Vaguely interesting (Jan 20)

(1)  “What exactly, then, is the ‘right’ story for how Trump won the election? … First, the background conditions were pretty good for Trump. … Second, demographics gave Trump a big advantage in the Electoral College. … Third, voter preferences varied substantially based on news events, and the news cycle ended on a downturn for Clinton.”

(2)  “[B]y getting everyone to think in Econ 101 terms — perfectly competitive well-functioning markets, rational well-informed consumers and so on — free-marketers were able to redefine the terms of the national debate to favor their own interests.”

(3)  That thing you’ve heard about working class whites dying more is not true generally, and complex in its details.

(4)  “[T]he statistical probability of Trump winning over 20% of the Latino vote in New York, as was reported by the Edison exit poll, is virtually zero. The Latino Decisions poll, which relies on random sampling and bilingual interviewers and found that Clinton won New York Latino voters by an 88% to 10% margin over Trump, appears to be much closer to the true outcome of the election.”

(5)  “Trust in institutions has evaporated…. This has been a slow-motion meltdown, an angry delayed recognition of permanent decline in economic and social status by those who have not kept pace with globalization and dramatic technological change.”