Author |
|
Daniel Gillotte Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 11 October 2005 Location: United States Posts: 2682
|
Posted: 16 October 2024 at 7:46pm | IP Logged | 1
|
post reply
|
|
I thought the MAGA-Qs were more about Kamal's marxism plus her plagiarism. WHich is funny, I guess they can go after plagiarism because Trump's never actually written anything that he could have plagiarized. Though I do recall MIlena having cribbed most of one or more of MIchelle Obama's speeches.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Dave Kopperman Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 December 2004 Location: United States Posts: 3484
|
Posted: 16 October 2024 at 8:00pm | IP Logged | 2
|
post reply
|
|
MAGA is as easily distracted as their godhead, which is to say, the attention span of the average toddler who just learned the concept of object permanence. Whatever the shiny new outrage that's being jingled in front of them in the moment is the thing they're going with.
Which is sort of odd, since the strategy that the GOP used to effectively wound Hillary was just mashing the same Benghazi button over and over and over again, which takes a kind of noxious messaging discipline that I'm almost nostalgic for.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Dave Kopperman Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 December 2004 Location: United States Posts: 3484
|
Posted: 16 October 2024 at 8:31pm | IP Logged | 3
|
post reply
|
|
To be fair, the flitting from outrage to outrage is also endemic on the left, though in our case it's not by design.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Jason Czeskleba Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 April 2004 Posts: 4649
|
Posted: 16 October 2024 at 8:49pm | IP Logged | 4
|
post reply
|
|
Dave Kopperman wrote:
My concern about the Fox News interview is that it's going to focus on/amplify the current RWEC* allegations about Doug Emhoff rather than anything remotely a) substantiated, or b) valid. |
|
|
Emhoff isn't running for President, though. Besides, to some segments of Fox viewership, the idea of slapping around a woman is probably viewed as a net positive. I don't think Baier will dwell overmuch on that, since he likes to present a persona of "serious journalist." He's simply going to hammer her on the usual stuff: "flip flopping" on fracking, failure at the border, causing inflation, etc.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Michael Penn Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 April 2006 Location: United States Posts: 12779
|
Posted: 16 October 2024 at 8:56pm | IP Logged | 5
|
post reply
|
|
Polls are... whatever they are, margins of error, etc. But (ignoring Oregon) if this paints a realistic picture, it doesn't look good for Kamala at all.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Dave Kopperman Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 December 2004 Location: United States Posts: 3484
|
Posted: 16 October 2024 at 9:57pm | IP Logged | 6
|
post reply
|
|
@Michael: where are you drawing these from? While the polls are tight, 538's average is a little less doomy:
National: Harris 48.6% / Trump 46.0%
Wisconsin: Harris 48.1% / Trump 47.5% Pennsylvania: Harris 48.1% / Trump 47.4% North Carolina: Harris 47.6% / Trump 48.0% Nevada: Harris 47.8% / Trump 47.0% Michigan: Harris 47.7% / Trump 46.9% Georgia: Harris 47.0% / Trump 48.7% Arizona: Harris 46.8% / Trump 47.4%
Maine's second district seems to be too under-polled to consider statistically, with the pendulum swinging from Harris up by five points in mid-August to Trump up by seven in mid-September. These are two different pollsters, but a swing of twelve points inside of a month seems more likely to be pollster methodology than an actual change in the electorate.
This does get at the biggest issue, which is that polling in the last two Presidential elections missed a lot of support for Trump, and so there are now a couple of different camps of how to properly weigh polling to account for that. The most recent episode of the 538 Politics Podcast does a pretty good job of running through how those different methods work.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Peter Hicks Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 April 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 1991
|
Posted: 16 October 2024 at 10:41pm | IP Logged | 7
|
post reply
|
|
Something that I find interesting is that websites like 538 and RealClearPolitics that calculate aggregates of multiple polls very much pick and choose which polls they feel like using. There was an interview with two veteran pollsters on Politico a few days ago who expressed frustration with the way such websites, and various news sites, give oxygen to polls that are so badly done they should not be presented to the public. For starters, the next time you read about a poll, read to the bottom of the article where they finally state the margin of error; anything over 3.0 is trash.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Tim O Neill Byrne Robotics Security
Joined: 16 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 10943
|
Posted: 17 October 2024 at 12:47am | IP Logged | 8
|
post reply
|
|
Michael and Dave - you both should source your info. A link is much better as they get updated/contextualized.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Dave Kopperman Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 December 2004 Location: United States Posts: 3484
|
Posted: 17 October 2024 at 1:09am | IP Logged | 9
|
post reply
|
|
@Tim: sorry, I thought that was clear from my post. Here you go:
538 is, as Peter notes, a polling aggregate and analysis platform. It was founded by Nate Silver and gained traction in affiliation with the New YorkTimes during the 2012 election. They’re now part of ABC News, and Silver has parted ways. They’re very up front about their methodology and their ranking of pollsters, and their podcast is a good wonky listen.
Note that the results I cited above were current as of the time of my post. They update several times a day and it’s an addictive thing.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Kevin Hagerman Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 April 2005 Location: United States Posts: 18123
|
Posted: 17 October 2024 at 7:34am | IP Logged | 10
|
post reply
|
|
Anything brought up in October that didn't happen THAT &$#@ING DAY may as well be a lie. Someone sat on the "pussy-grabber" tape until October. Hunter Biden's laptop was so important Rudolph Giuliani took it to... the New York Post.
It's cheap politics for low-information voters and I detest it. The Clinton campaign wanted to face the worst candidate in the GOP field because they thought it'd be a slam dunk - meanwhile I'm voting for Cruz in the Illinois primary to keep him out.
My parents did, too. They knew Trump was a walking diaper fire - until he won the nom and FOX told them different. Infuriating.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Trevor Krysak Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 4163
|
Posted: 17 October 2024 at 8:52am | IP Logged | 11
|
post reply
|
|
I don't believe the polling is really factoring in new voters. And there appears to be a rather large number of them this cycle. Based on new registrations. Most polls are focusing on those who voted in the 2022 and 2020 elections. So the margins may be far less tight than depicted. We shall see.
I don't think this year is 2016 or 2020. So I 'd say we're all in for a very different set of circumstances after.
One thing's for sure. After nearly a decade in the political spotlight voters know who/what Trump is. If they want four more years of that it isn't based on ignorance.
Edited by Trevor Krysak on 17 October 2024 at 2:03pm
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Kevin Brown Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 31 May 2005 Location: United States Posts: 9020
|
Posted: 17 October 2024 at 9:26am | IP Logged | 12
|
post reply
|
|
About those polls, watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK4AowD6okI
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|