Kamala's CNN interview was a disaster!!

[WyattEarp]

Kamala tries to make profound statements but just comes off as lacking any depth at all. It all turns into gibberish that only she can make sense of........

Obama was affable even though I didn't care for his politics.

Obama was a very good orator. I think he had depth and could convey that to voters.

Having said that, Obama won only 51% of the vote. This might demonstrate how rigid and divided the electorate has been in recent elections. It can also explain why later Democratic Presidential candidates without Obama's political skill struggled to reach the 50% mark.

 

[Bucktee]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848725907818655824

This grifter is finally coming around to speaking truth.

 

[WyattEarp]

This grifter is finally coming around to speaking truth.

Is it just me or does he sound completely different than his CNN days?

 

[squeezer]

So are you calling me Mitchy or did you just make an error in posting?

I don't think anyone here really mistakes me for Mitch.

No, I was addressing you but pre-empting Mitchy's incoming laugh emoji. You really need to be more observant of your surroundings.

 

[squeezer]

Obama was a very good orator. I think he had depth and could convey that to voters.

Having said that, Obama won only 51% of the vote. This might demonstrate how rigid and divided the electorate has been in recent elections. It can also explain why later Democratic Presidential candidates without Obama's political skill struggled to reach the 50% mark.

"Biden won the election with 306 electoral votes and 51.3% of the national popular vote, compared to Trump's 232 electoral votes and 46.9% of the popular vote."

You are incorrect when it comes to Biden's popular vote if you are correct of Obama's popular vote.

" In 2016, Donald Trump and Mike Pence won with 306 electoral votes. Donald Trump and Mike Pence won in 2016 with 306 electoral votes and 45.9 percent of the popular vote. Hillary Clinton had 48 percent of the popular vote, but only earned 232 electoral votes. "

You are correct on Hillary although she still did win the popular vote. Damn, the electorate college.

I agree with all you said here. As long as we're having a conversation, can we just discuss the state of the race for a moment. Building on your point that women will strongly come out against Trump with abortion being a big motivator, I would ask you to think about polling. (However, I would add Trump's demeanor.) My personal experience is that women who support Harris are very forthcoming about their support. I think they are counted in current polls. I don't think this bloc of women for Kamala are coy when asked by pollsters.

So does the accuracy of current polling depend on men and their proclivity to turn out or not turn out to vote?

If you are basing it on polls only it's a fool's game, regardless of who is slightly ahead or behind. It is way to close to call if just basing it on polls. I do believe it is now a game of which side can get their voters out. In 2020 the left was on a mission and came out in droves. If this happens again Harris easily wins if not, then Trump will win. I do believe Trump with get the 70M votes or so he received in 2020, the question is can Kamala hit the 80M bench mark and have it show up in the swing states as good ole Joe.

Has Trump gained ground? The latest 2024 polling, explained.

Stop me if you’ve heard this one before: The polls are very close.

www.vox.com

 

[mitchell76]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848514811149357298

 

[mitchell76]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848471180262662258

 

[mitchell76]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848507977776394494

 

[WyattEarp]

No, I was addressing you but pre-empting Mitchy's incoming laugh emoji. You really need to be more observant of your surroundings.

I don't think that's my bad. You were responding directly to my words without any indication of a pivot.

From my personal experience, it's hard to switch gears like that without a clear segue.

Mitchy, how bout you give this post one of those astonished emojis. (See how I made the transition Squeeze.)

 

[mandrill]

I think you are being too optimistic.
This is the same argument that was used for years as to why people didn't have to worry about the GOP actually doing anything about abortion.

I don't think you can assume real action won't be taken.

I don't think anyone really expected Roe v Wade to be overturned. And when it was, the GOP had to walk the walk.

 

[mitchell76]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848836155506364478

 

[mitchell76]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848768292858605604

 

[Bucktee]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848471180262662258

Such a lowlife to lie about working at McDonald's so that she can pretend to connect with working class voters.

 

[Valcazar]

I agree with all you said here. As long as we're having a conversation, can we just discuss the state of the race for a moment. Building on your point that women will strongly come out against Trump with abortion being a big motivator, I would ask you to think about polling. (However, I would add Trump's demeanor.) My personal experience is that women who support Harris are very forthcoming about their support. I think they are counted in current polls. I don't think this bloc of women for Kamala are coy when asked by pollsters.

So does the accuracy of current polling depend on men and their proclivity to turn out or not turn out to vote?

It's really hard to say.
So much - (SO MUCH) - of what polls report is based on the weighting model. There is an excellent article from a few year ago by Nate Cohn on this, where he sent the same raw data to 4 pollsters to see what they would do and the range of results was considerable since they had very different weighting methods.

Your impression about women supporting Harris being forthcoming is your personal experience. Is it true? No idea.
There are lots of reports by people of women in more conservative regions or with conservative husbands being more coy. (There is a whole campaign reminding women that their vote is secret and their husband doesn't have to know who you voted for.) So at least some people think there is some uncertainty about counting them.

From what I remember however, men are in general less consistent voters, so your core take away is probably correct in that the variation in male turnout might be more significant in terms of what the final result will be as different from what polls say.

 

[PeteOsborne]

It's really hard to say.
So much - (SO MUCH) - of what polls report is based on the weighting model. There is an excellent article from a few year ago by Nate Cohn on this, where he sent the same raw data to 4 pollsters to see what they would do and the range of results was considerable since they had very different weighting methods.

Your impression about women supporting Harris being forthcoming is your personal experience. Is it true? No idea.
There are lots of reports by people of women in more conservative regions or with conservative husbands being more coy. (There is a whole campaign reminding women that their vote is secret and their husband doesn't have to know who you voted for.) So at least some people think there is some uncertainty about counting them.

From what I remember however, men are in general less consistent voters, so your core take away is probably correct in that the variation in male turnout might be more significant in terms of what the final result will be as different from what polls say.

Reminds me of this:
"It was the summer of 1957, and the polling firm Gallup has then-federal opposition leader John Diefenbaker’s Conservatives trailing the governing Liberals — badly.
Reporters told him the polls gave him no chance of winning the general election that was only days away.
“I’ve always been fond of dogs, and they are the one animal that knows the proper treatment to give to poles.’” Diefenbaker replied, using a little word play to dismiss the validity of polls.

This view was given credence on Election Day, when he and his party sailed to victory."
https://www.thestar.com/politics/fe...cle_965957a6-2a7d-5054-b171-13ed3f3e5de7.html

 

[mitchell76]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848789392258986062

 

[mitchell76]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1848884729841373566

 

[Valcazar]

Obama was a very good orator. I think he had depth and could convey that to voters.

Having said that, Obama won only 51% of the vote. This might demonstrate how rigid and divided the electorate has been in recent elections. It can also explain why later Democratic Presidential candidates without Obama's political skill struggled to reach the 50% mark.

Obama was an excellent orator.
He also benefited from just how sick of George W Bush people were.

He got 53% of the vote. (just shy of)

In 2012, it went down to 51%.

As someone already pointed out, Biden got 51% as well.

Bush II got just under 51 in 2004.
He got less than 50 in 2000.

Clinton got 49 in 1996 and 43 in 1992 (Perot ran in both of those and outperformed normal 3rd candidate numbers)

Bush I got 53 %.

You have to go back to Reagan to get over 55.

It's been a split electorate for a very long time now.

 

[WyattEarp]

Your impression about women supporting Harris being forthcoming is your personal experience. Is it true? No idea. There are lots of reports by people of women in more conservative regions or with conservative husbands being more coy. (There is a whole campaign reminding women that their vote is secret and their husband doesn't have to know who you voted for.) So at least some people think there is some uncertainty about counting them.

Yes, that's possible.

I actually laughed to myself because in my circles when there is a marital split it's usually the other way around. Liberal wives who are quite vocal about politics. The husband doesn't say much about it, but privately isn't as liberal as his wife. Doesn't necessarily mean he's voting for Trump, but is likely to be voting mostly Republican. This could be just my community and/or socioeconomic group.

Obviously whether one is vocal about their choice this election, it's still just one vote. The less committed and less vocal voter also gets one vote. Now I say this because my personal social media reflects a world where some of my friends both left and right think they are political influencers. They will preach politics every day and all day now until November 5 and likely after that.

 

[WyattEarp]

Obama was an excellent orator.
He also benefited from just how sick of George W Bush people were.

He got 53% of the vote. (just shy of)

In 2012, it went down to 51%.

As someone already pointed out, Biden got 51% as well.

Bush II got just under 51 in 2004.
He got less than 50 in 2000.

Clinton got 49 in 1996 and 43 in 1992 (Perot ran in both of those and outperformed normal 3rd candidate numbers)

Bush I got 53 %.

You have to go back to Reagan to get over 55.

It's been a split electorate for a very long time now.

Yes, the split electorate was my point. I was also highlighting that even Obama had a difficult time breaking out.

My opinion is Trump lost 2020 more than Biden went out and fought for the victory. It was a very strange and unusual election. I would go as far as to say the 2020 election might have contributed to Harris taking awhile to find a rhythm this year. She's not as talented an orator as Obama and she has to campaign much harder than 2020.