Harris beating Trump in Iowa

[Anonymous]

Nate Silver breaks down Selzer poll.

The poll has a reasonable sample size: 808 likely voters. Still, the margin of error for the difference separating the candidates in a poll of that size is ±6.6 points. That means in theory, in 95 out of 100 cases, the “real” number should be somewhere between Trump +3.4 and Harris +9.6 if Selzer had surveyed every single Iowa voter instead of just an 808-person sample.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Kansas five point shift to the left that was disclosed last week was foretelling a massive shift in the electorate that the swing state polling has totally missed.

Fact is, Trump was awful for farmers, older women and particularly white women are outraged by Dobbs and the rights THEY enjoyed since 1973. No, they are not going back and are voting accordingly.

Factor in the "Republicans for Harris" and the various national security endorsements away from Trump and there is a huge untapped voice that will either stay home, leave the top of the ticket blank, or yes, vote for Harris.

Will she win Iowa? Possible.
Does this poll bode well for the 7 swing states? Absolutely.

I will maintain that there is a state or two that will flip to Harris, totally under the radar. Iowa was one of them, and for me, Alaska is the other (as they don't want to become part of Russia)

I have several farmers in my family. From Iowa no less. Let me tell you with complete certainty that they are strong Trump supporters.

Absolutely because he'll continue their welfare. As an Iowan, we’re sick of it. And there are more of us than them.

[Anonymous]

The Iowan farmers will turn out for trump but their wives, daughters, sisters are voting blue.

Lots of women incensed about Kim Reynolds gutting education. She’s not on the ballot this year but Iowan women are going to flip the state blue, mark my words.

-4th generation Iowan

[Anonymous]

Everyone says they are for Harris because no one wants to be canceled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone says they are for Harris because no one wants to be canceled.

In Iowa? Oh my god, you are hilarious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone says they are for Harris because no one wants to be canceled.

In Iowa? Oh my god, you are hilarious.

+1

The interesting thing about the Selzer poll is that it clearly shows the "shy Harris" voter. Women 65+ prefer Harris in the poll, 63% to 28% (HUGE margin, it's jaw dropping even if an outlier-- that any random sample of a decent size could produce that result should scare Trump). Men over 65 prefer Trump 47% to 45%.

A lot of those people are married to each other.

The other interesting takeaway for me is that independents, who were breaking for Trump in Selzer's September poll, now break for Harris.

This is basically Harris's Pennsylvania strategy-- get reliable women voters and take the margin on independents and late deciders. PA doesn't have the exact same climate as Iowa (no abortion ban, for starters), but Harris doesn't need as many voters in PA either because if the deep blue cities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nate Silver breaks down Selzer poll.

The poll has a reasonable sample size: 808 likely voters. Still, the margin of error for the difference separating the candidates in a poll of that size is ±6.6 points. That means in theory, in 95 out of 100 cases, the “real” number should be somewhere between Trump +3.4 and Harris +9.6 if Selzer had surveyed every single Iowa voter instead of just an 808-person sample.

Nate is wrong, dead wrong. He’s also on Peter Thiels payroll and has a gambling addiction.

Seltzer has a stellar record going back years using the same methodology. What she found was older, rural women are furious about Dobbs. This are the voters who are being undercounted.

I’m not saying Harris wins Iowa, but this bodes will for WI, MI, and PA. It also means any state where abortion is on the ballot is a toss up.

Trump is cooked.

[Anonymous]

This is a more reputable poll that shows Trump ahead by 10. Wishful thinking


https://emersoncollegepolling.com/november-2024-iowa-poll-trump-53-harris-43/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a more reputable poll that shows Trump ahead by 10. Wishful thinking


https://emersoncollegepolling.com/november-2024-iowa-poll-trump-53-harris-43/

LOL Emerson is not more reputable than Selzer.

Silver himself says Emerson is guilty of herding so they are basically making up their results.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a more reputable poll that shows Trump ahead by 10. Wishful thinking


https://emersoncollegepolling.com/november-2024-iowa-poll-trump-53-harris-43/

There is not a single IOWA pollster that is better regarded for polling the state than Selzer. Emerson is a good pollster too, but if I had to bet, I would say that the results are much more likely to be Trump +3 than Trump +10 (within the MOE of Selzer but not Emerson)

[Anonymous]

Fwiw i am in a rural part of Florida this weekend and I am shocked how few Trump signs I am seeing - and how many Harris signs I am seeing here.

I don’t think Harris is winning FLorida - if only - but I do think that people are much much less enthusiastic about Trump than they used to be, and many (like me) are desperate to move on from this wretched era.

I know it seems shocking given his slick dance moves, his unconventional method of opening truck doors, and his top notch air fellatio skills. But somehow here we are.

I imagine that people in Iowa are probably feeling about the same.

Anyway, last night when I saw the Selzer poll it took everything I had not to stop people on the street to show it to them.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

It’s not like Iowa has a long history as a red state. I would not be shocked if it starts to move back toward purple or blue.

I suspect Missouri will follow suit in the coming years as well.