2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris

Desert Eagle said:
He'll make it back a 100 times over if Trump wins.
Click to expand...
Yes.

Maybe Melinda Gates or his ex wife can buy the paper from him and set it up as a non profit. It's a disgrace that the paper that broke Watergate is reduced to this.

In other news:



Turnout as a whole has surpassed 2020 by 1%. The big metro areas are still lagging the rurals red by 5% or so, but the demographic of the remaining votes are overwhelmingly younger.
 
berbatrick said:
what that "comedian" said about palestinians was an off-colour joke, he then followed it up with an off-colour joke about jews. frankly that's about as good as you can get from most americans about israel/palestine.

what rudy said about palestinians was not a joke, it was a justification for ending that society, killing children. that comedian said other awful things, but on this, rudy was by far the worse one. it was nazi stuff. genuinely stands out. being scared of two year olds. read this recently and thought of it while hearing rudy: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/joseph-goebbels-quot-the-jews-are-guilty-quot
Click to expand...

Giuliani's statement was pretty standard anti-Palestinian racism, no? I've read similar here on redcafe plenty of times, and worse a few times.
 
NotThatSoph said:
Giuliani's statement was pretty standard anti-Palestinian racism, no? I've read similar here on redcafe plenty of times, and worse a few times.
Click to expand...

that's true... after writing that, i remembered biden's "they need to learn to shoot straight" and "i don't believe them". i guess rudy just said it more directly? or maybe i'm imagining a difference that doesn't exist.
and yes it's been said here too.
 
berbatrick said:
that's true... after writing that, i remembered biden's "they need to learn to shoot straight" and "i don't believe them". i guess rudy just said it more directly? or maybe i'm imagining a difference that doesn't exist.
and yes it's been said here too.
Click to expand...

Well, one difference is that Giuliani specifically mentioned two year olds, while people saying very similar things usually go with "kids" and have like 4+ year olds in mind. Usually combined with a Twitter clip. For me that doesn't make much of a difference.

He didn't even get into some spicy biological essentialism, like one of the people active in this very thread.
 
Looks like this could almost be called the October surprise of this election cycle. Seeing the reactions across all kinds of media it seems massive - hopefully it moves some votes.
 
I have Trump as favourite and what happened in MSG is not new in the discourse of the MAGA troupe. But the intensity and specially the proximity of the elections might cause him the advantage. People may forget something like this with the news cycle renewing constantly and anger dissipates with time, but 1 week before elections and being able to vote now might be a feck up as may have energized people that were not about to vote for laziness

Is there many polls during the last week?
 


He held the rally in metro Atlanta hoping for a crowd because playing in the rurals has gotten stale, and this is the result.

Trump isn't stronger, even his base are tired, they will turn out to vote and the devoted are as rabid as ever, but he's not growing that cult.
 
berbatrick said:
this is the first time after the kamala debate that i think she has any momentum. vibes-only, but the harris campaign felt like a ship slowly but determinedly heading into an iceberg, up until the insanity of that trump rally.
Click to expand...

It is because it has allowed Kamala's campaign & the media to focus on the pivotal issue driving her campaign, stop Trump from winning again. Whenever the focus is more on what policies specifically Kamala will drive, you see cracks.
 
RoadTrip said:
JD Vance - take a chill pill and is tired of Americans getting upset at every joke.

Odd time to double down.
Click to expand...
They can’t escape this one, and it’s delicious. It was a Trump event, they picked him, and they vetted his material. This whole “he’s not affiliated with Trump” simply won’t work.
 


The funniest thing is whenever something like this happen and is reported on, it's almost always in a state where committing the fraud just is irrelevant to the result.
 
crappycraperson said:
It is because it has allowed Kamala's campaign & the media to focus on the pivotal issue driving her campaign, stop Trump from winning again. Whenever the focus is more on what policies specifically Kamala will drive, you see cracks.
Click to expand...
This is true.

However, I've not seen instances of people putting up her policies against Trump's side-by-side and go "can you believe these cracks in Harris' policies?".

Surely she's dealing with unreasonably high standards compared to the other guy? And I often see people acknowledge that and then, go on to hold them to different standards.
 
erikcred said:
This is true.

However, I've not seen instances of people putting up her policies against Trump's side-by-side and go "can you believe these cracks in Harris' policies?".

Surely she's dealing with unreasonably high standards compared to the other guy? And I often see people acknowledge that and then, go on to hold them to different standards.
Click to expand...

It's nothing new either, remember Obama's tan suit?
 
Sweet Square said:


:lol:
Click to expand...

It's so mad that so many (not just Trump) want to take away one of the only good things about being American. When you're bleeding out on the roadside because you don't have healthcare, at least you were comforted by the thought that you had the freedom to burn a flag or two if you so wished.
 
Mike Smalling said:
These people have the minds of children.
Click to expand...
There’s always an added weirdness with Trump/Trump supporters. The expectation would normally be locking people up indefinitely for burning the flag but here it’s just for the 1 year. It’s so strange and stupid.

dumbo said:
It's so mad that so many (not just Trump) want to take away one of the only good things about being American. When you're bleeding out on the roadside because you don't have healthcare, at least you were comforted by the thought that you had the freedom to burn a flag or two if you so wished.
Click to expand...
:lol:

I remember someone describing America as having all the negatives of European capitalist countries but with none of the benefits.
 
Sweet Square said:
There’s always an added weirdness with Trump/Trump supporters. The expectation would normally be locking people up indefinitely for burning the flag but here it’s just for the 1 year. It’s so strange and stupid.
Click to expand...
I guess saying 1 year makes it sound a lot more like a policy proposal, rather than just nationalistic ranting. It's more the overly sensitive nature to what people do to their beloved flag. If someone were to burn the flag of my country, I'd be more concerned with the fire safety and littering aspect, rather than the symbolism.
 
Mike Smalling said:
I guess saying 1 year makes it sound a lot more like a policy proposal, rather than just nationalistic ranting. It's more the overly sensitive nature to what people do to their beloved flag. If someone were to burn the flag of my country, I'd be more concerned with the fire safety and littering aspect, rather than the symbolism.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the same redneck morons will almost certainly be the types to constantly bang on about “freedom” and the constitution, yet they want to set aside the first amendment because they’re so precious about a symbol.
 
Laurencio said:
I don’t think I can take 4 years, or more if he gets his way, of shit like this being normalised if Trump wins. It was bad enough the first time around.
Click to expand...
It's just the way the world is heading. Human society is becoming uglier by the day as we keep being hit by crisis after crisis. Extreme weather, viral epidemics, war, economic problems, it's all making us more bad tempered and resentful I think.
 
Mike Smalling said:
I guess saying 1 year makes it sound a lot more like a policy proposal, rather than just nationalistic ranting. It's more the overly sensitive nature to what people do to their beloved flag. If someone were to burn the flag of my country, I'd be more concerned with the fire safety and littering aspect, rather than the symbolism.
Click to expand...
True. I’ve never understood the attachment some have over others burning a flag. Tbf in the US flag burning thing is cross party -
"I condemn any individuals associating with the brutal terrorist organization Hamas, which has vowed to annihilate the State of Israel and kill Jews. Pro-Hamas graffiti and rhetoric is abhorrent and we must not tolerate it in our nation," the vice president said in the statement issued by her office. "I condemn the burning of the American flag. That flag is a symbol of our highest ideals as a nation and represents the promise of America. It should never be desecrated in that way." - Harris

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kamala-harris-american-flag-burning-union-station-dc-hamas-israel/
Click to expand...
.

africanspur said:
Click to expand...

It’s hard to disagree with any of that. Living in the UK a special jail for journalists seems like a mild reform!
 
NotThatSoph said:
Well, one difference is that Giuliani specifically mentioned two year olds, while people saying very similar things usually go with "kids" and have like 4+ year olds in mind. Usually combined with a Twitter clip. For me that doesn't make much of a difference.

He didn't even get into some spicy biological essentialism, like one of the people active in this very thread.
Click to expand...
Was this supposed to say 14+?
 
Kind of wild the amount of pushback these PR comments are getting. For me, hardly in the top 10 worst things that have happened in a Trump rally in the past 2 months. I guess it's hard to predict what catches on hottest in the zeitgeist.

The comments seem to have generated more anger than Trump's actual abandoning of PR after Hurricane Maria. What a world we live in.
 
Beachryan said:
Kind of wild the amount of pushback these PR comments are getting. For me, hardly in the top 10 worst things that have happened in a Trump rally in the past 2 months. I guess it's hard to predict what catches on hottest in the zeitgeist.

The comments seem to have generated more anger than Trump's actual abandoning of PR after Hurricane Maria. What a world we live in.
Click to expand...
Also, who the hell wants to be at these hour long rallies? I just saw the list of speakers, and I was shocked. Besides Trump there were 30(!) speakers. Trump himself spoke for 78 minutes. You couldn't pay me to go to a rally like that, even for something I supported. Christ these people are weird.
 
Playing around with the electoral calculus and it seems an obvious Trump win. I merely give him the states where he's massively favoured to win and it goes to 264 for Trump. That leaves all three northern swing states open and all of them are either 51-49 or the other way around. He only needs one of those with an "even" chance at all three.

Basically, Harris has to win all three swing states whereas Trump only needs one. That's massively in his favour regardless of individual polling about this or that metric. The electoral college is really all that matters.

https://www.270towin.com/maps/pwGzz

Also, Trump's numbers (aggregate) are peaking and Harris's are flagging across all polls. It doesn't seem like a close election to me. Those three states are not easy to win. They flip, from memory, all the time. They all went blue last time. I'd expect a flip in at least one of them (as would the odds per polling). Ohio is 90-10 in Trump's favour. Contiguous with two of these swing states which is "even" (ish). That bleeds in ways polls will not catch imo and he picks up minimally one of those three.
 
Last edited:
neverdie said:
Playing around with the electoral calculus and it seems an obvious Trump win. I merely give him the states where he's massively favoured to win and it goes to 264 for Trump. That leaves all three northern swing states open and all of them are either 51-49 or the other way around. He only needs one of those with an "even" chance at all three.

Basically, Harris has to win all three swing states whereas Trump only needs one. That's massively in his favour regardless of individual polling about this or that metric. The electoral college is really all that matters.
Click to expand...
Those being Nevada, Arizona, North Caroline and Georgia? I wouldn't be shocked if Harris takes at least one of those.
 
Mike Smalling said:
Those being Nevada, Arizona, North Caroline and Georgia? I wouldn't be shocked if Harris takes at least one of those.
Click to expand...
Going by the numbers, 538 aggregate, I;d be shocked if she took one. Nevada would be her best shot. But that won't matter much if Trump takes a northern swing state because he passes the threshold anyway.

Trump is >60% in three of those. NV is 52-48 for Trump. And, as said, if we make NV solid blue it makes no difference. It's all about if he takes one of three northern states based on the probability of what I'm looking at plus trajectory of each campaign re agg polling.
 
neverdie said:
Going by the numbers, 538 aggregate, I;d be shocked if she took one. Nevada would be her best shot. But that won't matter much if Trump takes a northern swing state because he passes the threshold anyway.
Click to expand...
We shall soon find out. But I don't think I would say he's "massively favored" in all of those.
 
Mike Smalling said:
We shall soon find out. But I don't think I would say he's "massively favored" in all of those.
Click to expand...
I take 538 with a grain of salt because in the past it has been wrong. Clinton is the most notable. But it usually is wrong in the other direction (favors dems over gop).

A week out either way.

tl;dr

If i give Dems all non northern swing states that they can realistically win (even at 6-4 disadvantage) they still have to win all three northern swing states whereas Trump only needs one and each of these is 50-50 (i.e., 52-48 dem, 50-50, and 52-48 gop).
 
neverdie said:
I take 538 with a grain of salt because in the past it has been wrong. Clinton is the most notable. But it usually is wrong in the other direction (favors dems over gop).

A week out either way.

tl;dr

If i give Dems all non northern swing states that they can realistically win (even at 6-4 disadvantage) they still have to win all three northern swing states whereas Trump only needs one and each of these is 50-50 (i.e., 52-48 dem, 50-50, and 52-48 gop).
Click to expand...

You're reading too much into the aggregated polls, they are all within the margin of error.
 
Those kind of analyses don't tend to work, as if one candidate takes one of the 'belts' they're much more likely to take all of them. Ie, they're not independent events, there's correlation there.

Also, and it's probably just copium/hopium, but my anecdotal evidence is so far off these polls it's got me feeling like they're just wrong. I don't feel the energy of Trump surging, don't see huge support everywhere out there. If anything, almost everyone I know is incredibyl sick of even hearing about the guy and are over it.

For him to win he'll have to outperform or come close to his record breaking (for a republican) performance in 2020 and I just can't see that.
 
Beachryan said:
Those kind of analyses don't tend to work, as if one candidate takes one of the 'belts' they're much more likely to take all of them. Ie, they're not independent events, there's correlation there.

Also, and it's probably just copium/hopium, but my anecdotal evidence is so far off these polls it's got me feeling like they're just wrong. I don't feel the energy of Trump surging, don't see huge support everywhere out there. If anything, almost everyone I know is incredibyl sick of even hearing about the guy and are over it.

For him to win he'll have to outperform or come close to his record breaking (for a republican) performance in 2020 and I just can't see that.
Click to expand...

You're not among them. Just like they dont see the same thing on Kamala. Would you even consider befriending a large group of Trump voters? Most would be more likely to keep politics of the office chatters and pretend to be ignorant.

Birds of a feather and all

The first Trump might be a surprise, but he did get 47% last election amidst all the shenanigans. There's absolutely no reason to think that 47% would be gone or dwindling. He's not encumbent, for better or for worse he can only be judged by his first presidency and that's 47%

Voting Trump first time might be a fluke, but the second Trump is a very clear indication that his voters arent going away or being repulsed by his presidency
 
Just cancelled WaPo and informed them why. Obviously doesn't make a difference, but hey.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.