(11-18-2020 10:50 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 08:09 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 07:41 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Just local Republican leaders being obstinate and refusing to accept results which look perfectly legit.

2012 Wayne County - Romney 214K, Obama 595K votes
2016 - Trump 229, Clinton 519
2020 - Trump 264, Biden 587

What looks out of place? Nothing. You really think Detroit would vote big for Trump? Yes, Trump has made inroads there the last 2 election cycles but it's not as if vote totals are out of whack. Trump got 35K more votes from 2016 to 2020, and Biden improved Clinton's total by 68K. That's a lot I suppose but Wayne County has a population of 1.75 million people. We're talking about voting totals that are significantly lower than most other counties in 2020.

Just for comparison, Oakland County is the 2nd largest county in Michigan (about 1.26 million people). In 2016, it was 343 for Clinton and 289 for Trump. In 2020, it was 433 for Biden and 325 for Trump. Way bigger voter increase in the 4 years, and a much, much larger voter turnout percentage. Oakland County might raise a red flag in my eyes, but Wayne County seems well within the expected margins.

I'm curious how many "local Republican" leaders there are since 21 of 22 elected leaders in Wayne County are Democrats from County Executive to County Commission to Sheriff to Clerk, etc. The lone Republican is one commissioner out of 15 county commissioners.

Or go north to Republican run St. Clair County:

2012 - Romney 53.0%, Obama 45.9% (Romney +7.1)
2016 - Trump 62.9%, Clinton 31.5% (Trump +31.4%)
2020 - Trump 64.3%, Biden 34.1% (Trump +30.2)

Or Macomb:

2012- Obama 51.6% Romney 47.6% (Romney -4.0%)
2016 - Trump 53.6%, Clinton 42.1% (Trump +12.5%)
2020 - Trump 53.3%, Biden 45.4% (Trump +7.9)

Trump wasn't doing as well in those counties that have become very Red, so if his margins were falling in his go-to districts (without fraud) it is logical to see that he will also lose ground in bluer counties.

Except polling indicated he did better with minority voters this time around. In fact, polling indicated the only group he did worse with was white suburban women. His margins among white suburban men stayed even. He did substantially better with African American men. So, no—blue areas, especially minority urban districts, actually should have been tighter than in 2016.