CharonY Posted October 9 Posted October 9 At minimum, interference from that court would need to be more explicitly partisan. Though some might argue that that ship has already sailed.
iNow Posted October 9 Posted October 9 https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/us/politics/harris-billion-dollar-fundraising.html Quote Kamala Harris Has Raised $1 Billion Since Entering Presidential Race No presidential candidate is believed to have ever raised so much money so fast after entering a race.
iNow Posted October 14 Posted October 14 (edited) Meanwhile at an event in Pennsylvania, this instant classic flag is waving Edited October 14 by iNow
J.C.MacSwell Posted October 15 Posted October 15 How much worse does Trump need to act for it to be reflected negatively for him in the polls?
Genady Posted October 15 Posted October 15 1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said: How much worse does Trump need to act for it to be reflected negatively for him in the polls? I don't think it is a factor for many of his supporters. Certainly not for this relative of mine, writing in his email three days ago, Quote we are voting for Trump, because we had great economy with him, and Peace in the world. Also, Democrats are against Israel and supported by all anti-Semites.
MSC Posted October 15 Author Posted October 15 1 hour ago, Genady said: I don't think it is a factor for many of his supporters. Certainly not for this relative of mine, writing in his email three days ago, There was literally a Trump supporter boat parade by a group of neo Nazis with swastikas just a few days ago. Those were definitely anti-semites supporting Trump. Someone needs their algorithm reset, damn. I'm sorry you have to deal with that Genady, my dad went down the alt-right Internet rabbit hole too. I'm honestly starting to think that politicians, judges and other civil servants need to start releasing their phone browsing data. There are way too many people straight facedly claiming utter bs and it's reaching the point where I just want to spend 15 minutes on their phone to find out where this crap is coming from. I don't really believe in devils and angels, but these devices are starting to become the devil on everybody's shoulders and most people believe it's an angel, metaphorically speaking ofc.
dimreepr Posted October 15 Posted October 15 The number of people trying to cancel him, it's like he wrote "A catcher in the rye"...
MSC Posted October 15 Author Posted October 15 2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said: How much worse does Trump need to act for it to be reflected negatively for him in the polls? In this current political climate, Trump has actually backed himself into a corner and can't grow his base. How Trump behaves is all relative to his supporters because they aren't unified behind ideology but behind him. So if Trump doesn't maintain the illusion of being behind his supporters ideology, if they are deeply conservative, they just won't vote. If they are closer to the center, they'll defect to Harris. Putting Trump into the position where he has to figure out how to win new support, without losing any. Which he can't do, if he admits he lost the election, people like Nick Fuentes will crucify him. If he adopts relatively fairer policy in women's reproductive health, he'll maybe gain support from independents but lose it in evangelicals. Really it's less about how much worse he can act, but how media can improve on reporting it all. 1
TheVat Posted October 15 Posted October 15 3 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said: How much worse does Trump need to act for it to be reflected negatively for him in the polls? Same question asked in 2016. He's a circus clown show that makes liberals cringe - i.e. that's all the base wants. What's really needed is for him to keep stating clearly that he will be a dictator on Jan. 20, 2025. As in his most recent statement that he will use the military to round up his enemies. Keep that up and his erosion among Independents and suburban moderates will continue. 2 hours ago, Genady said: I don't think it is a factor for many of his supporters. Certainly not for this relative of mine, writing in his email three days ago, The Right Wing has done a good job of propaganda using false correlations between global trends and the Trump years in office.
J.C.MacSwell Posted October 15 Posted October 15 51 minutes ago, TheVat said: What's really needed is for him to keep stating clearly that he will be a dictator on Jan. 20, 2025. As in his most recent statement that he will use the military to round up his enemies. Keep that up and his erosion among Independents and suburban moderates will continue. It doesn't seem to be showing in the polls though, at least not overall nor in critical States. Or am I missing something? It seemed to be heading in the right direction for a while but seems otherwise lately.
TheVat Posted October 15 Posted October 15 The question is if the younger and busier people who don't take time to answer pollsters will bother to vote. We need Australia's compulsory voting system. If we did, I think Trump's actual loss of support would become starkly visible on 11/5.
toucana Posted October 15 Posted October 15 40 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said: It doesn't seem to be showing in the polls though, at least not overall nor in critical States. Or am I missing something? It seemed to be heading in the right direction for a while but seems otherwise lately. A recent article in The Hill highlights some of the problems US pollsters face nowadays when conducting US Presidential election polls. https://thehill.com/homenews/4894892-if-landline-phones-are-dying-out-how-do-political-polls-work-today/ Up until the early 2000’s, pollsters in the USA regarded telephone landline polling as the ‘Gold Standard’ for obtaining responses from voters (some still do). The problem is that nowadays an estimated 183 million Americans (7 out of 10 US adults) do not even have a landline anymore - they rely solely on their cellphones for day-to-day communication - according to US Chamber of Commerce Statistics: https://www.chamberofcommerce.org/landline-phone-statistics Those who do still use landlines in the US tend to be seniors who are more likely to hold conservative views and favour right-wing candidates. This immediately introduces a significant bias into the responses obtained by such old-fashioned polling methods. Pollsters have belatedly begun switching to combinations of phones, text-to-web and online panel discussions to improve their response rates. But they still face the problem of reaching younger voters and ethnic minorities who are often the least likely targets to answer a call, and then sit there for 15 minutes answering a poll. Basically I don’t have a lot of confidence in the US polls right now, as I suspect their sampling methods are fundamentally flawed - a suspicion borne out by the woefully wrong ‘Red Wave’ predictions offered in the last set of mid-term elections. 1
Genady Posted October 15 Posted October 15 2 hours ago, MSC said: I'm sorry you have to deal with that Genady My way of dealing with that is simple: ignore and vote. My wife and I voted a few weeks ago.
MSC Posted October 15 Author Posted October 15 1 hour ago, Genady said: My way of dealing with that is simple: ignore and vote. My wife and I voted a few weeks ago. My wife will be voting for Harris but I personally can't vote in American elections, not until I naturalize anyway. With y'all in spirit for 2024 and at the ballot in 2028. Thinking about putting up a pro-harris sign that combats misinformation at the same time. Something like "Vote Harris! As an immigrant, I can't!"
Airbrush Posted October 15 Posted October 15 (edited) Allan Lichtman still predicts a Harris victory. He is the only one who can describe a rational, fact-based, scientific method of predicting the US presidential election. He was correct in 9 of the last 10 elections. Edited October 15 by Airbrush
swansont Posted October 15 Posted October 15 52 minutes ago, Airbrush said: Allan Lichtman still predicts a Harris victory. He is the only one who can describe a rational, fact-based, scientific method of predicting the US presidential election. He was correct in 9 of the last 10 elections. 50-50 chance, 9 out of 10 is just under 1% chance by random guessing, which is less than three sigma.
MigL Posted October 15 Posted October 15 D Trump is leading or tied ( but still within the statistical margin of error ) in most of the 'swing' states, and this would indicate a winning scenario for D Trump. However it is said that in the 'confirmed' Republican voting states, about 9% of 'centrist' Republicans ( ones who haven't drank the crazy Kool-aid ) will vote for K Harris. The Electoral College system makes prediction of an outcome, under those conditions, a crap shoot, but it may have an effect in states that are marginally Republican. The election is too close to call, so everyone who can vote, and values democracy, had better get out to vote on the 5th ) if you haven't already ). This election will affect me, also ( and the rest of the world ), so don't take it for granted.
TheVat Posted October 15 Posted October 15 31 minutes ago, MigL said: The election is too close to call, so everyone who can vote, and values democracy, had better get out to vote on the 5th ) if you haven't already ). What he said! Amusing to hear that Trump, at a rally this past weekend, advised people to get out and vote on Jan. 5. 1 hour ago, swansont said: 50-50 chance, 9 out of 10 is just under 1% chance by random guessing, which is less than three sigma. In the social sciences, a result may be considered statistically significant if its confidence level is of the order of a two-sigma effect (95%), while in particle physics and astrophysics, there is a convention of requiring statistical significance of a five-sigma effect (99.99994% confidence) to qualify as a discovery.[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/68–95–99.7_rule 2 hours ago, Airbrush said: Allan Lichtman still predicts a Harris victory. He is the only one who can describe a rational, fact-based, scientific method of predicting the US presidential election. He was correct in 9 of the last 10 elections. A thin reed I shall cling to the next three weeks, bobbing on an anxious ocean. On an unrelated topic, do any of you Canucks have a sofa-bed?
MigL Posted October 15 Posted October 15 1 hour ago, TheVat said: do any of you Canucks have a sofa-bed? You are more than welcome, but you'll have to put up with me talking your ear off about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict for the 4 years. 1
MSC Posted October 16 Author Posted October 16 20 hours ago, Airbrush said: Allan Lichtman still predicts a Harris victory. He is the only one who can describe a rational, fact-based, scientific method of predicting the US presidential election. He was correct in 9 of the last 10 elections. Yeah I'm still relying on lichtmans keys too. Thomas Millers predictions based on betting numbers is an interesting idea; but it has some issues with it. Namely that in a poll of potential voters, they usually are potential voters. I can't vote, but I can bet, but me betting on Harris wouldn't be in reflection to some vote Harris is definitely going to win. That's one issue. Another is that bets are decided on an individual level of risk to said individuals wallet, meaning there is a cold feet effect and a doubt effect you don't get when voting. The final issue, is the reporting response. See, when a poll is released, you can't just decide to be a part of the next poll as people are reached out to by pollsters, randomly. When you report on betting odds, anyone who is old enough to gamble, can bet, in the context of this election, with one side being high in toxic masculinity, if you tell them they are losing in a certain arena, their pride will have them show up at that arena. Now, I haven't tracked it rigorously but it kind of felt like Kamalas odds for winning the election started to take hits, after Millers work entered into the news cycle. I suspect this may mean that republicans responded to this news by placing more bets on Trump. Which really is the easiest way to mess with Millers predictions model, as it can be made incorrect the same way a company can artificially inflate the price of it's stock. You see, I can't respond to a poll by getting 100s-1000s of people to take part in the next poll, but I can get that many people to make a bet, especially when you're asking cultists to bet on their leader, that's a no brainer for them. 1
swansont Posted October 17 Posted October 17 10 hours ago, MSC said: voters. I can't vote, but I can bet, but me betting on Harris wouldn't be in reflection to some vote Harris is definitely going to win. That's one issue. Another is that bets are decided on an individual level of risk to said individuals wallet, meaning there is a cold feet effect and a doubt effect you don't get when voting. Betting gives you arbitragers when the odds shift. They are interested in making money, so the bets don’t have to represent support of a candidate On 10/15/2024 at 11:11 AM, toucana said: Basically I don’t have a lot of confidence in the US polls right now, as I suspect their sampling methods are fundamentally flawed - a suspicion borne out by the woefully wrong ‘Red Wave’ predictions offered in the last set of mid-term elections. There have apparently been a lot of right-wing-biased polls reported lately, which shifts the average toward Trump. Same thing happened two years ago.
LaurieAG Posted October 17 Posted October 17 On 10/16/2024 at 5:01 AM, MigL said: D Trump is leading or tied ( but still within the statistical margin of error ) in most of the 'swing' states, and this would indicate a winning scenario for D Trump. https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2021/07/19/pre-election-polls-in-2020-had-the-largest-errors-in-40-years/
MJ kihara Posted October 17 Posted October 17 I fear politics,hope will not be classified as interference....the kind of intolerance Trump faces from the other side is astonishing.....we can't throw someone off cliff because of a mere fact,his facts are false or he entertains fake news...anyway welcome to the new era of AI we need to know and elvolve to live in the new era....being obsessed with proving facts is also a form of extremizim....am from outside your region where majority would not support Trump.We need a lot of irritation to our ears....given a chance I would vote Trump big time. -1
swansont Posted October 17 Posted October 17 2 hours ago, MJ kihara said: I fear politics,hope will not be classified as interference....the kind of intolerance Trump faces from the other side is astonishing… Why is opposing a fascist astonishing to you? Why do we have to tolerate such views? 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now