Who do you think is going to win and why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump

Based on polling. He’s doing better than he did against Clinton and Biden. He beat Clinton and lost to Biden by a millimeter.

If you think that Biden beat Trump by a millimeter, than you must realize that Trump beat Clinton by a micrometer.

2016 Trump had 62.9M (46.1%) to Clinton's 65.8M (48.2%). He lost the popular vote by 2.9M votes (2.1%)
2016 Trump won the electoral college 304-227

2020 Trump had 74.2M (46.8%) to Biden's 81.3M (51.3%). He lost the popular vote by 7M votes (4.5%)
2020 Biden won the electoral college by 306-232

Biden beat Trump by wider measures in 2020 than Trump beat Clinton. You can minimize his defeat by calling it a mm. But then his win 4 years before was even smaller.

[Anonymous]

Trump is going to win. Women have already showed us they will not vote for a woman president. Just go back and look at the numbers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been really unsure about this one (and I was pretty sure in 2016 and 2020). A few days ago I thought Trump. But now I am thinking Harris. Reason: better GOTV in swing states.

The thing that I am unsure about is which way the angry women voters break. Gen Z for sure goes Harris but I am less sure of the rest. They will determine the election.

I want Harris to win, although I do not love her.

genz will vote for harris but her numbers are down compared to biden
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/gen-z-vote-harris-trump-poll-b2606912.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone seen lines for early voting like they did in 2020? It’s worrying.

I'm not sure why. First, there is no longer a pandemic. Many people were voting by mail and voting early because of the pandemic. Those who were in high risk groups voted by mail. Those who were not in high risk groups voted early to try and hit less times when the polls were less busy, so that it would be easier to social distance. I know that in our local polling places in 2020, the early voters were spread out and distributed much more evenly than normal. Normally there are peak times before and after work. In our area, most people were working remotely and many were taking trips out in the middle of the day to vote and so rather than two larger spikes before 8am and after 5pm, there was a much more even distribution. Still before and after work spikes but they were smaller and the distribution across the day was fuller.

And they were right. The election day was a madhouse and I do know a number of people who tested positive after they went to vote.

Now, more people are back to work either hybrid or full-time and it's harder to get to early voting stations due to work. Many local jobs, like federal jobs or contracts will give people 1 or 2 hours leave to go and vote on election day and so I know a number who are taking advantage of that to vote without having to take leave. Some who have flexibility on their WFH days are voting early, but not nearly in the same numbers as 4 years ago. For many, it's about the convenience factor.

Just my anecdotal input.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Trump fan but if he wins it won’t be because of him, it’s because Kamala is the worst candidate a major party has run for president ever. She’s so laughably bad I’m still amazed she’s the candidate they literally *handpicked*. Why?!?!

They didn't hand pick her she was the only one allowed to use bidens donations. In 2020 she polled in single digits.

It’s interesting to consider how the Democratic Party got itself in to this mess.

Given where the country was in 2020, her selection as VP was understandable. It’s debatable whether Biden even intended to serve out his first term and certainly must not have expected to run for reelection. Presumably Biden’s hope was that Kamala would build her brand as VP and be politically strong enough to take over the presidency in 2023.

That plan was screwed well and truly by Kamala’s horrible performance - both administratively and politically - as VP. The logical thing for Biden to have done then would have been to announce his intention not to run and allow the primary process to play out. Clearly he was dissuaded by others in the Democratic Party from doing this, presumably by those who argued that subjecting Kamala to a primary would be disrespectful and divisive for the party.

Given a binary choice between himself and Kamala, Biden believed that he was more electable than his VP. He was probably right about that up until the debate. After the American public saw that, Kamala was probably the better option.

In retrospect (and regardless of the actual election result), the decision to not hold a primary was the height of political arrogance. We can only hope that the decision making process around becomes the subject of a book by Bob Woodward or someone like him so that we can come to know exactly who it was that was responsible.

Thank you for this post. It lays out a lot of my trouble with the Democratic Party this cycle and why I cannot, will not vote for them this time (not voting for Trump either). I’d rather write-in (and waste, according to most) than sit out completely and shirk what I consider a fundamental right and both a privilege and a duty.

I don't understand the argument being made at all.

First off being VP is like a nothing role. It's historically an annoying and amorphous position that even talented politicians struggle in. I think this is because most VPs are presidential hopefuls who get the position as a consolation prize or as part of a grooming process for president. Then they have to spend 4-8 years basically touting the president (even when they disagree with them) while also always avoiding overshadowing them. So the people in the role are often particularly ill suited for it.

The only actual job of the VP is to be alive so that they can be president if the president dies or is incapacited. Everything else is window dressing.

When people complain Harris was a bad VP I don't really get what they mean. Biden did her a real disservice by hanging immigration on her. The VP has no actual power to fix immigration. And Harris actually did something useful and productive on this point by helping to hammer out the bipartisan legislation. But then she has no power to actually get that passed and it fails. And now immigration is her fault but she has zero tools to make it better.

The real error here is that Biden got hubristic. He should have seen himself as a one-term president from the start and made choices that would explicitly help Harris win in 2024. Which means he should not have put her in the impossible position of being associate with but not actually in charge of a hot button issue. He really torpedoed her chances at that point.

And then him deciding to run in 2024 was just pure arrogance and lack of self-awareness. His family is also partially to blame for this -- they should have seen the writing on the wall and talked him out of it. The idea that Biden ran for re-election for the good of the party to spare them Harris as a candidate is BS. If he really didn't think Harris was up for the job he should have bowed out much earlier to allow for a full-field primary. Every minute he held on before bowing out made Harris more and more likely and that's entirely on Biden.

Biden did some good stuff as president but he screwed up succession. I don't view that as a failure of the Democratic party or as a good reason to help elect Donald Trump who will be worse than Biden or Harris in virtually every respect -- economy and immigration and foreign policy and budget and also filling the figurehead aspects of the role -- representing the US at home and abroad with dignity and intelligence.

VP has one very significant role, to be the President of the Senate. And while many VPs have not had to do much on that stance, Harris has had to do more than any two other VPs in that respect. For the first two years she was VP, she presided over a 50-50 split Senate and had to frequently cast the tie-breaking vote. Even in the last two years, she has presided over a 49R, 47D, 4I Senate, which tends towards 51D, 49R. But with Sinema and Machin being unpredictable and with times when other Senators are not present she has still had to cast many tie-breaking votes.

In her 3.5 years as President of the Senate, she has had to cast 33 tie-breaking votes and preside over many sessions of divided leadership in the Senate. Contract with Pence making 13 tie-breaking votes, Biden making 0 tie-breaking votes, Cheney 8, Gore 4, Quayle 0, Bush-41 7. She has had to work twice as hard as any two other VPs in the last 40 years just as President of the Senate.

[Anonymous]

Harris. A lot of the people I know who voted for Trump before are now voting for Harris. I do not think you can count of reliable Republican voters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump is going to win. Women have already showed us they will not vote for a woman president. Just go back and look at the numbers

Please show us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is some points about why trump is going to win, they are ads and commentary but it's spot on and something you won't hear on CNN or other mainstream media.

WOW WOW

Wow she's really evil. "with a swipe of my pen, their lives will be changed forever." insanity. Evilness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Trump fan but if he wins it won’t be because of him, it’s because Kamala is the worst candidate a major party has run for president ever. She’s so laughably bad I’m still amazed she’s the candidate they literally *handpicked*. Why?!?!

They didn't hand pick her she was the only one allowed to use bidens donations. In 2020 she polled in single digits.

It’s interesting to consider how the Democratic Party got itself in to this mess.

Given where the country was in 2020, her selection as VP was understandable. It’s debatable whether Biden even intended to serve out his first term and certainly must not have expected to run for reelection. Presumably Biden’s hope was that Kamala would build her brand as VP and be politically strong enough to take over the presidency in 2023.

That plan was screwed well and truly by Kamala’s horrible performance - both administratively and politically - as VP. The logical thing for Biden to have done then would have been to announce his intention not to run and allow the primary process to play out. Clearly he was dissuaded by others in the Democratic Party from doing this, presumably by those who argued that subjecting Kamala to a primary would be disrespectful and divisive for the party.

Given a binary choice between himself and Kamala, Biden believed that he was more electable than his VP. He was probably right about that up until the debate. After the American public saw that, Kamala was probably the better option.

In retrospect (and regardless of the actual election result), the decision to not hold a primary was the height of political arrogance. We can only hope that the decision making process around becomes the subject of a book by Bob Woodward or someone like him so that we can come to know exactly who it was that was responsible.

Thank you for this post. It lays out a lot of my trouble with the Democratic Party this cycle and why I cannot, will not vote for them this time (not voting for Trump either). I’d rather write-in (and waste, according to most) than sit out completely and shirk what I consider a fundamental right and both a privilege and a duty.

I don't understand the argument being made at all.

First off being VP is like a nothing role. It's historically an annoying and amorphous position that even talented politicians struggle in. I think this is because most VPs are presidential hopefuls who get the position as a consolation prize or as part of a grooming process for president. Then they have to spend 4-8 years basically touting the president (even when they disagree with them) while also always avoiding overshadowing them. So the people in the role are often particularly ill suited for it.

The only actual job of the VP is to be alive so that they can be president if the president dies or is incapacited. Everything else is window dressing.

When people complain Harris was a bad VP I don't really get what they mean. Biden did her a real disservice by hanging immigration on her. The VP has no actual power to fix immigration. And Harris actually did something useful and productive on this point by helping to hammer out the bipartisan legislation. But then she has no power to actually get that passed and it fails. And now immigration is her fault but she has zero tools to make it better.

The real error here is that Biden got hubristic. He should have seen himself as a one-term president from the start and made choices that would explicitly help Harris win in 2024. Which means he should not have put her in the impossible position of being associate with but not actually in charge of a hot button issue. He really torpedoed her chances at that point.

And then him deciding to run in 2024 was just pure arrogance and lack of self-awareness. His family is also partially to blame for this -- they should have seen the writing on the wall and talked him out of it. The idea that Biden ran for re-election for the good of the party to spare them Harris as a candidate is BS. If he really didn't think Harris was up for the job he should have bowed out much earlier to allow for a full-field primary. Every minute he held on before bowing out made Harris more and more likely and that's entirely on Biden.

Biden did some good stuff as president but he screwed up succession. I don't view that as a failure of the Democratic party or as a good reason to help elect Donald Trump who will be worse than Biden or Harris in virtually every respect -- economy and immigration and foreign policy and budget and also filling the figurehead aspects of the role -- representing the US at home and abroad with dignity and intelligence.

VP has one very significant role, to be the President of the Senate. And while many VPs have not had to do much on that stance, Harris has had to do more than any two other VPs in that respect. For the first two years she was VP, she presided over a 50-50 split Senate and had to frequently cast the tie-breaking vote. Even in the last two years, she has presided over a 49R, 47D, 4I Senate, which tends towards 51D, 49R. But with Sinema and Machin being unpredictable and with times when other Senators are not present she has still had to cast many tie-breaking votes.

In her 3.5 years as President of the Senate, she has had to cast 33 tie-breaking votes and preside over many sessions of divided leadership in the Senate. Contract with Pence making 13 tie-breaking votes, Biden making 0 tie-breaking votes, Cheney 8, Gore 4, Quayle 0, Bush-41 7. She has had to work twice as hard as any two other VPs in the last 40 years just as President of the Senate.

And that is why the country is in the shitter it is in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sincere lack of interest in this election, I don't feel enthusiasm from anyone around me except for one friend saying she is only voting for Harris for Abortion Rights. I kind of get her point, but so many other issues but really neither has a plan.

People aren't voting FOR a candidate this election. They are voting AGAINST the other candidate. Neither Harris nor Trump are offering anything positive now. They are both just trying to generate hate for the other side. I honestly have no idea how it's going to go. All I know is that this is the most pathetic election in US history. My only hope is that whatever party loses this time, they'll use the next four years to fix themselves so that we have at least one sane and competent party in '28. Because we have none now. A pox on both houses is my sentiment. They both suck.

Almost every election in my lifetime has been picking the lesser of two evils. (except Obama)

US politics is toxic and generally attracts power-driven people. That’s what we get with the system we have.

Stop whining and vote like an adult. There is one reasonable option and the other is a dumpster fire of sht. It’s not a difficult choice this year.

Obama was a huge evil. He met with the banks in September 2008 before the crash. He was making them promises to bail them out and not jail them. He bailed the bankers not the homeowners.

To this day, I truly believe a Republican president like McCain would’ve made the bankers pay or go to jail. Do you know who wanted Wall Street bankers to go to jail? Eliot Spitzer.

We all saw how he was taken out quickly

[Anonymous]

Leaning more toward Harris after that spectacle at MSG. Yikes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harris. A lot of the people I know who voted for Trump before are now voting for Harris. I do not think you can count of reliable Republican voters.

Are they just saying that?

I still think there are numerous closet trump voters + genz males+ low propensity voters that show up and show out for the cult + Hispanic voters = trump win. There are more of them in swing states than there are disenfranchised republicans.

Buckle up, we are whitnessing the true end of the US as a free country and world super power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Leaning more toward Harris after that spectacle at MSG. Yikes

No, you were already in the tank for Harris. That event did not hurt Trump one bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is some points about why trump is going to win, they are ads and commentary but it's spot on and something you won't hear on CNN or other mainstream media.

WOW WOW

Wow she's really evil. "with a swipe of my pen, their lives will be changed forever." insanity. Evilness.

+100 Evil woman. She was even laughing about arresting parents for truancy. Imagine what kind of heartless person would arrest the parent of a child with sickle cell anemia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Leaning more toward Harris after that spectacle at MSG. Yikes

No, you were already in the tank for Harris. That event did not hurt Trump one bit.

Of course I was already voting Harris. The thread asked who I thought would win.