Jump to content

2024 Presidential Election Thread - Let's keep the party going.


bolverk

Recommended Posts

Tomorrow is Harris' turn with the National Association of Black Journalists.  Another off-the-cuff interview that's not with our for-profit, MAGA-sympathizing media

MEDIA ADVISORY

What: The National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) will host an in-person conversation with Vice President Kamala Harris. This event will feature an interview between Vice President Harris and NABJ member journalists. It will take place in Philadelphia—a city deeply tied to NABJ’s legacy.

When: Tuesday, September 17, 2024, 2:30 p.m. EDT

Where: WHYY, Downtown Philadelphia

Who: The event will be attended by NABJ professional and student members and 100 journalism and communications students from local HBCUs will be invited. It is not a campaign event and is not open to the public.

Details:

•PolitiFact will provide real-time fact-checking of the conversation via the #NABJFactCheck social media hashtag and through a live feed on the NABJ website.

•The event will be livestreamed for those unable to attend in person on WHYY’s platforms and NABJ’s YouTube and Facebook pages.

•Registration will not be available onsite. This will be an intimate setting. Seating is limited. Members and students interested in attending must RSVP by September 16 to attend. Details regarding in-person access will be provided via NABJ’s member email system and shared with local universities.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chuckie Finster said:

 


Alternate Translation: Kamala wins the vast majority of scenarios where she wins the popular vote, which means my model showing Trump as the favorite contains a significant number of Trump winning the popular vote scenarios. Seems likely.

Not to state the obvious, but Trump with a 37% chance of winning the popular vote is insane. Seriously, if your model spits that out, rethink everything you're doing. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Red Five said:

Not to state the obvious, but Trump with a 37% chance of winning the popular vote is insane. Seriously, if your model spits that out, rethink everything you're doing. 

Yeah, that’s pretty fucking stupid. A Republican has won the NPV just once since 1988 (Bush in 2004). Trump, becoming less popular by the day, is suddenly going to have a 40% chance to win the popular vote?

Sure Jan GIF

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

538 - Harris 60/40

Also love how something called Atlas released a poll showing Trump up nationally 3-4 and Silver says it has a huge weight on his model. Of course it does. A poll could come out today showing Harris up 7 or 8 and he’d ensure it has little impact. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Js1 said:

538 - Harris 60/40

Also love how something called Atlas released a poll showing Trump up nationally 3-4 and Silver says it has a huge weight on his model. Of course it does. A poll could come out today showing Harris up 7 or 8 and he’d ensure it has little impact. 

Silver is getting paid by Thiel for all this, but once Harris wins nobody will ever have to care about him again.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Yeah, that’s pretty fucking stupid. A Republican has won the NPV just once since 1988 (Bush in 2004). Trump, becoming less popular by the day, is suddenly going to have a 40% chance to win the popular vote?

Sure Jan GIF

I'm not sure how the numbers would work out, but wouldn't any statistical model give Trump a significant chance at PV victory?  The raw numbers for the 2020 election was 51.8 to 46.8 percent.  Texas was almost a flip of that result, 52.06 to 46.48 percent.  I'd believe the soundness of a model that formulated Harris had a 40% chance of winning Texas, even if I also know that there's no chance in hell of it happening.  Same for the general.  It's not like the polls or actual results are indicating a 20 point pummeling (they should, but alas).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

Someone want to explain to me how Arizona has voted for a D Governor and 2 D senators and last election voted Biden over Trump now will switch back to Trump?  I find this hard to believe.  

I do too. Especially with abortion on the ballot. I’m just posting as I see them

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

There's fuckery afoot in Arizona. Maybe there's truth to the rumor about Charlie Kirk bussing "volunteers" into AZ who registered to vote.

There's definitely fuckery afoot in Arizona, just like in Georgia and Pennsylvania, etc. Let's just hope Harris' win is so large, it won't make a shit.

Edited by C-Man
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

Someone want to explain to me how Arizona has voted for a D Governor and 2 D senators and last election voted Biden over Trump now will switch back to Trump?  I find this hard to believe.  

Really awful polling of Latino and suburban voters, especially women. Democrats are going to have a great night here.

  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, C-Man said:

There's definitely fuckery afoot in Arizona, just like in Georgia and Pennsylvania, etc. Let's just hope Harris' win is so large, it won't make a shit.

No matter how large of a margin she wins by there will be fuckery on the other side. They are not going to take any loss lightly.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Rage+1 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Zonahorn said:

Arizona soundly rejected sore losers and election deniers in 20/22. The two biggest sore losers and election deniers are at the top of the ticket. Arizona. Will. Be. Blue. I don’t give a shit what polling says.

I don’t know that I’d call it soundly in 20 with 11k margin, and then lake in 22 was 17k. I’d say both dem candidates are stronger in 24 but still feels coin flip if the state was that close to electing lake period. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bluto said:

I don’t know that I’d call it soundly in 20 with 11k margin, and then lake in 22 was 17k. I’d say both dem candidates are stronger in 24 but still feels coin flip if the state was that close to electing lake period. 

I would call Martha McSally losing by more votes in 2020 after she got appointed to her seat because she lost in 2018 as soundly rejecting a sore loser. Mark Kelly got more votes than President Biden. I would call Republicans losing SoS, AG, and the Gubernatorial race soundly rejecting election deniers. Especially since Republicans barely managed to win more congressional districts and a whopping one-seat majority in both chambers of the state legislature. The best news Republicans got in 22 was Tom Horne barely scraping by and Kimberly Yee getting re-elected by big margins for the state treasurer. Donald Trump and MAGA are going to lose Arizona, Bigly. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Zonahorn said:

And to put the final nail in the coffin: Arizona is 53% White Non-Hispanic, not 71%, and 50-64 makes up 17% of Arizona, not 35%. Poll is bad and wrong

Is that relevant? The issue is the make up of voters, not the makeup of the population generally. You'd have to compare to the demographics of past elections to judge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Zonahorn said:

And to put the final nail in the coffin: Arizona is 53% White Non-Hispanic, not 71%, and 50-64 makes up 17% of Arizona, not 35%. Poll is bad and wrong

It's def a little skewed for age - 50-64 was 26% of the electorate in 2020.  Really got oversampled there.

The race crosstabs don't look skew-y to me  - 2020 was 74% white, 19% Latino.  This poll is 71% and 19%.  Gender was also the same as 2020 - 52/48

Party ID is a little screw-y - 2020 was 26 D, 35 R, 39 I and this poll is 32 D, 33 R, 35 I

Overall, just take it for what it is - a Trafalgar poll.  We need more high quality GA, PA, AZ polls - period.

Edited by Js1
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Harris has held solid leads in WI, MI and now even Trafalgar has her up in NV (by what would be a healthy margin, considering their lean)

That is 257

She has led in several high-quality NC polls - that is all she needs to put her over 270.  GA/AZ/PA is running up the score and I fully expect that she will win all 3

There's an expectation of several high-quality PA polls coming this week (FINALLY) to see where this race really is. 

Do you know of historically there is a period before election day where opinions solidify and don’t change, such that good polling/enough data in the set is fairly reflective of the final outcomes?  And if so where are we relative to that time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pato del Muerto said:

Do you know of historically there is a period before election day where opinions solidify and don’t change, such that good polling/enough data in the set is fairly reflective of the final outcomes?  And if so where are we relative to that time?

Well this I know - I don't think there's been a change in the PV winner from who was leading post-Labor Day (margin changes, but not the overall winner).  I'd probably bank more on what the state polls look like in say, 30 days, compared to now.  Hence why I think Silver giving Trump a 40% chance of winning the PV is a joke, because Harris has been the national PV leader pre- and post-Labor day. 

For instance - in September 2020, Ann Selzer had Iowa a TIE race.  In October 2020, like the weekend prior to the election, she dropped that Trump +7 that ended up very close to the final margin.   The closer you get to Election Day, the more accurate polling should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

And they picked on a group that cannot defend themselves at the ballot box. 

Except the people targeted for repression/harassment/violence won’t be limited to Haitian immigrants who are here legally. Some citizens who happen to be black will probably also suffer. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

To me it does not matter if born here, under legal status or illegal. This is bullshit, Nazi type propaganda and will get people killed. This will end with body count, and that could be 1 or escalate into something a hell of a lot worse.

It's what they want. Look at J6.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

It's what they want. Look at J6.

J 6 was not about body count. It was about mass hysteria and taking over the government. How many died in the Reichstag fire? Even if the Berlin FD has put it out, saving the building, etc, the action alone created what the Nazi asswipes needed to continue their propaganda rule. Every extreme group needs a date. I do not think they were going to hang all of congress, etc. I think they wanted to show that they could. Michigan is another story. There they were going to end up killing the Governor if they got away with it.

Edited by InkaUtexas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

To me it does not matter if born here, under legal status or illegal. This is bullshit, Nazi type propaganda and will get people killed. This will end with body count, and that could be 1 or escalate into something a hell of a lot worse.

See the uptick in violence against Asians amidst Trump’s rhetoric about the “China Virus” and “Kung Flu.”

Edited by WhatTheBuck
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Do you know of historically there is a period before election day where opinions solidify and don’t change, such that good polling/enough data in the set is fairly reflective of the final outcomes?  And if so where are we relative to that time?

I'm sure there's a very small percentage of people who don't decide who they're going to vote for until they get in the ballot box. In the case of Diaper Dotard, that percentage has to be very small because he's been around so long and people who aren't going to vote for him will know so far ahead of time. The more pressing and unpredictable issue for a campaign is getting their voters to take the time to vote.

Keep in mind that for every poll you see, there's not only a sampling error (the +/- 3 (or so) percentage points based on whether the sample being polled is a match to the entire voting population) but other built-in errors, such as whether the sample polled are actually likely voters.

There are barely any high-quality state polls anymore. Good polling is expensive, and our media has been captured by corporate interests which are for the most part only concerned with profits. That's why there's so many shitty national polls. It didn't used to be this way. For example, Gallup used to do public polling on behalf of media clients but there's no longer demand for the type of extensive pre-election research they'd do in the public sphere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Except the people targeted for repression/harassment/violence won’t be limited to Haitian immigrants who are here legally. Some citizens who happen to be black will probably also suffer. 

Since Haitians is code for non-white, it might affect Usha's kids.  I only say might in terms of before the election.  They will eventually feel the hate.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...