First thing first. Let’s vote to elect Harris. We will worry about 2028 later.
I don’t mind if she wins and becomes a one-term president.
2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
I don’t mind if she wins and becomes a one-term president.
Was just listening to Senior Advisor to Harris in a podcast interview, and I think he made some fairly interesting points about the race, polling, and early voter data:
- They don't spend a lot of time looking at public polls, but their internal polls are tight. Discount anything that has either candidate winning a swing state by 4-5 percentage points.
- They think Harris might end up doing surprisingly well with Republicans or Independents normally leaning Republican. This seems consistent with their strategy.
- Trump will have to rely on a lot of voters that haven't voted before, and they don't think he is doing very well in getting to those people. Also, they are the hardest people to get through the funnel.
- The early data does not suggest that a lot of the young men with no voting history showing up in the data for Trump. They might show up on election day, though.
This.
That said, the only "problem" with Harris winning is that she will block a better Dem candidate in 2028. On the other hand if she doesn't win then there might not be an election (like we know it) in 28 at all...
"For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin.”
Keep faith in the strat.
Keep faith in the strat.
I don't think this race is anything like 2016 at all, the "vibe"-factor doesn't add up, the enthusiasm is different, Harris isn't taking the rustbelt states for granted at all(unlike Hillary).
Things like these are, well, annoying, but this is a different campaign than Hillary's.
Isn't the reason Dems are in this predicament because they chose to pick Biden in 2020 and worry about 2024 later?
She will get 95% of the Dems vote. The first question would be about the turnout of Democrats?
The second question: how many Republicans will cross over?
In 2020, we picked the only candidate who could beat Trump. No other candidate could’ve done that.
Second, guess what? We beat Trump as an incumbent president, and earned ourselves 4 years. That was a good outcome.
If you’re down 0-1 in an NBA series, you don’t think about Game 3 or Game 4. Your goal is to win Game 2, and then worry about the next.
Man arrested at checkpoint near Trump rally in Coachella Valley for allegedly possessing illegal firearms
https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/...ey-for-allegedly-possessing-illegal-firearms/
This is a completely unprovable statement.
I guess Kamala better hope that Jill Stein manages to expand her outreach into Michigan's Arabs because otherwise that's a big get for Trump
That’s an opinion.
Still, we lost Game 1 to Trump, won Game 2. That was a great outcome. We are now competing in Game 3. I’m not worried about Game 4. See the rest of my post above.
Looking back, and how close it actually got, picking Biden aka "remember Obama?" was the strongest candidate for the race, i think.
Could anybody else have done it? Maybe, but not Sanders, he might have in 2016, but not in 2020.
Maybe she is simply hoping that many Hispanic voters personally know someone named Alberto Gonzalez. Would seem fairly likely.
Agreed.
No other candidate on that stage in 2020 had a better chance than Biden and Sanders. And Sandres would’ve lost to Trump. The rest weren’t established enough or not moderate enough (in the eyes of the average swing voter) to win.
Not to mention that Sandres would probably have become a one term candidate himself given his age.
Agreed. Don't understand the Clinton comparisons at all. The Clinton campaign was doomed by the email scandal drama and her awful mainstream media appearances. She was an easy target for Trump. Harris' campaign has been pretty clean up to now.
Yes, Sanders' support fell off a cliff once Clyburn got behind Biden to win SC. His entire movement seems to have dissipated since then, including many of the policies he was promoting.
There are around 1,500 days to go to the 2028 election. If she gets in, you have no idea what kind of success she will have.
If there is no scandal, the economy is good and there is peace and prosperity, then it would be very hard to oust an incumbent.
@Raoul any insight into why it is so close? As an outsider I am somewhat taken aback that 8 years of Trump's whining and general failure has people thinking he is their guy.
She was also just the epitome of the establishment, which the population clearly needed to break with, resulting in massive support for Trump and Bernie. This time around, I'd say Harris feels more like the "change candidate" even though she is technically incumbent as the VP, because she is not an old, white fart and because some people are probably super tired of Trump.
What explains the sudden influx?
I think you are giving them too much credit as they predicted a Trump win in 2016.
How did they do in the midterms?
Like Rasmussen, there are tools of the GOP. They will be used as part of The Big Lie Pt 2.
Another point,approval ratings, Hillary was nearly as despised as Trump in 2016, Harris is not like super popular or anything, but she is net zero, Trump is -10(pretty much always).
He can win, of course, but i doubt its typical for the candidate that is significantly more unpopular than the other wins in the end.
Maybe maybe not, it's unprovable.
I do think that the perception of Biden's strength as a candidate was heavily influenced by his large polling lead over Trump throughout the entire 2020 election cycle. But as we found out on election night, the polls were extremely inaccurate. So this strength was a mirage.
Remove that and you have a man who had ran for president multiple times with no success whatsoever, then barely won against an unpopular Donald Trump, had a tremendously unpopular presidency, and was so soundly rejected by potential 2024 voters that the party had to get him off the ticket.
It is really not all that different than Clinton, who was perceived to be a running a decent/good campaign against Trump in 2016, but this was partly based on polling that was not accurate. It was more accurate than in 2020, but since the outcome actually changed and she lost, people were more willing to look at the past under a different light.
The idea that its a sudden influx is being a bit overhyped by Dem pundits who are getting nervous that polls may serve to create a narrative that Trump is going to perform better than expected. Its simply down to which models utitlyze which polls and how much they weight them by. Most of the polls I've seen in the models are quality polls that score fairly high in the FiveThirtyEight pollster rating page.
It worked before though. That's why President Hillary was passing all of those bipartisan infrastructure bills.
Either these are all just sensationalist lies to sell a book or a lot of things happened behind the scenes that reflect even more ominous on Trump.
The Trump years were not really a failure to the average person (through little input of his own). That is why he can remain competitive with voters who might pick one of the two candidates.
(covid exceptions may apply)
Overall its still down to the basic fact that the country remains politically bifurcated between both parties, as well as the idea that people are voting more based purely on emotion and identity, than they are on who has the better policies.
Maybe failure isn’t the right word since it was by design, but overturning Roe obviously angered many voters as well.
There was also things like the China trade wars that were generally considered failures and just led to higher consumer prices. But the average voter has probably forgotten that or never knew it in the first place.
I meant: what I said is an opinion. I believe that only Biden would have won in 2020 of the list of candidates. It’s my opinion, and I can’t prove it.
A lot of people really thinks the country you place tariffs on, directly pays for them, you really can't fix stupid.
By the way, is it just me, or does this election seem “quiet”, or least quieter than I expected?
(of course Trump has his things, but generally, it feels quiet… ). Wonder what you think.
(of course Trump has his things, but generally, it feels quiet… ). Wonder what you think.
What do you mean? A lack of major stories or scandals?
That’s part of it. In 2016, we had Comey and the Access Hollywood tape, the debate where Trump brought accusers of Clinton, etc. We had some well-known republicans asking him to drop, too.
In 2020, Covid, including Trump going to Walter Reed Hospital, the aftermath of the Floyd killing, Kenosha, uncivilized first debate, etc.
This year feels different. Harris is cautious, one debate, a draw between the VP candidate in their debate, stalled poling, no unexpected endorsement either way, and so on.
Maybe we will get an October surprise?
Two attempts on Trump, an unprecedented withdrawal from the incumbent president , and practically open talks of fascism.
Don't want to know what a noisy election would look like for that poster.
I’m not looking for a noisy election. I prefer it this way.
I also meant how the election unfolded since Harris took over, particularly since the convention and the debate. Quieter than what I would expect in the Trump era.
From his rally in Arizona.
That’s not an endorsement at all.