U.S. Politics

[Davkaus]

14 minutes ago, maqroll said:

 

Not a chance that Trump is in any way referencing historical precedence.

Wrong. Trump knows all the historical precedence. He knows them better than anyone. Nixon. Anyone remember Richard Nixon? Wonderful man. Beautiful scandals, the best. Not like those democrat historical precedents, no way. They're eating our kids. Kamala will too. 

[nick76]

If he loses it’s going to kill him, he’s going to explode that he’s lost to a person who’s black, Indian and a women. Three things he’s always thought are beneath him and he had contempt for.
 

 

[sidcow]

Can someone post me some tweets from election experts who still expect Harris to win because the papers are not great reading right now. 

[maqroll]

More humiliation for America courtesy of Trump-

 

[sharkyvilla]

24 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Can someone post me some tweets from election experts who still expect Harris to win because the papers are not great reading right now. 

This professor has an alternative method of predicting elections to polling, he has 13 'keys' that he judges the incumbent President on to decide whether they will win or lose, I think he had Biden to lose but Harris to win now.  The only election he got wrong was George W Bush's first win (which he technically shouldn't have won imo).

 

[Genie]

32 minutes ago, nick76 said:

If he loses it’s going to kill him, he’s going to explode that he’s lost to a person who’s black, Indian and a women. Three things he’s always thought are beneath him and he had contempt for.
 

Hopefully the day after the votes are counted he gets arrested and thrown in jail.

[sidcow]

10 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

This professor has an alternative method of predicting elections to polling, he has 13 'keys' that he judges the incumbent President on to decide whether they will win or lose, I think he had Biden to lose but Harris to win now.  The only election he got wrong was George W Bush's first win (which he technically shouldn't have won imo).

 

Thanks but ryat was 2 weeks ago and a lot of momentum seems to have moved to Trump since then. 

[GrootVilla]

1 minute ago, sidcow said:

Thanks but ryat was 2 weeks ago and a lot of momentum seems to have moved to Trump since then. 

I added a video above. Been watching the polls go back towards Trump for around a week and I think within 7-10 days he will have a substantial lead.

[sharkyvilla]

9 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Thanks but ryat was 2 weeks ago and a lot of momentum seems to have moved to Trump since then. 

Yes but that's largely the point of what he is saying about 'October surprises' being irrelevant in the past and polls being unreliable, rather looking at the fundamental issues at the heart of what gets Presidents elected as the real metric.  Just an alternative to seeing the polls fluctuate on a day-to-day basis and panicking.

Edited 17 hours ago by sharkyvilla

[Jareth]

Saw an interesting stat t'other day - about white women, the largest single demographic of the voting public. That he's lost their support, compared to every other past republican candidate including himself in the election he won. Abortion being the key issue that will stop him winning. 

[nick76]

1 hour ago, GrootVilla said:

I added a video above. Been watching the polls go back towards Trump for around a week and I think within 7-10 days he will have a substantial lead.

I think you are missing that almost all of the polls recently have been right leaning or non-partisan which has skewed the trend.  This causes many of the averaging polls to look like they are moving in favour of Trump, when things haven’t changed that much.  It was something like 45% right leaning, 45% non-partisan and 10% left leaning.  If when there is a more balanced mix I will be more concerned but some of the left leaving I’ve seen they haven’t changed much.  The problem is that it’s all in the margin of error so who knows and polls haven’t been that accurate in recent years anyway.

[bickster]

18 minutes ago, nick76 said:

I think you are missing that almost all of the polls recently have been right leaning or non-partisan which has skewed the trend.  This causes many of the averaging polls to look like they are moving in favour of Trump, when things haven’t changed that much.  It was something like 45% right leaning, 45% non-partisan and 10% left leaning.  If when there is a more balanced mix I will be more concerned but some of the left leaving I’ve seen they haven’t changed much.  The problem is that it’s all in the margin of error so who knows and polls haven’t been that accurate in recent years anyway.

And some of those right leaning polls are doing more than leaning

The polling story really doesnt stand up when you look at the polls included

[mjmooney]

1 hour ago, bickster said:

And some of those right leaning polls are doing more than leaning

It could even be counterproductive for Trump, by shaking Democrat voters out of complacency as to whether they need to bother to vote. 

[ml1dch]

I'd be very wary of paying much attention to US polling. If the polling misses like it did in 2016 then Trump will win easily. However if it misses like it did in 2022 then Harris is on for an absolute landslide. 

Both are completely plausible outcomes at this point, as is the tightest race in history decided by Kevin Costner's vote. But they're only all plausible outcomes because the polling is so shoddy and partisan.

It's really not worth getting hung up about one way or the other. 

Edited 13 hours ago by ml1dch

[Jareth]

Polls are so close that there is no predicting this on polls alone. 

[TreeVillan]

Harris dodging the Al Smith Dinner will only hurt her polling. 

[Seat68]

27 minutes ago, TreeVillan said:

Harris dodging the Al Smith Dinner will only hurt her polling. 

Hilary Clinton attended and lost an election, Trump attended and lost an election. Not sure your average american is looking at a dinner where it starts at $5000 a ticket and thinks, you know what, I don't think she is Presidential enough for me.

[TreeVillan]

19 minutes ago, Seat68 said:

Hilary Clinton attended and lost an election, Trump attended and lost an election. Not sure your average american is looking at a dinner where it starts at $5000 a ticket and thinks, you know what, I don't think she is Presidential enough for me.

It will hurt her polling. 

[Mr_Dogg]

16 hours ago, nick76 said:

If he loses it’s going to kill him, he’s going to explode that he’s lost to a person who’s black, Indian and a women. Three things he’s always thought are beneath him and he had contempt for.
 

 

Is a person being mixed race something he can't grasp? He keeps bringing it up.

[LondonLax]

22 minutes ago, Mr_Dogg said:

Is a person being mixed race something he can't grasp? He keeps bringing it up.

I think he sees it as an opportunity to paint her as not being authentic.

The accusation from conservatives is that she didn’t really mention her ties to her estranged father until recently, when it became politically expedient to be black in left wing politics, following the BLM movement.