Connect with us

Published

on

The most succinct explanation for how Republicans expect Donald Trump to win in November may have come from, of all people, the firebrand Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida.

What I can tell you, Gaetz said earlier this year, is for every Karen we lose, theres a Julio and Jamal ready to sign up for the MAGA movement.

What Gaetz is saying, in his somewhat stereotypical racial shorthand, is that even if Trump alienates a growing number of well-educated white women (Karen), he can overcome those losses by attracting more blue-collar, nonwhite men (Julio and Jamal).

Even most Democrats agree that Trump appears positioned to gain ground this year among Black and Latino men without a college degreegroups that already moved in his direction from 2016 to 2020, according to studies of the vote such as the analysis of the results released by Catalist, a Democratic voter-targeting firm. And even many Republicans acknowledge that Trump in 2024 could face an even bigger deficit among college-educated white women, who already voted against him in larger numbers in 2020 than in 2016, according to those same studies.

Read: Americans really dont like Trumps health-care plans

Those offsetting movements among white women with a college degree and nonwhite men without one point toward the shifting demographic dynamics that could settle the rematch between Trump and President Joe Biden.

The differences in political allegiance across racial groups has long been one of the central divides in American elections, and it will remain crucial in 2024. But the differences within each racial group along the lines of education and gender may prove at least as important this year.

For Trump, the most likely path to victory in 2024 is maximizing his support among voters without a college degree, especially men, in every racial group. Victory for Biden will likely require him to maximize his backing among voters with a four-year degree or more, especially women, in each racial group.

Early polling about the 2024 presidential race mostly shows a continuation of the complex interplay between race, education, and gender that has reshaped the two parties coalitions over the past generation.

Since the 1980s, the consistent trend among white voters is that Democrats have run better among men than women, and better among those with at least a four-year college degree than those without one. These effects are reinforcing: Democrats typically perform best among white women with a degree and worst among men without one. The men with a degree, and the women without one, are the most closely contested groups among white voters, though those women usually lean red and those men have tilted more toward Democrats in the Trump era.

Traditionally, minority voters did not divide as much along these axes of gender and education. But more of these cross pressures have surfaced since Trumps emergence as the GOPs dominant figure. In 2016, Hillary Clinton drew much less support among Latino men than among Latinas, according to the analysis by Catalist. In 2020, Trump improved substantially among Latino men and Latina women, but this time his gains were greatest among those without degrees. Those cumulative changes moved Latinos closer to the pattern familiar among white voters: Though Biden carried 67 percent of Latina voters with a college degree, he won only 56 percent of Latino men without one, Catalist found.

Black voters didnt differ much along educational lines in either Trump campaign, but those contests opened a consistent gender gap: Each time, Trump ran a few points better among Black men than among Black women, according to the Catalist results.

All of these movements have stirred Republican hopes that they are now poised to advance in minority communities among the same groups where they have gained the most over the past generation among white peoplevoters without a college degree, especially men. A wide array of national polls, as well as surveys in the swing states, have consistently shown Trump now attracting about 20 percent support among Black voters, and as much as 45 percent among Latinos. Thats well above his 2020 showing with both groups and a better performance than any GOP presidential nominee since the civil-rights era.

Read: Trump would break the budget

People will ask you: Why is it? Its because of the issues these people care about. Its crime, its affordability, and its also immigration, Jim McLaughlin, a pollster for Trump, told me.

Bidens support is drooping in these surveys among nonwhite voters of almost every description. But detailed results from the most recent New York Times/Siena College poll show that, among minority voters, Biden now faces the greatest vulnerability with the same group that is toughest for him among white people: men without a college degree. That survey, released early in March, found Trump, stunningly, running even with Biden among those blue-collar nonwhite men, according to the results provided by Don Levy, the director of the Siena Research Institute, which conducts the poll.

In that same poll, only one in seven nonwhite men without a degree said that Bidens policies had helped them personally, while more than one in three said his policies had hurt them. For Trump, the proportions were reversed: More than one in three of those men said his policies had helped them, while only about one in seven said they had been hurt by his agenda.

Like many Democratic strategists, the longtime party consultant Chuck Rocha believes that Biden risks losing ground among blue-collar, nonwhite men, especially those who are younger to early middle age. Ive never seen more of a disconnect when I do focus groups of people who dont give him credit for any of that shit hes done, Rocha told me. He gets no credit with nobody.

If Biden can hold his losses among nonwhite voters primarily to men without a college degree, Democrats would likely breathe a sigh of relief. Thats because those men cast less than 9 percent of all votes in 2020, according to calculations from census data by William Frey, a demographer at Brookings Metro, shared exclusively with The Atlantic. Partly because their turnout is so low, they are not a rapidly growing group in the electorate: Frey projects that only about 500,000 more of those noncollege, nonwhite men will vote in 2024 than 2020.

Biden will face much greater risk if Trump can extend his gains to other segments of the nonwhite community. Polls now suggest thats possible.

Looking through the lenses of gender and education, the largest group of nonwhite voters are women without a college degree. They cast more than 10 percent of all votes in 2020, according to Freys calculations (although he expects that they will add only a modest 225,000 more voters in 2024).

These blue-collar women of color are not an intrinsically easy audience for Republicans. Nearly three-fifths of them agreed that the Republican Party has been taken over by racists, and a comparable number supported legal abortion in all or most circumstances, according to polling provided by the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI). In surveys by the Pew Research Center, four-fifths of non-college-educated Black women said they had an unfavorable view of Trump, as did two-thirds of Latina women without a degree.

Yet economic discontent has left a clear opening for Trump. In last months New York Times/Siena survey, fewer than one in 10 of these women said Bidens policies had helped them personally; more than three times as many said they had benefited from Trumps policies.

College-educated nonwhite men are another obvious target for Trump, though they are a relatively small group. These men are highly liberal on social issues. But they also express substantial economic discontent: More of them say that they personally benefited from Trumps policies rather than Bidens.

Among voters of color, women with a college degree provide Biden his best chance to improve on his 2020 support. Those women cast about 6 percent of all votes in 2020, Frey calculates, but heexpects they will add more voters in 2024 than will any other segment of the minority community.

In PRRIs polling, college-educated women consistently take the most liberal positions of any minority group: Nearly three-fourths of them, for instance, say abortion should be legal in all or most circumstances. High percentages of both Black and Latina college-educated women express negative views about Trump in Pews polling. And in contrast to the other minority groups, significantly more nonwhite women with a college degree said in the New York Times/Siena poll that they had been helped rather than hurt by Bidens policies, while slightly more of them said the opposite about Trump.

White women with a college degree may be even more important as an offset for Biden if he loses ground among nonwhite men, as polls now suggest he will. These well-educated white women cast more than 16 percent of all votes in 2020, and with women now composing three-fifths of all college graduates, Frey projects that 1.1 million more of them will vote in 2024 than in 2020. These women tilt strongly left on most social issues and were far more likely than any of the other groups in the New York Times/Siena poll to say that Trumps policies had hurt them personally.

McLaughlin said Trump has an opportunity to improve among these women compared with 2020 because they are concerned about the same issues moving men toward Trump, particularly crime and immigration. But Democrats believe these womens strong support for abortion rights should allow Biden to expand his already substantial margin among them.

Theres evidence to justify those hopes. The 2022 midterm election was the first campaign after the Supreme Courts Dobbs decision rescinding the constitutional right to abortion. In those races, Democratic gubernatorial candidates supporting abortion rights ran even better than Biden did in 2020 among these college-educated white women in the key swing states of Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, according to exit polls. Biden could do better among college white women and get more of them out to vote, the Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, who worked for Bidens 2020 campaign, told me. Hes not tapped out in the number of women [he can win] on the abortion issue.

Mike Madrid, a GOP strategist who has become a prominent Trump opponent in the party, told me Trump faces a conundrum as he tries to hold down his losses with these white women while securing more support among nonwhite men. Madrid said that the only bulwark Trump has against white college-educated women deserting him over abortion is to heighten their fears about illegal immigration.

But pressing those buttons with inflammatory language, and proposals such as mass deportation of undocumented migrants, risks endangering his gains among Latinos, said Madrid, the author of the upcoming book The Latino Century. Madrid said that Biden may not rebound to the margins Democrats enjoyed among Latinos a decade ago, but that once more of them become aware of Trumps proposals on immigration, the former presidents high poll numbers with the group are going to come back down to Earth.

Robert P. Jones, the president of the PRRI, told me that Trump so far has had the luxury of running two parallel campaigns. All of his belligerent proposals and dehumanizing language about immigrants are reaching his base of socially conservative white voters through conservative media, while little is getting through to nonwhite voters, who are mostly less attuned to the election. Like Madrid, Jones believes that more nonwhite voters will recoil from Trumps harshest policies and words when they learn more about them. The question is whether he is going to be able to keep up this two-track strategy, Jones said.

Demographic change will provide another thumb on the scale for Biden. White voters without a college degree, now the GOPs best group, have declined about two percentage points as a share of voters in each presidential election for decades, and Frey expects that pattern to continue in 2024. In all, Frey predicts that the number of college-educated voters of all races will increase by about 4 million this year compared with 2020, while the number of noncollege voters will decline by about a million. If Frey is right, the share of college-educated voters of all races in the 2024 electorate will increase by about two percentage points from 2020, while voters of color will increase their share by about one percentage point.

These small changes in the electorates composition should marginally boost Biden. But they are not enough to overcome the level of defection polls show him now facing among nonwhite voters. Democratic strategists such as Rocha working in minority communities believe that Biden can claw back some of that support, particularly among women, by focusing more attention on abortion and Trumps racially confrontational policies and language. Yet these cultural and race-related issues may work better for Biden with college-educated white voters, who consistently express much less concern in polls about their immediate economic situation than other Americans do.

Matt Morrison, the executive director of Working America, a group that organizes working-class voters who are not in unions, told me that the key for Biden with blue-collar voters of color will be to make them more aware of policies he has pursued to help them make ends meet, such as his programs to reduce prescription-drug costs. The nonwhite voters leaning toward Trump, Morrison noted, are not nearly as attracted to his policies and persona as most working-class white voters are. I am looking at who Biden has lost support from, and they are not MAGA Republicans, Morrison told me. They are people who have not gotten a reason to vote for the president.

If Biden cant effectively communicate such a reason to more nonwhite voters, the 2024 election could produce a historic irony. After a political career in which Trump has relentlessly stoked white racial grievances, his ability to fracture the nonwhite community along lines of gender and education could be the decisive factor that propels him to a second term.

Continue Reading

Sports

How the Rangers rallied their way to the Eastern Conference finals — and which key trends will continue

Published

on

By

How the Rangers rallied their way to the Eastern Conference finals -- and which key trends will continue

The New York Rangers were as dramatic as a Broadway play until the end of Round 2.

The Blueshirts trailed early in Game 6 of their series against the Carolina Hurricanes, and appeared in danger of not only allowing the Hurricanes to stay alive, but win the entire thing by sending things back to New York for Game 7.

The third period was all Rangers, though. A hat trick from Chris Kreider in that frame helped New York overcome multiple deficits and punch their ticket to the Eastern Conference finals with a 5-3 win.

Here’s a look at the keys to their run so far, and a look ahead at how they match up against their two potential opponents.

Rallying Rangers

There’s no arguing that New York had its worst outing of the postseason in Game 5 against Carolina. The Rangers were comparatively lifeless from the start — and still nearly completed a comeback to send the Hurricanes home.

New York responded well after losses in the regular season, and if Game 5 was a blip in that respect (as was losing at all for New York in the postseason, let alone twice in a row), Game 6 is where the Rangers showed why they were Presidents’ Trophy winners. Even after falling behind 3-1, they staged an epic third period rally to seal the deal on opposing ice.

Instead of letting Carolina continue to fester and create doubt about how good a lineup New York actually has, the Rangers tapped back into their strengths (i.e., scoring more than one goal like they did in Game 5) and channeling their top-tier pedigree in enemy territory. Perhaps it wasn’t the cleanest of series, like the Rangers’ first-round sweep, but in the end New York finished the job.


Best of the bunch

It’s cliché for a reason: If your top skaters aren’t performing in the playoffs, it’s tough to find success (just ask the Toronto Maple Leafs).

Consider New York’s run last season, when Artemi Panarin produced just two assists in seven games. This time around? Panarin had four goals and nine points — through seven games. Vincent Trocheck has been a revelation in the postseason, with five goals and 12 points, Mika Zibanejad has tossed in 13 points and Alexis Lafreniere is playing some of his best hockey to date, with four goals and 10 points.

While depth is always an asset in the postseason, it almost always has to be in tandem with a team’s high-end talent steering the ship. That’s what’s happening for the Rangers. When all their stars are aligned, it’s hard to imagine slowing this group down.


Stealing with Shesterkin

The Rangers can give an opponent’s goaltender fits when their high-flying forwards get in a flow. New York is fortunate its netminder is in top-top shape, though, because for all the Rangers’ offensive prowess, they allow a shocking number of scoring chances against.

Igor Shesterkin has been up to the task of keeping New York from hurting itself (too much) defensively. Not only are the Rangers giving up the most shots on goal in the postseason (32.9 per game), Shesterkin also faced the most high-danger shots (63) and completed the second-most high-danger saves (52).

Carolina in particular peppered Shesterkin with an onslaught of quality opportunities. The cool, calm, collected version of Shesterkin (circa, say, winning the Vezina Trophy in 2022) has been on full display throughout the playoffs (with a .924 save percentage and 2.33 goals-against average to prove it). There’s no question he’s an integral piece in the Rangers’ dominance and will continue to be so in the series ahead.

play

0:20

‘IGOR’ chant rings out after another clutch Shesterkin save

Rangers fans go wild after Igor Shesterkin shuts down Jake Guentzel’s breakaway goal attempt.


Super special teams

It’s a classic case of pick your poison, because the Rangers can beat a team in multiple ways.

Their 5-on-5 numbers are, thanks to that noted core of offensive threats, strong this postseason. And then there’s the power play, which is third best in the playoff field (33.3%) and packs a powerful punch (with 10 goals through nine games).

New York’s penalty kill is even more effective, sitting second best overall at 91.2%, and it was a backbreaker for the Hurricanes to try to get through (Carolina started the series going 0-for-15 on the man advantage). And short-handed goals? New York leads the playoff field with four.

Thanks to that strong play in all situations, the Rangers present a formidable challenge to whomever lines up against them next.


How the Rangers match up with the Florida Panthers

At its best (and most entertaining), a New York-Florida series would just be nonstop goal-scoring. And if any two teams have the offensive firepower to make that vision a reality, it’s the Rangers and Panthers.

Florida and New York are averaging some of the best scoring totals in the playoff field (with 3.70 and 3.33 goals per game, respectively). They can be superb on special teams with two excellent power plays (30.3% and 23.7%) duking it out versus difference-making penalty kills (91.9% and 85.3%), and notably, the Panthers are second in shots on net (33.5) to spice things up even further with their competition.

The Rangers’ stars have come out in the postseason, and so have the Panthers’. Matthew Tkachuk (four goals and 13 points in the postseason), Aleksander Barkov (five goals and 13 points), and Carter Verhaeghe (six goals and 10 points) would be going stride-for-stride with the Rangers’ elite. And while teams don’t necessarily want to be into a track meet at any point in their season — particularly when stakes are highest — it might be inevitable when gifted scorers are rolling out on nearly every line.

New York’s defensive performance aligns with Florida’s, too. The Rangers have allowed 2.56 goals against per game in the postseason, compared to 2.60 by the Panthers — but Florida holds a considerable edge in limiting shots (giving up 24.2 per game versus 32.1). So, New York would have to tighten up there lest the Panthers take advantage to run wild. But even then, the back-and-forth that could come out of this series highlights what New York does well, and Florida has potential to offer up more chances than the Bruins might.

The Rangers’ other big boost is in the crease. Sergei Bobrovsky‘s numbers (.892 SV%, 2.62 GAA) have been solid, and he’s giving Florida timely saves. Shesterkin, though, has been exceptional for much of the postseason (.924 SV%, 2.33 GAA) despite New York’s leakier back end, and he has factored squarely into making New York appear at its most dominant. Naturally, we assume that will offer the Rangers a serious bump on the goaltending side (something they may not have in a series vs. Boston, where Jeremy Swayman has been locked in throughout the playoffs).

New York’s bread and butter has been its attack up front plus excellent netminding, and a series against Florida gives them the opportunity to lean on both — and punch their ticket back to a Cup Final.


How the Rangers match up with the Boston Bruins

This is the Original Six matchup both cities have longed to see on the big stage.

The last postseason meeting between these clubs was in 2012-13, a series Boston won in five games. The Rangers know what it takes to top the Bruins this time around, having swept the season series 3-0.

Boston doesn’t have the same showcase of scoring talent as New York does. The Bruins’ depth was an issue in their series against the Panthers, and the Rangers may, arguably, have more offensive threats in their lineup for Boston to heed. That would likely be the biggest question mark heading into this particular conference finals matchup: Can the Bruins go toe-to-toe with the Rangers up front?

Boston is relying on younger skaters than New York as well. While the Rangers are thick with experience, the Bruins require vital contributions from the likes of John Beecher (22 years old) and Mason Lohrei (23) to give them quality minutes in the postseason. The Bruins also average nearly one goal less per game than the Rangers (2.50 vs. 3.33).

It’s Boston’s goaltending that has been its backbone in the postseason. And Swayman might be the only netminder who can challenge Shesterkin when he’s in top form. The Bruins’ defense has allowed the third-most shots against (32.5 per game) while averaging the fourth fewest goals against (2.42 per game). The Rangers are in the same boat, giving up the fourth most shots (32.1) and fifth fewest goals (2.56). Frankly, this series’ winner would be the one not getting “goalied.”

The Rangers have a special teams advantage against the Bruins with the better penalty kill (91.9% vs. 81.8%) and power play (30.3% vs. 22.6%). But Boston’s kill stepped up big against Florida, and there may be momentum to carry on into another series, too.

Boston has shown resilience in the postseason by not blowing a 3-1 lead in the first round, and if the Bruins make it past Florida it will be by overcoming a 3-1 deficit. The Rangers would have to be prepared for Boston’s confidence to be sky-high going into a conference finals matchup that not too long ago likely looked — and felt — like a pipe dream.

Continue Reading

Sports

Kreider’s hat trick in 3rd lifts Rangers to East final

Published

on

By

Kreider's hat trick in 3rd lifts Rangers to East final

RALEIGH, N.C. — Chris Kreider had a third-period hat trick to help the New York Rangers erase a two-goal deficit and beat the Carolina Hurricanes 5-3 in Game 6 on Thursday night to advance to the Eastern Conference final.

Kreider single-handedly erased the Hurricanes’ 3-1 lead entering the final period. The go-ahead score came when he got position on Jalen Chatfield at the top of the crease and tipped in Ryan Lindgren‘s pass to make it 4-3 at the 15:41 mark.

That finally allowed the Presidents’ Trophy-winning Rangers to put away the Hurricanes, who had won two straight after falling into a 3-0 hole in the best-of-seven series. The Hurricanes appeared on the verge of forcing a Game 7 for a pressure-packed finale but couldn’t contain Kreider and the Rangers’ surge in the final 14 minutes.

Barclay Goodrow finished this one off by getting to a loose puck near the boards and scoring a long empty-net goal in the final minute, sending Goodrow to the nearby Rangers bench to be mobbed by teammates.

That sent the Rangers on to the Eastern Conference final to face the Boston-Florida winner, with the Panthers leading that series 3-2.

Kreider’s first goal came when he cleaned up a stop by Frederik Andersen on Mika Zibanejad at the 6:43 mark to make it 3-2. He followed by tipping in a shot by Artemi Panarin to tie it at the 11:54 mark.

Igor Shesterkin hung in after a pressured first two periods, finishing with 33 saves and coming up with a big stop on Jordan Staal near the crease and another tying chance from Andrei Svechnikov off a faceoff win in the third period.

Vincent Trocheck also scored off a deflection in the second period for New York.

Martin Necas, Seth Jarvis and Sebastian Aho scored for Carolina, while Andersen finished with 19 saves.

The Hurricanes also missed on multiple late chances to increase their lead, with Jordan Martinook — who had a highlight-reel sliding effort to knock away a loose puck from the goal line midway through the second period — and Jake Guentzel each pinging the metal past Shesterkin to come up empty.

There was also a big opportunity in the third when two Rangers collided and fell to the ice in their own end, leaving top Carolina center Aho with a 1-on-1 chance on Shesterkin. But as Aho skated in from the left circle, he went wide right of the net as he tried to move to his backhand.

Those missed chances added up to a brutal exit for the Hurricanes, a team that was in the playoffs for the sixth time in as many seasons under Rod Brind’Amour and has been open about the goal of breaking through to win the Stanley Cup.

Carolina finished three points behind the Rangers for the Presidents’ Trophy awarded to the top team in the regular-season standings, and entered the NHL playoffs as the favorite to win the Stanley Cup. But the Rangers won the first three games by one-goal margins — two coming in overtime — to threaten an unexpectedly quick resolution.

Carolina successfully beat back its power-play struggles for the Game 4 winner to stay alive, then rallied from a 1-0 deficit with four straight third-period goals to win Game 5 in Madison Square Garden and bring the series back to Raleigh.

But days later, the Rangers returned the favor with four straight of their own in the third, leaving a boisterous Hurricanes crowd in stunned disbelief.

Continue Reading

Environment

$39,199 Bobcat zero turn electric lawnmower is ready for summer

Published

on

By

,199 Bobcat zero turn electric lawnmower is ready for summer

Bobcat revealed a new, commercialized version of its battery-powered ZT6000e zero-turn electric lawnmower that promises up to eight hours of continuous runtime.

The company says its new machine can deliver up to eight hours of continuous runtime on a single charge, the ZT6000e produces zero “tailpipe” emissions while in use, and is significantly quieter than the ICE-powered competition. Perfect, in other words, for use in municipalities with strict noise regulations.

“The ZT6000e is designed for both lawn care professionals and other businesses that want to create their own professional-grade results in a more sustainable way,” said Daniel Stibral, s grounds maintenance product specialist at Bobcat. “It’s highly maneuverable, efficient, and takes on challenging mowing tasks with precision, ease and the perfect cut.”

The Bobcat ZT6000e packs a 58V, 20.4 kWh battery that can be fully recharged in about 6 hours with a 240-volt “Level 2” connection, or in about 12 hours with a “standard” 120-volt connection. Considering a full charge is enough to mow more than 23 acres, however, there should be very little “range anxiety” involved.

What’s more, Bobcat claims that, apart from routine recharge cycles, the lithium-ion battery requires no maintenance for the life of the machine.

The ZT6000e is built with a heavy-duty, dual-tubed steel frame and is powered by three electric motors to provide precise control over high and low blade speeds and make quick work of any lawn. Pricing starts at $39,199.

Electrek’s Take

Yes, the ZT6000e electric lawmower is more expensive than the 850cc gas-powered version. About 3x more expensive, in fact – but that doesn’t matter.

The fact is that more and more municipalities across the country are effectively banning internal combustion lawn equipment from lawnmowers to edgers to leaf blowers – and the ones that aren’t outright banning small engines are banning them indirectly with increasingly stringent noise regulations. Translation: if you plan on making a living in landscaping, you’re going to need to pony up for an electric mower rather sooner than later.

When you do, Bobcat’s seems like a solid choice.

SOURCES | IMAGES: For Construction Pros; Bobcat.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending