It’s the Pollsach Test
Even if it’s just a few people breaking away from the GOP to support Harris, it can hopefully have a large effect.
I’m throwing this in here but unsure if it is right thread.
Hurricane Helena is looking like it may displace a bunch of people in the Florida panhandle, a pretty wide swath sounds like. I sincerely hope the damages are less than expected. And I am curious about what the election impacts of significant disruptions and displacement in very GOP leaning portion of Florida might be. The people and local governments of those regions may have concerns more immediately pressing than effectively running polling stations and getting out the vote. Is there historical precedence for the impact of natural disasters on elections (short of great job Brownie sort of stuff)?
ETA I can find this in the immediate aftermath of Ian. Unsure how it ended up playing out.
Given the wording of the Florida referendum, I’m not confident about it passing:
Never mind the dead babies - it’ll cost you money!
The marijuana one, on the other hand, is basically “pot will be legal AND we’ll be raking in the tax revenue”. Maybe they should have netted the effects of the two…
Yikes! Neither am I, now that I’ve read it. It reads like Republicans wrote it. Why on earth does it include every possible negative factor without saying a single positive thing about reproductive rights?
The Your Lungs, Your Uterus bill.
I care a bit about its passings d more about its ability to drive Democratic turnout. Pulling Florida out for Harris and defeating Scott would be wonderful unexpected events that while improbable are not impossible.
Reading up about the response to Ian - DeSantis specifically made executive orders to help offset the election turnout impacts in the GOP leaning districts and NOT in the D leaning one. But I can’t find any post hoc analysis of the impact yet.
She was right smack in the middle of a “bounce” when the convention happened and had already been in the news 24/7 for the couple weeks prior to that since Biden dropped out. Her convention bounce happened prematurely.
(my emphasis)
Won’t go into detail here because this is not the polling thread, but it should be noted that most aggregators weigh individual polls differently before calculating their final horse-race figure. Real Clear Polling does use just raw polling numbers without weighting BUT only aggregates a handful of poll numbers.
One exercise I like to do is to go through FiveThirtyEight’s raw list of polls and just peruse how many recent polls are at or above a certain number. Right now, I’m focused on Harris +4 or better. She’s got a ton of polling in that range since the debate. Yes, closer polls from NYT/Siena. Quinnipac, CNN, etc. will drag the weighted average down a good bit. But right now? I’ll eat my hat if Harris doesn’t win the popular vote by 4 or more points (cf. Biden’s ~4.5% popular vote lead in the 2020 general election).
I know, I know … Electoral College!TM Yeah – let’s see how clear The Pollsters’ crystal balls actually end up being in the battleground states. John Fetterman vs. Dr. Oz (Fetterman won by 5%). Tom Suozzi vs. Mazi Pilip (Suozzi won by 8%). Etc., etc.
Tie into thread topic: Kamala Harris is in no way in a bad position “in the polls”. The very most you can say is that right now “the polling” doesn’t support a guaranteed Harris victory – which is not a particularly remarkable statement. She’s never going start racking up +20 polls or anything like that. It “will be close!” until November 5th.
A lot of people seem to be following the 2016 Clinton belief that the Democratic candidate “should” be miles ahead of Trump, because he’s such an awful person, and not beating him by double digits is a sign of Democratic weakness, deficiency, or increased odds of defeat.
That’s because they did. The wording was approved by a “non-partisan” panel that DeSantis packed with people he hand selected.
Gift link to Washington post Article.
I’m perfectly happy seeing significant damage, and then seeing those hypocrites begging for relief while simultaneously criticizing “big government.”
As much as I despise the politics and mindsets of the majority of folk down there, I’m not bothered by the idea of their god inflicting its wrath on them.
That’s what it seemed like to me. The actual amendment is pretty simple.
No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary
to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider. This amendment does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.
When we have initiatives on the ballot here in Washington State, generally someone from the “pro” camp writes an argument for, someone in the “con” writes an argument against, and those get included in the voting pamphlet. (Assuming someone actually writes either one.)
This read like the “con” argument you’d see on a Washington pamphlet. It’s extremely partisan.
The gift link didn’t work, so I’m confused. How does an abortion rights referendum, which I assume was championed by Democrats, end up being written by Republicans?
(Apologies if this is a hijack having only the most tenuous link to Kamala Harris’ chances in the upcoming election.)
I am very optimistic of the same, but my dome needs a hat in November, so no gustatory promises!
Yes polls can only say so much with error possible either direction, and more than that is covered elsewhere. Enthusiasm, as measured by small donor involvement if nothing else, is up for Harris. She is running a smart campaign, better than Biden’s which won. Trump enthusiasm is down and he is not campaigning at his best. Perception of the economy is picking up. The EC GOP advantage even seems to be smaller right now (Silver concurs with Cohn, differing only by degree). I am hoping to see a six point win or more.
Huh, don’t know why it didn’t work.
Here are the relevant portions
Proposed amendments to the state constitution are required to be accompanied by a statement approved by a panel called the Financial Impact Estimating Conference. The FIEC is usually considered to be nonpartisan.
Last fall, the panel approved language that said the impact of Amendment 4 was “indeterminate.” Since then, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) and Florida House Speaker Paul Renner (R) appointed new members to the panel who voted to change the financial statement that will be on the ballot.
Hundreds of thousands of people in the Florida panhandle voted for Biden, do you think God will be kind enough to pass over their houses? Should they anoint their doors with lamb’s blood?
FWIW, the abortion amendment in Kansas a couple of years ago was deliberately worded so a ‘No’ vote was in favor of abortion rights.
It was defeated, 59% to 41%.
It’s The South. Pig’s.
Seriously whatever political stripe, and no matter the preachers who always declare disasters God’s wrath upon sinners, I hope for as little harm to people and property as can be.
Which does not stop me from my wondering what impacts on the political might happen. Panhandle is predominantly pretty dark red.
The cats and dogs living with humans of various political opinions, and what remains of wildlife in the Florida panhandle, didn’t get a chance to vote for anybody. If the hurricane hits there badly enough, some of them will die, and some of the survivors will never get back to their homes.
The hurricanes, or at least the strength of them, may indeed be the planet’s retribution for human misbehavior. But as has been pointed out since Biblical times (and probably before) “the rain falleth on the just and on the unjust.” I’m not going to cheer for the damage.
(Well, unless Mar el Lago gets drowned or blown down; but that a) seems unlikely and b) wouldn’t happen unless a whole lot of others get ruined also.)
How can that possibly be legal? (Besides, “because Florida.”)