear “Destiny knocks at the door.” But reaching agreement on what this means is elusive.

Many foreign observers and Democrats who have never liked Trump have been thinking about how he could get more than 74 million votes in 2020—as he said, more than any current president in history. On the contrary, supporters of the former president and members of the Republican establishment have put forward various theories, some of which are rather weird, to explain how the Democratic Party won.

At the same time, everyone is thinking about the long-term impact of the Trump movement’s transformation into an openly anti-system political organization, which is disturbingly reminiscent of the Weimar Republic and the selective closure of large technology companies after the storm. Amazing way to access the system. House of Parliament. As the changes sweeping the international system become more apparent, new concerns continue to emerge: in particular, whether the US shocked Afghan troop withdrawal is a warning that both parties are living in the paradise of fools.

All of this leads us to believe that a closer look at what happened in the 2020 election is not out of curiosity. Elections, especially in a money-driven political system, are complex matters that require analysis at many different levels.

our New INET working paper Analyze the 2020 presidential election, focus on voters rather than political funds, and emphasize the importance of economic geography. It makes extensive use of the returns from county elections and analyzes how spatial factors are combined with the industrial structure to shape the results. It details the role of Covid 19. The paper reviewed the research that showed that Covid 19 was not important, but then proposed a new method that showed that it was very important. The paper not only analyzes the impact of unemployment on voting, but also analyzes differences in income and industry structure, as well as demographic factors, including religion, ethnicity, and race. It also studied how the 2020 wildcat strike and wave of social protests affected voting in specific areas. Trump’s highly controversial trade policies and little-known agricultural policies have received detailed attention.

The paper finally examines how political funding can help make the outcome of congressional elections different from presidential elections. It also emphasizes the continuing importance of private equity and the energy sector as (especially) conservative forces in the Republican Party and agricultural interests that oppose government action to reverse climate change.



Source link