2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris

https://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=b7d2e65d-f396-4270-b2e1-62423de28238

Two months ago, when SurveyUSA last polled North Carolina on behalf of High Point University, Democrat Kamala Harris led Republican Donald Trump by 1 nominal point, 46% to 45%, among all registered voters, with the race tied among likely voters and Harris ahead two points among those who said they were certain they would vote. Today, Harris continues to lead Trump by a single point, now 47% to 46%, with 1% of registered voters planning to vote for another candidate and 6% undecided. Early voting began in North Carolina on October 17, as this poll entered the field, and among those voters who tell SurveyUSA they have already voted, Trump leads by 2 points, 50% to 48%. Among those who say they are 100% certain they will vote, Trump also leads by 2, 49% to 47%. Those who say they will probably vote – 13% of all registered voters – prefer Harris by a 15-point margin, 53% to 38%. Two months ago, the "certain" vote narrowly favored Harris and probable voters preferred Trump by a 10-point margin.

Trump leads by 7 points among men; Harris leads by 8 among women – a 15-point gender gap. Younger voters narrowly prefer Harris, 47% to 46%; those 35 to 49 give Harris a 5-point edge, 48% to 43%. Voters aged 50 to 64 are split, 46% for Trump, 46% for Harris; those 65+ prefer Trump by 4 points, 50% to 46%. Trump leads by 24 points among white voters, but by 29 points among white men and by 18 points among white women. Harris leads by 62 points among Black voters, but by 55 points among Black men and by 68 points among Black women. Among Latinos, Harris leads by 23 points.
Click to expand...
 
Sweet Square said:
Click to expand...

In November 2020, the country was much worse off than in November 2016. Still, Trump also won.

There is always a “reason” to justify voting for Trump. The economy being in shambles in 2020 didn’t stop people from voting for him. If it’s not the economy, it’s the Supreme Court, or whatever.

There was no inflation in 2016, but he still got the vote.

Just say you want Trump and don’t tell me all kind of nonsense.
 
ManUtd1999 said:
In November 2020, the country was much worse off than in November 2016. Still, Trump also won.

There is always a “reason” to justify voting for Trump. The economy being in shambles in 2020 didn’t stop people from voting for him. If it’s not the economy, it’s the Supreme Court, or whatever.

There was no inflation in 2016, but he still got the vote.

Just say you want Trump and don’t tell me all kind of nonsense.
Click to expand...

Right, a lot of people are convinced its about "the economy", but its not, its culture issues and racism, "the economy" is just as an excuse to not admit the real reasons people vote for Trump.
 
UpWithRivers said:
I get that but the commonality between Latinos, Black, Mixed race like me etc is that you are not white. And if you are not white then you shouldn't vote for a racist. Heck even if you are white and dont like racists then you shouldn't vote for a racist. Surely that is priority number 1. Sure you might get better tax breaks from candidate x then y. But if candidate x is a racist then why the fk are you voting for them? It makes 0 sense. Same as women. Sure you might be a white woman and candidate x maybe is better for jobs for white women and you might not care about the fact he is a racist. But you should all care about the fact that he is indicted on abusing women. Surely that binds everyone into 1 commonality? Its like voting for a Paedo teacher for your kids because they have better qualifications and will ensure your kids will be good at maths. Its nuts.
Click to expand...

In this example, a white woman may be more anti abortion than a Latino man. And this policy may be incredibly important for her, moreso than it may be for the Latino man.

I comprehensively disagree with her but she won’t care on that.

This is Ikers point. That many people don’t base their whole identity and voting choice on these characteristics. And many react with relative disdain when told they should by others.
 
UpWithRivers said:
This makes no sense to me. I get Latinos can identify as white. But its irrelevant because you can be sure Trump doesn't. I guess that's the point? Are mixed race/latinos etc thinking they are part of the Maga group and not realizing you are in the group that Trump wants to deport. I remember seeing documentary that in the UK when the Polish people moved in the Indian/Pakistani community went nuts and told them to get our of their country. Which it is...not saying different. Buy they don't seem to realize there ancestors too immigrated. Is this whats happening in America. All these different races now just identify with being white American and think they are in Trumps camp?
Click to expand...

Trump isn’t going to deport Latinos who are legally in the USA, who may themselves be pissed off with how the debate about the border affects how they are seen in the country.

Nobody is treating Gisele Bundchen in the same way they treat Vicinius Jr. Nor would anyone reasonably think their political values and views have to align, just because they both happen to Latino.
 
Morty_ said:
Right, a lot of people are convinced its about "the economy", but its not, its culture issues and racism, "the economy" is just as an excuse to not admit the real reasons people vote for Trump.
Click to expand...
This would imply that people have been swinging between "more" and "less" racist over the last three presidential elections which I'm not sure is true.
 
africanspur said:
Trump isn’t going to deport Latinos who are legally in the USA, who may themselves be pissed off with how the debate about the border affects how they are seen in the country.

Nobody is treating Gisele Bundchen in the same way they treat Vicinius Jr. Nor would anyone reasonably think their political values and views have to align, just because they both happen to Latino.
Click to expand...
He probably won't. But he would if he could. And at the very least he sees them as less than. If they think they are equal in Trumps eyes then they are very much mistaken. Sure they can stay because he needs workers to clean his house but that's about as far as it goes
 
UpWithRivers said:
He probably won't. But he would if he could. And at the very least he sees them as less than. If they think they are equal in Trumps eyes then they are very much mistaken. Sure they can stay because he needs workers to clean his house but that's about as far as it goes
Click to expand...

He definitely won’t. He didn’t do it in his previous 4 years or even suggest it. He won’t do it in the next 4 years either if he wins.

Not really sure what to say to that last sentence to be honest.
 
africanspur said:
In this example, a white woman may be more anti abortion than a Latino man. And this policy may be incredibly important for her, moreso than it may be for the Latino man.

I comprehensively disagree with her but she won’t care on that.

This is Ikers point. That many people don’t base their whole identity and voting choice on these characteristics. And many react with relative disdain when told they should by others.
Click to expand...
I can't get around a black/Latino etc voting for a racist because his policies are better on x, y or z. He's a fkn racist. I.e. he fkn hates you. Who gives a sht about what else he does
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
This would imply that people have been swinging between "more" and "less" racist over the last three presidential elections which I'm not sure is true.
Click to expand...
That’s not a good interpretation. I would have been concerned even if Trump barely lost in 2016. It’s not him winning per se, but the fact that he’s even “in the game.”

If the economy is the reason, he should’ve lost by a massive margin in 2020. But he didn’t. Everything was closed back then: schools, shopping centers, parks, you name it. Still, 73-74 million cast their vote for him. You wonder why.

No inflation in 2016, low unemployment, low gasoline prices, stock markets doing well, no pandemic, etc. Still, he went toe to toe with Clinton, and in that case he won.

It’s probably not just racism, but it’s not just the economy that led to voting for him. There is more than that.
 
africanspur said:
He definitely won’t. He didn’t do it in his previous 4 years or even suggest it. He won’t do it in the next 4 years either if he wins.

Not really sure what to say to that last sentence to be honest.
Click to expand...
He won't because he can't not because he doesn't want to. Does no one understand racist anymore
 
ManUtd1999 said:
Cruz coming to DC was a bad moment for the country. It was a big step towards Trumpism.
Click to expand...

Yep. It’s kind of crazy how much the Overton window has shifted in the party in the last 20 years or so.

Some of the politicians coming into power at that time I considered extreme back then and are now deemed ‘moderates’. With the differentiating factor seemingly being whether or not you accept election results.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
This would imply that people have been swinging between "more" and "less" racist over the last three presidential elections which I'm not sure is true.
Click to expand...

Largely what made Trump popular/famous in the republican party in the first place, was him popularizing the conspiracy that Obama was from Kenya with a false birth certificate, not economics.
 
UpWithRivers said:
He won't because he can't not because he doesn't want to. Does no one understand racist anymore
Click to expand...

Beyond hyperbolic nonsense, I don’t think anyone actually believes trump would deport legal Latinos en masse. Nor have I heard anyone but the most extreme even talk about such a thing (happy to be proven wrong if not).

Again Latino is such a nebulous term. For all purposes, Gisele is a white woman. And is treated as such. Same as Elon is a white man. And is treated as such. He doesn’t function in life as an ‘African’ even though that’s what he technically is.
 
ManUtd1999 said:
That’s not a good interpretation. I would have been concerned even if Trump barely lost in 2016. It’s not him winning per se, but the fact that he’s even “in the game.”

If the economy is the reason, he should’ve lost by a massive margin in 2020. But he didn’t. Everything was closed back then: schools, shopping centers, parks, you name it. Still, 73-74 million cast their vote for him. You wonder why.

No inflation in 2016, low unemployment, low gasoline prices, stock markets doing well, no pandemic, etc. Still, he went toe to toe with Clinton, and in that case he won.

It’s probably not just racism, but it’s not just the economy that led to voting for him. There is more than that.
Click to expand...
Trump is in the game because he is the Republican candidate.
 
Morty_ said:
Largely what made Trump popular/famous in the republican party in the first place, was him popularizing the conspiracy that Obama was from Kenya with a false birth certificate, not economics.
Click to expand...
I thought it was his foreword to Keynes' The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money.
 
Is the US the only, or one of the most extreme examples in the world of people voting for a party and sticking with them, whoever the candidate or policies are?
 
onemanarmy said:
Is the US the only, or one of the most extreme examples in the world of people voting for a party and sticking with them, whoever the candidate or policies are?
Click to expand...

That’s pretty common across democracies no? Most western democracies have political parties which have a floor of support regardless of which candidates they put up.

Japan has been ruled by the same party for almost their entire post war existence too.
 
onemanarmy said:
Is the US the only, or one of the most extreme examples in the world of people voting for a party and sticking with them, whoever the candidate or policies are?
Click to expand...
Yes.

Regarding deportation: here is how I would think about it. You live in a good and safe neighborhood, where crime almost never happens. You would probably be safe not locking the door at night. Still, lock the door, just in case.

I wouldn’t give Trump a chance on such an important matter. I prefer to slam the door shut on his candidacy, and then putting 2 lockers. You know, just to be safe.
 
africanspur said:
That’s pretty common across democracies no? Most western democracies have political parties which have a floor of support regardless of which candidates they put up.

Japan has been ruled by the same party for almost their entire post war existence too.
Click to expand...

Depends I think. In Belgium, there's almost always a coalition of 3 parties needed for a majority, out of 6-7 parties. I have friends voting for different parties almost every election, based on their current point of views.
It's less polarized that way I guess. I know it's the same in other European countries.
 
ManUtd1999 said:
So, don’t tell me (not you, but in general) that it’s the economy. It’s beyond that, and that’s my point.
Click to expand...
I was mostly responding to Morty, who said it's not an issue. I disagree with that.

There is no singular issue for all voters, I think that's generally known. But elections usually hinge on a smaller percentage of total voters who can be swayed, and I do think those voters can respond to economic conditions.

Biden beat Trump 51.3% to 46.8% in 2020, under poor economic conditions (which, must be said, were because of a pandemic, which changes things). In 2008 there was a worse economic crisis (in addition to a failed foreign excursion) and Obama beat McCain 52.9% to 45.7 %. Even larger margin. In 1932 there was the Great Depression, and Roosevelt beat Hoover 57.4% to 39.6%. An enormous margin.
 
UpWithRivers said:
This makes no sense to me. I get Latinos can identify as white. But its irrelevant because you can be sure Trump doesn't. I guess that's the point? Are mixed race/latinos etc thinking they are part of the Maga group and not realizing you are in the group that Trump wants to deport. I remember seeing documentary that in the UK when the Polish people moved in the Indian/Pakistani community went nuts and told them to get our of their country. Which it is...not saying different. Buy they don't seem to realize there ancestors too immigrated. Is this whats happening in America. All these different races now just identify with being white American and think they are in Trumps camp?
Click to expand...
Why does it make no sense?

No matter who is in the White House racism will persist and will continue to do so, affording food, housing and medical care are much more improtant to the majority
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
I was mostly responding to Morty, who said it's not an issue. I disagree with that.

There is no singular issue for all voters, I think that's generally known. But elections usually hinge on a smaller percentage of total voters who can be swayed, and I do think those voters can respond to economic conditions.

Biden beat Trump 51.3% to 46.8% in 2020, under poor economic conditions (which, must be said, were because of a pandemic, which changes things). In 2008 there was a worse economic crisis (in addition to a failed foreign excursion) and Obama beat McCain 52.9% to 45.7 %. Even larger margin. In 1932 there was the Great Depression, and Roosevelt beat Hoover 57.4% to 39.6%. An enormous margin.
Click to expand...

Yes, and Trump beat Hillary under okay economic conditions by the Obama admin, 2018 midterms, economy was doing well, blue wave, 2022, high inflation, GOP barely won, while they should have slaughtered the dems.

So, the evidence supporting "its the economy, stupid", is inconclusive, but, we will probably never agree on this.
 
africanspur said:
Beyond hyperbolic nonsense, I don’t think anyone actually believes trump would deport legal Latinos en masse. Nor have I heard anyone but the most extreme even talk about such a thing (happy to be proven wrong if not).

Again Latino is such a nebulous term. For all purposes, Gisele is a white woman. And is treated as such. Same as Elon is a white man. And is treated as such. He doesn’t function in life as an ‘African’ even though that’s what he technically is.
Click to expand...
I know this isn't how most latino immigrants feel, but as one myself (although I look as white as gisele) I have little doubt that if it were up to Stephen Miller I wouldn't be here. He probably can't do anything about it anymore, but when he got Trump to introduce the ban on immigrant and non-immigrant visas during the pandemic they were expressing how they truly feel about most immigration.

Plus, I do see myself in other immigrants, even illegal ones. They're leaving desperate situations in the hope of something better. The only real difference between me and them is that I was fortunate enough to have a much better starting situation that made a legal immigration path viable for me. But the basic motivation (a better life, mine wasn't a desperate situation) is the same. They don't deserve a fraction of the negative rhetoric directed at/about them.

I know other Brazilian immigrants who themselves are anti-immigrant, and I find it a deeply undignified attitude.
 
onemanarmy said:
Is the US the only, or one of the most extreme examples in the world of people voting for a party and sticking with them, whoever the candidate or policies are?
Click to expand...
Nope, that's a worldwide thing, the same happens in the UK for example, there are 10's of 1000's of people who would rather be dead than vote for a Conservative and the same appplies to Labour
 
onemanarmy said:
Is the US the only, or one of the most extreme examples in the world of people voting for a party and sticking with them, whoever the candidate or policies are?
Click to expand...

Wasn't it the same in Brazil, to get rid of Bolsonaro?

According to common sense, it shouldn't have been close, but i guess making "libs" mad was a big thing there too, so it turned into a very close one.
 
Morty_ said:
Yes, and Trump beat Hillary under okay economic conditions by the Obama admin, 2018 midterms, economy was doing well, blue wave, 2022, high inflation, GOP barely won, while they should have slaughtered the dems.

So, the evidence supporting "its the economy, stupid", is inconclusive, but, we will probably never agree on this.
Click to expand...
I don't really agree with the 'it's the economy stupid' phrase, though I do think that in extreme cases it can be the most salient issue.

To me it's not clear 2020 was that extreme case, because I don't think it's right to look at the issue as 'the economy.' The issue was a global pandemic. It had economic repercussions, but that was just part of it. It affected different states in different ways, and different people responded in different ways to the various measures that were and weren't taken. It is more complicated than, say, "high inflation."
 
Last edited:
The Obama/Eminem bit was good but felt Obama set himself up for the 'dropping bombs but keep on forgetting'. Should have left it at 'arms are heavy'
 
onemanarmy said:
Depends I think. In Belgium, there's almost always a coalition of 3 parties needed for a majority, out of 6-7 parties. I have friends voting for different parties almost every election, based on their current point of views.
It's less polarized that way I guess. I know it's the same in other European countries.
Click to expand...
That's because you have a proportional representation in Belgium, which tends to lead to having a lot of parties and therefore a plethora of choice. Same in the Netherlands, where I have voted for three different parties so far.

But in a winner-takes-all systems like the US, UK, and Canada, you have very few parties, and often power will shift between two leading ones. Those then therefore benefit from painting stark contrasts, driving voters deeply into their camps - so you often have a left and a right and that's it (if you want your vote to matter), and there will also people that will harden in their support for either of the opposing parties.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.