Anonymous wrote:Fabrizio talking about 2020 as if:

(a) we didn't all watch on live TV as Trump's yahoos tried to take the capitol using force after that election, and

(b) Trump's hand-picked judges didn't overturn a fundamental right for women that had been secured in 1973 specifically to keep women from dying (as has started happening again).

We'll see what happens on Tuesday, but it's a different election than it was 4 years ago.

But they’re running on ThE bOrDeR (which Trump wanted to worsen to keep as an issue) and InFlAtIoN (which Trump’s moron policies would worsen by leagues), how is that not more important?! /s

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

A Democrat got 47.5% of the vote for Iowa governor in 2018.

That’s a lot different than a national democrat. And kamala harris is a bottom of the barrel national democrat at that. No chance there has been a huge swing in her favor.

Copium

Like i said, you’re free to think whatever you want. Experience tells me you are wrong and Seltzer is wrong.

Except Seltzer has been spot on for the last 12+ years, even as she’s contrasted other polls. I tend to lean on her reliability as a good indicator of where things are vs. your gut.

That’s your choice. I believe she is wrong. I would not even be surprised to learn she got paid big money to put out a poll like this. I fully expect these types of organizations to throw out some last minute polls purporting to show that Kamala Harris is riding high as a last ditch effort to try to push her across the line. It is all BS by a very partisan set at this point.

NP. Was she wrong when she called Iowa for the obese orange man in 2016 and 2020?

Anonymous wrote:Fabrizio talking about 2020 as if:

(a) we didn't all watch on live TV as Trump's yahoos tried to take the capitol using force after that election, and

(b) Trump's hand-picked judges didn't overturn a fundamental right for women that had been secured in 1973 specifically to keep women from dying (as has started happening again).

We'll see what happens on Tuesday, but it's a different election than it was 4 years ago.

You act as if a) Biden and Harris didn’t go on a massive spending spree and cause prices to rise by 20%, b) Biden and Harris didn’t open up the border, inviting over 10 million illegal immigrants to come into the country.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emerson poll has Trump +10 in Iowa. But feel free to cling to whatever poll makes you happier.

Yes but Selzer is THE Iowa pollster. Emerson polls nationally and is parachuting in.

I'm really struggling with this because the gulf is so wide, but I trust Selzer on Iowa over anyone else.

Her result is still within a standard margin of error, making them effectively tied. But if true, that is a huge swing. Iowa should not be in play if Trump is winning.

Also I'm still reviewing details of the poll but the most interesting result: it has women 65+ voting Harris 2-1. That's a huge deal because that's a very reliable voting bloc-- older people vote at high rates and older women vote more reliably than men.

Yes. Older women are super super pissed. They don’t want people messing around with reproductive rights and they remember pre-roe and many have a lot of sad stories. Not so much back alley abortions, but misguided marriages and lost career opportunities.

Plus they don’t want the gop cratering social security and Medicare. The media has not given this much attention, but it has been a consistent plot line from the gop to get rid of those entitlements and older women are sensitive about the issue.

Some other analysis I've seen mentions that while young voters may have no memory of Trump's "grab 'em by the pussy," older women do remember. They are also more likely to accurately remember that Trump's economy was inherited from Obama and how badly Trump screwed up Covid response, stuff that many voters appear to have randomly forgotten or never knew. But it all undercuts Trump's argument to voters that they were "better off" when he was president.

That’s interesting because my oldest kid and their classmates have hated Trump since 2016. They are all 18-20 now.

They remember so I assumed all young voters were up on this.

I think Harris is going to win, but you'd be surprised how many 18-22 year olds are voting for Trump. Progressives have lost the plot with that generation. Someone not Trump would totally win that generation

Progressives have lost the plot with the 18-22 yr Olds ??? Loooool. OK, weirdo.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a huge booster for democrats, no matter how you Trumpies try to spin at.

First of all, she’s an extremely reliable pollster for Iowa who predicted Trump’s win in Iowa in 2016. Nobody other than a moron will discount her results. Instead of attacking her poll, Orange-supporters should figure out how to address this problem with women that gets worse with every fulmination of their Dear Leader. Stop gaslighting people, as the truth catches up with you.

My take is that Seltzer is at least marginally wrong. I don’t think Harris will win Iowa. Trump will win. But the poll probably picks up an extremely high degree of enthusiasm among democratic voters. Especially women. Which bodes well for the Midwest. WI, MI, PA. NC and GA too, maybe.

Women, including older women, are absolute livid, hopping mad against Trump and they will crawl over hot coal to vote against him. Regardless of whether they are D or R. Every outrage perpetrated by the Trump bros hardens their resolve. Trumpies, be afraid, very afraid. Let’s see if you have enough of your bros turning out to vote to counteract our effect. And young women will expand our advantage. Good luck to your plan to turn out low propensity dudes trying to take out time between video games and porn.
Here’s the thing. We don’t operate by Elon Mask paying dudes to register people. Or the number of desperate posts he pukes on his platform. Instead we text, email, talk to our sisters. Every one of us talks to 5 of our sisters. And we talk to our boyfriends and spouses too. Gently, insistently, lovingly. No amount of Joe Rogan bile can counteract what we do. Be afraid, Trump Nazi freaks, be very afraid. Be ready to weep. Just don’t attack the Capitol.

It’s mostly Democrat women who share your mindset. Sorry, I and most Republican women are not mad at Trump; we are mad at Biden and Harris for their terrible policies.

Pu$$y grabbing policies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emerson poll has Trump +10 in Iowa. But feel free to cling to whatever poll makes you happier.

Yes but Selzer is THE Iowa pollster. Emerson polls nationally and is parachuting in.

I'm really struggling with this because the gulf is so wide, but I trust Selzer on Iowa over anyone else.

Her result is still within a standard margin of error, making them effectively tied. But if true, that is a huge swing. Iowa should not be in play if Trump is winning.

Also I'm still reviewing details of the poll but the most interesting result: it has women 65+ voting Harris 2-1. That's a huge deal because that's a very reliable voting bloc-- older people vote at high rates and older women vote more reliably than men.

Yes. Older women are super super pissed. They don’t want people messing around with reproductive rights and they remember pre-roe and many have a lot of sad stories. Not so much back alley abortions, but misguided marriages and lost career opportunities.

Plus they don’t want the gop cratering social security and Medicare. The media has not given this much attention, but it has been a consistent plot line from the gop to get rid of those entitlements and older women are sensitive about the issue.

Some other analysis I've seen mentions that while young voters may have no memory of Trump's "grab 'em by the pussy," older women do remember. They are also more likely to accurately remember that Trump's economy was inherited from Obama and how badly Trump screwed up Covid response, stuff that many voters appear to have randomly forgotten or never knew. But it all undercuts Trump's argument to voters that they were "better off" when he was president.

That’s interesting because my oldest kid and their classmates have hated Trump since 2016. They are all 18-20 now.

They remember so I assumed all young voters were up on this.

I think Harris is going to win, but you'd be surprised how many 18-22 year olds are voting for Trump. Progressives have lost the plot with that generation. Someone not Trump would totally win that generation

A note about Selzer from someone in the business:

Their approach is very old school and based on traditional sampling methods using registered voter rolls and a very intimate familiarity with Iowa. Selzer's polls tend to be very expensive because they are time and labor intensive. And unlike a lot of the other major pollsters, they use a smaller number or survey interviewers which allows tighter control of training and quality assurance. A lot of polling outfits maintain call centers (often staffed by college students -- the cheap labor of students is why so many pollsters are associated with colleges) and will staff way up during election season but there is often high turnover and their interviewers are often inexperienced. Plus they are often polling nationally as well as in multiple states and thus don't have the focus of Selzer's polling (Selzer may sometimes do national polling, which is easier, but they don't poll in any other state than Iowa) and it's harder to control quality.

It is obviously possible that the Selzer poll is an outlier result. In fact if I were making a prediction based on polling in Iowa I would assume Trump would win by 2-3 points and that this Selzer poll represents some late-breaking momentum for Harris but not a total flip of a red state. However even that conservative interpretation of these results is very bad news for Trump. I think it's very hard to dismiss this poll out of hand and just point to the Emerson poll giving him a 10 point lead. Selzer's poll is more transparent (she releases all her data and is very transparent about sampling methodology in a way Emerson is not) and Selzer's familiarity with Iowa (she's been running polls in the state for nearly 40 years) is much better. Even if you assume the "real" result is somewhere in the middle and Trump wins Iowa but by a smaller margin than expected, that's a major shift.

This is a big deal and the first genuine piece of good news for Harris in a long while. Wow. I’m honestly stunned.

Anonymous wrote:This is a huge booster for democrats, no matter how you Trumpies try to spin at.

First of all, she’s an extremely reliable pollster for Iowa who predicted Trump’s win in Iowa in 2016. Nobody other than a moron will discount her results. Instead of attacking her poll, Orange-supporters should figure out how to address this problem with women that gets worse with every fulmination of their Dear Leader. Stop gaslighting people, as the truth catches up with you.

My take is that Seltzer is at least marginally wrong. I don’t think Harris will win Iowa. Trump will win. But the poll probably picks up an extremely high degree of enthusiasm among democratic voters. Especially women. Which bodes well for the Midwest. WI, MI, PA. NC and GA too, maybe.

Women, including older women, are absolute livid, hopping mad against Trump and they will crawl over hot coal to vote against him. Regardless of whether they are D or R. Every outrage perpetrated by the Trump bros hardens their resolve. Trumpies, be afraid, very afraid. Let’s see if you have enough of your bros turning out to vote to counteract our effect. And young women will expand our advantage. Good luck to your plan to turn out low propensity dudes trying to take out time between video games and porn.
Here’s the thing. We don’t operate by Elon Mask paying dudes to register people. Or the number of desperate posts he pukes on his platform. Instead we text, email, talk to our sisters. Every one of us talks to 5 of our sisters. And we talk to our boyfriends and spouses too. Gently, insistently, lovingly. No amount of Joe Rogan bile can counteract what we do. Be afraid, Trump Nazi freaks, be very afraid. Be ready to weep. Just don’t attack the Capitol.

It’s mostly Democrat women who share your mindset. Sorry, I and most Republican women are not mad at Trump; we are mad at Biden and Harris for their terrible policies.

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)

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.

I lived there in a rural community, and I could see them voting for Harris.

NP

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emerson poll has Trump +10 in Iowa. But feel free to cling to whatever poll makes you happier.

Yes but Selzer is THE Iowa pollster. Emerson polls nationally and is parachuting in.

I'm really struggling with this because the gulf is so wide, but I trust Selzer on Iowa over anyone else.

Her result is still within a standard margin of error, making them effectively tied. But if true, that is a huge swing. Iowa should not be in play if Trump is winning.

Also I'm still reviewing details of the poll but the most interesting result: it has women 65+ voting Harris 2-1. That's a huge deal because that's a very reliable voting bloc-- older people vote at high rates and older women vote more reliably than men.

Yes. Older women are super super pissed. They don’t want people messing around with reproductive rights and they remember pre-roe and many have a lot of sad stories. Not so much back alley abortions, but misguided marriages and lost career opportunities.

Plus they don’t want the gop cratering social security and Medicare. The media has not given this much attention, but it has been a consistent plot line from the gop to get rid of those entitlements and older women are sensitive about the issue.

Some other analysis I've seen mentions that while young voters may have no memory of Trump's "grab 'em by the pussy," older women do remember. They are also more likely to accurately remember that Trump's economy was inherited from Obama and how badly Trump screwed up Covid response, stuff that many voters appear to have randomly forgotten or never knew. But it all undercuts Trump's argument to voters that they were "better off" when he was president.

That’s interesting because my oldest kid and their classmates have hated Trump since 2016. They are all 18-20 now.

They remember so I assumed all young voters were up on this.

This is a huge booster for democrats, no matter how you Trumpies try to spin at.

First of all, she’s an extremely reliable pollster for Iowa who predicted Trump’s win in Iowa in 2016. Nobody other than a moron will discount her results. Instead of attacking her poll, Orange-supporters should figure out how to address this problem with women that gets worse with every fulmination of their Dear Leader. Stop gaslighting people, as the truth catches up with you.

My take is that Seltzer is at least marginally wrong. I don’t think Harris will win Iowa. Trump will win. But the poll probably picks up an extremely high degree of enthusiasm among democratic voters. Especially women. Which bodes well for the Midwest. WI, MI, PA. NC and GA too, maybe.

Women, including older women, are absolute livid, hopping mad against Trump and they will crawl over hot coal to vote against him. Regardless of whether they are D or R. Every outrage perpetrated by the Trump bros hardens their resolve. Trumpies, be afraid, very afraid. Let’s see if you have enough of your bros turning out to vote to counteract our effect. And young women will expand our advantage. Good luck to your plan to turn out low propensity dudes trying to take out time between video games and porn.
Here’s the thing. We don’t operate by Elon Mask paying dudes to register people. Or the number of desperate posts he pukes on his platform. Instead we text, email, talk to our sisters. Every one of us talks to 5 of our sisters. And we talk to our boyfriends and spouses too. Gently, insistently, lovingly. No amount of Joe Rogan bile can counteract what we do. Be afraid, Trump Nazi freaks, be very afraid. Be ready to weep. Just don’t attack the Capitol.

Anonymous wrote:This is happening people! Thank goodness.

Trump beat Biden in Iowa by 8 pts in 2020. Harris has overtaken him.

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2024/11/02/iowa-poll-kamala-harris-leads-donald-trump-2024-presidential-race/75354033007/

Woo hooo!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is happening people! Thank goodness.

Trump beat Biden in Iowa by 8 pts in 2020. Harris has overtaken him.

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2024/11/02/iowa-poll-kamala-harris-leads-donald-trump-2024-presidential-race/75354033007/

Wow. If this comes to pass, Harris will have a Reaganesque victory.

Yup. I’ve been feeling this way for a couple of weeks. The gender gap is going to be huge and women are turning out in huge numbers. And the media is sleeping on the story of Republicans for Harris. This story hits on both of these points.

I agree that the gender gap is going to be huge. However, Hillary Clinton won female voters by 15 points and women were 55% of the electorate in 2016 and she still lost the electoral college because Trump won male voters by 11. Unfortunately, running up the score with female voters won’t be enough unless Harris wins them by like 25 points. I think Harris has to do just a little better than Hillary Clinton with male voters to pull this off.

I don’t disagree, but see my second point-the media is asleep at the wheel on Republicans for Harris. Other than his base, people are sick of Trump.

We’ve heard Hispanics, black men, and young men are all going to go for Trump. Or at least that was the story a week or so ago. Now Trump is in Salem VA for a rally. Makes no sense if the above groups are where you are counting on votes.

Anecdotally, I’m in Blacksburg this weekend. Took a drive around the area today-I was surprised at the number of Harris-Walz signs. It wasn’t half, but it wasn’t zero by any means either.