Trump’s Victory in Two Graphs

 

I’ve done some analysis on the exit polls, comparing the results of Trump/Harris 2024 with Trump/Biden 2020.  I’ve come up with two graphs that you may find interesting. 

Both graphs show Trump’s increased or decreased margin of victory for various groups, with a positive number indicating that Trump did better among that group, and a negative number indicating that he did worse.  As an example, Trump’s margin of victory changed by -5% (i.e. it decreased) among white voters, who he won by a margin of 12% in 2024 (55%-43%) and won by a margin of 17% in 2020 (58%-41%)

The main graph is an attempt to show three groupings on a single graph — race, religion, and sex:

As you can see, Trump lost ground among white voters slightly, was essentially even among black voters (1% improvement), but did far better among Latinos, improving his margin by 25%. 

By religion, Trump’s big gain was among Catholics, improving his margin by 20%.  He also did better among religious “others,” but this is a much smaller group than Catholics.  Catholics are 22% of the electorate, “others” are 10%.

Trump improved marginally among both men and women, but I don’t find the difference between these to be notable.

The polls are from CNN, for 2024 and 2020, respectively.  The polls don’t give crosstabs between Catholics and Latinos.  I expect that Latinos are a substantial part of the overall Catholic vote, but I don’t know how much.

Focusing on these two groups with significant change:

  • Trump did not win Latinos, but improved from a 33% deficit in 2020 (32%-65%) to a mere 8% deficit in 2024 (45%-53%).
  • Trump flipped Catholics, winning by a 15% margin in 2024 (56%-41%) after losing by a 5%  margin in 2020 (47%-52%).

One fairly simple interpretation of these results is that Catholics were more inclined to vote for one of their own, Joe Biden, in 2020.  (This isn’t meant as a criticism, by the way.)

The second graph is sex-by-race, which shows the male-female aspect of Trump’s major improvement among Latinos:

Trump’s margin among Latino men improved by a whopping 33%.  After losing Latino men 36%-59% in 2020, he actually won this group in 2024, 54%-44%.  His improvement among Latino women is also notable, though overshadowed by the huge swing among the men.

There are other ways to parse the electorate, so I don’t want to imply that the Latino and Catholic swings are the only factors of importance.  I do find them notable.

Published in Election 2024
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 49 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. EJHill Staff
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    Exit polls skew liberal because they are self selecting. I prefer Pew’s Verified Voter surveys. That said, I think this says a lot:

    Source: NBC News

    Young women under 30 are miserable and want someone to care for them – and they’re ignoring the men that are increasingly fed up with the feminized world they’re forced to deal with.

    • #1
  2. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    Nicely done!

    Non-hispanic Catholics have always been a key swing vote.  They are a big chunk of Reagan Democrats, the anti-McGovern and anti-Dukakis voters.  Like southern protestants, they tend to have had a higher rate of military service. Unlike southern protestants, they are not as moved by 2A issues and are actually less net pro-life than evangelicals.  Crime, sexual deviance, anti-patriotism combined with cost-of-living pressures can generate a large-scale desertion from their ancestral Democratic party home.  

    Bob Casey Sr., father of the empty-suit zombie who is currently losing his senate race, was once the quintessential Catholic politician–staunchly pro-life, pro-union, patriotic, pro-safety net.  The Clintons literally kicked him out of the party and it was testament to the political incompetence and tone deafness of Bush and Dole that they could not fashion a campaign to capitalize on that.

     

    • #2
  3. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Exit polls skew liberal because they are self selecting. I prefer Pew’s Verified Voter surveys. That said, I think this says a lot:

     

    Source: NBC News

    Young women under 30 are miserable and want someone to care for them – and they’re ignoring the men that are increasingly fed up with the feminized world they’re forced to deal with.

    I don’t entirely agree, as there are other obvious motives.  I think that your point is good, but is not very important as an explanation.

    Women want to be able to kill their babies.  This, in my view, is the main reason that there is a gap of roughly 10% between the male and female vote, at every age level.  This issue is most important to women under 30, because they are the ones who are most likely to have babies that they want to kill.

    This seems to be what occurs, just about universally, when women get political power.  They adopt laws making sure that they can kill their babies.

    • #3
  4. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    A minor point that I left out of the main post.

    Of the groupings by race, religion, and sex, the most pro-Harris group was blacks, who favored Harris by 74% (12%-86%).

    The second most pro-Harris group was Jews, who favored Harris by 58% (21%-79%).

    I left small groups like Jews, Asians, and “other” race people out of the main analysis, to make the graphs more readable.  In addition, as to Jewish voters in particular, the 2020 exit polling showed the category but did not report figures, explaining that the sample was too small.

    Jews are just 2% of the electorate, and Asians and “other” race people are 3% each.

    It is possible that the figure for the Jewish vote refers principally to religious Jews.  “Jewish” is not a racial or ethnic category in the exit polls, but is a religious category.  It’s possible that a secular Jew might choose “Other” or “None” as a religious category.

    • #4
  5. namlliT noD Member
    namlliT noD
    @DonTillman

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio…:

    I’ve done some analysis on the exit polls, comparing the results of Trump/Harris 2024 with Trump/Biden 2020.

    I don’t think this is meaningful because:

    1. You can’t perform exit polls on mail-in and dropbox votes.
    2. In 2020, mail-in and dropbox votes swung 9 to 40 points toward Biden from the in-person votes for *every* county in the US (where the data is available, clear, and were more than a couple percent of the vote).
    • #5
  6. Barfly Member
    Barfly
    @Barfly

    namlliT noD (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio…:

    I’ve done some analysis on the exit polls, comparing the results of Trump/Harris 2024 with Trump/Biden 2020.

    I don’t think this is meaningful because:

    1. You can’t perform exit polls on mail-in and dropbox votes.
    2. In 2020 mail-in and dropbox votes swung 9 to 40 points toward Biden from the in-person votes for *every* county in the US (where the data is available, clear, and were more than a couple percent of the vote).

    It’s still a useful observation. Trump’s same-day increase over 2020 came from Catholics and Latinos – is that a fair characterization?

    Of course, 2020’s same-day vs mail-in votes would have been especially skewed by pandemic. I don’t know how to separate out the post-pandemic rebound.

    • #6
  7. TheRightNurse, radiant figure of feminine kindness Member
    TheRightNurse, radiant figure of feminine kindness
    @TheRightNurse

    EJHill (View Comment):
    Young women under 30 are miserable and want someone to care for them – and they’re ignoring the men that are increasingly fed up with the feminized world they’re forced to deal with.

    That’s a very interesting interpretation.

    Could it be that young women under 30 are miserable and want men to stop being so feminized that they can’t support them? Could it be that young women are tired of being the breadwinners so their boyfriends/husbands can play video games all day? Could it be that they want the government to pay for their daycare because the expense is crushing them into dual income situations where nobody wins?

    The woman vote is largely a solidarity vote with a female candidate and personal dislike of Trump. That’s it. It’s not so much about policies, it’s about vibes. I’m surrounded by women and that’s all that it is about. How much they hate him personally, how he’s so rude, how he’s a horrible person, etc, etc. It’s almost never about policy (except when they’re wrong about it or distort it and parrot talking points about a national abortion ban, etc.).

    • #7
  8. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    It is a testimony to the echoing nullity of Harris that we tend to look at the result as something Trump did, rather than something the Democrats did. While I supported Trump and am delighted with the electoral outcome, I think it’s probably true that the Democrats, that the progressive movement, has simply pushed normal Americans too far in too many ways, and it would have required a far smoother and better liar than Harris — someone on the caliber of a Clinton or Obama — to pull the wool over the voters’ eyes one more time.

    Trump is a tireless campaigner and his patter appeals to a lot of people, even while many of us find it frustrating. I don’t want to minimize his skills. But the woke left is perversely radical, and Harris is a dimwitted woman utterly devoid of charisma and completely unable to deceive the electorate into believing that she is not a creature of that woke left.

    I think America is finally unwilling to be further bullied by elitist clowns.

    • #8
  9. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    It is a testimony to the echoing nullity of Harris that we tend to look at the result as something Trump did, rather than something the Democrats did. While I supported Trump and am delighted with the electoral outcome, I think it’s probably true that the Democrats, that the progressive movement, has simply pushed normal Americans too far in too many ways, and it would have required a far smoother and better liar than Harris — someone on the caliber of a Clinton or Obama — to pull the wool over the voters’ eyes one more time.

    Trump is a tireless campaigner and his patter appeals to a lot of people, even while many of us find it frustrating. I don’t want to minimize his skills. But the woke left is perversely radical, and Harris is a dimwitted woman utterly devoid of charisma and completely unable to deceive the electorate into believing that she is not a creature of that woke left.

    I think America is finally unwilling to be further bullied by elitist clowns.

    You mean Bill Clinton, right?

    • #9
  10. Steve Fast Member
    Steve Fast
    @SteveFast

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    It is a testimony to the echoing nullity of Harris that we tend to look at the result as something Trump did, rather than something the Democrats did. While I supported Trump and am delighted with the electoral outcome, I think it’s probably true that the Democrats, that the progressive movement, has simply pushed normal Americans too far in too many ways, and it would have required a far smoother and better liar than Harris — someone on the caliber of a Clinton or Obama — to pull the wool over the voters’ eyes one more time.

    Trump is a tireless campaigner and his patter appeals to a lot of people, even while many of us find it frustrating. I don’t want to minimize his skills. But the woke left is perversely radical, and Harris is a dimwitted woman utterly devoid of charisma and completely unable to deceive the electorate into believing that she is not a creature of that woke left.

    I think America is finally unwilling to be further bullied by elitist clowns.

    You mean Bill Clinton, right?

    LOL! Bill was a better liar. Hillary was just a liar.

    • #10
  11. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    TheRightNurse, radiant figure … (View Comment):

    EJHill (View Comment):
    Young women under 30 are miserable and want someone to care for them – and they’re ignoring the men that are increasingly fed up with the feminized world they’re forced to deal with.

    That’s a very interesting interpretation.

    Could it be that young women under 30 are miserable and want men to stop being so feminized that they can’t support them? Could it be that young women are tired of being the breadwinners so their boyfriends/husbands can play video games all day? Could it be that they want the government to pay for their daycare because the expense is crushing them into dual income situations where nobody wins?

    The woman vote is largely a solidarity vote with a female candidate and personal dislike of Trump. That’s it. It’s not so much about policies, it’s about vibes. I’m surrounded by women and that’s all that it is about. How much they hate him personally, how he’s so rude, how he’s a horrible person, etc, etc. It’s almost never about policy (except when they’re wrong about it or distort it and parrot talking points about a national abortion ban, etc.).

    It is hard to tell what motivates women.  To me, they rarely seem to make sense.

    Here is a recent poll indicating that abortion is the most important issue for women under 30, indicating that 40% stated that it was the most important issue.  This is quite remarkable, given the large number of potential issues.

    I think that this gets back to my point in #3 above.  The most important issue to women is killing their babies, and this is particularly true of young women.

    This means that they are a remarkably evil group of people, on the whole.

    • #11
  12. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    The most important issue to women is killing their babies, and this is particularly true of young women.

    This means that they are a remarkably evil group of people, on the whole.

    You and I probably have a different idea of what it means to say a person is “evil.” I think intent matters, and I also think that a great many of these young women who vote with abortion as an important issue aren’t intentionally defending the killing of babies. Rather, they are intending to defend the right to terminate a pregnancy in its early stages — in the first few weeks, before the word “baby” seems like the appropriate term for the developing fetus.

    I think a simple majority of Americans probably think that way, and, speaking only for myself, that doesn’t meet my own definition of “evil.”

    • #12
  13. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    It is a testimony to the echoing nullity of Harris that we tend to look at the result as something Trump did, rather than something the Democrats did. While I supported Trump and am delighted with the electoral outcome, I think it’s probably true that the Democrats, that the progressive movement, has simply pushed normal Americans too far in too many ways, and it would have required a far smoother and better liar than Harris — someone on the caliber of a Clinton or Obama — to pull the wool over the voters’ eyes one more time.

    Trump is a tireless campaigner and his patter appeals to a lot of people, even while many of us find it frustrating. I don’t want to minimize his skills. But the woke left is perversely radical, and Harris is a dimwitted woman utterly devoid of charisma and completely unable to deceive the electorate into believing that she is not a creature of that woke left.

    I think America is finally unwilling to be further bullied by elitist clowns.

    Maybe, but other Republicans have shown an amazing ability to not want to be “rude” by pointing out the Left’s abject failures.  Trump doesn’t fall for that.

    • #13
  14. GrannyDude Member
    GrannyDude
    @GrannyDude

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    TheRightNurse, radiant figure … (View Comment):

    EJHill (View Comment):
    Young women under 30 are miserable and want someone to care for them – and they’re ignoring the men that are increasingly fed up with the feminized world they’re forced to deal with.

    That’s a very interesting interpretation.

    Could it be that young women under 30 are miserable and want men to stop being so feminized that they can’t support them? Could it be that young women are tired of being the breadwinners so their boyfriends/husbands can play video games all day? Could it be that they want the government to pay for their daycare because the expense is crushing them into dual income situations where nobody wins?

    The woman vote is largely a solidarity vote with a female candidate and personal dislike of Trump. That’s it. It’s not so much about policies, it’s about vibes. I’m surrounded by women and that’s all that it is about. How much they hate him personally, how he’s so rude, how he’s a horrible person, etc, etc. It’s almost never about policy (except when they’re wrong about it or distort it and parrot talking points about a national abortion ban, etc.).

    It is hard to tell what motivates women. To me, they rarely seem to make sense.

    Here is a recent poll indicating that abortion is the most important issue for women under 30, indicating that 40% stated that it was the most important issue. This is quite remarkable, given the large number of potential issues.

    I think that this gets back to my point in #3 above. The most important issue to women is killing their babies, and this is particularly true of young women.

    This means that they are a remarkably evil group of people, on the whole.

    Male support for abortion exceeds female support for it. And, of course, the RTL movement has plenty of women, as leaders and as rank-and-file.

    Is there data to support this assertion: “This seems to be what occurs, just about universally, when women get political power.  They adopt laws making sure that they can kill their babies?” I’m not dismissing it, just wondering if this is observable other than in the last, say, fifty years? It is my understanding that both the original suffragette feminists and the second wave feminists weren’t particularly pro-abortion and many, perhaps most, were against it. Heck, even eugenicist Margaret Sanger disapproved of abortion. 

    But there’s no question that American progressive women have allowed themselves to be persuaded that abortion matters more than anything else. You might have noticed that the only policy Kamala directly referenced in her delayed concession speech was the right of a woman to “make her own decisions about her body,” a euphamism for abortion (and not, obviously, COVID shots or other government-required intrusions). 

    • #14
  15. Doug Watt Member
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    There are about 52 million Catholic adults in the US.

    CatholicVote issued its first presidential endorsement in its history for Trump in January. 

    The group devoted $10 million to advertising, education and a “Catholic-to-Catholic” canvassing program emphasizing the critical swing states.

    According to a CatholicVote memo shared exclusively with Fox News Digital, the group contacted over two million Catholic voters across the country, including approximately 100,000 “high affinity, low propensity Catholics” in the swing states Arizona, Nevada, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

    The memo states that the 2024 election has proven that “Democrats have a Catholic problem, and must now wrestle with the growing influence of the progressive wing of [the] party that is openly hostile to people of faith.”

    “Kamala Harris snubbed us, and she repeatedly affirmed our deepest fears about her animus and bigotry towards Catholics. She opposed a judicial nominee because he was Catholic. She introduced legislation that would cut our charities. She said there would be no accommodations for Catholics when it came to her abortion policies, which would effectively have ended Catholic health care in America,” he explained.

    In Pennsylvania, which has 19 electoral votes and was considered the most important swing state by both candidates, Catholics make up a quarter of the electorate. According to Fox exit polling, Catholic voters in Pennsylvania favored Trump by a margin of 56 to 43 percent, that is 13 points.

    Meanwhile, Catholic voters in two of the next largest swing states – North Carolina (16 electoral votes) and Michigan (15 electoral votes) – voted in Trump’s favor by 17 and 20 percentage points, respectively.

    Trump also won Wisconsin Catholics by 16 percentage points, helping to deliver the state’s 10 electoral votes to the former president.

    • #15
  16. Steve Fast Member
    Steve Fast
    @SteveFast

    The progressive wing that controls the Dem party keeps accumulating more and more enemies – evangelicals, Catholics, practicing Jews, black men, Latinos, married women, legal immigrants, and on and on. And the Karens that make up the progressive wing are not reproducing, so this can’t end well for them.

    • #16
  17. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    The progressive wing that controls the Dem party keeps accumulating more and more enemies – evangelicals, Catholics, practicing Jews, black men, Latinos, married women, legal immigrants, and on and on. And the Karens that make up the progressive wing are not reproducing, so this can’t end well for them.

    It doesn’t seem to have been a big problem for them so far, since they have access to turn other peoples’ children into Karens.

    • #17
  18. TBA, sometimes known as 'Teebs'. Coolidge
    TBA, sometimes known as 'Teebs'.
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    It is a testimony to the echoing nullity of Harris that we tend to look at the result as something Trump did, rather than something the Democrats did. While I supported Trump and am delighted with the electoral outcome, I think it’s probably true that the Democrats, that the progressive movement, has simply pushed normal Americans too far in too many ways, and it would have required a far smoother and better liar than Harris — someone on the caliber of a Clinton or Obama — to pull the wool over the voters’ eyes one more time.

    Trump is a tireless campaigner and his patter appeals to a lot of people, even while many of us find it frustrating. I don’t want to minimize his skills. But the woke left is perversely radical, and Harris is a dimwitted woman utterly devoid of charisma and completely unable to deceive the electorate into believing that she is not a creature of that woke left.

    I think America is finally unwilling to be further bullied by elitist clowns.

    You mean Bill Clinton, right?

    LOL! Bill was a better liar. Hillary was just a liar.

    Bill was a charming liar. 

    Trump is an entertaining liar. 

    • #18
  19. Freeven Member
    Freeven
    @Freeven

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    The most important issue to women is killing their babies, and this is particularly true of young women.

    This means that they are a remarkably evil group of people, on the whole.

    You and I probably have a different idea of what it means to say a person is “evil.” I think intent matters, and I also think that a great many of these young women who vote with abortion as an important issue aren’t intentionally defending the killing of babies. Rather, they are intending to defend the right to terminate a pregnancy in its early stages — in the first few weeks, before the word “baby” seems like the appropriate term for the developing fetus.

    I think a simple majority of Americans probably think that way, and, speaking only for myself, that doesn’t meet my own definition of “evil.”

    I don’t disagree, but I’m curious about how you would map this thinking onto slavery in the US. Evil? Would your answer change if the slave owner believed blacks were not sub-human?

    • #19
  20. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Freeven (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    The most important issue to women is killing their babies, and this is particularly true of young women.

    This means that they are a remarkably evil group of people, on the whole.

    You and I probably have a different idea of what it means to say a person is “evil.” I think intent matters, and I also think that a great many of these young women who vote with abortion as an important issue aren’t intentionally defending the killing of babies. Rather, they are intending to defend the right to terminate a pregnancy in its early stages — in the first few weeks, before the word “baby” seems like the appropriate term for the developing fetus.

    I think a simple majority of Americans probably think that way, and, speaking only for myself, that doesn’t meet my own definition of “evil.”

    I don’t disagree, but I’m curious about how you would map this thinking onto slavery in the US. Evil? Would your answer change if the slave owner believed blacks were not sub-human?

    The parallel question as regards slavery, and my response to it, would be this:

    Were slave owners necessarily “evil” people?

    I would answer in the negative. I can easily imagine that there were people who were brought up believing, taking for granted, that the ownership of slaves was natural and appropriate, something justified by the respective natures of the slave owner and the slave. I wouldn’t consider such people to be evil simply by virtue (if I may use that word) of their views regarding the ownership of slaves. Of course, they may earn the title for other reasons, for cruelty, treachery, etc.

    Certainly an argument could be made that the concept of slavery is itself evil. I’d argue that, even if one made that assertion, one might still argue that those unaware of the evilness of slavery weren’t necessarily evil people for practicing it.

    • #20
  21. TBA, sometimes known as 'Teebs'. Coolidge
    TBA, sometimes known as 'Teebs'.
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Freeven (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    The most important issue to women is killing their babies, and this is particularly true of young women.

    This means that they are a remarkably evil group of people, on the whole.

    You and I probably have a different idea of what it means to say a person is “evil.” I think intent matters, and I also think that a great many of these young women who vote with abortion as an important issue aren’t intentionally defending the killing of babies. Rather, they are intending to defend the right to terminate a pregnancy in its early stages — in the first few weeks, before the word “baby” seems like the appropriate term for the developing fetus.

    I think a simple majority of Americans probably think that way, and, speaking only for myself, that doesn’t meet my own definition of “evil.”

    I don’t disagree, but I’m curious about how you would map this thinking onto slavery in the US. Evil? Would your answer change if the slave owner believed blacks were not sub-human?

    The parallel question as regards slavery, and my response to it, would be this:

    Were slave owners necessarily “evil” people?

    I would answer in the negative. I can easily imagine that there were people who were brought up believing, taking for granted, that the ownership of slaves was natural and appropriate, something justified by the respective natures of the slave owner and the slave. I wouldn’t consider such people to be evil simply by virtue (if I may use that word) of their views regarding the ownership of slaves. Of course, they may earn the title for other reasons, for cruelty, treachery, etc.

    Certainly an argument could be made that the concept of slavery is itself evil. I’d argue that, even if one made that assertion, one might still argue that those unaware of the evilness of slavery weren’t necessarily evil people for practicing it.

    And indeed there were plenty of slave owners who were evil in their treatment of slaves, going above and beyond in going low and vicious. 

    • #21
  22. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    TBA, sometimes known as 'Teebs… (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Freeven (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    The most important issue to women is killing their babies, and this is particularly true of young women.

    This means that they are a remarkably evil group of people, on the whole.

    You and I probably have a different idea of what it means to say a person is “evil.” I think intent matters, and I also think that a great many of these young women who vote with abortion as an important issue aren’t intentionally defending the killing of babies. Rather, they are intending to defend the right to terminate a pregnancy in its early stages — in the first few weeks, before the word “baby” seems like the appropriate term for the developing fetus.

    I think a simple majority of Americans probably think that way, and, speaking only for myself, that doesn’t meet my own definition of “evil.”

    I don’t disagree, but I’m curious about how you would map this thinking onto slavery in the US. Evil? Would your answer change if the slave owner believed blacks were not sub-human?

    The parallel question as regards slavery, and my response to it, would be this:

    Were slave owners necessarily “evil” people?

    I would answer in the negative. I can easily imagine that there were people who were brought up believing, taking for granted, that the ownership of slaves was natural and appropriate, something justified by the respective natures of the slave owner and the slave. I wouldn’t consider such people to be evil simply by virtue (if I may use that word) of their views regarding the ownership of slaves. Of course, they may earn the title for other reasons, for cruelty, treachery, etc.

    Certainly an argument could be made that the concept of slavery is itself evil. I’d argue that, even if one made that assertion, one might still argue that those unaware of the evilness of slavery weren’t necessarily evil people for practicing it.

    And indeed there were plenty of slave owners who were evil in their treatment of slaves, going above and beyond in going low and vicious.

    Including black slave owners.  And let’s not forget that the slaves were sold into slavery to start with by their black “brothers” in Africa.

    • #22
  23. Steve Fast Member
    Steve Fast
    @SteveFast

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Were slave owners necessarily “evil” people?

    Are we talking about white slave owners? Then the question answers itself.

    • #23
  24. Michael Minnott Member
    Michael Minnott
    @MichaelMinnott

    GrannyDude (View Comment):

    Male support for abortion exceeds female support for it. And, of course, the RTL movement has plenty of women, as leaders and as rank-and-file.

    Your statement about male support for abortion is not true.  Although the numbers are close, opposition to abortion is slightly higher among men, while support is slightly higher among women.  Per the Pew Research Center:

    Chart shows Younger Americans are more likely than older adults to say abortion should be legal in all or most cases

    • #24
  25. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    It is a testimony to the echoing nullity of Harris that we tend to look at the result as something Trump did, rather than something the Democrats did. While I supported Trump and am delighted with the electoral outcome, I think it’s probably true that the Democrats, that the progressive movement, has simply pushed normal Americans too far in too many ways, and it would have required a far smoother and better liar than Harris — someone on the caliber of a Clinton or Obama — to pull the wool over the voters’ eyes one more time.

    Trump is a tireless campaigner and his patter appeals to a lot of people, even while many of us find it frustrating. I don’t want to minimize his skills. But the woke left is perversely radical, and Harris is a dimwitted woman utterly devoid of charisma and completely unable to deceive the electorate into believing that she is not a creature of that woke left.

    I think America is finally unwilling to be further bullied by elitist clowns.

    Like some tectonic pressure buildup, years of being told to shut up about men in women’s sports and bathrooms, green energy fiascos, destruction of education in favor of idiot woke indoctrination,  disastrous fiscal policies, crime, the unscientific fascism of COVID mandates, etc. the energy was there.  But I am not sure that a Bush, Romney or McCain could have tapped into it.

    • #25
  26. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Were slave owners necessarily “evil” people?

    Are we talking about white slave owners? Then the question answers itself.

    Weren’t there very fine people on both sides?

    • #26
  27. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Old Bathos (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    It is a testimony to the echoing nullity of Harris that we tend to look at the result as something Trump did, rather than something the Democrats did. While I supported Trump and am delighted with the electoral outcome, I think it’s probably true that the Democrats, that the progressive movement, has simply pushed normal Americans too far in too many ways, and it would have required a far smoother and better liar than Harris — someone on the caliber of a Clinton or Obama — to pull the wool over the voters’ eyes one more time.

    Trump is a tireless campaigner and his patter appeals to a lot of people, even while many of us find it frustrating. I don’t want to minimize his skills. But the woke left is perversely radical, and Harris is a dimwitted woman utterly devoid of charisma and completely unable to deceive the electorate into believing that she is not a creature of that woke left.

    I think America is finally unwilling to be further bullied by elitist clowns.

    Like some tectonic pressure buildup, years of being told to shut up about men in women’s sports and bathrooms, green energy fiascos, destruction of education in favor of idiot woke indoctrination, disastrous fiscal policies, crime, the unscientific fascism of COVID mandates, etc. the energy was there. But I am not sure that a Bush, Romney or McCain could have tapped into it.

    Nor could a Trump46, I suspect. We needed the departure and the return.

    It didn’t hurt (electorally speaking) that Biden/Harris was sold as a “return to normalcy,” and then became (and continues to be) an extraordinarily abnormal administration followed by a bizarre campaign for (re-)election. Talk about bait and switch: all those voters who might actually have voted for Biden hoping for that return to normalcy got the opposite of what they were promised.

    It takes a lot to make Trump47 seem like the safe play, but they did it.

    • #27
  28. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Old Bathos (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Were slave owners necessarily “evil” people?

    Are we talking about white slave owners? Then the question answers itself.

    Weren’t there very fine people on both sides?

    Right? I was reluctant to respond to the question at all, given the landmines. But I lean toward positivism and, well, lack the self-control required to keep my mouth shut.

    • #28
  29. Doctor Robert Member
    Doctor Robert
    @DoctorRobert

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Harris is a dimwitted woman utterly devoid of charisma and completely unable to deceive the electorate into believing that she is not a creature of that woke left.

    A nicely turned phrase, Henry.

    • #29
  30. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    GrannyDude (View Comment):

    . . .

    Male support for abortion exceeds female support for it. And, of course, the RTL movement has plenty of women, as leaders and as rank-and-file.

    Comment #24 rebutted this factually, though the latest Gallup data is more stark (here).  As of 2024,  per Gallup, American women are +30% in favor of abortion, 63%-33%.  Men are slightly opposed to abortion overall, by 4%, 49%-45%.

    The Gallup link includes historical results since 1995, which are interesting.  Male and female views were pretty close until 2019.  In 2019, men favored abortion by 2% (48%-46%), while women opposed abortion by 8% (51%-43%), though this result for women was a bit anomalous.  Since 2019, women became far more strongly in favor of abortion.

    This makes sense to me, as Roe was overturned in 2020.  Before that, the issue was less urgent — frankly, it allowed women to pose as anti-abortion, because their opinions didn’t actually matter.  Now that it matters, women have migrated to support abortion almost 2-1, at least according to this particular Gallup poll.

    Is there data to support this assertion: “This seems to be what occurs, just about universally, when women get political power. They adopt laws making sure that they can kill their babies?” I’m not dismissing it, just wondering if this is observable other than in the last, say, fifty years? It is my understanding that both the original suffragette feminists and the second wave feminists weren’t particularly pro-abortion and many, perhaps most, were against it.

    I haven’t done a serious empirical study, and don’t know of any.  This is supported by the Gallup data cited above, though I have to confess that I wasn’t aware of this particular information when I made my comment yesterday.

    My general impression is that looking at a map demonstrates my theory.  Virtually every so-called “democratic” country allows abortion.  The exceptions are generally not “democratic” or, in some cases, haven’t been for long.  The countries outlawing abortion are generally in Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East.

    Ireland is a demonstration of the long-term slide, in my view.  Ireland used to be quite traditionally Catholic and opposed to abortion, but I think that so-called “democracy” undermines such traditionalism.  As a result, even Ireland amended its constitution to “enshrine” abortion.

    “Enshrine.”

    That’s the word that I’ve seen used, since the election this week, to describe the passage of state referenda creating “abortion rights.”  This occurred in my home state of Arizona, alas, by a very wide margin (around 61%-39% so far).

    Heck, even eugenicist Margaret Sanger disapproved of abortion.

    I don’t know about this.  I found an article (here) arguing that Sanger supported both abortion and infanticide, though I don’t know the author and couldn’t say whether it is accurate.  A Planned Parenthood fact sheet about Sanger (here) says (on p. 4, bottom right): “Margaret Sanger, who passionately believed in a woman’s right to control her body, never ‘promoted’ abortion because it was illegal and dangerous throughout her lifetime. She
    urged women to use contraceptives so that they would not be at risk for the dangers of illegal, backalley abortion.”

    As an aside, soft eugenics is a reasonable proposition, in my view.  Being pro-abortion is murderously evil, in my opinion.  Thinking that, say, the mentally retarded ought not to have children seems quite sensible.

    But there’s no question that American progressive women have allowed themselves to be persuaded that abortion matters more than anything else. You might have noticed that the only policy Kamala directly referenced in her delayed concession speech was the right of a woman to “make her own decisions about her body,” a euphamism for abortion (and not, obviously, COVID shots or other government-required intrusions).

    Sadly, it’s not just “progressive” women, unless you adopt a tautological definition of pro-abortion women being “progressive.”  It’s 63% of American women, according to Gallup, and among young women, 39% of them said that it was the most important issue (in the poll linked in my prior comment). 

    I do realize that some women oppose abortion.  Not very many, sadly.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.