25 Oct
9:56am, 25 Oct 2024
33,303 posts
|
Johnny Blaze
There is an anti-Trump majority in the states. There was one in 2016 and one in 2020. I find it impossible to believe that a 78 year old rapist and his Rambling Sid Fascist act is going to reverse that, and Roe and Democracy will increase the margin or at least hold it steady. Just because Trump's main outreach groups are podcast incels and WWE fans doesn't mean he will greatly expand this to match or exceed the vote of outraged women and repulsed Republicans. That's my non-data based take. We shall see. |
25 Oct
9:57am, 25 Oct 2024
23,301 posts
|
rf_fozzy
"Harris is winning the women's vote by a huge margin, but Biden also did and there is a huge untapped resource for her to increase that margain" This should have said **not** a huge untapped resource |
25 Oct
10:00am, 25 Oct 2024
17,990 posts
|
jda
Worth noting that the 3% margin of error is really a meaningless number anyway. The sampling uncertainty is far smaller (3% is the sampling uncertainty on a sample size of 1000) but the possibility of bias in sampling can be basically anything depending on how good a job the pollsters have done. And neither of these factors can account for changes in voter sentiment (including turnout or not). I'm still optimistic of a Harris win, the same basic reason that she can't possibly be less popular than Hilary Clinton was v Trump in 2016. I saw quite a few Harris/Walz signs in the USA recently and very few Trump. I'm surprised the polls aren't more in her favour but think that turnout will be better for her. No-one was excited at the prospect of Clinton winning in 2016 (even solid Dem-voting women!), she was only ever the better of two choices. |
25 Oct
10:03am, 25 Oct 2024
25,908 posts
|
larkim
jda wrote: Changing the rules to allow more spending within the (new) rules is exactly the same as breaking the rules and spending outside the (old) rules and it's just sophistry to pretend otherwise. Which made the original promise either stupid or dishonest, possibly both. That depends on whether the old "rules" were right or not. I agree it's breaking the rules, but rules are not immutable, and the fact that the rules are under the control of the party in government means they were always on the table, even if publicly there was an assumption that the rules stayed the same. |
|
25 Oct
10:03am, 25 Oct 2024
17,991 posts
|
jda
And by the way, the 3% sampling uncertainty is a two-sided 95% confidence interval, meaning there's only a 2.5% chance of the true number being more than 3% out in the "wrong" direction. Which isn't much.
|
25 Oct
10:06am, 25 Oct 2024
22,305 posts
|
Chrisull
Interestingly Beyonce is playing at the Harris rally in Houston Texas tonight. Dems don't have a prayer of taking Texas, but they obviously think the Senate seat is in play (it is but odds being quoted at 25% roughly, Cruz has narrowly topped every poll but one I've seen), and they want to highlight abortion and Roe vs Wade once more. It is a risk campaigning away from the seven swing states, but it at least shows the thinking that IF Harris wins, they also would like a Democratic senate if at all possible. |
|
25 Oct
10:06am, 25 Oct 2024
33,304 posts
|
Johnny Blaze
I can't fault Harris as a candidate given she was pitched in with only 4 months to go. She and Walz and the Dems are fighting like hell to save America from its worst impulses. Win or lose she will still be on the right side of History and deserves credit for her doughty performance. Sometimes people see the worser course and approve of it, and they can't be saved from themselves. If that's the case they brought what happens next on themselves. |
|
25 Oct
10:06am, 25 Oct 2024
25,909 posts
|
larkim
Chrisull wrote: larks - it ain't my logic, this is the analyst whose logic I used to make money on in the 2020 and 2022 elections. He was the only one predicting a senate gain for the dems in 2022. Sorry, wasn't trying to suggest you'd come up with the concept - just trying to understand what you were meaning when you summarised it on here! |
25 Oct
10:34am, 25 Oct 2024
5,381 posts
|
run free
One of the issues for Brexit was migrants; same for Austria recently; and now for the US who sees that Trump will stem the flow
|
25 Oct
11:09am, 25 Oct 2024
5,666 posts
|
J2R
run free, it's standard right wing populist fare, it's always worked and always will, demonising a group of 'others', who can then be blamed for all problems. It's simple to grasp if you're a 'low-information' (aka thick as pigshit) voter, unlike thorny, awkward, complex reality.
|
Useful Links
FE accepts no responsibility for external links. Or anything, really.Related Threads
-
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024
-
EU Referendum - In or Out? Vote here
Aug 2018
-
March to Parliament Against Brexit - Sat 2nd July
Jun 2016
-
EU Referendum
Feb 2016
-
Ads on Fetch - anyone else getting Leave and Remain?!
Feb 2017
-
The Environment Thread :-)
Oct 2024
-
Economics
Aug 2023
-
Dear Scottish Fetchies
Jan 2023
-
Any economists out there - question
Oct 2022
-
Power and exploitation - please check my sanity
Oct 2018
