Harris beating Trump in Iowa

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

It’s easy to grasp at straws in the face of desperation. (And I say this as someone who was hopeful about the poll.)

Please don’t be desperate. Just do what the rest of us are doing - live your life. Don’t get wrapped up in this stuff. There’s more to life than politics. Win, lose, whatever. Life goes on.


-a (reluctant) Trump voter

It’s not whatever. Many of us stand to be impacted personally by the election results (federal employees just as an example). Women already lost healthcare access because of the last Trump term SCOTUS picks. But go ahead and laugh at us. I hope you’re still laughing in 4 years.

Correct. The right and left both have agendas. If you get your way, you'd take away all firearms. Your side weaponized the legal system against political opponents, like Soviet Russia.

We heard the true democrat agenda from Marc Andreessen on Joe Rogan. Glad you are not in power.

Can you give me a summary or the time stamp on rogans podcast?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

+100

For my part, I liked the early pages of the "Election Results" thread where people were giddily talking about how Harris had carried some random Indiana county by 2-3 points more than Biden carried it in 2020. They were just so sure Harris was on her way to a landslide win.

And lets not forget the delightful "Trump campaign death spiral" thread. Hours of entertainment for the whole family!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

It’s easy to grasp at straws in the face of desperation. (And I say this as someone who was hopeful about the poll.)

Please don’t be desperate. Just do what the rest of us are doing - live your life. Don’t get wrapped up in this stuff. There’s more to life than politics. Win, lose, whatever. Life goes on.


-a (reluctant) Trump voter

It’s not whatever. Many of us stand to be impacted personally by the election results (federal employees just as an example). Women already lost healthcare access because of the last Trump term SCOTUS picks. But go ahead and laugh at us. I hope you’re still laughing in 4 years.

DP. I am not laughing at your but I was a reluctant political appointee who managed to stay 18 months at a federal agency where I was told to keep my head down and not deal with the bureaucrats -- by an HR bureaucrat. She taught me how to get work done and the two people out of a large office who actually would cooperate and work. We were able to get some Congressionally mandated work completed and when I left, one of the two went with me to the private sector. The other went to law school at my urging.

In my opinion, the government attracts fearful people who want security rather than to do anything meaningful with their lives. This was before work from home, but one of my deputies would start pacing nervously if I tried to engage him after 4:45 pm. He had to make his 5:15 pm bus and that was the only thing he cared about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:haha, yes. they still haven't given up and now there is chat about AOC running for president in 2028. LOL

Not a fan of AOC's politics, but she did the hard job of knocking on doors in her district to gain name recognition. She was also smart enough to not fall for Amazon's siren song of creating tech jobs in her district. Amazon completely hoodwinked Arlington by promising jobs that would fill the vacant office buildings in Crystal City. Now plans are stalled and Arlington is another Bezos sucker --- like Kamala Harris.

She also screwed her district out of a lot of business and jobs. Do you care about campaigning or economic results?

You mean like the business and jobs that were not brought to HQ2 Headquarters in Crystal City. In 2019, the office vacancy rate was 16.2%. Post Amazon, it is 20%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol if you believe this. Have you been to Iowa? I grew up there. The Democrats are dead to those people. I have family members that were Democrats for years, but are now loyal Trump supporters. No chance those people are backing Kamala Harris.

Did you see the post above yours? Ann Seltzer polls are usually very accurate.

Not a chance. This is not a normal election. I 100% believe this poll is accurate
Ok. Everyone is wrong sometimes, and here, direct experience strongly indicates this poll is very wrong. It is also an outlier among polls. For all I know, Ann Seltzer got a huge payday to sacrifice some credibility to put out good numbers for Harris. In any event, I do not believe it is accurate. This is based on the experience of having grown up there and having watched people abandon the Democrats first hand.

You’re free to think what you want. I believe you are engaged in wishful thinking.

The Trumpers who somehow think he’ll win the popular vote are the ones with wishful thinking.

Please come back PP and update this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

I would love to meet the people posting to this thread arguing that they absolutely certain that this singular poll was correct and that Harris would win Iowa. Do they just cognitively memory hole all of this and compartmentalize?

Yes. Social justice warriors just ignore past misjudgments and invent new causes that are foolish.

It must take a special kind of person to just argue like crazy for something and then pretend it didn’t happen after.

The next funny episode (already getting underway) will be when libs start yammering about blue waves in 2026 and 2028…. after spending the last two years telling us democracy will END and there will never be anymore elections if Trump wins.

Well he isn't in office yet so let's wait and see. I doubt you would ever say you were wrong if he did end elections

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

I would love to meet the people posting to this thread arguing that they absolutely certain that this singular poll was correct and that Harris would win Iowa. Do they just cognitively memory hole all of this and compartmentalize?

Yes. Social justice warriors just ignore past misjudgments and invent new causes that are foolish.

It must take a special kind of person to just argue like crazy for something and then pretend it didn’t happen after.

The next funny episode (already getting underway) will be when libs start yammering about blue waves in 2026 and 2028…. after spending the last two years telling us democracy will END and there will never be anymore elections if Trump wins.

Well he isn't in office yet so let's wait and see. I doubt you would ever say you were wrong if he did end elections

Not a single poster on this board has ever offered an even vaguely coherent explanation of exactly how Trump would “end elections.”

It’s as if most of the people on this board have no idea how our government or political system actually work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

I would love to meet the people posting to this thread arguing that they absolutely certain that this singular poll was correct and that Harris would win Iowa. Do they just cognitively memory hole all of this and compartmentalize?

Yes. Social justice warriors just ignore past misjudgments and invent new causes that are foolish.

It must take a special kind of person to just argue like crazy for something and then pretend it didn’t happen after.

DP, but she had a pretty good track record and it would've suggested that there was systematic bias out there, not being picked up elsewhere. She was obviously very wrong. Predictions markets weren't. Some of us can admit when there are errors and be more skeptical of polls like this (and polling in general going forward) and look to prediction markets as a better barometer of potential outcomes. Happy now?


The next funny episode (already getting underway) will be when libs start yammering about blue waves in 2026 and 2028…. after spending the last two years telling us democracy will END and there will never be anymore elections if Trump wins.

Well he isn't in office yet so let's wait and see. I doubt you would ever say you were wrong if he did end elections

Not a single poster on this board has ever offered an even vaguely coherent explanation of exactly how Trump would “end elections.”

It’s as if most of the people on this board have no idea how our government or political system actually work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

I would love to meet the people posting to this thread arguing that they absolutely certain that this singular poll was correct and that Harris would win Iowa. Do they just cognitively memory hole all of this and compartmentalize?

Yes. Social justice warriors just ignore past misjudgments and invent new causes that are foolish.

It must take a special kind of person to just argue like crazy for something and then pretend it didn’t happen after.

DP, but she had a pretty good track record and it would've suggested that there was systematic bias out there, not being picked up elsewhere. She was obviously very wrong. Predictions markets weren't. Some of us can admit when there are errors and be more skeptical of polls like this (and polling in general going forward) and look to prediction markets as a better barometer of potential outcomes. Happy now?


The next funny episode (already getting underway) will be when libs start yammering about blue waves in 2026 and 2028…. after spending the last two years telling us democracy will END and there will never be anymore elections if Trump wins.

Well he isn't in office yet so let's wait and see. I doubt you would ever say you were wrong if he did end elections

Not a single poster on this board has ever offered an even vaguely coherent explanation of exactly how Trump would “end elections.”

It’s as if most of the people on this board have no idea how our government or political system actually work.

DP, but she had a pretty good track record and it would've suggested that there was systematic bias out there, not being picked up elsewhere. She was obviously very wrong. Predictions markets weren't. Some of us can admit when there are errors and be more skeptical of polls like this (and polling in general going forward) and look to prediction markets as a better barometer of potential outcomes. Happy now?

[Anonymous]

lol

[Anonymous]

Thanks for reviving on Christmas. Best present ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

+100

For my part, I liked the early pages of the "Election Results" thread where people were giddily talking about how Harris had carried some random Indiana county by 2-3 points more than Biden carried it in 2020. They were just so sure Harris was on her way to a landslide win.

And lets not forget the delightful "Trump campaign death spiral" thread. Hours of entertainment for the whole family!

It was a beautiful thing!

And all the deletions of contrary, but true info, on DCUM were constantly disappearing. All for nothing!!

[Anonymous]

Hahah somehow I missed this thread the first time around. I love it. Totally delusional. Never change, democrats!

They need to learn that this forum is a left wing echo chamber that doesn’t reflect normal society at all. If they hadn’t been living in this bubble then they would have known how insane the thread was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

I would love to meet the people posting to this thread arguing that they absolutely certain that this singular poll was correct and that Harris would win Iowa. Do they just cognitively memory hole all of this and compartmentalize?

Yes. Social justice warriors just ignore past misjudgments and invent new causes that are foolish.

It must take a special kind of person to just argue like crazy for something and then pretend it didn’t happen after.

DP, but she had a pretty good track record and it would've suggested that there was systematic bias out there, not being picked up elsewhere. She was obviously very wrong. Predictions markets weren't. Some of us can admit when there are errors and be more skeptical of polls like this (and polling in general going forward) and look to prediction markets as a better barometer of potential outcomes. Happy now?


The next funny episode (already getting underway) will be when libs start yammering about blue waves in 2026 and 2028…. after spending the last two years telling us democracy will END and there will never be anymore elections if Trump wins.

Well he isn't in office yet so let's wait and see. I doubt you would ever say you were wrong if he did end elections

Not a single poster on this board has ever offered an even vaguely coherent explanation of exactly how Trump would “end elections.”

It’s as if most of the people on this board have no idea how our government or political system actually work.

DP, but she had a pretty good track record and it would've suggested that there was systematic bias out there, not being picked up elsewhere. She was obviously very wrong. Predictions markets weren't. Some of us can admit when there are errors and be more skeptical of polls like this (and polling in general going forward) and look to prediction markets as a better barometer of potential outcomes. Happy now?

The only “systemic bias out there” is from the media against Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

I would love to meet the people posting to this thread arguing that they absolutely certain that this singular poll was correct and that Harris would win Iowa. Do they just cognitively memory hole all of this and compartmentalize?

Yes. Social justice warriors just ignore past misjudgments and invent new causes that are foolish.

It must take a special kind of person to just argue like crazy for something and then pretend it didn’t happen after.

The next funny episode (already getting underway) will be when libs start yammering about blue waves in 2026 and 2028…. after spending the last two years telling us democracy will END and there will never be anymore elections if Trump wins.

Well he isn't in office yet so let's wait and see. I doubt you would ever say you were wrong if he did end elections

Not a single poster on this board has ever offered an even vaguely coherent explanation of exactly how Trump would “end elections.”

It’s as if most of the people on this board have no idea how our government or political system actually work.

They said this about Virginia elections in 2021. So I guess no need to vote next year.