This post doesn’t make any sense to me.
Agree. @madmonk28 please try again. I have no idea what you are agreeing or disagreeing with, nor what POV you are pushing.
More context please.
There are those who divide people into neat binary groups, and those who do not.
There are also those of us who do not crow but who are not going to opine on every single poll, whichever direction it is. A result out of the trends is put in the mix, not ignored, but neither does it invalidate the mass before it. Let’s see if it is replicated first.
That is his ceiling. His floor ain’t much below. Maybe 45? If Harris does as well as Biden did she wins and she seems to be running a stronger campaign than he did with Trump running weaker. The intensity about Trump seems less … in both directions. But Harris has more voting FOR her than Biden had. And she is extremely aware of where she needs to win votes, whose turnout she needs to motivate, and what groups she needs to court not to win but to lose less in.
I do not think it likely that she does less well than Biden did. Or that Trump 2024 is a better candidate running a better campaign than Trump 2020 was.
“Likely” carries a lot in that paragraph though!
This thread is about how Trump can win. People are using good Harris polls as proof he can’t win, so it is reasonable to point out bad Harris polls to counter their argument.
The trend is that it is very close and the EC gives Trump an advantage.
So, sort of the opposite of how can Trump win, is how can he lose. Every time I hear him speak he sounds like a lunatic. Never mind what I think of his policies, he’s just so clearly stupid and incoherent.
But I’m surprised at how little of that incoherence seems to come across in the mainstream media coverage. It’s almost like, having enabled him in the past, they’re ignoring him now. And now is when maybe everyone needs to hear more of the Trump we saw in the debate.
I’ve seen it referred to as sanewashing.
I consider the original question “how can Trump win at this point” to be answered. The thread has since become another horserace watch party, which is fine, but not really interesting compared to the more focused polls thread.
(Simul-posted with @DSeid below with a similar sentiment.)
The question of the OP, how Trump can win, has been discussed in depth; the implied incredulity that it could be possible, has also been discussed, and very few here have staked their hill as that it is impossible, that there is convincing proof he cannot win. The mantra has long been varying degrees of cautious optimism against degrees of guarded pessimism. Most everyone here is in those grays, not at either binary choice. I like following the ups and down of the polls as much as anyone, but the aggregate mass of polling right now tells a story that a single poll does not change the narrative of:
It will boil down to whether or not there is any systemic bias, how big, in which direction, on turnout, and quite possibly on a few voters in a very few states.
Legitimate question - obviously, Trump has moments of incoherence. But what percentage of his remarks are incoherent? Are there large periods that he simply reads meaningless pap off of teleprompters? Are clips of his blathering the equivalent of photos of Biden’s or Ford’s occasional stumbles?
I seriously don’t know - and am incapable of listening to him long enough to try to figure it out.
Depending on what percentage of his remarks are irrational blather, how do his supporters view that?
Do they AGREE with his blather, and NOT think it irrational?
Do they consider his blathering an entertaining act?
Do they think a tendency to blather does not detract from all the good he will do? Or is inconsequential compared to the harm Harris would do?
Something else?
Ohio may be more attainable than the polls are showing, as evidenced by the turnout for the last special election regarding the “Every Vote Counts”, and the following abortion rights and marijuana legalization votes, which passed easily. Sherrod Brown has the charisma of a toad, which is not helping matters, but there is a path through the suburbs, and of course, urban voter turnout.
Vance is not well liked, even when he was elected it was by less than 7%, and his Springfield narrative is not great, and has angered a lot of Ohioans. Anecdotally, Butler County has been a R stronghold in the past, especially in the more rural areas. The enthusiasm for Trump as judged by signage (I know, I know) is not nearly at the 2020 level, and there are some blue dots. I would not be surprised if there were a decent amount of voters that are for Harris but silent because of the Trump crazies, or voters who will support down ballot R’s without voting for Trump (again, a yard sign trend.)
The winning tactic here is to come out strong in favor of women’s rights, reminding everyone about Trump, Vance, and Bernie Moreno’s stance on these. I would not be surprised if Trump won here again, but I think he margin will be much narrower.
(my emphasis)
I think the bolded is putting it strongly. Keep in mind what the state of play was at the time this thread was started – Harris had just picked up Walz, Trump had been out of the news cycle since Biden dropped out, and every last public vibe out there was leaning in Harris’ direction. At the time, there wasn’t a compelling reason to assume her rise wouldn’t continue apace (other than platitudes similar to “what goes up must come down”).
Regarding posting “good poll news”: Myself, early last week I posted several times when Harris’ number in FiveThirtyEight’s forecast rose in ~36 hours from ~58 to 64. That was largely in response to post-debate national polling – when Harris started racking up +4 to +7 leads, and before battleground-state polling came in a little tepid. It was a heady day-and-a-half – I still maintain that that big and that rapid of a shift in a major aggregate is post-worthy. Wasn’t meant to convey or even suggest “Trump’s done” (though, yes, I admit to poking fun at the “coin flip” stuff).
Speaking of, though … I am not seeing in any of FiveThirtyEight collected polling numbers where Harris should have given back all of those points in the FiveThirtyEight forecast (back from 64 down to current 57). For a few days last week, Harris had settled in around 60-ish, which seemed to be the “correct” settling-point after some lukewarm state polls. Not sure where the additional -3 came from, unless it’s just variance.
That’s the thing.
Nearly all individual sentences he utters sound like grammatically coherent sentences. Comparatively few of his statements are totally nonsensical.
When the content and context of those words is analyzed at all but the most superficial level, few statements he makes on anything resembling policy make any sense. But his typical audience usually isn’t thinking at any but the most superficial, stereotypical level.
And of course, there are the comparatively few statements where you can see his brain glitching, and something only resembling coherent English comes out of his mouth. These sorts of statements get more time on the internet but they’re a very low percentage.
Basically, what we saw in nearly every debate. The vast majority of his stances and utterances are nonsensical but “6 year old trying to sound adult” nonsensical, not “frothing at the mouth, oh my god get the straitjacket” nonsensical.
The problem comes when the audience itself doesn’t understand what is coherent or not. Again, it’s what we saw during the debate. A lot of people didn’t pay attention to the actual words and mostly listened to his demeanor and attitude rather than his words (his body language was still bad but not “out of my depth and potentially suffering from dementia” bad). And a lot of people paid attention to his words but didn’t realize he was making little sense and still liked what they saw of their candidate. It’s one reason why demagoguery works - the audience itself is often at best only of average intelligence.
In a model like 538’s, the more recent the poll, the more weight it gets…but slightly older polls still figure in the mix, until more time passes and they’re totally disregarded.
So, when one or two highly-regarded polls show a change in some direction, it takes a few days at least for that change to be fully incorporated into the percentage of trials going a certain way.
If there were no new polls at all for the last couple days and the next few days, I would expect the 538 percentage to bottom out around Thursday, at around 55%. Since there ARE other polls (though not such high-quality ones), and they tend to not be quite as bad for Harris on average, I think the bottom is more likely to be 56%.
These are TINY differences, and mean nothing!! I’m just answering your specific question. I won’t address such minutiae again, ever – it’s distracting and a waste of time. (I’m talking to myself here – no aspersions at all intended toward bordelond, nor anyone else).
(my emphasis)
Ah … the bolded makes sense. The most recent NYT/Siena polls were cool on Harris both nationally and at the state level. I know NYT/Siena are highly-regarded – and thus, highly weighted. That alone could account for ~3 points in FiveThirtyEight’s forecast.
Amen. Can’t find a clip, but I’m recalling the final scene in The Day the Earth Caught Fire. It’s the printing room in the basement of the newspaper the protagonist works for. Two presses are loaded and ready to go, the pressmen waiting for the order on which one to start. The camera pans from the sample page on one with the banner headline, EARTH SAVED!, to the other, EARTH DOOMED! Fade to black.
ETA: And a hearty welcome to @TheJobsGuy.
Unless it’s a blowout we won’t know for weeks who won.
Between states that won’t count mail-in ballots until after live ballots to poll shenanigans to legal challenges, I find the idea of us knowing definitively who won by the wee hours on Wed to be delightfully quaint. And equally stupid.
Sooo last century. Sooo lame.
I saw something new today.
A pop-op storefront in a dead convenience market selling trump merch.
Flags, hats, and oh so tacky framed pix & commemorative plaques. In each case the orange felon has been photoshopped to look super-heroic.
The two walmartians clerking inside certainly made me think of a revolt of the peasants.
Whether they were just desperate for a job or were true believers wasn’t obvious and I wasn’t willing to venture inside to ask.
I’ve seen pop-up Trump shops, usually under a tent, in parking lots around the Grand Rapids (Mich) area over the past couple years. Nine times out of ten it’s a couple Black guys running it. Now, I suppose they could be true believers, but I suspect they’re there for the dough.
Eh, I’m guessing it’s bootleg stuff and Trump won’t get a dime, so more power to them I suppose.
don’t you (general you) think that at one moment in time, the GOP will come to their senses and do a critical analysis/look-back and find out, that they basically wasted 10-15 years with that orange charlatan, AND will take care that their party cannot be taken (stockholm syndrome) hostage by the next Trump ever again? …
any sane organization would do that … (obv. some people who were permissive must die retire before that process to happen and be addressed thoroughly)
that SHOULD put a damper on all that irk in the nearer future… what I see more likely is a 3 party system in the USA, where the Trumps/Rubios/Greens/ et al will form a 3rd more radical party