1 photos
For those who enjoy polls
Nothing much has changed among the major poll aggregators as the polls are tightening as they usually do this close to election day;.
Harris is still at the winning 270 Electoral College Vote in Race To The White House, still only 0. 3 point at most in one state, PA, away from 270+ in 538 and 538 Who Is Favored To Win, 270 To Win and Nate Silver Bulletin. She is only 0. 4 point away from 270+ even in the demonstrably Winger-leaning RealClearPolitics poll aggregator.
Oh, and speaking of Nate Silver, he has at this late hour come to the conclusion that pollsters might, just might have been lowballing Harris all along considering one of the Gold Standard pollsters has today posted a poll showing Harris ahead of Trump by a whopping 3 points in the ruby red state of Iowa!
[B]Iowa Poll: Kamala Harris leapfrogs Donald Trump to take lead near Election Day. Here's how.
The nationally recognized Iowa Poll shows Kamala Harris picking up support from women to surpass Donald Trump in a ruby-red state he has won twice.
Nov. 2, 2024[/B]
[URL]https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2024/11/02/iowa-poll-kamala-harris-leads-donald-trump-2024-presidential-race/75354033007/[/URL]
[QUOTE]Democrat Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in Iowa 47% to 44%, a new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll shows.
A victory for Harris would be a shocking development after Iowa has swung aggressively to the right in recent elections, delivering Trump solid victories in 2016 and 2020.
The poll shows that women particularly those who are older or are politically independent are driving the late shift toward Harris.
Trump continues to lead with his core base of support: men, evangelicals, rural residents and those without a college degree.
......
Fewer than 1% say they would vote for Libertarian presidential candidate Chase Oliver, 1% would vote for someone else, 3% arent sure and 2% dont want to say for whom they already cast a ballot.
[/QUOTE]And I should probably mention in passing that the supposedly highest regarded of the Presidential Betting Markets, PredictIt, at this writing has Harris ahead of Trump by 8 points:
[URL]https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/7456/Who-will-win-the-2024-US-presidential-election[/URL]
How about asking a different question
[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2957844][URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/02/upshot/democrats-trump-election.html[/URL][/QUOTE]From your link:
[QUOTE]How is Mr. Trump still so competitive? The simplest answer is that the national political environment just isnt as conducive to a Democratic victory as many might imagine.[/QUOTE]When will the NYT ask this question instead;.
Why can't the one candidate who knows better than anyone else how to exploit and capitalize on the still racially-polarized, misogynistic elements of American society and who is best equipped by decades of experience to sell shit as chocolate pudding to the dumbest Repub hillbillies in the country, another middle-aged or older White guy Donald Trump, been unable to come within 3,000,000 then 7,000,000 votes of winning the approval of the American Electorate and is now still within a normal +/-MoE of losing again even with typically pro Mainstream Media like the NYT working mightily to help him and his fellow America-hating Repubs get elected?
Trump must feel utterly humiliated that a woman of mixed minority ethnicity not only slaughtered him in the one debate he could not avoid and hide from in his basement, but is amazingly competitive in this election according to the polls and by many of the most intelligent readings of the polls and the early vote is on track to whip his fat butt like a rented mule.
NYT should ask the REAL question, to Repubs...
[QUOTE=EihTooms;2957913]From your link:
When will the NYT ask this question instead;.
Why can't the one candidate who knows better than anyone else how to exploit and capitalize on the still racially-polarized, misogynistic elements of American society and who is best equipped by decades of experience to sell shit as chocolate pudding to the dumbest Repub hillbillies in the country, another middle-aged or older White guy Donald Trump, been unable to come within 3,000,000 then 7,000,000 votes of winning the approval of the American Electorate and is now still within a normal +/-MoE of losing again even with typically pro Mainstream Media like the NYT working mightily to help him and his fellow America-hating Repubs get elected? ... [/QUOTE]The article's headline title, is very politically telling, if not also bias, in its very hubris assumptions.
Make no mistake about it, [I][b]Donald Trump is mainly a Republican problem[/b][/I] and collectively speaking, is American's problem child.
Democrats ONLY job, is to provide their best candidate, they believe will beat the one candidate, Repubs place in front of them. Which they've done once already, in Joe Biden/Harris win and soon to be a second (2x) time, in a Harris/Walz win.
The fact that the Repubs, "set the bar so low", that a serial-liar, pussy-grabbing, indicted felon and 'Commander-in-Cheat', could easily jump over said "low bar", not once (1x), not twice (2x) but three times (3x), to take-over the party and destroy it, along with Republican so called conservative "values", their "moderate" candidates and the rest of gullible GOP/Repub Party.
It has NEVER been about Dems, but rather a Repub cautionary tale, of [I][b]how and inept Repub Party, couldn't beat Trump[/b][/I] and imploded and devolved, into in fascist 'MAGA' political party.
The question, rather should read, [I][b]"Why haven't the Republicans, been able beat Donald Trump?[/b] Why has it been so hard for Repubs to find a candidate with and higher IQ, with better moral Repub 'Conservative values', that loves America, abides by the Rule of Law, upholds The Constitution and American democracy?"[/I].
Trump rally cameraman goes rogue. Lolol
[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2957966][URL]https://www.newsmax.com/politics/nate-silver-pollsters-cheating/2024/11/01/id/1186344/[/URL]
[URL]https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/11/02/poll-donald-trump-leading-kamala-harris-by-10-percent-in-iowa/[/URL][/QUOTE]While Trump is blathering his usual lies about his crowd sizes, never an empty seat, bigger crowds than any rallies in the world and all that crap, his cameraman goes rogue and pans around to alllll the empty seats and allll the repeating, bussed-in rally goers distracted and not paying the least bit of attention, many apparently bailing out already or heading back to the concession area for whatever free food and beer they are given just for showing up again and again and again.
Hilarious, must-see video:
[URL]https://x.com/AntiquarianMuse/status/1853070980878352810[/URL]
That's what he gets for stiffing the crew at those rallies. Pay the bills you rack up every now and then, Donnie.
Newsmax flat-out lied to MDS. He fell for it.
[QUOTE=MiamiSammy;2958052]Anyone using Newsmax or Breitbart as a "source" doesn't understand the meaning of a "credible source".[/QUOTE]Yes. Case in point; to read Newsmax's spin on Nate Silver's conclusion that pollsters are "herding" or cheating to keep the poll results within a point or two for Trump and Harris, Newsmax cons Trumpster suckers like MDS into thinking Silver meant that they have been [I]raising[/I] Harris' numbers to match Trump's.
Nope.
My earlier comment about Nate Silver finally concluding pollsters other than the highly-regarded one who conducted the 47% Harris /44%Trump poll in Iowa might, just might have been "lowballing Harris" all along came directly from his website. Those were his words. Not the other way around, not that they have been [I]raising[/I] her numbers to match Trump's but that they have been either [I]raising[/I] his numbers or [I]lowering/lowballing[/I] hers to keep the polls tight.
He has updated and eliminated that page by now. With lying, fake news organizations like Newsmax around, I suppose I should have linked and quoted it at the time, taken a screenshot of it or both. But you can read actual quotes and similar sentiment expressed by Silver in this recent Newsweek article:
[B]What Nate Silver Has Said About Kamala Harris' Chances.
Nov. 3, 2024[/B]
[URL]https://www.newsweek.com/nate-silver-kamala-harris-chances-election-1978638[/URL]
[QUOTE]In his column, Silver wrote that Harris might be underestimated in the polls because "pollsters are terrified of missing low on Mr. Trump again" and "they may consciously or unconsciously make assumptions that favor him."[/QUOTE]
Harris wins Iowa? Selzer Polls indicates wider implications for Red States?
[QUOTE=EihTooms;2957838]Nothing much has changed among the major poll aggregators as the polls are tightening as they usually do this close to election day;.
Harris is still at the winning 270 Electoral College Vote in Race To The White House, still only 0. 3 point at most in one state, PA, away from 270+ in 538 and 538 Who Is Favored To Win, 270 To Win and Nate Silver Bulletin. She is only 0. 4 point away from 270+ even in the demonstrably Winger-leaning RealClearPolitics poll aggregator.
Oh, and speaking of Nate Silver, he has at this late hour come to the conclusion that pollsters might, just might have been lowballing Harris all along [b]considering one of the [u]Gold Standard pollsters[/u] has today posted a poll showing Harris ahead of Trump by a whopping 3 points in the ruby red state of Iowa![/b]
[B]Iowa Poll: Kamala Harris leapfrogs Donald Trump to take lead near Election Day. Here's how.
The nationally recognized Iowa Poll shows Kamala Harris picking up support from women to surpass Donald Trump in a ruby-red state he has won twice.
Nov. 2, 2024[/B]
[URL]https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2024/11/02/iowa-poll-kamala-harris-leads-donald-trump-2024-presidential-race/75354033007/[/URL][/QUOTE]
[i][b]This is actually a freakin' big deal![/b][/i] Iowa, may indeed turn blue and Repubs are freakin' out!
Not sure why I didn't pay attention to this post sooner, but upon watching a Maddow video on this segment and the voting patterns playing out in Iowa, may indeed, signal similar voting implications in other red states. She interviews, pollster J. Ann Selzer, president of Selzer & Co. one of the [u]Gold Standard pollster[/u], you indicated in your post, to explain her shocking findings.
[b]'Shock result': Maddow on bombshell Iowa poll with Harris leading Trump[/b] (12 min)
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdBtDN85X7k[/url]
When Harris also wins Iowa (according to Selzer), I wonder what predominately black and brown neighborhoods, is Trump gonna target in Iowa, to find 11,780 votes! (...kkkk!)
Check out CNN on White trash Bubba
[QUOTE=EihTooms;2958141]Yes. Case in point; to read Newsmax's spin on Nate Silver's conclusion that pollsters are "herding" or cheating to keep the poll results within a point or two for Trump and Harris, Newsmax cons Trumpster suckers like MDS into thinking Silver meant that they have been [I]raising[/I] Harris' numbers to match Trump's.
Nope.
My earlier comment about Nate Silver finally concluding pollsters other than the highly-regarded one who conducted the 47% Harris /44%Trump poll in Iowa might, just might have been "lowballing Harris" all along came directly from his website. Those were his words. Not the other way around, not that they have been [I]raising[/I] her numbers to match Trump's but that they have been either [I]raising[/I] his numbers or [I]lowering/lowballing[/I] hers to keep the polls tight.[/QUOTE][URL]https://nypost.com/2024/10/23/us-news/famed-polling-guru-nate-silvers-gut-says-donald-trump-will-win-2024-presidential-election/[/URL]
[URL]https://www.aol.com/news/cnn-exclusive-bill-clinton-hopes-113023817.html[/URL]
He was the one who tapped into the White working-class vote back then to break through the political establishment, and then signed trade agreements and banking laws that created the job losses and resentment that has transformed American politics. His wife was the one whose loss put Trump in the White House, in a way that burns him still.
But so did NAFTA, letting China into the World Trade Organization and the other deals that Clinton ushered in, boosting globalization but gutting American jobs and wages in ways he never imagined.
Trade is a sensitive subject for him, yes it is his TPP helped us keep him from a 3rd term.
(Then again, Clinton said, he was "gobsmacked" that companies that said they'd pay to help with the transition never did. And he blamed the Republicans who rode an anti-Clinton, anti-NAFTA wave in 1994 for never getting the universal health care and job retraining programs he had envisioned as the other side of the agreement.
White trash Bubba "spreads blame like a John Deere spreads manure" or a favorite bit he has about how Bubba would take credit for this unseasonably sunny weather in the final campaign stretch but would blame Trump if it rained.)
