Indecision 2024

[philbo]

He probably heard about the dolphin thing and searched for it using those words. Most people would do that.^{[cetacean needed]}

But as with the couch thing (and Cameron and a pig), the truth doesn't matter if you antagonise enough people to make them think that the grubby alternative to the truth is plausible

<applause>

[jimbob]

He probably heard about the dolphin thing and searched for it using those words. Most people would do that.^{[cetacean needed]}

But as with the couch thing (and Cameron and a pig), the truth doesn't matter if you antagonise enough people to make them think that the grubby alternative to the truth is plausible

EPD is sad

[Gfamily]

EPD is sad

Is he wailing?

[Woodchopper]

Very good you two.

[Woodchopper]

I just want to personally thank @JDVance for knocking me out of the position of the worst Donald Trump hire. I didn’t think it would happen but here we are and I am grateful.

[jimbob]

Mark Steel on the whole process

https://x.com/mrmarksteel/status/1817115207363436978

[Woodchopper]

The Economist and Fivethirtyeight forecast models are still suspended.

But Nate Silver has one out which gives:

IMG_4901.jpeg (118.24 KiB) Viewed 1297 times

The forecast for Harris is a significant improvement over Biden, but it still looks like there is much to do.

[dyqik]

I'd recommend that you ignore Nate Silver these days:
1) he's become increasingly reactionary in recent years.
2) this model is completely untested.
3) it's based on polls which are getting increasingly less accurate
4) he is employed by a gambling company run by far right techno-fascist billionaire Peter Thiel who is trying to buy this election for Trump, and who already bought JD Vance's Senate seat.

As you can see with Real Clear Politics, there's been an active attempt by the far-right to put their finger on polls and poll aggregators in order to legitimize their attempts to claim that the election is rigged and justify overthrowing the results. I'm not saying this is necessarily part of that, but the "right winger hires well-known poll modeler who got disaffected and left mainstream media" is what it might look like.

[dyqik]

Oh, and anyone touting a probabilistic model of the race before the Democratic convention, before one of the VP nominees is known, and before most voters start paying attention to the election, is trying to sell you something.

[lpm]

We'll be OK, we can just get EPD to do our polling tracker.

For context:

1) National Polls

2016
Most trackers: Clinton +3 to +4 (e.g. 538 +3.6)
Result: Clinton +2.1
Electoral College loss

2020
Most trackers: Biden +7 to +8 (e.g. 538 +8.4)
Result: Biden +4.5
Electoral College win

2) State by State

2016 Clinton margins:

MI -0.2 loss
NV +2.4 win
PA -0.7 loss
WI -0.8 loss
AZ -3.5 loss
GA -5.1 loss
NC -3.7 loss
FL - 1.2 loss

2020 Biden margins:

MI +2.8
NV +2.4
PA +1.2
WI +0.6
AZ +0.3
GA +0.2
NC -1.4 loss
FL - 3.3 loss

3) Pathways to 270

Assume Harris starts with 227 in the bag.

This is all states won by both Biden and Clinton down to New Hampshire (Biden +7.0) and Minnesota (Biden +5.6). It also includes one EC vote from Nebraska 2nd (Biden +6.5, although Clinton lost by -2.2).

(a) Great Lakes

46 from MI (16 EC votes), PA (20) and WI (10) = 273

(b) Sun Belt

48 from NV (6), AZ (11), GA (16) and North Carolina (15) = 275
(reminder: Biden lost NC by 1.4)

(c) Mixture

e.g. 43 from MI (16), WI (10), NV (6) and AZ (11) = 270
(the 1 from Nebraska 2nd becomes crucial in this particular mix)

(d) Florida

I've not seen this talked about and I think it's being overlooked. I know, I know, Florida is packed full of the craziest of the red caps crazies. But it also has abortion on the ballot. High turnout?

Since the 2000 theft from Gore, Florida has been won by

2004 Bush +5.0
2008 Obama +2.8
2012 Obama +0.9
2016 Trump +1.2
2020 Trump +3.3

If Harris wins Florida's 29 EC votes then there's almost no scenario where Trump can win. Harris would simply need one more large state (PA, MI or GA) or a couple of smaller ones (e.g. WI and NV)

Admittedly the main reason I'm watching Florida is because it would be hilarious. The actual state to study in depth is always going to be Pennsylvania.

[lpm]

And another thing (as poor Joe kept saying in his debate) - there's been a collapse of RF Kennedy Jr that has been almost unnoticed.

Various third parties like Libertarian and Greens usually combine for 4% or 5% of the vote. Only Ross Perot has been significant, crippling Bush Sr in 1992 by getting 18% of the vote.

Kennedy was getting around 15% in polls a few months ago. The reason was that the "hate both candidates" scores were remarkably high, so inevitably people selected a third party with a famous name. Bless 'em, if they knew anything they'd be telling pollsters "hate all three candidates".

RFK was going backwards for a while, drifting down to 10%. The switch to Harris has devastated his numbers further. A YouGov poll now has him on just 5%. He's been trampled in the excitement and more people know he's a loon.

My hope is the "think Biden's too old, I'll pick Kennedy" vote has vanished, but the "think Trump's too awful, I'll pick Kennedy" vote remains.

[Stranger Mouse]

You will see some viral clips of Trump f.cking up an interview with the NABJ (National Association of Black Journalists).

Here’s a few

https://x.com/atrupar/status/1818715975140696568?s=61

https://x.com/ronfilipkowski/status/181 ... 38261?s=61

https://x.com/fpwellman/status/1818724370942247114?s=61

https://x.com/atrupar/status/1818714787624124416?s=61

Here’s the full interview https://x.com/katiephang/status/1818728 ... 09108?s=61

[jimbob]

You will see some viral clips of Trump f.cking up an interview with the NABJ (National Association of Black Journalists).

Here’s a few

https://x.com/atrupar/status/1818715975140696568?s=61

https://x.com/ronfilipkowski/status/181 ... 38261?s=61

https://x.com/fpwellman/status/1818724370942247114?s=61

https://x.com/atrupar/status/1818714787624124416?s=61

Here’s the full interview https://x.com/katiephang/status/1818728 ... 09108?s=61

Is it a good thing if your opponent shows recent footage of your interview which you choose to take part in?

Q: You have pushed false claims about people like President Barack Obama, saying he was not born in the United States, which is not true. You have told four congresswomen, women of color who were American citizens, to go back to where they came from. You have used words like ‘animal’ to describe Black district attorneys. You've attacked Black journalists, calling them a loser, saying the questions that they ask are quote, ‘stupid and racist.’ You've had dinner with a white supremacist at Mar-a-Lago. So my question, sir, now that you are asking Black supporters to vote for you, why should Black voters trust you after you have used language like that?

Trump: Well, first of all, I don't think I've ever been asked a question in such a horrible manner


Video in link

https://x.com/KamalaHQ/status/1818716378574037022

[lpm]

Wait, racistDonaldTrump is a racist? Why did America not know that?

Oh, they did know it. In 2016. And voted for him because of it.

This is the same old treadmill. He diverts from being a felon by picking a whacko VP. He diverts from that by saying something racist. He'll diverts from that by disrespecting veterans and diverts from that by insulting women and diverts from that by dodging the debate and diverts from that with praise of Putin.

It might entertain the twitter addicts but we know this is not how elections are decided.

[dyqik]

Wait, racistDonaldTrump is a racist? Why did America not know that?

Oh, they did know it. In 2016. And voted for him because of it.

It's not 2016 any more.

[lpm]

No, it's now a more extreme divide. In 2016 there was movement across the divide.

Now it is only about getting your side to vote.

Trump's weird political instincts are telling him to revert to type. Post assassination attempt and at the Convention he dabbled with unity. A statesman, with Vance there to feed the rabid pack of followers.

They clearly hadn't game planned for Harris. Presumably they expected chaotic infighting. But Trump immediately went into his natural aggressive hate mode.

It might be the wrong choice. But he understands his followers. They love it when Trump humiliates people and says outrageous slurs. Direct racism appeals just as much as being brutal to perceived enemies. In a close election who's to say this instinct won't take Trump to the win?

[dyqik]

No, it's now a more extreme divide. In 2016 there was movement across the divide.

Now it is only about getting your side to vote.

The entire white engagement with Black Lives Matter happened since then. The entire me too movement happened since then. Roe v Wade got overturned since then. 8 years of generational turnover happened since then.

Trump's side of the divide has shrunk, and he's less able to go beyond it now.

[lpm]

I'm not convinced. I think the number of racists has increased significantly in 8 years.

People with a number one priority of maintaining white supremacy are a far higher proportion now, due to 8 years of MAGA propaganda. Exceeds the generational turnover factor.

Harris wins if it is about abortion, Project 2025 and Trump's criminality. Race, immigration and economic perceptions are Trump's home turf.

[lpm]

Also meant to say: Trump's aggression, insults and attacks on journalists are his way of covering up his age problem.

People don't associate age and aggression. Trump acts like a confrontational 20 year old male spoiling for a fight the while time.

Voters believe he is mentally capable because Democrats keep stressing his unpleasant rudeness and insults.

[dyqik]

I'm not convinced. I think the number of racists has increased significantly in 8 years.

But they were all already voting for Trump.

The racism is acceptable crowd voted for him in 2016. Some of them died, some of them became racists, some of them gave up on him

There's few to zero Clinton or Biden voters who will have switched to Trump because of the racism. And there's a whole bunch of voters who will vote for Harris who wouldn't vote for Clinton or Biden.

[Chris Preston]

I'm not convinced. I think the number of racists has increased significantly in 8 years.

I am not convinced. I think it is the number of people who feel it is acceptable to say and do racist things in public has increased. These were people who voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020 because Trump said things they wished they had the guts to say.

[lpm]

I'm not convinced. I think the number of racists has increased significantly in 8 years.

I am not convinced. I think it is the number of people who feel it is acceptable to say and do racist things in public has increased. These were people who voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020 because Trump said things they wished they had the guts to say.

I strongly disagree. It is implausible to think that 8 years of overt racism and propaganda had no effect. Why would Americans be immune to these forces? Why would a thriving White Supremacy movement fail to expand? Young men in America have grown up racist, mild racists have become fervent racists, and women in particular are more racist.

Electorally the switch is between not voting in 2020 and turning out for Trump in 2024. If Trump converts lazy racist non-voting morons into active racist voting morons then it could take him to a win.

E.g. Pennsylvania 2020

Registered Voters 9,098,998
Biden 3,458,229 (38.0%)
Trump 3,377,674 (37.1%)
Did not vote 2,162,022 (23.8%)
Others 101,073 (1.1%)

Extra votes Trump needed: 80,556 out of 2,162,022 non voters = 3.7% of that pool

This race is going to be very tight. 3.7% of a large pool of the electorate is nothing. Trump's instincts are clear: he thinks non-voters can be motivated to turn out to vote against a woman of colour. Who knows America's racists better than Trump, their leader? Why assume he's wrong?

[hakwright]

The Economist and Fivethirtyeight forecast models are still suspended.

But Nate Silver has one out which gives:

IMG_4901.jpeg

The forecast for Harris is a significant improvement over Biden, but it still looks like there is much to do.

What was the previous figure for Biden winning from this model? The 5-38 model showed Trump and Biden at 50/50 in their prediction model for winning the presidency (wobbling a percent or two either way over a couple of weeks). So this figure for Harris is much lower than that, but I guess that's because the model is very different.

[bolo]

The 538 model assumes, on the basis of historical trends, that (a) polls this far out are not very predictive, even though they have been more stable this cycle than is historically typical, and (b) as the election gets closer, voter preferences will revert toward correlating with the state of the economy, even though public perceptions of the economy are now based more on party identification (rather than the actual state of the economy) than is historically typical.

Both assumptions are IMHO optimistic, though that doesn't necessarily make them wrong.

In any case, the change of Democratic candidate has thrown everything up in the air, so I'm not sure any model is worth a hill of beans at the moment. Maybe in a month or so it might be worth looking at them again.

[El Pollo Diablo]

Appreciate I'm a bit early, but regardless of the outcome of this vote, in 2028 Trump will definitely not be running. What do we reckon are the republicans' chances then? Seeing as they've remade the party in his fascist image, does the republican party get elected without Trump?