oblong Posted Wednesday at 06:03 PM Share Posted Wednesday at 06:03 PM 538 and Nate both have Harris at 55% winning.... too low for my liking. I'm not suggesting they are wrong or anything... I haven't been paying too much attention other than what I see here and on twitter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Cat Gentleman Posted Wednesday at 07:01 PM Share Posted Wednesday at 07:01 PM 3 hours ago, romad1 said: Lets go! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted Wednesday at 08:35 PM Author Share Posted Wednesday at 08:35 PM Bummer c'mon doobie lover Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted Wednesday at 09:52 PM Share Posted Wednesday at 09:52 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smr-nj Posted Wednesday at 09:53 PM Share Posted Wednesday at 09:53 PM Just now, Motown Bombers said: That’s f’ing disgusting 😤 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edman85 Posted Wednesday at 10:57 PM Share Posted Wednesday at 10:57 PM That guy's wiki page is quite impressive. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Cat Gentleman Posted Wednesday at 11:33 PM Share Posted Wednesday at 11:33 PM 36 minutes ago, Edman85 said: That guy's wiki page is quite impressive. yikes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted Thursday at 12:07 AM Share Posted Thursday at 12:07 AM 6 hours ago, oblong said: 538 and Nate both have Harris at 55% winning.... too low for my liking. I'm not suggesting they are wrong or anything... I haven't been paying too much attention other than what I see here and on twitter. Nobody will say it, but between the pollsters and the aggregators, there are many incentives not to underestimate Donald Trump's chances this year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted Thursday at 12:09 AM Share Posted Thursday at 12:09 AM 1 hour ago, Edman85 said: That guy's wiki page is quite impressive. He's not a household name like MTG, but he's in the Top 5 of odious Congresscritters for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted Thursday at 12:11 AM Share Posted Thursday at 12:11 AM It's apparently now election interference that weapons that Ukraine uses to defend themselves are made in Scranton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motor City Sonics Posted Thursday at 12:18 AM Share Posted Thursday at 12:18 AM In 1968 an immigrant named Sirhan Sirhan shot and killed the man who looked destined to by our 37th President. Kamala Harris' fault. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted Thursday at 12:21 AM Share Posted Thursday at 12:21 AM 2 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said: In 1968 an immigrant named Sirhan Sirhan shot and killed the man who looked destined to by our 37th President. Kamala Harris' fault. It was in California. As D/A, she just let him go after he murdered an entire family and ate their dog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted Thursday at 01:37 AM Share Posted Thursday at 01:37 AM 7 hours ago, oblong said: 538 and Nate both have Harris at 55% winning.... too low for my liking. I'm not suggesting they are wrong or anything... I haven't been paying too much attention other than what I see here and on twitter. Harris with a very slight edge is a consistent theme. The gamblers give her a similar edge. It's basically a toss up right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted Thursday at 12:59 PM Share Posted Thursday at 12:59 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted Thursday at 01:37 PM Share Posted Thursday at 01:37 PM 13 hours ago, mtutiger said: Nobody will say it, but between the pollsters and the aggregators, there are many incentives not to underestimate Donald Trump's chances this year I think we have seen from 2016 that the Trump campaign has some kind of stealth voter turnout capability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted Thursday at 02:04 PM Share Posted Thursday at 02:04 PM 8 minutes ago, chasfh said: I think we have seen from 2016 that the Trump campaign has some kind of stealth voter turnout capability. Without investigating it.... was it turnout for Trump or apathy towards Hillary? I know going by gut feeling is bad but I can't help but feel there's real meaning in the crowds and enthusiasm I see for Kamala, which exceeded my what my expectations would have been prior to July 2024. I think having a black woman is going to draw in voters that didn't participate previously and I don't know how pollsters can account for that. But maybe they are. To me 2020 is the baseline and I don't think dems lose any share, they only gain, and the GOP doesn't gain any, they lose share. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted Thursday at 02:05 PM Share Posted Thursday at 02:05 PM Just now, oblong said: Without investigating it.... was it turnout for Trump or apathy towards Hillary? Without knowing for sure either way, i would hope Harris-Walz never lets their foot up off the gas even a touch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted Thursday at 06:20 PM Share Posted Thursday at 06:20 PM 4 hours ago, oblong said: Without investigating it.... was it turnout for Trump or apathy towards Hillary? Voter apathy, and it's just hard in this country for the same party to win the Presidency three elections in a row; Reagan-Reagan-Bush are the exception, not the norm. 2020 was a different ball of wax, but I don't think it was so much a secret stealth Trump voter more than it was COVID and how it impacted sampling. Along with the fact that the Democrats basically had zero ground game as well (which won't be the case this year). Either way, pollsters aren't going to broadcast trade secrets, but there's little chance that they all sat around for the past four years without making modifications based on lessons learned from 2020. Especially given, again, the incentives strongly favor not underestimating Trump again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted Thursday at 06:32 PM Share Posted Thursday at 06:32 PM (edited) With polling as well, discussing 2020, it's important to note that most national polling and state polling (Wisconsin being the exception) were pretty close on Biden's share of the vote.... for instance, he was generally pulling 51-52% in a lot of the national polling that year, but polls underestimated Trump's share. This is a big factor in the "miss" Fast forward to four years, Harris has polls where she's pulling a similar share to Biden, but Trump's share is polling a lot higher in 2024 than it did four years ago. This doesn't mean that polling error isn't possible in 2024, but it does tell me that if it happens, it isn't going to happen exactly like 2020. And it's a possible data point to suggest that pollsters might be having a better time picking up Trump's support versus previous cycles. Edited Thursday at 06:34 PM by mtutiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted Thursday at 07:03 PM Share Posted Thursday at 07:03 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted Thursday at 09:27 PM Share Posted Thursday at 09:27 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted Thursday at 09:28 PM Share Posted Thursday at 09:28 PM Big for a few reasons... One, it's an important EC vote. But another reason is that the Omaha district may be most fitting avatar for a generic suburban district and suggests Trump will fall further in suburban areas this fall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted Thursday at 09:30 PM Share Posted Thursday at 09:30 PM (edited) 3 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said: Cruz is stuck hoping Trump's margin in Texas is close to 2020... If she can draw closer, like into range of a Trump +3 or so, the Senate race will be a tossup. He's just a uniquely flawed politician Edited Thursday at 09:31 PM by mtutiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted Thursday at 09:45 PM Share Posted Thursday at 09:45 PM 16 minutes ago, mtutiger said: Big for a few reasons... One, it's an important EC vote. But another reason is that the Omaha district may be most fitting avatar for a generic suburban district and suggests Trump will fall further in suburban areas this fall If Harris is +9, I think Bacon may be toast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted Thursday at 09:51 PM Share Posted Thursday at 09:51 PM 4 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said: If Harris is +9, I think Bacon may be toast. Bacon tends to be served on toast with lettuce and tomato... Sometimes avocado (for the millennial crowd). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.