2024 Pre-Election Political Polls | POLL - Trump would have had 7 point lead over Biden

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 6K
  • Views: 183K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:
There was a bruising battle between Harry Reid’s Democratic Machine and Bernie Bros in Nevada in 2016 and 2020. Soon after Reid died in 2021, Team Bernie managed to take over most key elected positions in the Nevada Democratic Party.

But it turned out that Team Bernie was good at firing up Progressive but incompetent at running a party apparatus. They were voted back out in 2023 and Reid Moderates took back control of the party. But that left deep wounds in the coalition (who already hated Reid and his moderates for changing rules to undermine Bernie’s chances there in 2020) and a lot of progressives consider themselves not part of the Democratic Party now. That schism has been aggravated by the progressive rejection of the Biden policy toward the Israel-Hamas war, moving progressives even further from supporting Democrats.

Trump’s no tax on tips proposal really spoke to the young progressives in Vegas, many of whom live off tips. They figured if the GOP and Dems have basically the same policy on Gaza, why not go with the better tax policy for their state, which was particularly hammered during the pandemic and still holds a grudge about liberal positions on pandemic safety requirements that really hurt Vegas tourism.

Which is why the local unions reportedly told Harris it was vital that she adopt the no tax on tips proposal to have a shot in Nevada. But that hasn’t fixed the progressive disgruntlement and it is not clear how much support Dems can claw back from still angry progressives. And most of the rest of the state is dead red.
Click to expand...
And yet CCM won in 2022.

Anyone who supports "no tax on tips" and is even considering voting GOP is not a progressive. Of course, a lot of Bernie Bros weren't progressives. A lot of them were just resentful of women, which is why they had never heard of Bernie Sanders before 2016.
 
superrific said:
And yet CCM won in 2022.

Anyone who supports "no tax on tips" and is even considering voting GOP is not a progressive. Of course, a lot of Bernie Bros weren't progressives. A lot of them were just resentful of women, which is why they had never heard of Bernie Sanders before 2016.
Click to expand...
CCM won by 2 points in 2016 and less than half a point in 2022. Also, incumbent Dems lost the Governor’s race and Lt Governor’s race (mostly due to COVID restrictions) and the GOP took some other spots that were open but formerly Democratic. There has been a slow red shift in Nevada and polling suggests that drift continues.
 
nycfan said:
CCM won by 2 points in 2016 and less than half a point in 2022. Also, incumbent Dems lost the Governor’s race and Lt Governor’s race (mostly due to COVID restrictions) and the GOP took some other spots that were open but formerly Democratic. There has been a slow red shift in Nevada and polling suggests that drift continues.
Click to expand...
POLLING SUCKS IN NEVADA.

Ask John Ralston about it.
 
superrific said:
It hasn't had that effect so far. And you don't know whether it strongly or hugely favors Dems. All we know is that the measures typically pass with large margins. But it's possible that the initiative pass by even more (in percentage terms at least) among the voters who typically vote in elections.

This idea that the initiatives will provide big dividends to Harris is just an intuition. Which is fine, but behind that intuition there are several assumptions that could be wrong. It's fair to say that the intuition that the ballot initiatives will do little on net are as firmly grounded.
Click to expand...
It has absolutely had the effect of surging the turnout numbers. If it hasn't had a demonstrated causal effect yet on the candidates/down-ballot, it's only because of sample size and the other point I mentioned -- there *has now been* a concerted effort to anchor republicans to the losing side of this issue. For KS, OH, KY and the rest of the initiatives/measures/special elections from the last couple years, the Dem strategy had not yet coalesced in the way it has over the last year, and especially since Harris. Since then, the messaging has not only gotten stronger and more pointed squarely at republicans, but part of the Dem strategy was to get as many of these on states' ballots as possible.

Anyone who truly believes it's a coin-flip as to whether reproductive rights will provide dividends (big or otherwise), or a coin-flip as to whether the reproductive rights issue even hugely favors the Dems... is outsmarting themselves. The writing is on the wall, even if the data is still trailing behind.
 
duluoz said:
It has absolutely had the effect of surging the turnout numbers. If it hasn't had a demonstrated causal effect yet on the candidates/down-ballot, it's only because of sample size and the other point I mentioned -- there *has now been* a concerted effort to anchor republicans to the losing side of this issue. For KS, OH, KY and the rest of the initiatives/measures/special elections from the last couple years, the Dem strategy had not yet coalesced in the way it has over the last year, and especially since Harris. Since then, the messaging has not only gotten stronger and more pointed squarely at republicans, but part of the Dem strategy was to get as many of these on states' ballots as possible.

Anyone who truly believes it's a coin-flip as to whether reproductive rights will provide dividends (big or otherwise), or a coin-flip as to whether the reproductive rights issue even hugely favors the Dems... is outsmarting themselves. The writing is on the wall, even if the data is still trailing behind.
Click to expand...
Yeah, so I'm wary of "the data is still trailing" behind narratives in politics. It's basically the position of everyone whose theories are unsupported by data. Sometimes the data trailing behind story is accurate, so I'm not going to say that you're wrong. I'm simply going to say that it's not persuasive to me.

Reproductive rights issues favor Dems for sure. That's a different question from whether reproductive rights ballot amendments favor Dems.
 
nycfan said:
CCM won by 2 points in 2016 and less than half a point in 2022. Also, incumbent Dems lost the Governor’s race and Lt Governor’s race (mostly due to COVID restrictions) and the GOP took some other spots that were open but formerly Democratic. There has been a slow red shift in Nevada and polling suggests that drift continues.
Click to expand...
I don't think this is a correct analysis:

1. 2022 was a midterm election. It was supposed to be closer. And indeed the GOP took the majority of votes cast for the House (even excluding one-candidate races). So CCM's margin of half a point in 2022 doesn't seem like an underperformance relative to 2016. It was a different environment. Also, Dems won 3 of 4 house seats in 2022.

2. True, the GOP won the governor's race. This was no anomaly -- Sisolak was Nevada's only Democratic governor this century. Prior to 2022, the GOP had won 6 of the previous 6 gubernatorial elections.

3. Prior to 2018, the Dems had controlled both Senate seats in NV for a decade in the 1990s, and before that you have to go back to the early 1970s. The Dems have now won three straight Senate races, which is the most since they won 5 straight with Reid and Bryan.

4. At the presidential level, Dems have won NV four straight elections. Before that, the GOP won NV in 8 of the 10 presidential elections, with only Bill winning between LBJ and Obama. The margin in 2020 was about what it was in 2016 (correcting for national environment), maybe slightly better. True, neither HRC nor Biden approached Obama's 2012 performance, but that might have been an outlier.

IOW I'm not seeing any red shift here. I've thought of Nevada as trending slowly blue. At most, I think, you could say that Nevada is about 50/50 and the recent Dem dominance is more blip than a new reality -- meaning we'd expect the GOP to start winning some federal races at some point.
 
lawtig02 said:
At a macro level, I think we’re now to the point where the election comes down to one question — can Kamala avoid a major mistake? If she can, she wins. Trump’s support is capped. He’s not even trying to win new voters now. He’ll be doing everything he can to drive down Dem enthusiasm, but realistically, the only way that happens is if Kamala says something really stupid, a new (legitimate) scandal emerges, etc.

The biggest problem for Trump, though, is that Kamala’s support is not yet capped. She’s still not universally known, and even many of those who know her don’t know what she really stands for. She can still bring people off the sideline. Trump can’t.

Get ready for the ugliest, most negative two months in the recent history of presidential politics. Trump and his sycophants will be doing everything they can to make Kamala trip. She just needs to stay on her feet and shrug off the muck that will be thrown her way. I think she can do it.
Click to expand...
Agree I see more variance in support for Kamala given Trump is a far more known quality. And Trump will go as down low as can be imagined (or is beyond imagination).

But by no means is Kamala in’s a position where merely avoiding a major mistake is sufficient to win this election.

She’s reset the election and made it winnable. But she needs to pick up vote share across multiple demographics to win this election. So she has to not merely avoid a major mistake, but also net out gains in multiple voter groups between now and election day. And, she / the Democratic party cannot afford to lose the benefit of renewed Democratic enthusiasm or surging registrations. Once again, that’s not merely a matter of avoiding a mistake. There is an incredible amount of work to be done.
 
quakerdevil said:
To be fair we were dealing with an unprecedented amount of mail in voting in 2020. I'll be shocked if we don't know night of in November.
Click to expand...
On election night in 2008, my older brother was visiting me and my wife was out of town. We stayed up until 4 AM, waiting for the Cumberland County results to come in and put NC in Obama's column. The overall result was already know at that point. But, sometimes I wonder if Obama got just enough hard-core racist votes in NC to win because these racists were sure he would lose, but wanted to say, "But, I voted for Obama." An expression that later morphed into "I'm not a racist. I voted for Obama, once."
 
lawtig02 said:
At a macro level, I think we’re now to the point where the election comes down to one question — can Kamala avoid a major mistake? If she can, she wins. Trump’s support is capped. He’s not even trying to win new voters now. He’ll be doing everything he can to drive down Dem enthusiasm, but realistically, the only way that happens is if Kamala says something really stupid, a new (legitimate) scandal emerges, etc.

The biggest problem for Trump, though, is that Kamala’s support is not yet capped. She’s still not universally known, and even many of those who know her don’t know what she really stands for. She can still bring people off the sideline. Trump can’t.

Get ready for the ugliest, most negative two months in the recent history of presidential politics. Trump and his sycophants will be doing everything they can to make Kamala trip. She just needs to stay on her feet and shrug off the muck that will be thrown her way. I think she can do it.
Click to expand...
I think that's a little optimistic. I think all available data suggests the race is very tight and is likely to remain tight. And I think more than just a Kamala mistake can shift things back to Trump - the most obvious possible event is a run of bad economic news.
 
superrific said:
Yeah, so I'm wary of "the data is still trailing" behind narratives in politics. It's basically the position of everyone whose theories are unsupported by data. Sometimes the data trailing behind story is accurate, so I'm not going to say that you're wrong. I'm simply going to say that it's not persuasive to me.

Reproductive rights issues favor Dems for sure. That's a different question from whether reproductive rights ballot amendments favor Dems.
Click to expand...
I'll be back in Nov with some data for you.
 
Polls won't mean much until about September 15 after the pundits have explained the debate to the naifs.
 
Igs149 said:
Agree I see more variance in support for Kamala given Trump is a far more known quality. And Trump will go as down low as can be imagined (or is beyond imagination).

But by no means is Kamala in’s a position where merely avoiding a major mistake is sufficient to win this election.

She’s reset the election and made it winnable. But she needs to pick up vote share across multiple demographics to win this election. So she has to not merely avoid a major mistake, but also net out gains in multiple voter groups between now and election day. And, she / the Democratic party cannot afford to lose the benefit of renewed Democratic enthusiasm or surging registrations. Once again, that’s not merely a matter of avoiding a mistake. There is an incredible amount of work to be done.
Click to expand...
I'm happy for the campaign to keep attacking it as though they're in a close race. Given the registration numbers I've seen, combined with the polling aggregates, I just don't think it's actually that close anymore.

But what they won't do this time is make the same mistake that Hillary and the DNC made -- shift budget over to House and Senate races, and slow campaign trail stops in key states and regions. If Hillary hadn't coasted and instead had acted like she was in a close race, we would've never been in this mess in the first place. Comey notwithstanding, she got outworked in the home stretch of that race.

Harris won't. In fact, he's the one who has been inexplicably coasting, relatively.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top