2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris

[Raoul]

You are right, and I think the important thing to note is that the campaign is not oblivious. They are not and never really were getting too far ahead of themselves with the media momentum narratives etc. Even with record money hauls and donations, they were always always stressing a tight race that will need on the ground grassroots focus. Especially battleground states.

They have never stopped stressing that they were the underdogs and never taking it for granted that there is A LOT of work to do and any way you go about it there has to be record turnout and continued pressure to reach every voter.
If we were seeing the campaign take anything for granted or get too far ahead of themselves cheering on momentum I would be worried more. But everything including the avalanche of campaign and Pac mailers are clearly stressing the challenges and need to volunteer, register to vote, get everyone you know to register and have a voting plan.

Meanwhile....Kid Rock is headlining the "star studded" Log Cabin Republican fundraiser

Keep fighting the good fight for people that absolutely despise your existence.

Ultimately, I think she's facing a number of lingering challenges that if left unresolved, will thwart any further momentum she is going to need to win.

Is she running as an incumbent (inclusive of embracing the Biden/Harris agenda of the past 4 years) or is she running as an outsider who is willing to distance herself from the very administration she has worked for over the past 4 years ?

What are her actual comprehensive policy positions across the board and is she willing to do more press to articulate and defend them ? We are less than a week from early voting ballots being sent out in PA, so anyone running for President should have a clear and concise policy agenda available if they expect to get votes (simply not being Trump isn't enough).

 

[gaffs]

You may be right. Given the limited timeline she was probably the most logical choice, although certainly not the strongest candidate by any measure - as in, if Biden had withdrawn 6 months earlier and the Dems had a proper competition, there's little to no chance Harris would've beaten the other lead Dem candidates. And if by chance she did, she would be well honed for battle against Trump, armed with clear and concise policies and with the confidence of plenty of public speaking and interviews behind her back. This version of Harris appears to be close to the 2019 version.

Maybe, but Bident did not drop out earlier. He had every intention to continue had it not been for Pelosi making it crystal clear he would be a drag on down ballot candidates.

Just be thankful he and his team called Trump for a debate in June. Had the debates been in Sept and Oct, as in previous years, then Biden would still be on the ticket, mixing up world leaders names and celebrating abolishing medicaid.

When you say....

This version of Harris appears to be close to the 2019 version.

Do you mean in terms of policy or confidence from not doing many interviews or public speaking?

 

[Avatar]

I really do think people need to chill about the polls.

The sample size for these PA polls are circa 1000...
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/pennsylvania/

6.9mil people voted in PA in 2020.

So 0.014% of the PA electorate is being polled.

That's how stats, probability and science works .

The sample is always few hundreds or thousands max. in scientific research, whether physical sciences or social sciences like politics, thanks to the Law of large numbers and regression to the mean phenomenon.

For example, the COVID vaccines were tested on several tens of thousands of people then given to billions of people, and that is to detect any potential side-effects. As for protection from COVID, you might not even need all this..

 

[Beachryan]

It just feels to me like the media ecosystem is so thoroughly rigged against Democrats that any choice the party made after Biden refused to bow out was doomed to fail.

Someone pointed out that if you looked at the NYT yesterday - the entire home web page - you'd have no idea that Trump went on a long rant about literally rounding up and imprisoning his political opponents - journalists included. Didn't even make the front page. What you did have was the poll, several articles about what Harris needs to do at the debate and a handful of 'both sides' puff pieces. I half expect to see something about Harris' wardrobe before anyone covers, for example, Trump's incredible response to the question on spiralling child-care costs from last week's economic conference.

I don't know how a candidate can compete with that. One side has to be totally above board, not a hint of scandal in their past, be articulate, have coherent, consistent policies or long pieces on how and why they changed their mind. They have to be sensitive to the Maga crowd, progressive to court the far left of the party, but also able to not scare the more moderates that are just not comfortable at the moment. And this is the treatment they get from the LEFT side of media. The less said about the right-wing ecosystem the better.

Meanwhile Trump can ramble on about Hannibal Lector, clearly believe that asylum seekers come from asylums, lie about once a minute, rape some people, hang out with Jeffrey Epstein, make fun of war heroes, insult their monuments and legacy, barely string a coherent sentence together and he's treated like hey, isn't it fun that Donald's still here.

And on 'our' side we're here arguing over whether she should have picked Shapiro (great choice) or Walz (great choice), and that the metadata on a shareable google link hasn't been updated.

The debate will be an absolute pinnacle of this. Harris will, for at least 90% of it, be smart, intelligent, give rational, clear answers that are direct responses to the questions. Trump for 90% of it will badly try to regurgitate talking points, mistaking words, people, terms and ending each question with a vague statement of no one making it better than him, never once uttering an ounce of the how or why he didn't do it last time. And we'll read Wednesday morning how Harris just couldn't land a punch on the 'surprisingly disciplind' Trump because he didn't literally call her the N word on national TV. And despite him giving 0 iotas of tangible policies, countless words will be dedicated to how Harris was once again unable to properly articulate the nuances and intracies of hers.

How the f*ck do you deal with that?

 

[Raoul]

Do you mean in terms of policy or confidence from not doing many interviews or public speaking?

All of the above - numerous policy flip flops from 2019 suggest she has no guiding principles about her worldview and is simply attaching herself to policies she thinks will help her win, then after losing, swiftly ditching them for newer ones in the next election.

- Building a border wall : she now supports a more hawkish position on the border after trashing Trump's border wall idea in 2019

- Medicare for all : she tried to hop aboard the Bernie express on healthcare in 2019, and has since ditched medicare for all in favor of simply expanding Obamacare

- Fracking : she advocated for a fracking ban back when it was politically expedient in 2019 and is now against the ban because she needs to win PA.

This is all suggestive of someone who clearly isn't running on the things they actually believe in, and is instead simply telling voters what they want to hear in order to win in specific areas. And this is of course before we get to Israel/Palestine, where Harris is simply going to parrot the Biden policy despite probably being less sympathetic to the Israeli position than Biden has been.

 

[WI_Red]

It just feels to me like the media ecosystem is so thoroughly rigged against Democrats that any choice the party made after Biden refused to bow out was doomed to fail.

Someone pointed out that if you looked at the NYT yesterday - the entire home web page - you'd have no idea that Trump went on a long rant about literally rounding up and imprisoning his political opponents - journalists included. Didn't even make the front page. What you did have was the poll, several articles about what Harris needs to do at the debate and a handful of 'both sides' puff pieces. I half expect to see something about Harris' wardrobe before anyone covers, for example, Trump's incredible response to the question on spiralling child-care costs from last week's economic conference.

I don't know how a candidate can compete with that. One side has to be totally above board, not a hint of scandal in their past, be articulate, have coherent, consistent policies or long pieces on how and why they changed their mind. They have to be sensitive to the Maga crowd, progressive to court the far left of the party, but also able to not scare the more moderates that are just not comfortable at the moment. And this is the treatment they get from the LEFT side of media. The less said about the right-wing ecosystem the better.

Meanwhile Trump can ramble on about Hannibal Lector, clearly believe that asylum seekers come from asylums, lie about once a minute, rape some people, hang out with Jeffrey Epstein, make fun of war heroes, insult their monuments and legacy, barely string a coherent sentence together and he's treated like hey, isn't it fun that Donald's still here.

And on 'our' side we're here arguing over whether she should have picked Shapiro (great choice) or Walz (great choice), and that the metadata on a shareable google link hasn't been updated.

How the f*ck do you deal with that?

It all comes down to money and fear. The media, at the same time, is both titillated by the prospect of their viewership/readership numbers in a "competitive" race and also terrified of being labeled as biased by the MAGA crowd if they dare report accurately.

And honestly, I think many in the media (and maybe some in this thread??) are trending towards, or have become, nihilistic edge lords who secretly (or not) just want to see the chaos of a Trump win.

 

[MTF]

The debate will be an absolute pinnacle of this. Harris will, for at least 90% of it, be smart, intelligent, give rational, clear answers that are direct responses to the questions. Trump for 90% of it will badly try to regurgitate talking points, mistaking words, people, terms and ending each question with a vague statement of no one making it better than him, never once uttering an ounce of the how or why he didn't do it last time. And we'll read Wednesday morning how Harris just couldn't land a punch on the 'surprisingly disciplind' Trump because he didn't literally call her the N word on national TV. And despite him giving 0 iotas of tangible policies, countless words will be dedicated to how Harris was once again unable to properly articulate the nuances and intracies of hers.

I think this will turn out to be incredibly accurate, and that's both hilarious and tragic.

 

[Beachryan]

All of the above - numerous policy flip flops from 2019 suggest she has no guiding principles and is simply attaching herself to policies she thinks will help her win, then swiftly ditching them for newer ones in the next election. Building a border wall - she now supports a more hawkish position on the border after trashing Trump's border wall idea in 2019, Medicare for all -- she tried to hop aboard the Bernie express on healthcare in 2019, and has since ditched medicare for all in favor of simply expanding Obamacare, and fracking - she advocated for a fracking back when it was politically expedient in 2019 and is now against the ban because she needs to win PA.

This is all suggestive of someone who clearly isn't running on the things they clearly actually believe in, and is instead simply telling voters what they want to hear in order to win in specific areas. And this is of course before we get to Israel/Palestine, where Harris is simply going to parrot the Biden policy despite probably being less sympathetic to the Israeli position than Biden has been.

I mean, aren't you accusing her of being a politician? A rather famous US President had to be convinced on gay marriage, after initially being against it, and went on to legalise it, for example.

The situation with immigration and most obviously the southern border has fundamentally changed in the last 5 years. Any rational human being would have a different view on policies pertaining to it given the order of magnitude more crossings that were (until the exec action) being experienced. My position has also changed, because the world has changed. Is that hypocritical? Not at all.

What she does need to do is spend the next 55 days or whatever it is in our faces. Do interviews, on major channels, and with major hosts. Sprint from here to November 5th. She obviously has a much shorter amount of time to create her platform and articulate it, and she can only try to overcome that herself, no amount of fund-raising or surrogates can do it for her.

 

[Avatar]

@gaffs

 

[Beachryan]

It all comes down to money and fear. The media, at the same time, is both titillated by the prospect of their viewership/readership numbers in a "competitive" race and also terrified of being labeled as biased by the MAGA crowd if they dare report accurately.

And honestly, I think many in the media (and maybe some in this thread??) are trending towards, or have become, nihilistic edge lords who secretly (or not) just want to see the chaos of a Trump win.

I agree. On the latter, I think those people almost need another 4 years of Trump to be honest. That's my one silver lining for this - one bout of this anti-expert, anti-science, anti-diversity sh*t wasn't enough. America needs another 4 years to really lance the boil.

The fact that something like 30m women won't vote in this election just says it all to me.

 

[gaffs]

Check individual polls from @PpollingNumbers or @Politics_Polls on twitter, or any other account you follow. It's a general trend going on since late August.

I won't go quoting each and every poll, so more practically, let's talk aggregates. Nate Silver's model shows Harris numbers worsening. From almost 4 percentage points ahead at national level weeks ago to 3.2 to 2.9 now. Her lead is down as well at the more crucial state level, almost all of them. https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model

Now bear in mind the following:

1- Trump's effect: Trump beat his polls both in 2016 and 2020 by several percentage points in average. Biden won 'cause he had a comfortable lead. yet look at the numbers back then. Biden was ahead by 7-8 points nationally, he won by 4.5, in PA was ahead by 4.5 , won it by 1.3 , Trump was ahead in OH by 1 and won by 8!! If this repeats itself this year, it will be a landslide!!

2- Electoral college bias: The EC is biased against the democrats. That is, they can win the popular vote by 1 or 2 points nationally yet lose the more crucial EC. According to Silver Democrats need to be ahead by 4 or more percentage points to avoid such National/EC split. Harris again is ahead by just 2.9 and worsening. Biden survived by being 7 points ahead.

Even if 1 doesn't happen this year, fingers crossed, Harris still has to deal with 2, and with her declining numbers. But she was never an inspiring or amazing debater/orator.

You are talking about a "general trend going on since late August". There really hasn't been that many quality polls published since then.

Agree on the Trump effect and the EC bias.
There is nothing that can be done about the EC, but it has been said that pollsters are starting to mitigate for that "Trump Effect".

Forget the polls, what has happened in the past two weeks?

Since the DNC, Harris has done some events plus the CNN interview. It would seem that she is spending fare more time preparing for the debate, as she knows that will be pivotal.

In that same time, RFK has joined Trump and Trump has flooded the zone with negative advertising, especially around her changing positions since the 2019 Dem Primary.

So for me, the debate is everything. Harris knows this, as it is her way to explain that her changes in policy positions is down to her four years experience as VP, which has taught her how to be more pragmatic and create consensus for the American people. She can point to many policy wins as well as highlighting Trump's awful policy plans.

And just like the June Biden/Trump debate, there will be a stark contrast between Harris and Trump. I think Harris will leave a far better impression than Trump because she is coherent and is near 20 years younger.

I predicted back in November 2023 that Biden would stand up in the debate and look old compared to Trump....

Honestly feel that Biden had aged 15 years in 4 years. And it has been drilled into peoples brains that Biden is old. When he gets up on stage in a debate, he will look far older.

4 years later, Trump is just the same. If a giant meteorite hits the earth, the only things left will be cockroach's and Donald Trump.

Other prognosticators disagreed.....

Biden has definitely aged a bit, but that won't play into whether or not people vote for him or Trump. The masses turned out last time to keep Trump out of the Presidency, so they're not likely to change their minds just because both guys are a bit older. Also, Trump could very well be in jail and the prospect of potential jail time can't be ignored when it comes to public perceptions of him being a viable candidate a year from now.

So i believe that once the debate is over, Harris will come out on top, which will hopefully give her that polling bump she needs.

 

[Raoul]

I mean, aren't you accusing her of being a politician? A rather famous US President had to be convinced on gay marriage, after initially being against it, and went on to legalise it, for example.

The situation with immigration and most obviously the southern border has fundamentally changed in the last 5 years. Any rational human being would have a different view on policies pertaining to it given the order of magnitude more crossings that were (until the exec action) being experienced. My position has also changed, because the world has changed. Is that hypocritical? Not at all.

What she does need to do is spend the next 55 days or whatever it is in our faces. Do interviews, on major channels, and with major hosts. Sprint from here to November 5th. She obviously has a much shorter amount of time to create her platform and articulate it, and she can only try to overcome that herself, no amount of fund-raising or surrogates can do it for her.

The Supreme Court legalized gay marriage, not Obama.

Ultimately, it all comes down to whether voters are going to get excited about voting for someone who themselves doesn't actually believe in the policies they are promoting. Bearing in mind that it takes significant effort to go through the process of actually voting, its going to take more to get people off the couch to vote.

 

[Avatar]

You are talking about a "general trend going on since late August". There really hasn't been that many quality polls published since then.

Agree on the Trump effect and the EC bias.
There is nothing that can be done about the EC, but it has been said that pollsters are starting to mitigate for that "Trump Effect".

Forget the polls, what has happened in the past two weeks?

Since the DNC, Harris has done some events plus the CNN interview. It would seem that she is spending fare more time preparing for the debate, as she knows that will be pivotal.

In that same time, RFK has joined Trump and Trump has flooded the zone with negative advertising, especially around her changing positions since the 2019 Dem Primary.

So for me, the debate is everything. Harris knows this, as it is her way to explain that her changes in policy positions is down to her four years experience as VP, which has taught her how to be more pragmatic and create consensus for the American people. She can point to many policy wins as well as highlighting Trump's awful policy plans.

And just like the June Biden/Trump debate, there will be a stark contrast between Harris and Trump. I think Harris will leave a far better impression than Trump because she is coherent and is near 20 years younger.

I predicted back in November 2023 that Biden would stand up in the debate and look old compared to Trump....

Check the tweet I posted. I mentioned you.

I hope you are right concerning the debate. It would be a first though, she never was an amazing debater.

 

[gaffs]

@gaffs

I know. I follow Silver. But we are talking about polls and his model and a trend over the space of a week. Plus, doesnt he include a lot of trash polls from the likes of Trafalgar and Rasmussen? Albeit, not weighted as high. I have seen a lot of pro-Republican polls of late.

Bigger picture is that Trump tapped out at around 44%.

Harris has the opportunity to grow, i believe. Especially given the huge uptick in new voter registration since she joined the race...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...voter-registration-pennsylvania-b2608493.html

As i said before, let's wait until the debate to start bed wetting.

 

[gaffs]

Check the tweet I posted. I mentioned you.

I hope you are right concerning the debate. It would be a first though, she never was an amazing debater.

The only thing i think she lacks in a debate is that i believe she doesn't have a great grip on economic matters.

She needs to make it clear that it was Trump's policies (tax cuts for the rich, adding $8tril to the debt, handing out PPP checks during COVID to people that didn't need them just because he wanted his signature to be on them, lack of preparation for a pandemic, letting 1mil people die during COVID) that caused inflation and that it was her and Bidens plans that got inflation back under 3%.

She needs to explain that Biden got thing back on track post Trumps disastrous term and now her agenda will be to lower prices of companies who refuse to lower them and that Trump's plans of tarris are inflationary. Even Trumps alma mata said so...
https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2024/8/26/trump-campaign-policy-proposals-2024

I hope she mentions this because if an Ivy league business school that he attended says that Trump's plans are trash, then it is something people will remember as well as cutting Trump deeply.

She needs to show she has a plan. Because we all know he doesn't.

 

[Raoul]

@gaffs

One thing that may help Harris is that there haven't been nearly enough quality polls in key swing states lately.

For instance in PA, there have literally only been 2 polls in all of September and one of them sounds like an R leaning poll.

In AZ, most recent polls have it at even and the same right wing poll as above (Patriot Polling) has Trump up by 2.

I'm sure we will see a lot of polling done after the debate so we should know a lot more in a week or so.

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

Check individual polls from @PpollingNumbers or @Politics_Polls on twitter, or any other account you follow. It's a general trend going on since late August.

I won't go quoting each and every poll, so more practically, let's talk aggregates. Nate Silver's model shows Harris numbers worsening. From almost 4 percentage points ahead at national level weeks ago to 3.2 to 2.9 now. Her lead is down as well at the more crucial state level, almost all of them. https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model

Now bear in mind the following:

1- Trump's effect: Trump beat his polls both in 2016 and 2020 by several percentage points in average. Biden won 'cause he had a comfortable lead. yet look at the numbers back then. Biden was ahead by 7-8 points nationally, he won by 4.5, in PA was ahead by 4.5 , won it by 1.3 , Trump was ahead in OH by 1 and won by 8!! If this repeats itself this year, it will be a landslide!!

While it's obvious now that Trump voters were underestimated in 2016, after what was seen with the 2022 midterms, it's likely the reverse is true now and that polls are underestimating the turnout effect of abortion rights. I highly doubt Trump voters are being underestimated anymore either.

 

[Raoul]

While it's obvious now that Trump voters were underestimated in 2016, after what was seen with the 2022 midterms, it's likely the reverse is true now and that polls are underestimating the turnout effect of abortion rights. I highly doubt Trump voters are being underestimated anymore either.

Trump was underestimated in both 2016 and 2020, so Dems would be foolish to presume abortion will bail them out of that happening again this time. The only reason it worked in 2022 is because R candidates didn't have the benefit of Trump himself running that cycle, which suppressed turnout for MAGA stooges like Oz, Mastriano, Lake, and Hershel Walker. In 2020, Biden was up by 8.4 in national polling overages and only won by 4.5 . This time Biden and Harris are the incumbents, so expect a similar result where Trump probably outperforms his national polling.

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

Trump was underestimated in both 2016 and 2020, so Dems would be foolish to presume abortion will bail them out of that happening again this time. The only reason it worked in 2022 is because R candidates didn't have the benefit of Trump himself running that cycle, which suppressed turnout for MAGA stooges like Oz, Mastriano, Lake, and Hershel Walker. In 2020, Biden was up by 8.4 in national polling overages and only won by 4.5 . This time Biden and Harris are the incumbents, so expect a similar result where Trump probably outperforms his national polling.

I think what we've seen so far is that polling has corrected on the Trump vote but doesn't look like they have corrected for underestimating the abortion voters from 2022.

And its clear the Dems have and continue to be foolish but that's not relevant to whether these "pollsters" are accurate at their guesses or where they are over/under estimating their guesses.

 

[Morty_]

Trump was underestimated in both 2016 and 2020, so Dems would be foolish to presume abortion will bail them out of that happening again this time. The only reason it worked in 2022 is because R candidates didn't have the benefit of Trump himself running that cycle, which suppressed turnout for MAGA stooges like Oz, Mastriano, Lake, and Hershel Walker. In 2020, Biden was up by 8.4 in national polling overages and only won by 4.5 . This time Biden and Harris are the incumbents, so expect a similar result where Trump probably outperforms his national polling.

What about the sunbelt states? Outside NC, neither Arizona, Nevada or Georgia missed by much in 2020, and they are all right about tied this time, which makes sense.

Polling there is typically solid, but maybe they are the one's that are off this time, or could be they correlated in the rust-belt for once.

 

[Plastic Evra]

Good news for the US mental health institutions about to get staffed by genius psychiatrists !

 

[Raoul]

What about the sunbelt states? Outside NC, neither Arizona, Nevada or Georgia missed by much in 2020, and they are all right about tied this time, which makes sense.

Polling there is typically solid, but maybe they are the one's that are off this time, or could be they correlated in the rust-belt for once.

All of the swing states are in play imo. I think Harris has a good shot in GA as well. Her problem is in the rust belt imo, as in everything needs to go her way. If Trump happens to win one of them, he will have a good chance of winning another, which would upset Harris’ path. All of this is of course not taking into consideration that one of them could have a terrible debate and change the calculus, just as it did for Biden.

 

[Morty_]

Even Bernie Sanders, one of the few who got it right on Iraq back in the days, just accepts Dick Cheney into the "resistance" now.

Great....

 

[maniak]

Given that the Biden administration is trying to broker a ceasefire and a hostage deal

Sweet summer child...

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

Even Bernie Sanders, one of the few who got it right on Iraq back in the days, just accepts Dick Cheney into the "resistance" now.

Great....

How do you expect him to answer? "Feck Dick Cheney, we don't want his vote, he should go vote for Trump"? If they only accepted votes from people who were ideologically "pure" enough, they'd win no elections.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

How do you expect him to answer? "Feck Dick Cheney, we don't want his vote, he should go vote for Trump"? If they only accepted votes from people who were ideologically "pure" enough, they'd win no elections.

He could have probably done without "applauding them for their courage."

 

[Morty_]

How do you expect him to answer? "Feck Dick Cheney, we don't want his vote, he should go vote for Trump"? If they only accepted votes from people who were ideologically "pure" enough, they'd win no elections.

Well, i would certainly like for him to answer the question that way, but how about just..."no comment"?

Sanders fought against Bush/Dick Cheney's war of lies, that would cause the deaths of 100 of thousands of people, and millions of people struggling in other ways, effects still felt to this day.

This has actually nothing to do with ideology, nobody is going after Kinzinger, Lt Governor of Georgia, and various of other republicans, and you very well know the answer why, they are not war criminals, its very simple.

 

[Avatar]

What about the sunbelt states? Outside NC, neither Arizona, Nevada or Georgia missed by much in 2020, and they are all right about tied this time, which makes sense.

Polling there is typically solid, but maybe they are the one's that are off this time, or could be they correlated in the rust-belt for once.

Unfortunately only GA wasn't missed by much. For NV average polling was Biden +5.3 , Actual results +2.4 ...... AZ: +2.6 and +0.3 !!

 

[Morty_]

Unfortunately only GA wasn't missed by much. For NV average polling was Biden +5.3 , Actual results +2.4 ...... AZ: +2.6 and +0.3 !!

2 points isn't much, and it depends on the model you look at, for the record, i assume yours is 538.
RCP had it about even, but that doesn't mean they are better or worse than other models, its almost as if, every election is different somehow.

 

[Carolina Red]

True that is possible but who would be won over hearing Bernie essential lying about Cheney ? No one left wing will believe the shite Bernie is talking about in that video.

I tend to now view progressives like Sanders as very stupid. Which results in them making very bizarre arguments.

Once again, we are back to the evergreen question that always comes up... What was he supposed to say instead?

@oneniltothearsenal - I see you beat me to the question this time.

 

[gaffs]

One thing that may help Harris is that there haven't been nearly enough quality polls in key swing states lately.

For instance in PA, there have literally only been 2 polls in all of September and one of them sounds like an R leaning poll.

In AZ, most recent polls have it at even and the same right wing poll as above (Patriot Polling) has Trump up by 2.

I'm sure we will see a lot of polling done after the debate so we should know a lot more in a week or so.

Exactly. Most of what I have seen on 538 are in influx of Republican polls in the last two weeks. American Greatness, America's New Majority Project, Trafalgar Group, Patriot Polling, Rasmussen. I would not be surprised if they have been deployed to produce polls to tighten up the models. Anything to keep DJT happy and justify claiming the election was stolen.

I struggle to understand the bedwetting over Silver's forecast when the majority of his and other models are based on national polls. Yes, I understand that circa 4% nationally is what may be required for an electoral college win. But at this point, pollsters need to forget about the other 43 states and just focus on the 7 that matter.

 

[Avatar]

Nothing surprising really.

1- Biden's age was clearly a problem since 2023, and many warned of it yet were attacked and ridiculed.
2- Harris was never an inspiring figure platform-wise and debate-wise, and whenever she won in CA it was with a narrower margin then one you'd expect from a D in Cali.
3- Biden's campaign sucked, so what did Harris do. Rehire his team!!
4- Shapiro should have been picked. Period. The VP matters only for his/her state, even if by 1% . 1% in a toss up, probably the tipping-point, state is crucial.

Of course 2 and 3 'cause of time-constraints and other factors which wouldn't have been the case if 1 never happened.
Still I argued before that regardless of all these factors, the Dems. should still have had an open convention and Shapiro had to be selected.

i hope Harris proves me wrong tomorrow; I highly doubt it though.

Forgot to add

5- Giving cold shoulder to RFK.

Yes, I believe it's a factor; heck it might be responsible for Trump catching up with Harris in recent polls, at least partially.

 

[Raoul]

I struggle to understand the bedwetting over Silver's forecast when the majority of his and other models are based on national polls. Yes, I understand that circa 4% nationally is what may be required for an electoral college win. But at this point, pollsters need to forget about the other 43 states and just focus on the 7 that matter.

That’s not accurate. Silver factors in state polling which is why I previously cited that there haven’t been enough polls recently. If you subscribe to his site you can see the specific polls he uses.

 

[Avatar]

2 points isn't much, and it depends on the model you look at, for the record, i assume yours is 538.
RCP had it about even, but that doesn't mean they are better or worse than other models, its almost as if, every election is different somehow.

It is 538; RCP is an inferior aggregator to 538, Silver's 538 not the current one of course.

 

[Morty_]

Exactly. Most of what I have seen on 538 are in influx of Republican polls in the last two weeks. American Greatness, America's New Majority Project, Trafalgar Group, Patriot Polling, Rasmussen. I would not be surprised if they have been deployed to produce polls to tighten up the models. Anything to keep DJT happy and justify claiming the election was stolen.

I struggle to understand the bedwetting over Silver's forecast when the majority of his and other models are based on national polls. Yes, I understand that circa 4% nationally is what may be required for an electoral college win. But at this point, pollsters need to forget about the other 43 states and just focus on the 7 that matter.

Somehow, Rasmussen and Siena is finding the same national results these days, so who the feck even knows what that means.

Now, in terms of the states, presidential, about 7 states is the only ones that matters, but polls from other states are useful, senate races, house races, New York and California will be quite important for the latter, as they shit the bed in 2022 somehow.

 

[Sarni]

Things looking quite bleak for Harris now (without Trump actually doing anything of note to put himself back at the top of the race, he’s actually been quite horrendous recently), so the real question soon is going to be how much damage can Trump possibly cause in his next term.

 

[Morty_]

Things looking quite bleak for Harris now (without Trump actually doing anything of note to put himself back at the top of the race, he’s actually been quite horrendous recently), so the real question soon is going to be how much damage can Trump possibly cause in his next term.

Why are they looking so bleak, exactly? Siena poll is a warning sign, but not the end of the world.

Nothing to suggest Trump has it in the bag.

 

[Sarni]

Why are they looking so bleak, exactly? Siena poll is a warning sign, but not the end of the world.

Nothing to suggest Trump has it in the bag.

If they are polling close to equal in popular vote nationally, then she has no real shot, does she? Biden was well ahead in these polls 4 years ago and he still barely won.

 

[Morty_]

If they are polling close to equal in popular vote nationally, then she has no real shot, does she? Biden was well ahead in these polls 4 years ago and he still barely won.

Siena say they do, but its closer to 3% on the average, so, we don't really know how the electoral college lines up.

Assuming Trump is underestimated like in 2020 in the polls now, also means he is probably winning NH and MN, states he is no longer contesting.

Unless Trump has gotten super popular somehow(-10 points on average), he is not winning the popular vote vs Harris.

 

[Sarni]

Siena say they do, but its closer to 3% on the average, so, we don't really know how the electoral college lines up.

Assuming Trump is underestimated like in 2020 in the polls now, also means he is probably winning NH and MN, states he is no longer contesting.

Unless Trump has gotten super popular somehow(-10 points on average), he is not winning the popular vote vs Harris.

He’s probably not winning popular vote but he doesn’t really need to.