2024 Election - Trump vs. Harris, important downballot

[Lenonis]

Dunno. Peeps now fully experienced Trump rules and are fully aware how high the stakes are.

Yes but fatigue is a thing. Plus there is a lot of people who are more disillusioned due to inflation, etc. where "Trump is bad" isn't enough to motivate them.

I mean, I sure hope I'm wrong - but I can definitely see a path where people just stay home this time because they just can't anymore.

[Poopymonster]

Not only that but there are very real privacy issues at play when it comes to employment verification. Business don't just tell anyone who worked there when.

Not to mention McDonalds doesn't win - if they validate her employment then conservatives will scream about election interference, if they say she never worked there dems will cry foul for a company taking a side.

Staying quiet is the smartest choice for them.

When I was a manager in a customer facing job, I was OTR briefed by my supervisor.
If someone calls for a reference about a former employee on the store phone, the response you can give is "X was employed here from Y to Z". Nothing about the quality of the employee. Just that they were employed here. If you don't want to do that, or they want further inquiries you can direct them to call corporate. If they were extraordinary you can put a LOT of inflection in those few words. In either direction.

[Redwyrm]

Yes but fatigue is a thing. Plus there is a lot of people who are more disillusioned due to inflation, etc. where "Trump is bad" isn't enough to motivate them.

I mean, I sure hope I'm wrong - but I can definitely see a path where people just stay home this time because they just can't anymore.

“Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.”
George Santayana

[Edge-]

https://www.semafor.com/article/10/2...-for-president

But according to two people familiar with the situation, executive editor Terry Tang told editorial board staff earlier this month that the paper would not be endorsing a candidate in the presidential election this cycle, a decision that came from the paper’s owner Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, a doctor who made his fortune in the healthcare industry.

The paper did not explain its decision, though it noted at the bottom of its online endorsement page that “the editorial board endorses selectively, choosing the most consequential races in which to make recommendations.”

An LA Times spokesperson told Semafor, “We do not comment on internal discussions or decisions about editorials or endorsements.”

It seems Donalds very explicit threats to punish and go after the free press, which is expressly in violation of the First Amendment, is already beginning to have a chilling effect.

It wouldn’t be the first time since he bought the paper in 2018 that owner Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong had overruled the wishes of the paper’s editorial board. In 2020, the paper met with Democratic candidates for president for interviews with the intention of making a pick in the race. But after deciding to endorse Elizabeth Warren in the Democratic, at the last minute Soon-Shiong overruled its leadership and said there would be no endorsement in the primary race (the paper endorsed Joe Biden in the general election).

The paper also raised eyebrows over several local endorsements it made in recent election cycles of candidates supported by Soon-Shiong’s daughter Nika, whose progressive politics on racial justice and the war in Gaza have at some points heartened and emboldened some on staff and and other points caused friction. At the time, the paper told Politico that there was no involvement from Nika Soon-Shiong in the endorsements.

Still, it wouldn’t be the first time that the LA Times has declined to endorse candidates in a presidential general election. From the mid-1970s until 2008, the paper declined to endorse any presidential candidates following internal dissent over the decision to endorse Richard Nixon for reelection months after the Watergate break in, a decision the publisher Otis Chandler said he later came to regret. Before that, the Times had a near century-long streak of Republican presidential endorsements dating back to the paper’s founding in 1881.

And a reminder why having wealthy folks owning larger regional/national papers is probably not the best thing given that they can weaponize the outlet to support their chosen candidates whenever they want. Or not.

[callipygoustp]

The Most Important Election Of Our Lifetimes

Just a reminder of why this is currently the most important of our lifetimes.

[Dontrike]

Hype for Trump, all I will say. Hopefully the cackling hag gets the boot.

We get it, you like pedophiles.

[Edge-]

https://www.motherjones.com/politics...gallup-lepore/

Walking my dog. On the Metro. In line at a sandwich shop. People keep coming up and asking me about “the polls.” What do the numbers mean? Should they be worried about the election? If a set of swing state polls is released, the odds are by the end of the day I will have been asked by a friend, a relative, a neighbor, or a stranger, or several, “Did you see that poll in Nevada? Why was there a shift of three points since the last one? How could Pennsylvania be going in a different direction? And North Carolina, really? Do you think that’s accurate?” If they start referencing Nate Silver, Nate Cohn, or any of the other pollster celebs…I want to scream.

Polls, to be hyperbolic about it, have ruined American politics. Okay, a lot has ruined American politics. But polls have certainly made American politics less enjoyable. Many of those who follow politics—and not enough citizens do—have become slaves of polling, overly obsessed with these surveys and palpitating over the slightest changes. I’m not unsympathetic. This election is prompting more anxiety than most. The oft-repeated mantra that the 2024 race could determine whether the United States remains an imperfect democracy or slips toward a more authoritarian form of governance is true. Thus, every iota of data related to the face-off between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris appears loaded with relevance and consequence. Still, the hyperfixation on polls is unwarranted and distracts us from other important aspects of this most important election.



George Gallup (sitting), director of the American Institute for Public Opinion, and the institute's chief statistician, Edward G. Benson, working at an office in Princeton, New Jersey, in 1941.

The below article first appeared in David Corn’s newsletter, Our Land. The newsletter comes out twice a week (most of the time) and provides behind-the-scenes stories and articles about politics, media, and culture. Subscribing costs just $5 a month—but you can sign up for a free 30-day trial.

Walking my dog. On the Metro. In line at a sandwich shop. People keep coming up and asking me about “the polls.” What do the numbers mean? Should they be worried about the election? If a set of swing state polls is released, the odds are by the end of the day I will have been asked by a friend, a relative, a neighbor, or a stranger, or several, “Did you see that poll in Nevada? Why was there a shift of three points since the last one? How could Pennsylvania be going in a different direction? And North Carolina, really? Do you think that’s accurate?” If they start referencing Nate Silver, Nate Cohn, or any of the other pollster celebs…I want to scream.

Polls, to be hyperbolic about it, have ruined American politics. Okay, a lot has ruined American politics. But polls have certainly made American politics less enjoyable. Many of those who follow politics—and not enough citizens do—have become slaves of polling, overly obsessed with these surveys and palpitating over the slightest changes. I’m not unsympathetic. This election is prompting more anxiety than most. The oft-repeated mantra that the 2024 race could determine whether the United States remains an imperfect democracy or slips toward a more authoritarian form of governance is true. Thus, every iota of data related to the face-off between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris appears loaded with relevance and consequence. Still, the hyperfixation on polls is unwarranted and distracts us from other important aspects of this most important election.

Polls don’t matter. Or maybe they do. It depends on your definition of “matters.” By all measurements, this is a close race. What else do you need to know? The candidates are within a few points of each other in the national polls and the swing state polls. But the difference is usually within the reported margin of error. That means the poll that has just caused you heartburn may not have any value in terms of telling us what will happen on Election Day.

And get this: That margin of error may not even be accurate.

While doing a little (but not much) research for this rant, I came across a useful article from the Pew Research Center, which does a lot of polling. It was published this summer and called “Key things to know about U.S. election polling in 2024.” The piece made the usual points. In 2016 and 2020, polling underestimated Trump’s performance. (Polls on average overestimated Hillary Clinton’s strength by 1.3 percent and Joe Biden’s by 3.9 percent.) The 2022 nonpartisan polls—meaning those taken by the media and research centers and not by campaigns and political groups—were more accurate than people may have assumed after the mythical “red wave” did not materialize. Polling methodologies have shifted to keep current with changes (such as the decrease in the use of landlines and a low response rate). Pollsters have improved how they weigh demographic variables to obtain representative samplings.

What was most interesting in this article, though, was what it said about the margin of error: “The real margin of error is often about double the one reported.” What? Read that again. Double the margin of error. “A typical election poll sample of about 1,000 people,” Pew tells us, “has a margin of sampling error that’s about plus or minus 3 percentage points.” That’s usually the number you see associated with a poll. Three percent. That doesn’t seem so bad.

But there are other errors. If you must know, they are called noncoverage error, nonresponse error, and measurement error. I’m not going to go into the technical details here. But this is the bottom line from Pew: “The problem is that sampling error is not the only kind of error that affects a poll. Those other kinds of error, in fact, can be as large or larger than sampling error. Consequently, the reported margin of error can lead people to think that polls are more accurate than they really are…Several recent studies show that the average total error in a poll estimate may be closer to twice as large as that implied by a typical margin of sampling error. This hidden error underscores the fact that polls may not be precise enough to call the winner in a close election.”

So are you really going to pull your hair out over a poll with a margin of error of 6 points? C’mon. Get a grip.

Good piece on Mother Jones (it's much longer) about the obsession on polling and why it's largely so pointless.

It's great for media outlets who want to shit out tons of articles but don't want to have to like, actually do much work - you just take the many many press releases with poll results, bang out a 200 word wrapper and then copy/past much of the "additional context" that you post with those stories. It's easy fodder for a ton of articles, allowing for sensationalist headlines as the polls are updated daily and minor changes to results from different polling outfits are presented as major shifts and big news.

It's no wonder we're seeing Republicans suddenly start embracing the polling chaos.

Because, largely, when you look at polling it doesn't actually change that much in aggregate, especially when filtering out bad actors like Rasumussen.

- - - Updated - - -

Recently, ads have been running on Facebook for something called Progress 2028. It appears as though it’s Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris’ version of Project 2025.

Oh shit, big if true!

Progress 2028, which purports to outline a “truly inclusive agenda” for “progressive wins” at every level of government, was created by a Republican PAC. Neither Harris nor her allies were involved in its creation, according to state filings.

Business records reveal that Progress 2028 is a project of the Building America’s Future PAC, which has a history of supporting Republican causes and opposing Democratic candidates and policies.

Once again Republicans are bereft of any original ideas. They're so mad that Project 2025 is so fucking incredibly and nearly universally unpopular and they have so few actual policy-level criticisms of Kamala that they're resorting to having to make up "the liberal version of Project 2025" and spread lies on social media that it's a real thing and not a stupid dishonest strawman.

Really, one of the most galling and frustrating things to me as the Republican party has continued its descent into extremism is the casual way in which Republicans lie and make shit up, the brazen pushing of said lies, and the lack of any caring that they are knowing spreading lies.

We all make up some bullshit from time to time. We get hyperbolic at times. We embellish. But Republicans have made lying and intentionally trying to spread those lies into an Olympic sport, and I cannot fathom how people can be so knowingly dishonest. I couldn't fuckin do it, man.

[Paetolus]

https://x.com/RichardGrenell/status/1848389617856528792

This one's for all you horse race fans!



Big stuff!

Now what polling outfit did this poll?

Well, Richard Grenell made these numbers up and then just posted them, you see. You'll note the hundreds of responses to his tweet that appear to take the numbers he just made up and posted, seriously.

I hope this is actually indicative of the broader MAGA/Republican movement - all built upon lies, with people lying to each other and publicly and there actually being very little real support outside the fiction they create.

As someone who currently lives in NM, I can guarantee Trump is not polling that well. Conservatives always seem to have some weird wet dream about winning this state, it's not happening now or in the near future.

[Edge-]

As someone who currently lives in NM, I can guarantee Trump is not polling that well. Conservatives always seem to have some weird wet dream about winning this state, it's not happening now or in the near future.

Because he just reached up his asshole, up to the elbow (he's surprisingly flexible!), to pull those numbers outta there.

Republicans try to create their own reality around them and hope everyone else will indulge their fantasies.

[Skjaldborg]

As someone who currently lives in NM, I can guarantee Trump is not polling that well. Conservatives always seem to have some weird wet dream about winning this state, it's not happening now or in the near future.

I’ve only been living in NM for a bit less than a year, but it’s southeast NM and this place is massively pro-Trump. It’s really easy to forget that NM is a blue state where the governor, both senators, and all three House representatives are Democrats, since on my drive to work every day I get to see people and trucks that I used to think only existed in stereotypes.

If you’re a conservative living around Carlsbad, Artesia, Hobbs, Eunice, or Jal I guess you might think that you’re in the majority. It seems like a lot of Texas oil culture leaks up here, especially with all of the transient field workers. My wife and I demoted this place from «the armpit of the United States» to «the perineum.» Only surpassed by the unregulated expanse of west Texas…

[Kaleredar]

I’ve only been living in NM for a bit less than a year, but it’s southeast NM and this place is massively pro-Trump. It’s really easy to forget that NM is a blue state where the governor, both senators, and all three House representatives are Democrats, since on my drive to work every day I get to see people and trucks that I used to think only existed in stereotypes.

If you’re a conservative living around Carlsbad, Artesia, Hobbs, Eunice, or Jal I guess you might think that you’re in the majority. It seems like a lot of Texas oil culture leaks up here, especially with all of the transient field workers. My wife and I demoted this place from «the armpit of the United States» to «the perineum.» Only surpassed by the unregulated expanse of west Texas…

You’ll find rural areas like that in most blue states.

Drive along the 5 through central California and you’ll see miles of Trump signs and “stop the Pelosi-created dust bowl” stuff.

[Paetolus]

I’ve only been living in NM for a bit less than a year, but it’s southeast NM and this place is massively pro-Trump. It’s really easy to forget that NM is a blue state where the governor, both senators, and all three House representatives are Democrats, since on my drive to work every day I get to see people and trucks that I used to think only existed in stereotypes.

If you’re a conservative living around Carlsbad, Artesia, Hobbs, Eunice, or Jal I guess you might think that you’re in the majority. It seems like a lot of Texas oil culture leaks up here, especially with all of the transient field workers. My wife and I demoted this place from «the armpit of the United States» to «the perineum.» Only surpassed by the unregulated expanse of west Texas…

Oh yeah, for sure, that region is a different story. Just doesn't have the population to be significant enough in an election. And NM, even as a blue state, has always played pretty nice with oil, so I'm sure that hurts voter motivation in that region a bit, no one's jobs are really at risk. (NM needs the oil money after all, poor as hell state.)

[diller]

Hype for Trump, all I will say. Hopefully the cackling hag gets the boot.

Usually there isn't anything after 'all I will say' - so you failed on your promise.

---

At this point I kinda wish Trump would win so all his fans could see what they get, on the other hand I'd feel bad for everyone else.

[Tech614]

Just a reminder of why this is currently the most important of our lifetimes.

Not that I disagree, but this is gonna ring hollow on a lot of not in touch people. As a millennial I can tell you I have been told every election since I became age of voting has been "the most important of my lifetime" now that it's actually kind of true we are entering boy who cried wolf territory.

- - - Updated - - -

At this point I kinda wish Trump would win so all his fans could see what they get, on the other hand I'd feel bad for everyone else.

The US government being destabilized is a danger to the entire world, not just the US so you should probably rethink that wish.

[diller]

The US government being destabilized is a danger to the entire world, not just the US so you should probably rethink that wish.

It very well could be.

BUT I think it's about time place like where I live (Europe in general) accept the fact that the US is not to be relied upon or trusted

[CastletonSnob]

How are the early voting numbers looking for both parties so far?

[Ausr]

It very well could be.

BUT I think it's about time place like where I live (Europe in general) accept the fact that the US is not to be relied upon or trusted

Everytime I read dumb statements like this, almost guaranteed when there's a natural disaster or some other emergency happens "Where is the US?! We need their help!"

[Milchshake]

Everytime I read dumb statements like this, almost guaranteed when there's a natural disaster or some other emergency happens "Where is the US?! We need their help!"

It would just be so much fucking easier for them to just full throatedly support Hillary or Biden. But instead they just *have* to sneer "askually there's no Left in the US".

Being US Politics Hobbyists, but incredibly out of touch. Thanks for your support mon cherie....

[Iphie]

Everytime I read dumb statements like this, almost guaranteed when there's a natural disaster or some other emergency happens "Where is the US?! We need their help!"

Nah, we got that one down, but we'll take your army.

Seriously, you couldn't have chosen a poorer example than that.

[Ausr]

Nah, we got that one down, but we'll take your army.

Seriously, you couldn't have chosen a poorer example than that.

I guess the other half of the OR doesn't apply. Good job.