You are viewing this post: Rachel Bitecofer Husband Age, And Wikipedia Who Is She Married To? Top 109 Best Answers
Are you looking for an answer to the topic “Rachel Bitecofer Husband Age, And Wikipedia Who Is She Married To“? We answer all your questions at the website Bangkokbikethailandchallenge.com in category: Bangkokbikethailandchallenge.com/digital-marketing. You will find the answer right below.
Keep Reading
Rachel Bitecofer is a well-known American journalist and renowned political scientist. She was interested in journalism from an early age.
Surname
Rachel Bitecofer
Age
35-40
gender
Feminine
Height
5 feet 6 inches
nationality
American
profession
journalist
Married single
single
education
University of Georgia and University of Oregon
@RachelBitecofer
She graduated from the University of Georgia and the University of Oregon. After graduating, Bitecofer eventually took up journalism as a career. Rachel Bitecofer is the author of The Unprecedented 2016 Presential Election. Your work is highly appreciated by the public.
In addition, Bitecofer is also the publisher of The Cycle website. Rachel Bitecofer also serves as a Senior Adviser on the Lincoln Project.
advertisement
10 Facts On Rachel Bitecofer
Rachel Bitecofer was born and raised in America. As of 2020, her age is around 42-43 years. There is no accurate information about her date of birth in any source. Popular journalist Rachel Bitecofer is approximately 5 feet 6 inches tall. Bitecofer worked as a lecturer at Christopher Newport University in 2015. Regarding private life, Bitecofer has not given any information about her husband and her married life. The American-born journalist is fully focused on her career. Rachel Bitecofer speaks about her family and has kept her family’s information away from the media. From now on Bitecofer’s assets will be checked. She has not disclosed her salary and earnings to the media. Rachel Bitecofer holds American citizenship. She was recognized for predicting the outcome of the 2018 mterm elections in the United States. Well-known American political scientist Bitecofer is more popular and active on her Twitter account with more than 121.7k fan followers. Bitecofer completed her Ph.D. in Political Science and International Affairs from the University of Georgia. Back in July 2019, Rachel Bitecofer predicted that then-Present Donald Trump would not win the 2020 election, which turned out to be true.
Meet Kelly Tshibaka Husband, Niki Tshibaka; Age, Net Worth, Wikipedia, Biography, Married Life
Images related to the topicMeet Kelly Tshibaka Husband, Niki Tshibaka; Age, Net Worth, Wikipedia, Biography, Married Life
See some more details on the topic Rachel Bitecofer Husband Age, And Wikipedia Who Is She Married To here:
Rachel Bitecofer Husband Age, And Wikipedia: Who Is She …
Rachel Bitecofer Husband Age, And Wikipedia: Who Is She Married To? … Rachel Bitecofer is a well known American journalist and a renowned political scientist.
Source: 44bars.com
Date Published: 5/17/2021
View: 7228
Rachel Bitecofer – Wikipedia
Rachel Bitecofer (born February 23, 1977) is an American political scientist. Rachel Bitecofer. 2020 Headshot.jpg. Bitecofer in 2020.
Source: en.wikipedia.org
Date Published: 10/4/2022
View: 2804
Rachel Bitecofer Age, Husband, Married, Wikipedia, Bio …
That has made her one of the most intriguing new figures in political forecasting current times have seen. Currently, Bitecofer is a professor …
Source: www.marathi.tv
Date Published: 3/21/2021
View: 1628
Marla Gibbs’s Net Worth, Biography, Career, Awards, Fact and Life …
Marla Gibbs is probably most well-known for her portrayal of the sarcastic ma Florence Johnston on … Rachel Bitecofer Husband Age, Biography And Wiki.
Source: wiki.zgr.net
Date Published: 12/23/2021
View: 3243
Rachel Bitecofer
American political scientist
Rachel Bitecofer (born February 23, 1977)[1][2] is an American political scientist.
Early life and career[edit]
Bitecofer graduated magna cum laude with honors from the University of Oregon, where she received a bachelor’s degree in political science and her Ph.D. in Political Science and International Affairs from the University of Georgia. In 2015, she became an associate professor at Christopher Newport University and associate director of the Wason Center for Public Policy, where she conducted surveys. In 2019, she applied to convert her position to tenure track, which would relieve her teaching responsibilities, but was turned down by the university. As a result, she resigned her position and went to work for the Niskanen Center, a centrist think tank in Washington, D.C.[3] Bitecofer’s analysis has appeared on multiple media platforms, including MSNBC and The New York Times. She wrote the book The Unprecedented 2016 Presidential Election about the election of Donald Trump in 2017 and runs a podcast called The Election Whisperer, hosted by Substack. Today she runs Strike Pac, a liberal super-PAC.[4]
Election Analysis and Prediction [ edit ]
In 2017, Bitecofer published a book called The Unprecedented 2016 Presidential Election, in which she argued that Donald Trump’s election was not the result of one or two causes, but rather the result of a long process that began in the 1950s . She noted several breaks in media coverage of Trump from previous political coverage, such as the number of days Trump received 60% or more of total candidate coverage and his few newspaper endorsements.[5] She later criticized the media and public for calling Trump’s 2016 performance in the Blue Wall states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin a “mythical legend of invincibility”; Instead, she attributed the 2016 result to complacency, low African-American turnout, Russian interference, and dislike of Hillary Clinton.[6]
Bitecofer was recognized for predicting the size of the “blue wave” in the 2018 US midterm elections much earlier than other forecasters.[2] She first forecast that Democrats would win 42 House seats in September 2018,[7] and revised her forecast to 45 seats in November,[8] just days before the election, while others revised their estimates downwards.[2] ] ] The Democrats eventually won 41 seats in the general election, making their prediction one of the most accurate this cycle.[9] She then used the same theory to predict that the Democrats would regain the presidency more than a year after the election.[10]
Borrowing from Alan Abramowitz’s work on a concept called “negative partisanship,” Bitecofer’s main thesis is that modern elections are decided not just by swing voting, but by what she calls “coalition turnout” for each party. Negative partisanship, which argues that voters are increasingly motivated by dislike, hatred, and fear of the other party, prioritizes victory over the other side over a specific political goal.[2] According to this theory, shifts in turnout between cycles are critical to the success of any party. Aside from a small swing each cycle among “pure” independents (independents not “leaning” toward any party), another important and overlooked “swing” Bitecofer called the “turnout swing” that depends on voters making a choice to vote at all rather than decide who to vote for. This view has been criticized by other political analysts such as David Wasserman of The Cook Political Report, with others such as The Crystal Ball’s Kyle Kondik and Sam Wang offering more support.
Bitecofer argues that instead of ideology, Democratic candidates should “lean” on being Democrats and abandon the Democrats’ preference for nominating low-key “blue dogs” running against their own party’s brand. The fact that progressive favorites like Stacey Abrams and Beto O’Rourke were often much closer to winning their races in the red states in 2018 than blue dog moderates trying to ingratiate themselves with Trump came as validation for theirs theory.[2] Just like the successful campaigns by Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff in Georgia[11] and Mark Kelly in Arizona.
In July 2019, Bitecofer predicted that President Trump would lose the 2020 election, with the Democratic nominee winning a base of at least 278 electoral college votes, and correctly expected a Democratic victory over three Midwestern states in what is known as the Democratic Blue Wall, in the Trump narrowly won in 2016[6][12][13] During the 2020 Democratic primary, she attributed increased turnout and Joe Biden’s success in the primary process to the eagerness of Democrats and Democratically-leaning independents (and black voters in particular) to remove Trump from office.[9] Bitecofer argued that 2020 voters would see the return of voters who, certain of a Trump loss, sat out the 2016 election but were now “terrified” that Trump seemed unstoppable.[12]
Post-academic career[ edit ]
Following her research career, Bitecofer founded a liberal super-PAC called Strike Pac, which she describes as “a war machine for the left”. She argues that the Democrats’ strategy and messages are woefully asymmetric with those of the GOP, and claims that the Democrats must launch a “branding offensive” against the Republicans going forward.[4]
Filmography [ edit ]
References[edit]
JavaScript is not available.
We have detected that JavaScript is disabled in this browser. Please enable JavaScript or switch to a supported browser to continue using twitter.com. A list of supported browsers can be found in our Help Center.
help center
An Unsettling New Theory There Is No Swing Voter
In the 2016 election that really embarrassed pundits, Bitecofer was teaching at her new job and not making a forecast. She doesn’t pretend she saw it coming: She says she was just as surprised Trump won as everyone else, but what caught her eye examining the results and what she saw lost in post-election commentary was exactly how many people voted in the third party — for the Greens, the Libertarians, or Evan McMullin, a former CIA agent who ran for the “Never Trump” wing of the Republican Party.
Hillary Clinton had run an entire campaign built on classic assumptions: she was trying to reprimand Republicans and pro-Republican independents who were appalled by Trump. So she chose a boring white man, Tim Kaine, as her collaborator; It also explained their policy-compliant message and ads. But in the end, almost all of those voters stayed with the GOP. The voters who voted for Third should have been Democratic voters — they were disproportionately young, diverse, and college educated — but they were deterred by the divisive Democratic primary, and the Clinton camp made no effort to support them for the activate general elections.
Digging further into the 2016 data, Bitecofer noticed something else. As much as the media had toyed with the narrative that a majority of white women had voted for Trump, the election also signaled the first time that a majority of white college-educated men had voted for the Democratic Party. A long-term realignment was taking place in America, which had accelerated in 2016.
Part of Bitecofer’s job was to interview Virginia, and she saw a Democratic counter-wave building there in 2017. She remarked to state Democrats that they should be spending resources in areas that have traditionally been off-limits. Had they done so, Bitecofer says, they could have turned the legislature around this year. (Instead, it flipped in 2019.)
As 2018 rolled around, she saw what was to come: “White college educated men, and especially white college educated women,” she said, “were hot as hell.”
It didn’t matter who ran; it mattered who voted. From there the model followed. She published her prognosis for the general election when there were still candidates fighting in the primaries.
Bitecofer’s view of the electorate is fueled in part by a new way of thinking about why Americans vote the way they do. Her intellectual mentor is Alan Abramowitz, a political science professor at Emory University who popularized the concept of “negative partisanship,” the idea that voters are more motivated to win the other side than by specific political goals.
In an article detailing his work in POLITICO Magazine, Abramowitz wrote, “Over the past few decades, American politics has become a bitter sporting rivalry, with the parties sticking together primarily out of sheer hatred of the other team, rather than one common purpose. Republicans may not love the President, but they absolutely loathe his Democratic opponents. And it also applies to Democrats, who could be consumed by their internal feuds over foreign policy and the proper role of government if it weren’t for Trump.”
Bitecofer took that finding and mapped it across the country. From their point of view, it is not entirely correct to speak of a Democratic or Republican “base”. Rather, there are Democratic and Republican coalitions, the first made up of blacks, college whites, and metropolitan people; the second, mostly non-college white, with a few religiously-minded voters, financiers, and businessmen, mostly in rural and suburban counties.
“In the polarized era, the outcome isn’t really about the candidates. What matters is what percentage of voters are Republican and Republican Leaners and what percentage are Democratic and Democratic Leaners and how they are activated,” she said.
Accordingly, she believed it didn’t matter much who the Democrats nominated, and while the rest of the country focused on the counties where Hillary Clinton defeated Trump, she figured those were mostly in the bag already and focused instead to the 20 or so counties where Trump underperformed Mitt Romney in 2012. These were places with latent democratic opportunities, and had the national party recognized this earlier they could have flipped even more seats.
New to the forecasting scene and sitting out the 2016 election, Bitecofer took to Twitter, where she only had about 600 followers, and began relentlessly touting her analysis. “I’ve decided to market it on Twitter by being sort of that clunky, annoying little sister in all the big threads. I’d hop onto Nate Cohn’s and Nate Silver’s threads to promote the prognosis. And it was just when the generic vote started to narrow and all the other analysts were like, ‘Oh, the Democrats are going to screw this up. They exaggerate. They’ll get 23 spots if they’re lucky.’ And I just swung out.”
“She took a Krassenstein Brothers approach to getting attention for her predictions. In my opinion, that’s unfair to the many thoughtful forecasters who don’t relentlessly stage themselves.” David Wassermann
And while other forecasters chose a range, Bitecofer chose a number — 42, just one more than the actual number of seats the Democrats won in the House of Representatives. (As other forecasters saw the Democrats’ chances slipping, she revised them upwards in the waning days of the race, saying last week that Democrats would win 45 seats.) The forecast and the unrelenting Twitter hype earned her credit . The woman who decided to pursue a political science degree because she heard Rachel Maddow on the radio was suddenly on Rachel Maddow’s network. In the MSNBC Green Room before a guest appearance on The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, she wrote on the board, “Rachel’s Bucket List: Make it to MSNBC Green Room.”
Bitecofer’s approach to attracting attention did not endear her to many people in the closed world of election forecasting, where a certain humility and an ethos of letting the work speak for itself reign supreme.
“She took a Krassenstein Brothers approach to getting attention for her predictions,” says election forecaster Dave Wasserman, in-house editor of the Cook Political Report, referring to the pair of anti-Trump brothers who together have over a million Twitter gained followers. mainly by being among the first to respond to Trump tweets and kicking up #Resistance memes. “In my view, that’s unfair to the many thoughtful forecasters who don’t relentlessly stage themselves.”
He challenges their central idea—that elections are won by turnout, and by people entering and leaving the electorate rather than switching sides—as one that simply ignores many fundamental observations about how politics works.
“I’m sorry for the idea that turnout explains every election result, but that’s just not true in fact,” Wasserman said. “There is a significant number of compelling voters who hop back and forth between the two parties, depending on the candidate and the year. And there are absolutely millions of voters who voted for Donald Trump in 2016 and a Democratic congressional nominee in 2018 because they were won over by Democrat public relations.
“She would be well served as an analyst,” Wasserman added, “visiting some of the counties in Iowa that overwhelmingly voted for Obama and then overwhelmingly for Trump.” These are not places where turnout explains results. She would learn that persuasion and swing voters are the dominant variable in presidential elections, especially in these contested states.”
Bitecofer, as it happened, flew to Iowa for three days before and after the caucuses, a few weeks after I spoke to Wasserman — and dismisses criticism that getting out into the world somehow would improve her modeling work . If she allowed personal conversations to influence her work, she said, “I’d be a bloody terrible quantitative scientist.”
As for the overall role of these voters, she contends that actual swing voters account for only a small percentage of the outcome, even in districts where vote swings are as large as Wasserman describes. Don’t talk to people in the stands at rallies; Check the voter file, she says. “It would be one thing if 100,000 people voted in this county in 2012 and then it would be the same 100,000 who voted in 2016, but that’s not the case,” she says. “The circle of those who show up is changing.”
Related searches to Rachel Bitecofer Husband Age, And Wikipedia Who Is She Married To
Information related to the topic Rachel Bitecofer Husband Age, And Wikipedia Who Is She Married To
Here are the search results of the thread Rachel Bitecofer Husband Age, And Wikipedia Who Is She Married To from Bing. You can read more if you want.
You have just come across an article on the topic Rachel Bitecofer Husband Age, And Wikipedia Who Is She Married To. If you found this article useful, please share it. Thank you very much.
Articles compiled by Bangkokbikethailandchallenge.com. See more articles in category: DIGITAL MARKETING