2024 Presidential Election | ELECTION DAY 2024

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 8K
  • Views: 288K
  • Politics 
CFordUNC said:
I don't want to necessarily speak for @lawtig02 but I'll speak for myself- and I know that folks like lawtig and I probably seem like we are completely off our rocker with the optimism. I just feel that the fundamentals matter. Money matters, grassroots volunteers matter, the ground game matters, the message of joy and hope vs. the message of hatred and division and negativity matters, the message of "America is a great place but we still have work to do to make it even better" vs. "America is a garbage can" matter. Trump has been a massive albatross around the GOP's electoral chances in general elections for going on 8 years now. MAGA is deeply unpopular among all normal people in this country. There are significant numbers of Republicans claiming that they are voting for Harris. All of those things matter, IMO. I'm not saying that it won't be uncomfortably close, but I just trust that having literally all of the fundamentals and intangibles in Harris's favor, and none in Trump's, is what will seal the deal.
Click to expand...
That's fair enough. I simply can't share that optimism based on my assessment of the objective data. And I do think having leftover scar tissue from 2016 plays a role.
 
rodoheel said:
That's fair enough. I simply can't share that optimism based on my assessment of the objective data. And I do think having leftover scar tissue from 2016 plays a role.
Click to expand...
I can totally understand that. That is completely valid. I know that you are hoping that I am right just as much as I am hoping that I am right!
 
rodoheel said:
That's fair enough. I simply can't share that optimism based on my assessment of the objective data. And I do think having leftover scar tissue from 2016 plays a role.
Click to expand...
I also think it's understandable to be more pessimistic than I am, but just to be clear, what objective data are you referring to?
 
lawtig02 said:
I also think it's understandable to be more pessimistic than I am, but just to be clear, what objective data are you referring to?
Click to expand...
I think it has to do with the polls being sooo tight compared to how at least in 2020 Biden had some breathing room (even if the results ended up being very close). I don't feel like there's any room for error whatsoever now, and I think its one of those things where we'd rather assume a loss and be happy with a W, than be shocked with an L thinking we'd win.

I also feel like (and I said feel, and not factually know) there's tons of hopium on the Dem side, trying to explain away bad polls, explain away registration numbers looking off, explain away early voting totals etc.
 
lawtig02 said:
I also think it's understandable to be more pessimistic than I am, but just to be clear, what objective data are you referring to?
Click to expand...
I mean, mostly polling data. Pretty much every decent pollster shows a very close race, with battleground states on a knife's edge. We're all aware of the reasons that it's difficult to poll in the current time - I mean I know I sure as hell am not answering a call or text from a pollster - but I've yet to be convinced that there's anything more objectively predictive than polling. Most of the stuff cford mentions boils down to vibes more than anything objective.
 
rodoheel said:
I mean, mostly polling data. Pretty much every decent pollster shows a very close race, with battleground states on a knife's edge. We're all aware of the reasons that it's difficult to poll in the current time - I mean I know I sure as hell am not answering a call or text from a pollster - but I've yet to be convinced that there's anything more objectively predictive than polling. Most of the stuff cford mentions boils down to vibes more than anything objective.
Click to expand...
The only thing that gives me comfort is the fact the Dems have over performed the polling in every off cycle election since Dobbs, sometimes in stunning fashion.

It's largely in the hands of the first and second time voters IMO.
 
rodoheel said:
I mean, mostly polling data. Pretty much every decent pollster shows a very close race, with battleground states on a knife's edge. We're all aware of the reasons that it's difficult to poll in the current time - I mean I know I sure as hell am not answering a call or text from a pollster - but I've yet to be convinced that there's anything more objectively predictive than polling. Most of the stuff cford mentions boils down to vibes more than anything objective.
Click to expand...
I think that record breaking fundraising- particularly small dollar donors- and grassroots volunteer efforts are a little more than “vibes” but I hear ya.
 
lawtig02 said:
That all makes sense, and while you're right I don't think much like a long-term liberal, I think I may be intellectualizing this a little differently than you're suggesting. If Trump wins, I'll be devastated for the people who will be most impacted by his presidency (recognizing I'm probably not in any of those groups personally). I just don't think Trump is going to win. The polling, and especially changes in the polling within the margins of error, seems meaningless to me at this point in the race. All of the "momentum" talk is just noise from Trump's camp. I don't think this race has materially changed since Kamala took over and showed the country she has what it takes to be president of the United States, and nothing that happens in the next ten days is likely to change anything either. I'm not saying it's impossible for Trump to win. I just think his odds of doing so are somewhere in the 10% range.
Click to expand...
Right, but the discussion is why are liberals freaking out with anxiety. Trust me; there would be freakouts even if everyone believed Kamala is likely to win. Not so much from me (though there is a freakout scream inside me trying to get out, for real) but from other long-term liberals who feel the anxiety.

Let me put it a little differently. I'm guessing that all of your friends have some aspect to their lives or personalities that annoys you. We all do. Nobody is perfectly harmonious -- hell, not even with our spouses in the best marriages. I mean, look at all the dookies here who are our friends now. Nobody's perfect, right?

Well, liberals can be a bit neurotic. You're on team Blue now, sub-section CONTIFA. Some of your new friends will annoy you a little bit.
 
uncgriff said:
The only thing that gives me comfort is the fact the Dems have over performed the polling in every off cycle election since Dobbs, sometimes in stunning fashion.

It's largely in the hands of the first and second time voters IMO.
Click to expand...
I mean there's only been one significant off-cycle election since Dobbs, and it didn't involve Trump (or the presidential race in general). I'm skeptical that effect will carry over. But I certainly hope it does.
 
CFordUNC said:
I think that record breaking fundraising- particularly small dollar donors- and grassroots volunteer efforts are a little more than “vibes” but I hear ya.
Click to expand...
If you have any data about how donations and grassroots volunteers translate into votes I'm all ears. That stuff is great in theory, but in practice I'm not sure it translates into votes.
 
rodoheel said:
I mean there's only been one significant off-cycle election since Dobbs, and it didn't involve Trump (or the presidential race in general). I'm skeptical that effect will carry over. But I certainly hope it does.
Click to expand...
Several special elections.
 
CFordUNC said:
I think that record breaking fundraising- particularly small dollar donors- and grassroots volunteer efforts are a little more than “vibes” but I hear ya.
Click to expand...
They are. And ground games matter. Everything I have read about Trump's ground game is that it's basically non-existent, and it's especially non-existent in PA.
 
Exit polls of actual voters.
Gender gap statistics.
Fundraising.
Newly registered voters and when they registered.

These are the things I'm putting the most stock in. And all these things suggest that this race will not be as close as your chosen news source would like it to be.
 
rodoheel said:
If you have any data about how donations and grassroots volunteers translate into votes I'm all ears. That stuff is great in theory, but in practice I'm not sure it translates into votes.
Click to expand...
I guess I don’t understand. Do you think that people who donate to a certain candidate aren’t also likely to vote for them, too? The Harris campaign has shattered fundraising records, particularly as it relates to new, first-time, and/or small-dollar donors. They have a massive advantage over the Trump campaign in each of those areas. I guess it’s entirely possible that those folks are donating but not voting but I’d think those odds are kind of low, right?
 
rodoheel said:
If you have any data about how donations and grassroots volunteers translate into votes I'm all ears. That stuff is great in theory, but in practice I'm not sure it translates into votes.
Click to expand...
They do. There's research on that. For one thing, people who volunteer and donate are highly motivated to vote. It's a reflection of expected turnout. Second, those factors help increase turnout.
 
superrific said:
They do. There's research on that. For one thing, people who volunteer and donate are highly motivated to vote. It's a reflection of expected turnout. Second, those factors help increase turnout.
Click to expand...
Can you link it? I'm not trying to be a dick, I'd honestly like to see that.
 
rodoheel said:
I mean, mostly polling data. Pretty much every decent pollster shows a very close race, with battleground states on a knife's edge. We're all aware of the reasons that it's difficult to poll in the current time - I mean I know I sure as hell am not answering a call or text from a pollster - but I've yet to be convinced that there's anything more objectively predictive than polling. Most of the stuff cford mentions boils down to vibes more than anything objective.
Click to expand...
Ok, I hear you, and I join everyone here in wishing the spreads were more than they are. Here are the things I keep coming back to as far as the swing state polls are concerned, and I don't think any of these things are particularly vibey.

1. Kamala has more potential paths to victory than Trump does. In other words, I think she's more likely to pick up NC or GA than Trump is to pick up MI, WI or PA.

2. The state polling averages are being impacted by low quality red-leaning polls as much or more than the national average. If you just focus on the higher quality polls, Kamala does a little better than the averages indicate.

3. These are national numbers, but Kamala's unfavorable is 46.4%. Trump's is 52.1%. Maybe I'm old school, but I really do think that makes a big difference at the end of the day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top