The analysis presented by Third Way, The Collective PAC and Latino Victory is the most extensive of last year’s elections
ELECTIONS. Tabulators review ballots at the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office in Phoenix, Arizona, on November 2. | Photo: Efe.
The organizations Third Way, The Collective PAC and Latino Victory Fund reported this Monday, June 7, the results of a report on the 2020 elections, in races of the House of Representatives and the Senate, in which they reflect the challenges and opportunities of the Democrats.
In the study, conducted by Lynda Tran and Marlon Marshall, nearly 150 interviews were conducted, as well as in-depth analysis of information from voter polls and archives, television and digital media commercials, and other key aspects of campaign campaigns. 2020.
During the process, the reporting partner organizations consulted with members of Congress and staff from the New Democrat Coalition, Congressional Black Caucus, Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus; as well as staff from the NewDem Action Fund, CBC PAC, CHC BOLD PAC and ASPIRE PAC and countless others with in-depth knowledge of how election campaigns were handled.
Third Way Executive Vice President Matt Bennett said the report was not a classic “post-mortem,” because Democrats won the White House and maintained a majority in both houses of Congress.
Bennett said the purpose was to answer the most important question for Democrats after 2020: Given the great victory in the presidential race, why did the Democrats in the House and Senate fail to do as well as anticipated? .
The study offers a data analysis on what worked for Democrats and the obstacles they encountered. The team that led the analysis produced an extensive report. This is a summary of the main results:
-People of color are voters who need to be convinced: Despite a historic number of votes, even where African American voters were key in wins for Democrats in 2020, the data shows a drop in support for the party compared to previous election cycles. Equally worrisome is the decline among Latino voters and AAPI, which caused losses in key races.
-The Republicans’ attempts to brand the Democrats as “radicals” worked, even with key voters of color: In many districts where “defund the police” or “socialism” was an ongoing alert from Republicans, there was an increase in support from African American, Asian and Pacific Islander voters.
-The polls were a big problem, even after the 2016 adjustments: the polls failed to reach the right people, especially white voters with no college education; and the changes in the methodology that were made after 2016 led to an overly optimistic outlook. The party fought in contests that were not really at stake.
-COVID-19 affected everything: The pandemic changed outreach to voters and conversations about health care, and many Democrats missed an opportunity to speak about the need to keep COVID-19 under control through an economic perspective as the election cycle progressed.
-Organization throughout the year and collaboration between the party worked: But contests that did not have the benefit of long-term infrastructure investments, such as voter registration, in-person and ongoing organizing, and local outreach, had underperformed.
-Democratic expectations for 2020 were too high: Despite the fact that more Americans turned out to vote than in any other election in 120 years, this extraordinary turnout and enthusiasm for the presidential election helped Republicans in some places and Democrats in others, contrary to common assumptions that voters new ones are mainly progressive.
Press release information.