... I also don't see how one would at this point in time say Republicans do a better job of promoting from their ranks. Their whole party has very recently been completely hijacked by outsiders, and they struggle to find candidates that are even halfway competent. The Trump administration was just a complete circus.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Itse For This Useful Post:
Republicans should be more concerned with why Kamala's leads in the polls keep growing.
Yes but she should be up by much more, she should be trashing Trump in the polls. She's had an incredible 3 weeks. Appointed the nominee, not really grazed, dinged or questioned, got the VP announcement bounce as well. But Trump was up by 5 points prior to all this and Kamala is up by around 2 or 3 points? Certainly all the Democrats are coming home, all the double-haters (hating Biden and Trump) are shifting to Kamala.
But what happens next? What happens at the DNC? Does Trump have a bounce back in him? Does Kamala fall back to earth? Will there be debates?
This CNN
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
When the first priority is maintaining your momentum, the main thing you have to do is avoid some new distraction taking over the news cycle.
Part of what Trump and Vance have been trying to do - with the "stolen valor" thing, for example, and possibly some of the crazier stuff Trump has said recently like "she only recently identified as black" and "AI crowds" (though it's hard to tell when he's just being crazy) is likely aimed at that. Change the story from "wow, they seem to have a lot of energy and momentum and excitement around them and lots of people are showing up to these events". Nothing they've tried has really had any sticking power, despite the fact that cable news is incentivized to change the story so that they have something new to capture viewers' attention - after the fifth straight day of "Harriz / Walz rally in (swing state X) drew 15,000 people and they gave essentially the same speech as before" you start to lose viewership.
Meanwhile Harris / Walz are avoiding pressers because those are off-script and anything off-script is an opportunity for something weird to happen that changes the story. They just need to survive a few more days without any such nonsense getting traction and taking over the news cycle until Monday, when the DNC will take over.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Yes but she should be up by much more, she should be trashing Trump in the polls. She's had an incredible 3 weeks. Appointed the nominee, not really grazed, dinged or questioned, got the VP announcement bounce as well. But Trump was up by 5 points prior to all this and Kamala is up by around 2 or 3 points? Certainly all the Democrats are coming home, all the double-haters (hating Biden and Trump) are shifting to Kamala.
But what happens next? What happens at the DNC? Does Trump have a bounce back in him? Does Kamala fall back to earth? Will there be debates?
This CNN
Trump has a hard core base of 43% - it's never going to change. But what's happening is that they keep misfiring on their counter offensives.
These are the same point and it is that they are afraid of change and yes it is not irrational, but it is not something to be preyed on and poked at but worked at moving along with the change. Interracial marriage was made legal when 60-70% of the population still thought it should be illegal. Those leaders dragged their constituents into the future.
This was true before Trump showed up. Since then they couldn't even get their own majority congress to agree on literally anything. Not their own speaker, not border control, not healthcare reform, nada.
There are extremes to "both sides" but doesn't what that extreme fight for matter? One "extreme" is fighting for universal healthcare, body autonomy and to stop the bombing of civilians. One extreme wants to ban books, take away rights of women and minorities and install a theological government. One marches in the streets to stop police brutality, one marches to help an orange man take over the government. It's not even close. The left extreme is the actual norm in almost all of it's allies.
To the effect of allowing an oligarchal takeover of their economy with neutered and ineffective forces of regulation. This is not an accidental by product. It's on purpose.
Companies do not care about anything but their profit. That is their function. We do not expect them to care for anything but their profit. The governments literal function is to do work for people. Whether or not that works properly is a function of the people who are there and what they are doing with the power bestowed upon them and, as per above, by and large the people fighting to make it work better for the people and NOT the companies and specifically the very few people at the top of those very few companies are the people at the "extreme" of the left, and those working harder to make it easier for the companies to screw over workers every which way possible to the tune of creating more profit and personal wealth, are not even the extreme right its people in the Democratic Party too that many GOP members would refer to as extreme leftists.
Cool I will:
Tax: Their tax plan hasn't changed since Reagan and has done nothing but drive purchasing power away from the middle class to a hands of a few, creating a short term boom bust cycle based on borrowing at abnormally low interest rates sure to create booming inflation long term (whoops!) fraught with fraud and abuse of regulation to the tune of a completely underfunded infrastructure, education and a population that can't participate in basic economies like home ownership and food/clothing choice purchasing bringing everything to a halt. This was at one time just theory. Thankfully the US has now run a long enough social experiment with Trickle Down Economics spanning decades to have enough data to conclude it f***ing suuuuuuucks (to use a technical term).
Immigration: Build wall. Deport brown people.
Guns: LOL.
Religion: Should not exist in the government according to their constitution as written by infallible god-men never to be changed or re-interpreted so....not sure why it's the list at all....
These outcomes are not accidents. Its was GOP politicians want (not what GOP voters want). They know it creates these cycles they can use and abuse. They have whole doctrines of think tanks and universities where all these blow hards go to talk about it. So yeah.... that's their policy. It's not good for anyone but people who are already rich and powerful. So yeah they want hold onto it, that's understandable. Whats less understandable is why we keep handing it too them and then complaining it doesn't work. Well yeah, you're voting for the people whose OPEN POLICY is to screw you. Like, just read it.
Yes but she should be up by much more, she should be trashing Trump in the polls. She's had an incredible 3 weeks. Appointed the nominee, not really grazed, dinged or questioned, got the VP announcement bounce as well. But Trump was up by 5 points prior to all this and Kamala is up by around 2 or 3 points?
An eight point swing isn't much and she should be up by more??? An eight point swing in American politics is a massive swing. Like unheard of.
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
Yes but she should be up by much more, she should be trashing Trump in the polls. She's had an incredible 3 weeks. Appointed the nominee, not really grazed, dinged or questioned, got the VP announcement bounce as well. But Trump was up by 5 points prior to all this and Kamala is up by around 2 or 3 points? Certainly all the Democrats are coming home, all the double-haters (hating Biden and Trump) are shifting to Kamala.
But what happens next? What happens at the DNC? Does Trump have a bounce back in him? Does Kamala fall back to earth? Will there be debates?
This CNN
I suspect Harris is up by much much more, the polls we are seeing basically reflect the situation a week or more ago
They key polls recently are from PA, and all have a survey date from between August 8 to August 11-12. They show Harris up 3-4.
They seem likable enough.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
They have such a wide range of bogeymen (lgbtq, muslims, immigrants, socialists, women, government, teachers, trans, millennials, etc) because there is no one size fits all. Each person with a grievance needs to find a 'group' that they are ok to demonize.
And if they are not fundamentally racist , anti-trans, or whatever, many resent having these issues constantly 'rammed down their throats' and being branded by association.
Another emerging theme is natalism, which combines the real issue of declining population growth with a desire for traditional gender roles and pushing back on immigration as a solution. 'Let's solve this problem in our own bedrooms'. This comes out as attacks on feminism, single cat-ladies, and 'immigrants taking our jobs' while ignoring real issues like families needing two incomes to survive and declining birth rates due to environmental issues.
Not sure if this has been posted yet, but Harris is now opening up a lead in Pennsylvania according to the latest polls (+3 and +4 in Quinnipac and NYT respectively). Even in (R) leaning polls, she's within the MoE in Wisconsin, Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
Not sure if this has been posted yet, but Harris is now opening up a lead in Pennsylvania according to the latest polls (+3 and +4 in Quinnipac and NYT respectively). Even in (R) leaning polls, she's within the MoE in Wisconsin, Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia.
NYT/Siena has her +2 among likely voters, +2 among registered voters, poll conducted of 700 respondents between Aug 6-9.
Franklin & Marshall College has her +3 among registered voters, poll of 900 respondents between July 21 and Aug 11.
The Bullfinch Group has her +4 among 500 registered voters polled between August 8-11.
Quinnipiac U has her +3 among 1738 likely voters polled between August 8-12.
These are all within the margin of error so it's very possible that there is a uniform polling error and the reality is that the race is tied, but the fact that they're all so consistent with one another suggests that she has a decent lead, with the hope of pushing it to 5-6 points after a DNC bump.
They really need to make Shapiro the keynote speaker.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
These are all within the margin of error so it's very possible that there is a uniform polling error and the reality is that the race is tied, but the fact that they're all so consistent with one another suggests that she has a decent lead, with the hope of pushing it to 5-6 points after a DNC bump.
They really need to make Shapiro the keynote speaker.
As long as she doesn't bomb the debate, she really should be up by 6+ by November. You'd hope so anyways. I think Hillary was something like +6 or +8 until the Comey stuff, and Kamala is probably a better candidate than Hillary was.
EDIT: I also think Nevada, Georgia, and Arizona will go for here as well. It's a lot closer in those States obviously, but still think she'll inevitable pull ahead. Chris Bouzy has her winning Florida and NC as well. I can't see that, but he's been pretty accurate during the last few elections.
WaPo posted an analysis saying that she's gained enough in polls that she now has two paths to win: win the rust belt or win the sun belt. Where Trump has to win both to win.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
WaPo posted an analysis saying that she's gained enough in polls that she now has two paths to win: win the rust belt or win the sun belt. Where Trump has to win both to win.
I really don't think Pennsylvania will be in play for Trump once the election rolls around, making it basically impossible for him unless he steals Wisconsin.
The Following User Says Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
EDIT: I also think Nevada, Georgia, and Arizona will go for here as well. It's a lot closer in those States obviously, but still think she'll inevitable pull ahead. Chris Bouzy has her winning Florida and NC as well. I can't see that, but he's been pretty accurate during the last few elections.
So, we have no recent polling in Arizona other than GOP internal / commissioned polls. Those polls have the race even there or Trump +2. The last independent polls had Harris +1 but I don't think it's even worth speculating where things stand there right now.
In Nevada and Georgia, same thing except we don't even have recent GOP pollster data - all the most recent polls are late July. They have it either even there, or Trump +2. We might as well be blind.
Michigan is a weird one. Most recent poll is Trump +2, whereas the previous polls from a week ago all had Harris with a comfortable lead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
WaPo posted an analysis saying that she's gained enough in polls that she now has two paths to win: win the rust belt or win the sun belt. Where Trump has to win both to win.
I don't really agree with this. She has to win PA or she loses the election. If she loses MI she also probably loses unless she takes both Arizona and Nevada. But I'm just generally skeptical about GA/NC.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Last edited by CorsiHockeyLeague; 08-15-2024 at 02:25 PM.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Project 2025 Co-Author Says Donald Trump ‘Very Supportive Of What We Do’
Quote:
Trump has claimed to know nothing about the project and has attempted to distance himself from it, but Vought told the undercover people it is different behind the scenes.
“He’s been at our organization, he’s raised money for our organization, he’s blessed it,” Vought told the reporter during the undercover discussion. “I remember walking into our last day in office and told him what I was going to do. So, he’s very supportive of what we do.”
And the orange man is currently giving a "press conference" at Bedminster that started with mad rantings and is still continuing. I can't watch anymore but am dying to find out what all those toys are on the tables. Perhaps a new fundraining scheme.
