Again, the issue here is our different view of voting.
If the idea is to vote with no concern as to what actually happens, then "the candidate that is likely to hurt your cause the least" is someone who can't win but you feel good about voting for.
Trump : Palestinians, please move out of GAZA. We (USA) will clean it up and make it the Riviera of the middle east. Then you can come back.
- Thread starter Ceiling Cat
- Start date
If the idea is to vote with no concern as to what actually happens, then "the candidate that is likely to hurt your cause the least" is someone who can't win but you feel good about voting for.
Frank seems to not understand that we aren't rejecting the findings of the poll.
We are rejecting the conclusions he insisted were dictated by those findings. (And the way he represented the findings.)
Frank (and many others) want to vote in the system they feel would be better if it existed, not the system that actually exists.
Yes, if the argument is "who is worse", the person making an active case for one person to be less worse is making a positive case for them.
Yes, you are wrong to use the incorrect numbers of how many fewer votes there were.
That's not a controversial statement.
The number of fewer votes also does NOT map to "how many people voted for Biden last time and didn't vote for Harris" because the voting population does not consist of the same people.
This is also not a controversial statement.
You shouldn't be confused by straightforward things.
Nothing on that page supports that statement.Right now, the most accurate numbers I've seen say that 12 million fewer people voted for Harris than Biden. That number is supported here.
Voter turnout in United States presidential elections - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Please explain your math.
I never said it was unreasonable to argue that.
I said that your poll that "conclusively proves it" doesn't actually do any such thing.
It's 29%, but to be fair it is the largest number among the responses.
Just to be clear though, they did not say it was the reason. The poll asked what "the most important reason" was.
Nothing in the poll says they would have changed their vote if that reason wasn' t there.
About a third said they would have been more likely to vote for Harris, but no one was asked "Would you have voted for Harris if she changed the policy".
Just to be clear on what was actually asked and answered.
No, the poll is people "who voted for Biden in 2020 and cast a ballot for someone besides Kamala Harris in 2024".
Not "people who chose not to vote at all in 2024".
In fact, if you go into the toplines (and good on the IMEU for publishing properly) you can see the specific detail.
That question was only asked of those who voted.
So before even getting to the incorrect "Biden received 12 million more votes than Harris." statement, you have to remember that this 29% applies only to people who voted for Biden in 2020 and voted for someone else in 2024.
It does NOT apply to people who voted for Biden in 2020 and then chose not to vote in 2024.
The question to the people who did not vote is this one.
You will note that Israel/Gaza here comes in at 20%, behind Inflation, abortion access, climate change, and immigration
Attachments
For those with no knowledge of Middle East history and don’t see it as a factor in understanding today. Population transfer of Palestinians has been a wet dream of Ziontology since its inception
And this what many shamelessly carry water for on this board. But they will screech about the phrase “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”
Ok, lets start with what we agree on.
Multiple sources have posted different numbers on the total votes and even you agree the tally is not officially completed.
12 million people who voted for Biden did not vote for Harris and likely did not vote at all or for a third party candidate according to most sources.
That wiki page says 6 million difference.
The poll says 29% of those who did vote for Biden and did not vote for Harris said Gaza was their #1 reason.
That means up to 4 million people chose not to vote Harris over her support of genocide.
Another poll found 50% of dems think Israel is committing genocide.
Even if we use the 6 million number we are looking at up to 2 million voters that didn't vote for Harris because of Gaza.
That makes it an entirely plausible argument to claim that support of genocide cost Harris the election even with the lowest number and quite likely with the 12 million number.
Have I declared it 'conclusively proves' the claim? Of course not, that's you being dishonest and using straw man arguments.
But for you to argue that its impossible in an election decided by a 1.4% difference that an issue that 80% of dems opposed, and which caused national protests, is ridiculous.
Not at all.
It is the logical conclusion to your claim that voting for a candidate who will lose is wasting your vote.
You argued that voting for Stein was wasting your vote because she couldn't win.
Once trump was in the lead you were wasting your vote by voting for Harris and should have switched so your vote wasn't wasted on a losing candidate.
That is the exact same logic.
This is a fundamental difference between our understanding of democracy.
I argue that you are part of the system and that if you don't do all you can to work to change the system for the better you are not participating in democracy.
You argue that even if the system has done a Titanic and hit an iceberg its best to go on deck and vote for which tune the band should play.
Wrong.
The tally is officially complete and has been for some time and can be looked up easily.
You can get it at the FEC website: https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/2024presgeresults.pdf
TRUMP: 77,302,580
HARRIS: 75,017,613
Margin of victory: 2,284,967
So no, we don't agree on any of that.
Wrong.
We have no data on how many people voted for Biden and did not vote for Harris. (whether by not voting, voting for Trump, or voting for a third party)
We may get some info on that from Pew sometime in future, but right now we have no one even seriously estimating such a count that I've seen.
There have been people using the total number of votes fewer that Harris got than Biden as an approximation of that number, but that isn't valid since the voting populations are different and there is no reason to believe that mapped 1 for 1.
This we agree on, Harris received roughly 6 million fewer votes than Biden did in the election. (6,265,888)
The poll says that 29% of those who did vote for Biden, did not vote for Harris, and voted for someone else said Gaza was their #1 reason.
Where are you getting that number from?
The 12 million you made up?
Even if you had justification for that number, you yourself admitted that number includes people who didn't vote at all.
How many of those 12 million voted for Trump or voted for third party?
That's the number you need to take 29% of.
You could, of course, claim EVERY third party voter is actually someone who voted for Biden in 2020 and then changed their vote (this would be incorrect of course).
That total is 2,918,109, and 29% of that would be 846,252 votes (rounding up).
Yes, that poll does exist.
I already gave you the math earlier.
If you use the most generous interpretation possible - that the 29% includes people who didn't vote (Which it does not) and that everyone who said it was their most important reason also means that if her position had been different they would have voted for her instead (which isn't a realistic interpretation) and you took the total of how many fewer votes she received as the representation of every 2020 Biden voter who didn't vote for Harris (which isn't correct) then you end up with 1,817,108 votes (rounding up) that he didn't get because of this.
Leaving you 467,859 votes short of catching Trump.
I did this math for you earlier in the thread.
I have done it AGAIN.
Please don't make me do it a third time.
I have never said it wasn't plausible.
I have said your poll doesn't prove it because the math doesn't add up.
Yes you did.
You said the poll showed it was true.
A fact.
Please just own your bullshit and move on.
Good thing I never argued that.
I just challenged your numbers, interpretation, and representation of the poll, a subject on which I was completely correct.
To change the system and participate in a democracy you need to select the right government considering all the constraints that exist (Such as a 2 party system in the US) and make compromises on policy where necessary.
I see your logic is as good as you poll reading skills.
Ahh, so you completely misunderstand my argument.
At this point I am just going to assume it is willful obtuseness at this point.
I think it is a lost cause, here.
He is strongly opposed to working to change the system for the better.
Trump wouldn't have been in the lead had people voted for Harris, so that is not a logic that follows.
You've previously stated the official numbers aren't available, now you say they are.
Those totals agree with what I've arguing, with the exception of the initial reports saying it was a 12 million difference between Biden and Harris.
So you say the numbers are likely wrong but don't know what the real numbers are.
These were the numbers that were posted after the election, they were fair to use at the time.
Ok, we will use this number moving forward.
Agreed.
Yes, and 6 million people chose not to vote for Harris or to vote for someone else. Stein got about 900,000, Trump got 2 million more and Harris lost.
I didn't make up numbers, those were the numbers reported right after the election in Newsweek and other places, as previously noted.
If those voters switched to trump and cited Gaza, that doubles the effect of them not voting at all, which weakens your claim.
I'm sticking with the 29% who were polled saying they voted for Biden but didn't vote for Harris because of Gaza.
That total is more than 29% of the 6 million who voted for Biden but wouldn't vote for Harris. That confirms my argument, not yours.
Your entire argument lies on disproving that the election was lost on single issue voters, while I argue that the there were enough or nearly enough single issue voters to change the outcome combined with other voters who also weighed Gaza along with other issues and decided not to vote for her.
Of single issue voters. Which you also argue aren't most people and not the way most people vote. You keep arguing that Gaza was not an issue that affected the election at all, I keep posting these polls to show that it was a major issue.
And you well know that there likely never will be a poll that proves either of us correct, 100%.
The polls show that single issue voters could have changed the election and that means that its quite probable that all electors weighed this issue amongst others and couldn't stomach voting for Harris against what you have noted is someone who is a serious danger to US democracy. That you refuse to accept that it could have effected the election in any form is willful ignorance.
I dispute your claims entirely. The numbers are still not clearly official, the polls support my assertions and your interpretation is based on your own bias.
Your refusal to accept that Biden/Harris aiding and funding genocide could change the election outcome is willful ignorance.
That logic works for any candidate.
If the goal is to 'not waste' your vote by voting for a loser than you have to pick whoever is going to win.
Once it became clear trump was winning, using valcazar logic, you wasted your vote by voting for Harris.
Personally, I think democracy is better served by voting for who you want to lead.
These are the same discussions we had during the summer, where you argued it was pointless to try to change the system through protest or political pressure.
You repeatedly argued that only voting counts and it was wasting your vote if you didn't pick one of Harris or trump.
I repeatedly warned that Gaza could be a deciding factor and that Harris was likely to lose the election over the issue.
On the contrary, I supported trying to force change in all ways. Through protests, through political pressure, through the courts and all manners possible. That trying to change the party was the only way to make the dems electable.
You repeatedly said that the only thing that counted was voting to keep trump out of power.
Now trump is in power.
