I think when people are saying Texas is in play they mean Ted Cruz’s seat. Which actually is.
Well yes, Cruz is widely hated by both parties. However, the fact that trump has such a small lead , does indicate that maybe Texas turns purple by 2028. It is already only light pink.
I get you, and to some extent it’s true, but not entirely. Actually, this does have to do with the infrastructure (here I’m including “human resources.”) As flurb alluded to, you can’t just scale up entirely. Every four years (and to a lesser extent , during midterm run-ups as well), county-level party organizations (and state, and city, and university student clubs, and the League of Women Voters, etc.) crank into gear, using more or less donated money, attracting more or fewer volunteers, etc. to get out the vote, distribute signs, and more. Yes, in a bigger-population state, all this is bigger, that’s true, but not directly in proportion to that population.
It’s a little like how a school building with 100 students isn’t a tenth the size of a school building with 1000 students; it’s probably more like a fifth the size. They both need a similarly-sized front office; probably have a similarly-sized lawn in front; the latter has three times the number of bathrooms, not ten times; it costs twice as much to keep the latter building warm in winter, not ten times as much; they each pay for one principal… you get the picture.
Long story short, the collective pro-Harris apparatus in Wisconsin has a pretty good chance at changing (let’s say) 40,000 votes (and it’s reasonable to imagine they need to change 30,000 for Harris to win the state). The collective pro-Harris apparatus in Florida has a pretty good chance at changing maybe 100,000 votes…BUT they need to change 150,000 to win the state. Give or take. 
As much as I don’t want to dampen enthusiasm, Florida did become a bellwether state for those who thumbed their nose at COVID lockdowns, and so it had an influx of new (right wing) people over the last 4 years. There’s now a million more registered Republicans than Democrats in the state.
And those immigrant conservatives (I hear they eat dogs!) are reflected in the current polling, which has Trump in definite lead, and definitely favored. But surprisingly not an overwhelming lead, and one that would not be shocking to evaporate in face of a systemic polling error Harrisward and/or turnout that favors Democrats because of what else is on the ballot.
Yeah improbable. But the forecast based on polling alone is that Harris has 28% chance of winning, better than one in four. Motivated turnout is a wild card.
One poll isn’t the lead. The lead is an honest analysis of all polls, with proper weighting. Trump is ahead by 3.5 to 4 points or so. That’s very, very likely to be insurmountable, sorry. Not quite absurdly impossible, but Trump has probably nineteen chances in twenty.
The fact Florida’s a big state and well surveyed makes that gap more accurate and harder to make up than it would be in a smaller state; I wouldn’t be nearly as sure of his chances if he had a 3-point lead in a small state, though I am unaware of any example like that right now. Wherever else he has a small lead it’s smaller than 3 points and he doesn’t really HAVE any narrow leads in really small states at all.
On top of that I don’t think people remember what “close” even means anymore.
If Harris nips Trump in a lot of swing states and wins 319-219 that’s a VERY CLOSE election. That would be, in percentage terms, in the top quarter of all presidential elections for closeness. That’s an election that goes the other way if you flip one percent of the popular votes. A certain win, one where you’re like “we all know who’s winning” doesn’t end 319-219. A certain win is 442-89 (Eisenhower 1952) or 426-111 (Bush 1.0 in 1988) or 336-140 (Teddy Roosevelt in 1904). Or to be more extreme, 525-13 (Reagan in 1984, about which Dennis Miller joked of Walter Mondale, “I didn’t even run and I almost tied him.”) IIRC Johnson slaughtered Goldwater by a similarly horrific margin. Biden got 306 EVs but it was what, 100,000 votes total that could have flipped it?
I mean, I can’t be the only person here who’s 52 years old, right? This thing where a five point lead looks gigantic or winning 330-208 is seen as a blowout… uhhh, I would have thought everyone here knew that current elections are not historically normal? The thing where only seven or eight states are up for grabs and very other state in the Union is absolutely in the bag for one party or the other years ahead? I mean, it was just in the 90s that a Democratic candidate for President won LOUISIANA. I’m not making that up. The same guy, in the same year, won both Connecticut and Tennessee, I swear to God. In the election immediately prior to that… just four years, not 140… a Republican won both Vermont and California.
There simply is not that level of dynamism now.
A few reasons for this.
One, you are not fighting to change minds anymore. This isn’t 1976 to 1980; you aren’t convincing ten percent of the population to switch votes and 1% is immensely hard. What you are trying to convince people of is to get off their fat asses and vote at all - specifically, the fat asses already inclined to vote for you. In a huge state, that’s just harder to swing a substantial percentage of the votes. Whaddya gonna do.
Secondly, in a smaller state there’s a better chance the polls are in error. That’s even more true if it’s not a swing state of course. Florida is big AND still kinda a swing state, so it gets polled a lot, by many pollsters, and it’s easier to predict how it’ll go.
Third, Harris specifically is working against the fact Trump is underestimated in polls. In both 2016 and 2020 he performed 1.5 to 2 points better than predicted. His voters are simply more passionate because there’s a weird cult of personality around him there isn’t for, well, anyone else right now.
53 here, and I agree with you about there no longer being blowout elections any more. As you noted, Reagan lost only one state in 1984. That’s just unimaginable today.
One thing to push back on, however: in theory, the polls have been reweighted to prevent undercounting of Trump voters this year. Whether that is something that has been correctly won’t be known until election day.
trump can of course, simply lie-
Your assessment may be more accurate than 538’s. I just doubt it. Their assessment based on polling and considered the possibility of altered turnout based on the abortion and pit referendums (which is admittedly hard to factor other than complete guesswork) remains a bit less than three in four.
They come to their conclusion by running many simulations. How do you come to yours?
Not understanding that thought at much. Being a big state doesn’t make the polling less subject to possible systemic error, and confidence about which direction that error will be is unfounded. Actual reality snapshot? The complete country can move a few points either way over a couple of weeks, and in the past likely has; one large state could as well. Not too likely given how entrenched the numbers have been for a while now, and not likely to happen due to hypothetical investments in the state, but not outlandish to happen.
I’m mystified that they gave the claim that the Algerian boxer Imane Khalif “transitioned” the rating of unsubstantiated.
It’s the last fact check, so maybe they were starting to feel sorry for trump (or bored of saying “false”), but I can’t fathom it.
One could argue the claim that khalif is intersex is possible, if one were (undeservedly) giving the IBA the benefit of the doubt.
But that she transitioned?
It is closer to the truth to say he can’t not lie.
You got me there! 
Trump working hard on WI and PA.
Is there some way of breaking down who are the Trump voters? We will have them in 2028. The true MAGA, about 40%? Then folks who don’t care for Trump but can neverheless ever vote for a democrat?
Then all evangelicals, abortion only voters etc. It must be some sort of coaltition to get to the 47% that they got in 2020.
IOW, a cult of personality. This is why when someone – I’m lookin’ at you, DeSantis – tries to out-Trump Trump, it gets nowhere.
A generation from now some demagogue’s henchman will be walking around with a portrait of Trump tattooed on his back.
30% was the best estimate. And I think that was of republicans?
Yes, 30 to 33% of Republicans, meaning about 15 or 16% of Americans of voting age. That survey was conducted in 2022. Has the number gone up, down, or stayed the same?
I would have guessed it had gone down a little, until
the absurd, unfathomable, idiotic, fact-free, shameful explosion in hate towards immigrants occurred in recent months — now, I’d guess it’s gone up, to perhaps as much as 40% of Republicans (20% of voters).
Someone gave me a useful link. I made a short blog. The link for the Hillary era analysis is there. Politics: a view from the prairie: White Males and others...the Trump Coalition
Nice summary and good points, I think, up to and including the last line:
“The big strawman that Trump created for these people to focus on is illegal aliens. The are monsters, according to Trump. Groups 1-5 are not going to argue against that.”
I’m sure this has been asked before, but here I go:
Will the number of Republicans that passed away during COVID have any impact on the election?
If I recall the majority of deaths were in Red States, I don’t want to get into the details as to why this happened (I think we all know).
Or is it because these deaths happened in Red states, it wouldn’t have much impact (as opposed to if it happened in a swing state)?
MtM
Many Americans- and british and most other nations- have some xenophobia. This is why, the Border is a big issue for some many Americans- even Democrats- even tho we actually need those workers. And of course drug smuggling is a real issue.