Election 2024 Part III: Out with the old!

[Gori the Grey]

Who is more likely to have a surge in the last days?

Harris. More people are still getting to know her. Everyone has long known how they feel about Trump.

I don't think there will be a surge in the polls, but I do think Harris will outperform her polling, so there will be surprises on election day itself (or the week or so after during which all the ballots get counted).

 

[Sommerswerd]

Harris. More people are still getting to know her. Everyone has long known how they feel about Trump.

I don't think there will be a surge in the polls, but I do think Harris will outperform her polling, so there will be surprises on election day itself (or the week or so after during which all the ballots get counted).

I agree, except I will add that shy-Trump voters are a factor that will likely cause him to outperform his polling once again. However, as you point out, and I believe (hope ) correctly, Harris possibly has the shy-Harris voter factor going on, where women especially will keep quiet about their decision to break with the MAGAnaut men in their lives and secretly vote for Harris.

I agree with you that at this point, people aren't still deciding whether or not to vote for Trump. They are only deciding whether to vote for Harris or not. Some folks might claim that they haven't decided whether they will vote for Trump yet, but I'm calling BS on those folks for the most part. They might not want to admit that they've made their decision, or maybe they're deluding themselves, or possibly just milking the "undecided" label for the attention they get from pollsters, media, etc.

So Harris has room to grow, Trump doesn't. He will likely outperform his polling somewhat, but those won't be new, late-deciding voters, it will just be shy-Trump voters.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Harris possibly has the shy-Harris voter factor going on

Plus the polls aren't hitting young people. They're registering. They're going to vote. And they're going to vote Harris.

 

[Sommerswerd]

I think this is what they put it on. From the paper that references:

Fascinating read. From the article:

During the peak era of leaded gasoline in the United States, which ran from the late 1960s to the early 1980s, the average blood–lead level (BLL) for the general US population was routinely three to five times higher than the current reference value for clinical concern and case management referral (3.5 micrograms of lead per deciliter of blood) (3–5). Consequently, millions of adults alive today were exposed to high levels of lead as children. While these exposures were deemed harmless at the time, animal studies and epidemiological evidence accrued in the intervening years reveal that such exposures likely disrupted healthy development across multiple organ systems (particularly the brain, bone, and cardiovascular systems), resulting in subtle deficits to important outcomes, such as cognitive ability, fine motor skills, and emotional regulation (6), that may influence the trajectory of a person’s life (e.g., their educational attainment, health, wealth, and happiness). These deficits largely persist across time and, in some cases, worsen (7, 8) and are now hypothesized to put individuals at risk for difficult-to-treat chronic and age-related diseases, including cardiovascular disease and dementia (9–11).

So @Lexicus it seems like it was the increased leaded gasoline use... and yes it gave Gen X dementia

FWIW I'm still voting Harris... dementia or no dementia

 

[Sommerswerd]

Plus the polls aren't hitting young people. They're registering. They're going to vote. And they're going to vote Harris.

That's a really good point that I forgot about. For all the election spam that I get in the mail, and in my email, I can't remember ever getting an election related call on my cell phone. If pollsters are using mostly or exclusively landlines, they aren't really capturing the 18-35 vote at all.

If that 60 -30 split in Harris favor that the chart and CNN and everyone else is reporting is only taking into account 18-35 year olds with landlines, they are only getting the most old fashioned, traditional, more affluent, likely more conservative 18-35 year olds. That's a huge potential game changer.

Obviously if Harris were to substantially outperform the polling... you know how Trump is going to react... claiming that is proof that its all rigged, illegal aliens voting, dead people voting, people casting multiple ballots and so on. But then again, he is going to do that regardless, so I guess it doesn't really matter that much.

 

[Gori the Grey]

If it's a landslide, it was rigged.

If it's close, it was super-rigged (those nefarious Ds added just enough votes to win so that it wouldn't be obvious that they were cheating).

But if it's a very convincing win for Harris, he has a more difficult time getting traction for his fraud claims. Especially if the victory is apparent on election night itself, and called by the networks then. That's tough to achieve, though, because PA won't be called on election night.

 

[Lexicus]

I think Trump is just as likely to outperform his polls as Harris is. He did it the last two Presidential elections. And from what I can tell, young men are at least as likely to vote for Trump as for Harris. Young women I expect to break overwhelmingly for Harris.

 

[Gori the Grey]

When I say outperform the polls, I mean outperform the polling margin.

So, if a good poll, like Marist, say, is giving her a 1 point lead in PA, I expect her to win by 2.6.

i.e. Trump can't also "outperform" in this way of framing it.

 

[Lexicus]

When I say outperform the polls, I mean outperform the polling margin.

So, if a good poll, like Marist, say, is giving her a 1 point lead in PA, I expect her to win by 2.6.

i.e. Trump can't also "outperform" in this way of framing it.

https://jacob-long.com/post/polling-errors-map/

 

[Gori the Grey]

Thanks for that. It will take me a while to process it. But it may only bear on my opinion to a certain degree, because I think there are aspects of this race that won't fit precedent. I mean, Dobbs basically. And Swift, a little.

His Polling Bias 2022 maybe comes as close as anything to what I'm talking about.

Edit: check that. I'm not sure I'm yet taking in what he's giving there.

He couldn't do Congressional races in 2022?

 

[Voidwalkin]

I think Trump is just as likely to outperform his polls as Harris is. He did it the last two Presidential elections. And from what I can tell, young men are at least as likely to vote for Trump as for Harris. Young women I expect to break overwhelmingly for Harris.

I'm more optimistic on young men. 62/38. Maybe 65/35. Young women 75-25. I anecdotally note less glee in young guys on avg when transphobia is brought out. Older people, often I can feel their delight. The younger guys are often chauvinistic, but not really hateful to the extent necessary to actually buy into most R culture war positions in majority numbers.

Most young guys(18-30) I work with are reluctant to wholly jump aboard the Dem
train, of course, but they do generally prefer that ride, relative to the other. That's in Midwest cow country, too.

It helps that Harris hasn't pushed the morality to the logical maximum. You may not prefer that, but it has prevented a perception that this election is one moral crusade vs another from forming afaict. As long as her economic message is not lost in culture war noise, she will take the majority.

 

[Lexicus]

Swift endorsed Biden in 2020 IIRC

 

[Cutlass]

Fascinating read. From the article:

So @Lexicus it seems like it was the increased leaded gasoline use... and yes it gave Gen X dementia

FWIW I'm still voting Harris... dementia or no dementia

Trust me, we had the lead.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Swift endorsed Biden in 2020 IIRC

Yeah, but this time linked to a voter-registration site.

 

[Gary Childress]

A new discussion thread for the new race. Is black the new orange? You may freely change your vote in the poll as things move along.


Link to Part II

Jill Stein for President!!!

A Jill Stein administration will:

• Establish a foreign policy based on diplomacy, international law, and human rights
• End existing wars, military actions, proxy wars and secret wars
• Cut military spending by 50-75% and ensure a just transition that replaces military jobs with Green New Deal jobs
• Invest the peace dividend in a Global Green New Deal to prevent climate collapse, and build toward universal access to basic human needs for food, clean water and sanitation, education, and health care for every human being on Earth
• Close the vast majority of the 700+ foreign US military bases
• Stop U.S. support and arms sales to human rights abusers
• Lead on global nuclear disarmament
• End unilateral economic sanctions that primarily harm civilian populations
• Remove war powers from the president and restore Congress’ sole power to declare war
• Disband NATO and replace it with a modern, inclusive security framework that respects the security interests of all nations and people
• Demand an immediate ceasefire in Israel and Palestine, an end to the blockade of Gaza, immediate humanitarian and medical relief, and release of hostages and political prisoners
• Immediately end all military aid to Israel and adopt sanctions until Israel complies with international law to put an end to decades of violence, illegal occupation, displacement, dispossession, apartheid, and ethnic cleansing
• End the longstanding US practice of vetoing UN Security Council resolutions to hold Israel accountable to international law
• Move to end the UN Security Council to ensure the UN is a true democratic body
• Remove U.S. troops from Iraq and Syria
• Stop fueling the war between Russia and Ukraine and lead on negotiating a peaceful end
• End the embargo of Cuba and normalize relations
• End sanctions on Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela that amount to collective punishment of civilian populations
• End US interventionist policies that drive people to become migrant refugees
• End the failed drug wars and stop regime change attempts against foreign governments
• Ban the use of killer drones, robots, and artificial intelligence
• Close the Guantanamo Bay detention camp
• Ensure family-supporting wages and benefits for military service members
• Fully fund veterans’ programs and benefits, including healthcare, mental health, housing, and job training, for a transition to civilian life
• Protect the rights of service members, including conscientious objectors

https://www.jillstein2024.com/platform

 

[Cutlass]

Jill Stein for President!!!

https://www.jillstein2024.com/platform

Not a good idea.

 

[innonimatu]

Not a good idea.

Keep discreding yourself along with your discredited tribal chiefs - now that's a strategy huh?

 

[Cutlass]

Keep discreding yourself along with your discredited tribal chiefs - now that's a strategy huh?

No one thinks that that is what is happening.

 

[Zardnaar]

According to (CNN etc) some known media, the race is simply very close. Who is more likely to have a surge in the last days?
Though polls have been very often wrong in recent years.

Hard to say. Hypothetically Harris coukd blow Trump out with relatively few votes in a few places.

Trump's losing the popular vote pretty much no matter what. Popular vote doesn't matter. 3% apparently is the magic number Harris needs to carry the popular vote.

Whoever carries Pennsylvania will likely win imho assuming no supreme court shenanigans. IMHO of course. If Trump loses Pennsylvania he probably loses elsewhere so call it for Harris on Election night of she carries Pennsylvania. She can win elsewhere if she loses Pennsylvania but it's not good.

There's also sone interesting polls in places like obe of the Carolinas, Texas and Florida. Potential shock loses there for Trump. If he loses any of them it's basically over.

Assuming Harris wins she probably gets two terms and in 8 years great boomer die off ad Texas and Florida trending towards purple GoP is looking at electoral oblivion for several decades (think Democrats FDR until the 50s or GoP 68-92).

 

[Broken_Erika]

Escalating Trump row looms over Zelensky's US visit​

The Speaker of the US House Mike Johnson has demanded that Ukraine fire its ambassador to Washington, as a feud between the Republican Party and Volodymyr Zelensky escalates.
Johnson's intervention comes after President Zelensky visited an arms factory in Scranton, Pennsylvania - the hometown of President Joe Biden in a key swing state - with several top Democrats.
In a public letter, the top Republican said the visit was "designed to help Democrats" and claimed it amounted to "election interference".
The row has threatened to overshadow Zelensky's meeting with President Joe Biden on Thursday, during which he will present a "plan for victory" in his country's war with Russia.

Since his arrival to the US on Sunday, Zelensky has ramped up efforts to persuade the US and other allies to lend more support to Ukraine as it fends off Russian advances.
On Thursday, Biden announced that the US will send $7.9bn (£5.9bn) worth of military aid to Ukraine in a surge of assistance as his presidency nears its end.
The aid, part of a $61bn package that passed Congress in April, includes additional Patriot air defence missiles and long-range munitions.
The weapons package will be approved through presidential drawdown authority and will pull from existing Pentagon supplies to deliver the arms more quickly.
Congressional Republicans blocked the Biden administration's $61bn military package for months earlier this year, before ultimately relenting and passing the legislation in April. Before that, arms supplies to Ukraine had dried up for several months.
The US has been the largest foreign donor to Ukraine, with $56bn provided for its defence to date.
Responding to the aid package, Zelensky thanked the US and said he was "grateful to Joe Biden, US Congress and its both parties".
The Ukrainian president said the assistance would be used "in the most efficient and transparent manner" to achieve "victory for Ukraine, just and lasting peace, and transatlantic security".
Zelensky had planned to present his priorities outlined in Thursday's statement to the two presidential candidates: Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.
However, an official on Donald Trump's campaign said the Republican nominee would not meet the Ukrainian leader on his tour of the US this week.
Trump and Zelensky have long held a fractious relationship. In 2019, Trump was impeached by the US House over accusations that he pressured Ukraine's leader to dig up damaging information on a political rival.
He has frequently echoed Russian talking points over the war. At a campaign event on Wednesday he mocked Zelensky as the "greatest salesman on Earth" and accused the Ukrainian leader of refusing to "make a deal" with Moscow.
During an earlier rally on Tuesday, Trump also praised Russia's military capabilities, saying: "They beat Hitler, they beat Napoleon - that’s what they do, they fight."
The former president's remarks come amid a growing row between Zelensky and the Republican party over his visit to an ammunition factory in Biden's hometown of Scranton in the key swing state of Pennsylvania.
During the visit, Zelensky appeared with Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro and several other top Democrats. Speaker Johnson accused the president of taking part in a "partisan campaign event" designed to help Vice-President Kamala Harris' camapign.
Meanwhile, the Republican-led House Oversight Committee had already announced that it would investigate whether Zelensky's trip was an attempt to use a foreign leader to benefit Vice-President Kamala Harris' campaign.
Congressional Republicans blocked the Biden administration's $61bn military package for months earlier this year, before ultimately relenting and passing the legislation in April.
Before that, arms supplies to Ukraine had dried up for several months.
The US has been the largest foreign donor to Ukraine, with $56bn provided for its defence to date.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c80rkv0k4j8o