I actually do not think it is has bleak as everyone is making it out to be and it generally shows the limitations of Trump. Lake, Moreno, Baldwin's competitor, Slotkin's competitor are all trying to be mini-Trumps and failing. Montana has swung far to the right. As Republicans go, Jim Justice is not super-horrible. I have seen nothing showing the GOP has chances to pick up Maryland or New Jersey. Though New Jersey's last poll was in August, it was still a GOP poll that had Kim up by 5, which means his actual lead is probably higher
There have to be internal memos and emails on how to cover Trump and whitewash over his reactionary-authoritarian outbursts. There have to be. My thought is this:
1. The owners of the MSM are generally Trump friendly.
2. At the very least, they are anti-tax increase friendly.
3. Journalism has horrible careers prospects now and it is continuing to go down. If someone is really brave and enterprising, they can start a substack but that is hard.
4. So people with the brass ring jobs will do anything to keep them because the prospects for successful journalism careers might be lower than the prospects for successful acting careers.
Tester is likely going to lose his seat barring a miracle. West Virginia is also going red.
Osborne seems like he can be a real contender in Nebraska. No idea if he will caucus with the Democrats or not but it seems like a friendlier place for him than the GOP. It is unlikely but Cruz and Scott are polling as worse than they should considering they are in a red barely turning purple state (Texas) and redder state (Florida) in a Presidential election year.
Brown, Casey, Baldwin, Gallego, and Slotkin all generally seem to have decent and consistent leads in the polls but there could theoretically be surprises here too.
The media continues to sanewash for Trump. CNN is stating that Trump is offering a message for unity after Helene. He is doing nothing of the sort: https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2024/09/more-sanewashing-from-the-national-media
The Only Patriotic Choice for President: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/30/opinion/editorials/kamala-harris-2024.html
That is pretty damn strong language.
Now if only the rest of their coverage would actually reflect the sentiment instead of sane-washing Trump and having their top political reporters meltdown during interviews about how dare the peons criticize them
I think there is a plausible case for Fromkin and Magary to be correct. The polling has generally been trending in Harris’ favor and some if it this week has been decidedly bigger leads. Polling also doesn’t account for voter profiles changing since the shift and the Times as constantly weighed more for Republicans
Dan Fromkin wonders if the media has the election all wrong and speculates what if Harris is walking away it with: https://presswatchers.org/2024/09/what-if-the-media-has-the-election-all-wrong/
Rabid right-wing online homophone outed as gay porn star by white supremacists: https://www.yahoo.com/news/corey-deangelis-disgraced-not-liberals-214500257.html
Donald Trump is a horrible business person: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/sep/26/lucky-loser-review-how-donald-trump-squandered-his-wealth?CMP=share_btn_url
"Donald Trump started his career at the end of the 1970s, financed by his father Fred Trump. Over the years this transfer of wealth added up to around $500m in today’s money in gifts. My rough calculations say that, had he simply taken the money, leveraged it not imprudently, and passively invested it in Manhattan real estate – gone to parties, womanised, played golf, collected his rent cheques and reinvested them – his fortune could have amounted to more than $80bn by the time he ascended to the presidency in 2017.
And yet Trump was not worth $80bn in 2017. Instead, Forbes pegged him at $2.5bn – which, given the difficulties of valuing and accounting for real estate, is really anything between $5bn (£4bn) and zero (or less). It is in this sense that Pulitzer prize-winning New York Times reporters Russ Buettner and Susanne Craig call Trump a “loser”. He is indeed one of the world’s biggest losers. By trying to run a business, rather than just kicking back and letting the rising tide of his chosen sector lift his wealth beyond the moon, he managed to destroy the vast majority of his potential net worth."
Rick Perlstein on the persistent problems of polling: https://prospect.org/politics/2024-09-25-polling-imperilment/
"George Gallup, whom Time had just deemed the “Babe Ruth of the polling profession”—oops!—gave as his alibi, “No scientific method is known today which can accurately predetermine the voting intentions of people who are … undecided.” Nate Silver offered the same truism 67 years later: “There’s not much a pollster can do when a voter hasn’t made up her mind.” But you have to try something. So Gallup weighted the 13 percent of his last 1952 sample who hadn’t yet made up their minds as going 3-to-1 for the Democrat, as they had in 1948. But this time, they mostly went for the Republican. Oops again.
That error opens up onto the myriad conceptual fallacies built into the entire enterprise, if something so unavoidable can be called an “error.” Past performance is no guarantee of future results; but past performance is all a pollster has to go on. That’s why much of the process of choosing and weighting samples is … well, you can call it “more art than science.” Or you can call it “intuitive.” Or you can call it “trial and error.” But you can also call it “made up.”
Morning Consult has her up 5 with likely voters and an 11K sample and Ipsos has her up 6 but with a bunch smaller pool. I think this is more Obama than HRC/Biden territory.
There is something to looking at data honestly and not deluding yourself. Some swing state polls are still very tight and it could break for Trump but this is different than looking at data and assuming the worst or data that supports you is suspect. That is a psychological defense mechanism/hinderance.
And there seem to be a lot more sincerely enthusiastic voters for Harris among the young than Chris' hold your nose crowd. I think we need a few more days or a week to see how Robinson's scandals and collapse hurts NC Republicans and Trump in NC.
Plus the Times still oversamples Republicans and gives them more weight.
FWIW, Harris and Walz have net favorable ratings in this poll. Trump and Vance do not.Project 2025 is a dumpster fire of unfavorable ratings. “Socialism” is also unpopular but god knows what people are thinking when they here the term.
The Democratic and Republican Parties are equally unpopular and that is probably just negative partisanship
I think Harris has advantages that are being overlooked by a lot of polls which have not updated their models since the replacement drama. Hundreds of thousands of people have registered to vote since she became the nominee, the vast majority of these are young women, and young women vote more frequently than young men. 18-29 year old women are also much to the left.
From what I've read Trump's ground game is zero and outsourced. Harris has lots of cash, volunteers, and ground game. There is also Robinson putting NC in play more and that has not been reflected in the polls yet.
Frankly, the Times/Sienna have been outliers in being more Trump friendly during the entire election cycle. Additionally, she and Walz have net favorable ratings. Trump could still get an EC black swan but I think Harris has hidden strengths that the very serious pundits and pollsters like to ignore because it involves icky, women's issues like abortion.
I don't think it is an obsession of the foreign-policy establishment. TNC is not a member of the blob or the foreign party establishment. He is primarily known for his analysis of American racial issues.
What it really seems to be is a group of outsiders, often but not always college students or otherwise associated with academia, who think this is a very important issue and it works them up and they see the Palestinian struggle connected to American issues of racial justice. And they are quite upset that Hamas and Hezbollah are seen as baddies and the average American thinks calling Israel a "settler-colonialist" state is weird.
A lot of them are also very online in their politics and this tends to radicalize.
Harris' speech at the DNC probably captured the median Democratic stance quite well.
1. Israel has a right to exist;
2. Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist scum; not brave resistance fighters
3. Israel's war against Hamas is causing too much damage in Gaza and there should be a ceasefire.
Israel's attacks on Hezbollah are much more targeted and going after Hezbollah operatives and ammo supplies. As far as I can tell, it is only the dead enders of dead enders who insist otherwise.
People like TNC seem not to realize this and there are weird ways in which the hyper online don't understand how normal people view things. Trump and Vance and the rest of the GOP make the same mistakes.
Maybe. What I think there is a very still is a very passionate minority who wants this to be a defining issue of politics and see a sea change and that vast majority of voters who don't really vote on foreign policy.
Polling again and again has shown that most voters pretty much rank foreign policy of all sorts as dead last for their concerns and issues while voting. When there are voters, who are animated by an aspect of foreign policy in voting, they often seem to get very hyper about it. Maybe this happens because of the vast amounts of indifference foreign policy normally gets.
I am old enough to remember when Free Tibet was a big cause on campus in the 1990s and that faded to nothing or nearly nothing by the time I was a freshman in the fall of 1998.
For all the media coverage of protests on campus, the stories were mainly confined to the most elite schools or schools in Sapphire Blue cities like Portland or both. Even then, it was something like only 8-9 percent of college students who stated they participated in a protest or counter-protest.
The Times did a poll of undecided young voters after the Harris-Trump debate. The overwhelming majority did not seem supportive of the prostesters. Only one person on the panel called Israel's actions in Gaza a genocide and even he said inflation was his number one voting concern.
I don't see massive outcry at attacking Hezbollah for the most part.
So I don't know, TNC's book feels a bit like it might want to make Fletch happen.
On “The Race to Control the Senate”
I actually do not think it is has bleak as everyone is making it out to be and it generally shows the limitations of Trump. Lake, Moreno, Baldwin's competitor, Slotkin's competitor are all trying to be mini-Trumps and failing. Montana has swung far to the right. As Republicans go, Jim Justice is not super-horrible. I have seen nothing showing the GOP has chances to pick up Maryland or New Jersey. Though New Jersey's last poll was in August, it was still a GOP poll that had Kim up by 5, which means his actual lead is probably higher
On “Open Mic for the week of 9/30/2024”
There have to be internal memos and emails on how to cover Trump and whitewash over his reactionary-authoritarian outbursts. There have to be. My thought is this:
1. The owners of the MSM are generally Trump friendly.
2. At the very least, they are anti-tax increase friendly.
3. Journalism has horrible careers prospects now and it is continuing to go down. If someone is really brave and enterprising, they can start a substack but that is hard.
4. So people with the brass ring jobs will do anything to keep them because the prospects for successful journalism careers might be lower than the prospects for successful acting careers.
"
Trump apparently watched the purge recently: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/30/us/politics/trump-property-crime-crackdown.html
On “The Race to Control the Senate”
Tester is likely going to lose his seat barring a miracle. West Virginia is also going red.
Osborne seems like he can be a real contender in Nebraska. No idea if he will caucus with the Democrats or not but it seems like a friendlier place for him than the GOP. It is unlikely but Cruz and Scott are polling as worse than they should considering they are in a red barely turning purple state (Texas) and redder state (Florida) in a Presidential election year.
Brown, Casey, Baldwin, Gallego, and Slotkin all generally seem to have decent and consistent leads in the polls but there could theoretically be surprises here too.
On “Open Mic for the week of 9/30/2024”
The media continues to sanewash for Trump. CNN is stating that Trump is offering a message for unity after Helene. He is doing nothing of the sort: https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2024/09/more-sanewashing-from-the-national-media
On “Why a Trump Loss is Best for Conservatives”
The Only Patriotic Choice for President: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/30/opinion/editorials/kamala-harris-2024.html
That is pretty damn strong language.
Now if only the rest of their coverage would actually reflect the sentiment instead of sane-washing Trump and having their top political reporters meltdown during interviews about how dare the peons criticize them
On “Open Mic for the week of 9/23/2024”
Hezbollah confirms Nasrallah’s death
"
I think there is a plausible case for Fromkin and Magary to be correct. The polling has generally been trending in Harris’ favor and some if it this week has been decidedly bigger leads. Polling also doesn’t account for voter profiles changing since the shift and the Times as constantly weighed more for Republicans
"
Dan Fromkin wonders if the media has the election all wrong and speculates what if Harris is walking away it with: https://presswatchers.org/2024/09/what-if-the-media-has-the-election-all-wrong/
"
Because it is so unfair when Democrats punch back.
"
Buy some buildings and collect rents. Not go into development, casinos, etc.
"
Rabid right-wing online homophone outed as gay porn star by white supremacists: https://www.yahoo.com/news/corey-deangelis-disgraced-not-liberals-214500257.html
On “Why a Trump Loss is Best for Conservatives”
New avenues for bribery!
https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump-sells-100k-gold-watches-on-same-day-melania-insists-people-cant-afford-basic-necessities/
On “Open Mic for the week of 9/23/2024”
Donald Trump is a horrible business person: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/sep/26/lucky-loser-review-how-donald-trump-squandered-his-wealth?CMP=share_btn_url
"Donald Trump started his career at the end of the 1970s, financed by his father Fred Trump. Over the years this transfer of wealth added up to around $500m in today’s money in gifts. My rough calculations say that, had he simply taken the money, leveraged it not imprudently, and passively invested it in Manhattan real estate – gone to parties, womanised, played golf, collected his rent cheques and reinvested them – his fortune could have amounted to more than $80bn by the time he ascended to the presidency in 2017.
And yet Trump was not worth $80bn in 2017. Instead, Forbes pegged him at $2.5bn – which, given the difficulties of valuing and accounting for real estate, is really anything between $5bn (£4bn) and zero (or less). It is in this sense that Pulitzer prize-winning New York Times reporters Russ Buettner and Susanne Craig call Trump a “loser”. He is indeed one of the world’s biggest losers. By trying to run a business, rather than just kicking back and letting the rising tide of his chosen sector lift his wealth beyond the moon, he managed to destroy the vast majority of his potential net worth."
"
Rick Perlstein on the persistent problems of polling: https://prospect.org/politics/2024-09-25-polling-imperilment/
"George Gallup, whom Time had just deemed the “Babe Ruth of the polling profession”—oops!—gave as his alibi, “No scientific method is known today which can accurately predetermine the voting intentions of people who are … undecided.” Nate Silver offered the same truism 67 years later: “There’s not much a pollster can do when a voter hasn’t made up her mind.” But you have to try something. So Gallup weighted the 13 percent of his last 1952 sample who hadn’t yet made up their minds as going 3-to-1 for the Democrat, as they had in 1948. But this time, they mostly went for the Republican. Oops again.
That error opens up onto the myriad conceptual fallacies built into the entire enterprise, if something so unavoidable can be called an “error.” Past performance is no guarantee of future results; but past performance is all a pollster has to go on. That’s why much of the process of choosing and weighting samples is … well, you can call it “more art than science.” Or you can call it “intuitive.” Or you can call it “trial and error.” But you can also call it “made up.”
On “History Will Be Made: Harris VS Trump”
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/
Morning Consult has her up 5 with likely voters and an 11K sample and Ipsos has her up 6 but with a bunch smaller pool. I think this is more Obama than HRC/Biden territory.
There is something to looking at data honestly and not deluding yourself. Some swing state polls are still very tight and it could break for Trump but this is different than looking at data and assuming the worst or data that supports you is suspect. That is a psychological defense mechanism/hinderance.
And there seem to be a lot more sincerely enthusiastic voters for Harris among the young than Chris' hold your nose crowd. I think we need a few more days or a week to see how Robinson's scandals and collapse hurts NC Republicans and Trump in NC.
Plus the Times still oversamples Republicans and gives them more weight.
"
Sinage means nothing. I don't see many Harris-Walz signs in SF. That doesn't mean she is going to underperform here.
On “Open Mic for the week of 9/23/2024”
No, he doesn’t
On “History Will Be Made: Harris VS Trump”
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25171447/240405-nbc-september-2024-poll_922-release.pdf
FWIW, Harris and Walz have net favorable ratings in this poll. Trump and Vance do not.Project 2025 is a dumpster fire of unfavorable ratings. “Socialism” is also unpopular but god knows what people are thinking when they here the term.
The Democratic and Republican Parties are equally unpopular and that is probably just negative partisanship
"
Let's watch Trump do something probably illegal or at least illegal looking: https://x.com/ronfilipkowski/status/1838350186097041668?s=46
"
I think Harris has advantages that are being overlooked by a lot of polls which have not updated their models since the replacement drama. Hundreds of thousands of people have registered to vote since she became the nominee, the vast majority of these are young women, and young women vote more frequently than young men. 18-29 year old women are also much to the left.
From what I've read Trump's ground game is zero and outsourced. Harris has lots of cash, volunteers, and ground game. There is also Robinson putting NC in play more and that has not been reflected in the polls yet.
Frankly, the Times/Sienna have been outliers in being more Trump friendly during the entire election cycle. Additionally, she and Walz have net favorable ratings. Trump could still get an EC black swan but I think Harris has hidden strengths that the very serious pundits and pollsters like to ignore because it involves icky, women's issues like abortion.
On “Open Mic for the week of 9/23/2024”
Everything surprises Jaybird because he sees conspiracy everywhere
"
I don't think it is an obsession of the foreign-policy establishment. TNC is not a member of the blob or the foreign party establishment. He is primarily known for his analysis of American racial issues.
What it really seems to be is a group of outsiders, often but not always college students or otherwise associated with academia, who think this is a very important issue and it works them up and they see the Palestinian struggle connected to American issues of racial justice. And they are quite upset that Hamas and Hezbollah are seen as baddies and the average American thinks calling Israel a "settler-colonialist" state is weird.
A lot of them are also very online in their politics and this tends to radicalize.
Harris' speech at the DNC probably captured the median Democratic stance quite well.
1. Israel has a right to exist;
2. Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist scum; not brave resistance fighters
3. Israel's war against Hamas is causing too much damage in Gaza and there should be a ceasefire.
Israel's attacks on Hezbollah are much more targeted and going after Hezbollah operatives and ammo supplies. As far as I can tell, it is only the dead enders of dead enders who insist otherwise.
People like TNC seem not to realize this and there are weird ways in which the hyper online don't understand how normal people view things. Trump and Vance and the rest of the GOP make the same mistakes.
"
Maybe. What I think there is a very still is a very passionate minority who wants this to be a defining issue of politics and see a sea change and that vast majority of voters who don't really vote on foreign policy.
Polling again and again has shown that most voters pretty much rank foreign policy of all sorts as dead last for their concerns and issues while voting. When there are voters, who are animated by an aspect of foreign policy in voting, they often seem to get very hyper about it. Maybe this happens because of the vast amounts of indifference foreign policy normally gets.
I am old enough to remember when Free Tibet was a big cause on campus in the 1990s and that faded to nothing or nearly nothing by the time I was a freshman in the fall of 1998.
For all the media coverage of protests on campus, the stories were mainly confined to the most elite schools or schools in Sapphire Blue cities like Portland or both. Even then, it was something like only 8-9 percent of college students who stated they participated in a protest or counter-protest.
The Times did a poll of undecided young voters after the Harris-Trump debate. The overwhelming majority did not seem supportive of the prostesters. Only one person on the panel called Israel's actions in Gaza a genocide and even he said inflation was his number one voting concern.
I don't see massive outcry at attacking Hezbollah for the most part.
So I don't know, TNC's book feels a bit like it might want to make Fletch happen.
"
Do you realize how juvenile this comment is?
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.