I think that's a highly unlikely scenario.Well, that is the hope…
The hope of MAGA though, in the disputed election scenario, probably rests on the states rights agenda and interpretation of the constitution. Hence, red states declaring that they believe that Trump won and calling on those state forces that are under the control of individual states with republican administrations to act accordingly against “tyrannical” federal interference. At that point you have a constitutional crisis, with the federal government confronting the very question of using military force internally that has outraged their half of America when hypothesised by Trump himself (as a way he would deal with opponents) during the election campaign.
The Lincoln Project is a liberal Republican Party PAC that opposes Donald TrumpPretty amazing this has to be an advert..
I see they are trying to revive Trump's Epstein links this weekend Jeffrey Epstein showed photos of Trump with topless young women, author claims
A sign of how far things have gone that these further details in the story, which are all a bit second hand anyway, won't even flicker the needle.
Jesus
How Mormons could be Kamala Harris' secret weapon in Arizona
Some members of the Church of Latter-Day Saints are growing uncomfortable with the way the GOP talks about immigrants.www.newsweek.com
The Dems have a very capable GOTV operation so not sure anything Trump says will matter much without a comparable one…Can you contextualise that for us?
We know Biden won big among postal voters last time out. How does this compare to that? We also know Trump is now saying that it's ok to vote postally, so how has that affected Republican early voting?
Same kind of question re the second stat. What was the split in men/women for early voting in the last election?
I suspect that if a more unlikely result comes out as true then the second explanation the authors give will be correct rather than the first oneGuardian piece on 'herding' amongst the pollsters, creating the impression that it is neck and neck. No evidence for it, but strong suggestions they are finding wider margins in their data but are then 'flattening' the actual poll results to avoid getting it wildly wrong. Pretty cowardly if true - you only had one job to do - but might explain why the results have been so 'improbably' consistent.
Dead-heat poll results are astonishing – and improbable, these experts say
It’s possible the tied race reflects not the sentiments of the voters, but rather risk-averse decision-making by pollsterswww.theguardian.com
But I don;t actually think it is that improbable that the shares of the vote will be quite close - it was in 2016, it was in 2020, it has been in other elections. Why would Harris win by a much larger margin than Biden? For good or ill people know what Trump is and what Harris and the Democrats are.“Some of the tools pollsters are using in 2024 to address the polling problems of 2020, such as weighting by partisanship, past vote or other factors, may be flattening out the differences and reducing the variation in reported poll results,” they write.
Well - cos trump is even more extreme and demented and has declined physically - and is now a convicted felon - whereas Harris is considerably younger than biden and trump. Plus Roe vs Wade got overturned since the last election. All reasons that Harris might beat Trump convincingly. Not saying she will -but all stuff that could have a significent impact (especially the abortion stuff - as we've already seen in the midterms)I suspect that if a more unlikely result comes out as true then the second explanation the authors give will be correct rather than the first one
But I don;t actually think it is that improbable that the shares of the vote will be quite close - it was in 2016, it was in 2020, it has been in other elections. Why would Harris win by a much larger margin than Biden? For good or ill people know what Trump is and what Harris and the Democrats are.
(Which does not mean that the correction factors polling companies may be using are correct).
You could argue that this was already baked in in the 2020 and 2016 elections - both Biden and Clinton won convincingly with women, Trump won with men in both elections.Well - cos trump is even more extreme and demented and has declined physically - and is now a convicted felon - whereas Harris is considerably younger than biden and trump. Plus Roe vs Wade got overturned since the last election. All reasons that Harris might beat Trump convincingly. Not saying she will -but all stuff that could have a significent impact (especially the abortion stuff - as we've already seen in the midterms)
That's certainly true, though Trump has been almost deliberately undermining his position with women over the last few days. And I doubt that coming out with misogynistic shit necessarily brings on board an equivalent number of male bigots. No idea what the result will be and I don't think the 'Trump has cognitive decline' stuff is either helpful or necessarily true. However he does seem to have lost the instinctive touch he had that allowed him to make his pitch in 2016.You could argue that this was already baked in in the 2020 and 2016 elections - both Biden and Clinton won convincingly with women, Trump won with men in both elections.
I think Harris will walk it.
The abortion stuff is new though. As is Harris being significantly younger.You could argue that this was already baked in in the 2020 and 2016 elections - both Biden and Clinton won convincingly with women, Trump won with men in both elections.
We're all in the dark really. Pollsters are flailing, finding their historical precedents to be poor predictors but with little to base corrections on.
I think we can say a few things with confidence. Harris will win comfortably among women, as Clinton and Biden did. Harris will win the popular vote, as Clinton and Biden did, probably quite comfortably.
But could Trump fluke a victory like he did in 2016? The idea should be ridiculous and outlandishly unlikely, but it isn't quite.
If I were a pollster, I'd be tempted to throw out some numbers without trying to correct, particularly if they're predicting a big Harris victory. I do think that's possible - the possible range is between a big Harris victory and a Trump fluke win. If nobody else is predicting that and you are and you're right, you've made your name. Got to be worth a punt.
What did it say in the 2016 election?That Selzer poll is out. Most accurate poll in the US apparently.
It has Harris up +3 in Iowa
going by that Bahnhof Strasse I think you might be underselling Harris
It had Trump at +7, Trump won by +9What did it say in the 2016 election?
I think Harris will win but the polls were mostly wrong then.
Like LBJ I think all the stuff is baked in already. And the Democrats did less well in the 2022 midterms than 2018.Well - cos trump is even more extreme and demented and has declined physically - and is now a convicted felon - whereas Harris is considerably younger than biden and trump. Plus Roe vs Wade got overturned since the last election. All reasons that Harris might beat Trump convincingly. Not saying she will -but all stuff that could have a significent impact (especially the abortion stuff - as we've already seen in the midterms)