Apparently they add up to about 1% of FL voters … but they seem to already mostly vote D.
I was sincerely being nice about your not knowing this phrase.
And any of us are free to help another by defining a standard phrase used by a third Doper. We don’t intervene to presume to know another’s opinon, but for a simple definition or other point of fact, there’s no reason to wait for the original poster.
641/1,000. Morris is apparently re-running the trials several times a day now.
I knew what the phrase was, but it didnt make sense in light of his post.
Any way to get rock and roll on the ballot; 'cause I think that would help seal the deal.
Despite one poll more tied, Wisconsin is not winnable now. Harris vs. Trump Wisconsin polls - The Hill and DDHQ
Compared to the same people graphing PA, still close. Trump can win this election only with PA.
Harris vs. Trump Pennsylvania polls - The Hill and DDHQ
You do remember that Wisconsin polling has been off by 5 and 9 points Trumpward the last two presidential cycles? Oh sure it could be off the other direction instead this time, but “not winnable”??
Worse than that, polling by a highly regarded and well conducted polling outfit — Quinnipiac — shows Trump only 1% behind in Wisconsin now. A tie, in other words.
Funny how, over these couple of months, we keep shifting among WI, MI, and PA as to the softest (most worrisome) of the Big 3 for Harris. It must make it challenging for the campaign to plan ad buys and rallies.
Ha!
Got it. My mistake. (And, I can see how my post could be misconstrued as sarcasm. Perils of text-based communications.)
Pennsylvania is tied according to Washington Post poll (gift link).
Wisconsin is a Democrat leaning state, unlike Iowa for example. It is only through gerrymandering etc that GOp holds power, They have one senator. But the people in Madison have been quite active for four years. No Trump alternative electors will enter the capitol. So, in my opinion, Wisconsin is no longer winnable for Trump. He brought nothing at all to Wisconsin in his 4 year term.
This doesn’t make any sense. He won it in 2016 and almost won it in 2020. Polls indicate he is competitive there in 2024 - more so than in either of those years.
WI is very much in play.
In general, this whole thread feels like whistling past the graveyard. If it’s not extremely close on Election Day I will be gobsmacked.
Ref the several posters asking about Florida Haitians I’ll quote this comment I posted in the Springfield-related thread:
If these folks, Haitian or otherwise, are able to vote, they will. And they’re voting D. Lots and lots of Afro-[whatever] are second generation, where Mom & Dad were immigrants but they were born here. Lots more have been naturalized US citizens for most of their lives.
They’re scared and they’re motivated.
“Does not make sense” how? I lived in Wisconsin 5 years. it’s not Iowa, it’s more like Minnesota. For the past 15 years Foxnews has shaped a lot of rural areas, but still has not changed the culture of places like Wisconsin.
It doesn’t make sense because the polls show it as close. He has won Wisconsin before. I don’t see anything but wishful thinking to say it’s not in play now.
I am quite certain they don’t even show him bad poll numbers. All he is getting is a steady diet of Rasmussen and other pro GOP pollsters.
I don’t think we can call the election now based on polls. I think even the best polling is suspect due to selection bias in respondents and gathering enough representatives of all groups to adequately represent them.
Polls can only show trends, the cannot predict the outcome. They cannot account for various factors that affect voter participation and turnout.
I think the results of the polls and models are a source for optimism and hope, but not a justification that Trump cannot win.
If the gap were substantial, the state wouldn’t be a battleground state. The fact that it is in question means the outcome is not given, and no amount of polling can change that.
It’s like seeing a baseball team split the first two games of a series, be tied 1-1 in the 7th and say “no way the road team can win”. It flies in the face of all the evidence we have.
(my emphasis)
How does the bolded even work? Personal commitment to support Harris is only very rarely some hazy, ephemeral thing that can be reversed by Trump or Vance’s shameless appeals for attention. It beggars belief that “doing more crazy shit!” draws any likely Harris voters towards Trump.
Forget they liked Harris? If they’re truly that wishy-washy, Trump’s likely got 'em already.
Wasn’t this confirmed? He’s a ‘shoot the messenger’ type. And it is well known he has staffers whose job is to give him selectively curated printouts of “good” news articles.
A lot of ego.
He thinks of himself as a master salesman/negotiator. So all he needs is an opportunity to make his pitch.
I see that on local TV sometimes - some local owner of a moderately big (by local standards) company (invariably a middle to older aged white gent, of course) or would-be megachurch pastor just putting himself on camera pitching his company/church thinking his sales magic will work across the camera without any gimmicks.
As opposed to, ya know, not squandering any reputation through years of shady dealings and tactics.
Perhaps not the greatest strategy, but history has shown Trump that he’s never really needed much more.
I may have misread @PhillyGuy , on second thought. I thought he was saying it was a certainty that Trump could peel off committed Harris-Walz voters by doing more crazy things and staying more firmly in the news cycle.
If instead PhillyGuy was simply explaining Trump’s mindset, then his post makes more sense.