2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
I was never anxious about getting stuck in the washing machine until recently.
Also the reason "black dude rail white women" is their other fetishism. They watch these things because its part of their "whites are being bred out of society" conspiracy.
Might try to get tickets...
Savannah’s a solid spot for her to go
Can't see her announcing someone else in Philly, but who knows?
Rachel Anne Maddow (/ˈmædoʊ/ ⓘ, MAD-oh; born April 1, 1973) is an American television news program host and liberal political commentator.[1][2][3][4] Maddow hosts The Rachel Maddow Show, a weekly television show on MSNBC, and serves as the cable network's special event co-anchor.[5]
Maddow holds a bachelor's degree in public policy from Stanford Universityand a doctorate in political science from the University of Oxford and is the first openly lesbian anchor to host a major prime-time news program in the United States
----
I've never been a fan of her style, but then again I don't need to get my news from the teevee. Oxford is some rinky-dink no mark school in a backwater country, so I wouldn't pay any mind to her doctorate.
The only people who think they are the same have not watched both. I watched some Fox News to see what the hell my cousins were so upset about, and it is absolutely nothing like what happens on MSNBC>
"...it will not end well for you" does not sound ominous, no not at all. It's like the Trumpanzees can't help themselves trying to sound like tough guys 24/7.
I think they should use creepy, because Trump is a creepy old man. They have ready-made excuses for why they are not bigots, why their comments about race are not racist, why their views on telling women what to do is not misogynist, and so on, but there is no defense for being creepy.
Kentucky is not in play at all, and even if it were, the VP isn't enough to get it. It's basically a dead loss in that state still, so they should work on bolstering the ground game in a state that is in play.
Nate Silver had Hillary's chances of winning 2016 at 71.4% to Trump's chances of 28.6%. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/ . Silver's site that he started (and left) disagrees with his assessments. He admits there are a myriad ways to build a prediction model, and even then, the numbers don't mean what he (and others) claim they mean. https://newrepublic.com/article/155761/fall-nate-silver . He's also not the guru he thinks he is https://www.pastemagazine.com/politics/the-sudden-shocking-fall-of-nate-silver .
Whatever happend with him in the past isn't indicative of this latest forcast he's put out, which is completely in sync with most of the polls towards the end of Biden's run and a the few polls that have been taken for Harris over the past week. Therefore the 61% EC probability makes perfect sense given the preponderance of polling towards the end of Biden's run.
OK. For my money, being wrong on several big things is relevant, and when his current prediction models are disputed by his own (former) company and other experts, it calls into question his conclusions. Point is, no one will know until after the dust settles.
Yes, we obviously won't know until the election. But if you were to ask me who is currently favored based on recent polls over the past couple of weeks; Trump would still edge it at this moment. Although much could change when the next batch of polls come out.
Vote early, vote often!
Silver showed two weeks ago that Biden had a higher probability of winning than Trump. The polls were completely at odds with that prediction.
Since then, Biden dropped, Harris is the presumptive nominee and her numbers are better than Biden’s. Yet, Trump now has more than 60% of winning?
I’m not saying that Trump won’t win. I’m just interested in how Silver can explain that.
That I would disagree with. Trump edging the EC but losing the popular, I can however definitely agree with.
Let’s put the popular vote aside and focus on the EC:
Biden was doing worse than Harris nationally and in swing states. Yet, Silver had him with more than 50% of winning while Harris is under 40%. That’s what I don’t understand.
Can you post the specific information that Silver put out in regards to this ?
From my purely anecdotal experience in the Southeastern PA part where my in-laws live and I've spent much time in the June-Sept summer period:
In 2016, Trump signs were everywhere and I don't think I couldn't more than 2 Hillary signs out of 100
In 2020, far fewer Trump signs, more Biden signs (tbf they're right next to Delaware)
In 2024 so far, more visual Trump support than 2020 but not at 2016 ubiquity. The signs/flags are bigger though many are Let's Go Brandon type and it's still early but will be interesting to see if any Harris support starts materializing, especially if she picks Shapiro.
Here is what I’n referring to, @Raoul .
Going to bed now, but would love to know more. I know that the model is not just based on polling, but still- it’s not clear to me what’s going on.
Same, depending on dates and work travel
That makes sense given that Trump looked fairly strong in PA pre-Biden withdrawal. At the end of the day its going to be a turnout game, especially in the Philly suburbs. Its especially important for Harris to put a lot of time in PA as soon as possible since early voting starts in PA on 16 Sep (earliest in the country).
That's not Silver. That's FiveThirtyEight, which he founded but left in 2023.
Are you sure about this? I recall Silver's model being extremely negative on Biden's chances over the last weeks. It's one of the reasons why he was dead-set on Biden not being the nominee.
It was the 538 model that claimed Biden would win but that's no longer his model.
Okay, then. Thank you.
I didn’t know that he left 538. Now that makes sense to me. Thank you.
I think the counterpoint would be that the messaging needs to be as influential to as many influencable people as possible. And that includes bringing down more of the potential "coolness" by successfully painting your opponent as weirdos (accurate) vs dangerous threats to democracy (also accurate).
I'm not sure if he uderstands what health care is.
I know the tuba thing isn't supposed to be an argument in favor of the weird stuff, but it is amazing nonetheless
Kari Lake won the primary and will face Gallego in November, good news, for Gallego.
Meanwhile, Blake Masters can't even get a house seat these days, he actually lost in the primaries.
Meanwhile, Blake Masters can't even get a house seat these days, he actually lost in the primaries.
The current 538 model is definitely a bit 'broken' though it's been doing all sorts of weird stuff.
FWIW: my NBC coverage of the Olympics this morning has a Harris ad every break. So the spend begins.
You must live in a swing state. God help you until November with those ads.
The ads are insane
Just using Trump's actions against him, not too insane.
Isn't saying 'to fix the broken immigration system' contradictory as the Dems have been in charge over the last 4 years. They are essentially saying the broken system has continued under their governance.
Pretty much. It’s Democrats agreeing with Trump view on immigration.
If Trump says gangs of juiced up fentanyl human trafficked migrates are crossing the border then liberals view this as mad fascist propaganda. But if Harris says it then liberals think it’s true and also somehow holding Trump “accountable”.
The contradictions are endless in this election.
No, they are referring to what happened when Democrats and Biden proposed a bill on that would help with immigration and the border and the GOP in Congress, supposedly at the direction of Trump, completely opposed it: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/co...ecurity-bill-campaign-border-chaos-rcna153607
Although some Democrats also didn't vote for it for different reasons including the California Senators, Cory Booker and Bernie.