US Presidential Election 2024 - Trump vs Harris - Vote Hard with a Vengence

[Brad Sallows]

Source on that?

One focus group. No need to panic.

Anyone wanting to panic would be better off following RCP's daily "This Day In History" of poll spreads (2016, 2020, and 2024).

 

[KevinB]

Brad, I understand what you're saying. Words matter. However, the statement was drafted to give Biden an out during the debate last election. He was the one that made it 'fact' when responding to Trump. Parse it, A debate, that if the truth had been told, could seriously have affected the election outcome, but the intent was to close debate on the laptop and confirm it as Russian election interference. Between beating up Twitter and Facebook to fall in line, by 3 letter agencies and hiding the laptop, to the infamous 51 statement, it worked for what it was designed to do. Lie to and keep voters in the dark about the truth.

The FBI Counter Intelligence folks had said that it was genuine. Part of the issue that popped up was the chain of custody (or lack thereof). Yes there were a lot of stories from individuals in the FBI that it was likely Russian Disinformation, but as an agency no one actually contradicted the original CI claim.

New agencies ran with multiple stories about it being disinformation, which when looked at ran back to one individual FBI agent.

—- however Hunter Biden was not running for President, and as such it really has about as much to do with his father’s credibility as the Bush girls getting busted with fake ID’s while underage.

Don Jr has a litany of problems as well, but they are irrelevant to the suitability or not of his father to be President.


Quite frankly None of the Above is a better choice for President than either of the two current candidates.

 

[Brad Sallows]

—- however Hunter Biden was not running for President, and as such it really has about as much to do with his father’s credibility as the Bush girls getting busted with fake ID’s while underage.

Don Jr has a litany of problems as well, but they are irrelevant to the suitability or not of his father to be President.

The issue wasn't the presidential candidate's suitability. The issue was whether the presidential finances were entangled with the presidential son's finances, and whether those finances amounted to bribery.

 

[dimsum]

One focus group. No need to panic.

I just asked for a source for the comments.

Anyone wanting to panic would be better off following RCP's daily "This Day In History" of poll spreads (2016, 2020, and 2024).

I don’t 100% trust polls because, again, 2016 - but I did watch the debate and I’m not sure how comments like “3 v 1” translate to “Trump won the debate”.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Im seeing reports independent support went up for Trump after the debate.

Using the electoral map link I've posted a couple of times, today's showed little change. It still has Trump winning by a handy margin. Harris didn't get a bump out of this from the looks of it. The map is based on polling data from 538.com

 

[Brad Sallows]

I don’t 100% trust polls because, again, 2016 - but I did watch the debate and I’m not sure how comments like “3 v 1” translate to “Trump won the debate”.

It isn't necessary to trust the polls for accuracy in a particular year when comparing polls vs outcomes across a couple of elections. If polling agencies still haven't fixed the biases that produce measurement shifts advantageous to Democrats, then, for example, "D+1" might actually be "R+1".

The Democratic strategy of minimizing Harris's exposure to challenging venues looks like they think they're trying to protect a lead; the comparison of current and past numbers suggests it's a lead that doesn't exist. A handful of well-known Democrats (or supporters) are exhorting caution (eg. Nate Silver, Ruy Texeira), but the overwhelming majority of Democratic partisans are high on their own product ("vibe").

I suppose some people think "3 vs 1" is enough of a handicap that it amounts to a raw score of "Trump won". But the most common take I'm seeing from centre-right to not-particularly-centre-right is that Trump should have prepared and that he was ill-disciplined (kept rising to the bait) and missed opportunities. Not as much fart-huffing going on among Republicans.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Using the electoral map link I've posted a couple of times, today's showed little change. It still has Trump winning by a handy margin. Harris didn't get a bump out of this from the looks of it. The map is based on polling data from 538.com

Too early to measure bumps. Wait a few days.

 

[brihard]

Using the electoral map link I've posted a couple of times, today's showed little change. It still has Trump winning by a handy margin. Harris didn't get a bump out of this from the looks of it. The map is based on polling data from 538.com

Yeah, you posted from that same site the other day, and it had Trump at over 400 electoral votes. That’s, uh… I’ll be kind and say it’s a bit dubious.

 

[Lumber]

Using the electoral map link I've posted a couple of times, today's showed little change. It still has Trump winning by a handy margin. Harris didn't get a bump out of this from the looks of it. The map is based on polling data from 538.com

lol. "Donald Trump crushed Kamala Harris in the first Presidential debate..." is where I decided I didn't need to listen to the rest of it.

 

[KevinB]

The issue wasn't the presidential candidate's suitability. The issue was whether the presidential finances were entangled with the presidential son's finances, and whether those finances amounted to bribery.

None of which was able to be determined factually by the laptop or various audits of President Biden’s finances.

So much effort has been made by the MAG crowd about this, that then choses to overlook the selling of Pardons and State Secrets by DJT when he was President.