While everyone is focused on TX, FL and NE as the big flip opportunities, there are interesting races in MO and ND. Will be interesting to watch those races too.
And she has a decent, rural, midwestern white guy who is definitely not a "coastal elite" (Tim Walz) running with her who (I suspect) is also making it easier for sane Rs to vote for Harris.
Could be some of both. It also could be that a high enough non-response to a poll leads those who do respond to no longer be representative of the population.
I’d take it as a positive data point, but just that. Any one, singular poll is only so helpful.
Right, I’ve seen two or three say similar things. So I take them each as a positive data point, acknowledge that science of polling is in a really difficult spot right now, and take it as a small positive sign.
Combined in aggregate with all the other indicators, I personally believe it’s going to be a landslide victory for Harris-Walz and that we’re going to spend the next 6 months analyzing why we thought the race was so close.
Women are voting en masse to restore their constitutional rights and will be very important in deciding the results of this election. I posted yesterday that AARP polls say women over age 50 are voting for Kamala by 12 points. These are high-propensity voters. “There are 63 million women voters over the age of 50 and about 97 percent of them say they are going to vote.” https://19thnews.org/2024/10/women-voters-over-50-critical-group/
That’s 61.1 million votes and, if the AARP polling is accurate, Kamala Harris is expected to get roughly 7.3 million more of those votes than he-who-shall-not-be-named.
Note: There are a helluva lot of retired people in Florida!
(And lots more between half and two-thirds of a century old.)
It's probably partly enthusiasm bias at this point. Someone who voted for Harris is more likely to answer and say so than someone who voted for Trump. (This is the real reason candidates get a "convention bounce": The convention energizes people to respond.) I suspect that the true spread is somewhat smaller but still a good indicator of a sizeable movement by Republicans and Independents towards Harris, as well as high enthusiasm overall.
Why is a Harris voter likelier to respond and say so? An R defection rate of 20% seems entirely possible to me. Remember all those 'red flags' during the primaries when Trump underperformed so badly?
Much of what we think is poll movement over the course of a campaign is really just enthusiasm bias, manifested as response bias. I argued, and still argue, that Biden was in a better position than polling showed because voters weren't EXCITED about voting for him again, even if they ultimately would have, so his poll numbers were depressed. It's possible - even probable - that this early voter data is completely real, but let's face it, Trump voters aren't as excited about voting for him as we are for Kamala, they'll just do it because he hates who they hate or because he's a republican, and they may not be excited to tell anyone about it.
This reminds me of the election in France three months ago. The pre-election polls showed that the far right party was going to win the most seats. The exit polls of actual voters showed that the progressives would get the most votes. The actual vote totals showed the exit polls were correct. The far right party (Marine LePen's 28-year-old protege) came in third place. Turns out, when real voters vote, they don't like fascism.
Really appreciate your work. The Wash Post averages of the battlegrounds show Trump gaining ground (slightly) almost everywhere. Isn't that a matter of concern?
Even if they had a perfect likely voter model (they don’t) sampling error alone can cause movement like this. That doesn’t include other sources of polling miss (non-coverage, non-response, and measurement).
Add on top that turnout is expected to be very high, enthusiasm is on our side, our campaign organization is very strong, they are weak and underperforming polling since 2022, and they just held a hate rally.
What do you think is more likely: polling is going to miss because the likely voter models are overweighting conservatives or Trump is just a magical being that is inevitable?
Spot on with other analysis I’ve read. Even the Pew Research Center (who have a vested interest in keeping polling relevant) acknowledge many difficulties.
Thank you. I somehow missed this very helpful analysis. It was extremely informative, and I just wish more people were aware of the inherent difficulty in relying on polls for predictive information.
Nope, because even curated polling averages like the WaPo ones include right leaning or bad polls from time to time.
Take PA or WI for example. The only polls in the past month that show Trump ahead in these states are from the WSJ (a Murdoch paper) and Quinnipiac (whose polling has been all over the place this cycle).
Plus, most pollsters still use the 2020 election to model their polls and this year’s electorate just won’t look like that, because a looooooot has happened in the past four years.
THIS! I was struck by how much the polls in 2024 look like the 2020 polls --- IF the 2020 polls were done in hindsight. In other words, these polls are using 2020 models - not considering Dobbs. Not considering Jan 6th.
In addition to the other replies, it's also worth noting that historically polls tighten as ED approaches and then votes tend to "break" one way that the late stage polling didn't capture. Polling runs weeks behind the national mood/events.
Simon, Dan Turrentine who worked for Hillary Clinton keeps saying Harris is struggling? Why is he saying that? He’s supposed to be a Dem analyst. He’s on the 2Way platform online
I can't stand that guy. Sorry. Hate to make it personal. But he was part of the HRC fuck-up in 2016 and has been covering his ass every since, mainly by throwing darts at other Dems. Just a POS in my opinion. His comments over the past week or so have been particularly egregious and unfounded.
The whole HRC campaign was a complete joke. It was lazy, very little effort put into it, a whole "it's her turn" without telling us why, Clinton fatigue and so much baggage with that family, fair or not. It almost set the Democratic Party back a significant amount of time.
HRC won more votes than any other candidate up until Obama at that point. This is an unfair and inaccurate assessment re: 2016 and for millions of us that campaign was "historic," not a joke. You disregard the unknown T factor (he was a "new brand" based on the Apprentice b.s.); misogyny; the horrible and relentless media coverage re: emails and non-stop promotion of his campaign; Russian interference; and finally Comey among other things. Saying "'it's her turn' without telling us why says more about your attitude toward her than the reality that she was incredibly qualified and galvanized millions of voters to see "why" she was ready and willing to blaze that trail. Her efforts, IMO, have made it more possible for voters to see Kamala in the role of POTUS now, and she was the first one after Biden's endorsement to endorse her too. I'd hope for a bit more respect for someone who has dedicated 4+ decades to the Dem Party in a group committed to its advancement.
Thanks Tom. I don't mean to pull focus from the task at hand but felt I had to say something to the reflexive HRC bashing that still exists and definitely don't expect to see it in a group like this. Let's all pull in the same direction, especially now!
If you look back, the bashing was of the campaign and family baggage, not HRC. Let's just take the next week not to snipe at each other like D's love to do and concentrate on electing VP Harris.
On October 2nd, we had an opportunity to spend an evening listening to Hillary Clinton do a Q&A for close to two hours as part of the Colorado Speakers Series here in Denver. She is an amazing attorney, grandmother, former FLOTUS, U.S. Senator from New York, and finally Secretary Of State. She was probably the most qualified candidate for President in 2016 compared to almost any other candidate in history. The misogyny of the US electorate is the reason she lost, nothing else, period. It gave us the biggest (orange) stain on our country's history!
I'll split the difference. I voted for Clinton and would do so again in a heartbeat. That said, I do think she could've have responded to some of her baggage more effectively. More importantly the machinery of her campaign was not well organized. Therefore I do blame the tactical mistakes - and there were many imho - more on those who ran her campaign (Like Robby Mook), as opposed to Clinton herself. There is also no doubt she was the target of terrible media coverage, misogyny and 3 decades of RELENTLESS demonization by the right. She also was the first candidate to run against a troll, in every sense of the word. When you run against a showman, you can try to play your best game of chess, but in reality you're in a gladiator pit. I think anybody running against newly political Trump would've struggled hard. Anyway, that was '16, and this is '24! Let's kick there asses!!!
I voted for HRC, donated to her, supported her, and yes, she was more than qualified and had to deal with A LOT of obstacles (misogyny, Russia, Comey, no one knew how dangerous Trump was), but that campaign, compared to campaigns of Obama and Harris, which were run like well oiled machines, was a bit of a mess and made a significant amount of mistakes. I can say that while also respecting her legacy, which I do.
Agreed….that was an unfortunate and unnecessary hate post leveled at one of our party’s most distinguished and accomplished figures in all our history. We don’t do that here.
Folks cannot bring rando commentators in here and ask what we think of them. I dont give a flying fuck about what Dan Turrentine says about the election and neither should you. This a method of bringing worry and fear in here, which is not allowed. We do more, worry less. Thank you.
2. Please repeatedly post "not suckers or losers" comments in social media. According to Facebook, there are 4 million veterans and active duty members on Facebook, as well as 12.5 million family members and 242 million friends with veterans or active duty members. Military sites, veterans; organizations, historical sites. Vote vets has already flipped many 2016 and 2020 Trump voters.
Yes, have been doing this on TikTok! Also finding and reposting these categories of videos as well:
- Personal stories of women affected by Trump Abortion Ban
- Contraception Ban / National Abortion Ban per R's agenda
- Disrespect for Puerto Rico
-Taylor Swift related Kamala endorsements
-Positive or joyful related to Kamala's agenda and candidacy
-"I voted early" videos, mostly happy people with their "I voted" stickers
- Vote on Day One (I managed to get 22 people with tens of thousands of followers to repost a particular video that begins: "Want to Help Dems Win in a Landslide?")
You can view that last one here even if you are not on TikTok:
Do you sense that? that’s momentum! Do you feel that? That’s energy! Do you see that? that’s the finish line! Can you visualize that? that’s a victory for Kamala Harris on November 5th. So let’s go, you have five dollars to donate, donate six. you made 20 phone calls today, do 25. You hit 40 doors? Do 50. All gas no brakes, LFG!
Had to throw that in given that the US election this year is on Guy Fawkes night, so burn an effigy of TFG, and wear your Guy Fawkes masks that night (I'll have to dig mine up) as we celebrate the end of a hideous person's political career, the breaking of MAGA and the start of a new and joyous political age!
Guys, just remember: if politicial experts like Simon, Jen O‘Malley Dillon, James Carville and David Plouffe (all with decades of experience and first hand knowledge) feel cautiously optimistic about the outcome of the election, so can we. We just to have leave it all on the field in the next couple of days and then we will win this thing.
I get where it’s coming from. 2016, was painful and this time would be worse. Even a small chance of a very negative outcome can drown out the larger chance of a positive one, If you let it.
That said, MAGA wants you depressed. Don’t give it to them. Don’t obey in advance. We have the advantage and need to press it.
It’s okay to be confident even though the outcome is uncertain. Get in your flow state and let your purpose and focus drown out the noise.
Amazingly, I also find Rick Wilson is in the optimistic camp, and certainly all in on Kamala Harris. He gave an absolutely crucial pep talk on his podcast, The Enemies List, the other day, which I sorely needed with the narrative about Dem “panic,” etc. proliferating on many media sites and outlets. His message is the same as Simon’s, basically - get out there and work your butts off - we’re winning but we haven’t won yet!
Apropos future elections, here is a choice sentence from humor columnist Alexandra Petri’s endorsement of Kamala Harris, after Jeff Bezos blocked The Washington Post from endorsing her:
"I am endorsing Kamala Harris for president, because I like elections and want to keep having them."
– Alexandra Petri
(More than 200,000 people have cancelled their digital subscription after Bezos forced The Post to violate Timothy Snyder’s first rule of fighting tyranny: "Do not obey in advance.")
Agreed! We cancelled two subscriptions in my house — we subscribed even though we subscribe to other local and national daily newspapers because we believed the WaPo under Bezos would continue to shine a light in the news so that “Democracy (won’t) dies(s) in darkness”! We believed Bezos would helm WaPo in tradition of Woodward and Bernstein!
SEATTLE (The Borowitz Report) — A heated battle has erupted between two of the world’s richest men as Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk compete to see who can shed more customers, industry observers reported on Tuesday.
Davis Logsdon, who teaches a course about sociopathic CEOs at the University of Minnesota, said that both men “have what it takes” to send customers fleeing in droves.
“You might think that Musk, endowed with such world-class obnoxiousness, would be unbeatable as a customer-repellent,” he said. “But it’s impressive what Bezos has managed to do through sheer cowardice.”
“In the past 48 hours, for example, hundreds of people have tried to sell their used Teslas in the Washington Post classifieds,” he said. “Unfortunately for them, only 9 people still subscribe to the Washington Post.”
. "Democracy Dies When Cowardly Billionaires Own Newspapers"
General John Kelly went through the fascist checkboxes rather well in his NYT interview. Came to the conclusion Trump is a fascist. If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
Always a great start to my day is reading your updates. It seems that polls as of late that are more independent/non-GOP sponsored have Harris up around 3-4 points, which I still think is underselling her advantage. I think it's about 4-6 points all things considered.
Sounds like over 50,000 are going to attend her closing speech. Wow!
From the outset, non-partisan pollsters didn't want to undersell Trump, so when it came time to weight the polls, they placed more value on the assumption that Trump supporters show up no matter what than they did on the fact that women are pissed about Dobbs, that Gen Z will show up like never before, and that we're all pissed about fascism. It's an assumption borne of a laser focus on diners in rural Ohio at the expense of the rest of us, but it's likely not a very good one.
My guess is that 15-20 percent of Republicans will either vote for Harris, vote 3rd party or leave the presidential race blank. They want their party back.
I did some quick math on the vote to date with the actual vote appearing to outpace the voter registration numbers by about 25 points. Let's say 62-38 for the sake of easy math. At 47-44-9, if NPS go 2:1 for Harris, that leaves us with Rs giving us the 9 to make up the difference (47+9+6 = 62). That means 35/44 Rs are going with Trump, which adds up to about a 20% defection rate. This seems pretty plausible given the Haley zombie primary-voting pattern and all that's unfolded since then.
It's hard for us to envision massive realignment because we've never seen it in our lifetimes. Most recently, the 1980 and 2008 elections were very defining and required internal reassessments by political parties. We definitely have the potential for another one now broken along the lines of democracy vs. fascism. Trump and his goons are certainly doing everything they can, comic-book-villain-style, to make it happen.
I vividly remember all the Democrats who in 1980 fled President Jimmy Carter and chose to align themselves with Reagan. Incomprehensible to me and very traumatic!
FL is a red state now. I wouldn't worry about it. Focus on where we can win.
Agreed, a man I trust very much, Rick Wilson says Florida is not in reach, at least not for Harris.
Florida's a reach. At best we might flip a senate seat there. It would take a big landslide for it to go blue this year.
Don't forget to DMWL. It is a choice! US News and World Report only lists Miami-Dade County, Florida as the top bellwether county in FL.
https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/15-battleground-counties-in-the-2024-presidential-election while other pubs list Pinellas and Hillsborough.
Official results for FL by county are here. https://countyballotfiles.floridados.gov/VoteByMailEarlyVotingReports/PublicStats
Have a good trip !
While everyone is focused on TX, FL and NE as the big flip opportunities, there are interesting races in MO and ND. Will be interesting to watch those races too.
We could be seeing a "Harris Republicans", maybe not to the level of "Reagan Democrats" in 1984, but enough that it could be quite effective.
Or a bit of both
We had this exact discussion in my home yesterday!
Harris is by far the more conservative candidate in that she doesn't want to set the country on fire.
Absolutely!
And she has a decent, rural, midwestern white guy who is definitely not a "coastal elite" (Tim Walz) running with her who (I suspect) is also making it easier for sane Rs to vote for Harris.
Could be some of both. It also could be that a high enough non-response to a poll leads those who do respond to no longer be representative of the population.
I’d take it as a positive data point, but just that. Any one, singular poll is only so helpful.
It's been several polls saying that though
Right, I’ve seen two or three say similar things. So I take them each as a positive data point, acknowledge that science of polling is in a really difficult spot right now, and take it as a small positive sign.
Combined in aggregate with all the other indicators, I personally believe it’s going to be a landslide victory for Harris-Walz and that we’re going to spend the next 6 months analyzing why we thought the race was so close.
You and I might be related!
Women are voting en masse to restore their constitutional rights and will be very important in deciding the results of this election. I posted yesterday that AARP polls say women over age 50 are voting for Kamala by 12 points. These are high-propensity voters. “There are 63 million women voters over the age of 50 and about 97 percent of them say they are going to vote.” https://19thnews.org/2024/10/women-voters-over-50-critical-group/
Plus the men who listened and heard Michelle’s incrdible call- out in MI. What an incredible forceful and easily understood speech!
That’s 61.1 million votes and, if the AARP polling is accurate, Kamala Harris is expected to get roughly 7.3 million more of those votes than he-who-shall-not-be-named.
Note: There are a helluva lot of retired people in Florida!
(And lots more between half and two-thirds of a century old.)
Love the data in your comments.
I’m such a nutbag I’m expecting her to win Florida for an early election evening TKO.
That’s my not-so-secret Election Night dream: North Carolina and Florida being called early for Kamala Harris. Check mate!
From our hearts to G-d’s ears!
Florida is in 2 time zones....
Yes Arctic, and we can all have an early night of it! I'm SO rooting for North Carolina!
Didn’t make sense to me either, but I figure it can’t be bad. 🤣
It's probably partly enthusiasm bias at this point. Someone who voted for Harris is more likely to answer and say so than someone who voted for Trump. (This is the real reason candidates get a "convention bounce": The convention energizes people to respond.) I suspect that the true spread is somewhat smaller but still a good indicator of a sizeable movement by Republicans and Independents towards Harris, as well as high enthusiasm overall.
Why is a Harris voter likelier to respond and say so? An R defection rate of 20% seems entirely possible to me. Remember all those 'red flags' during the primaries when Trump underperformed so badly?
Much of what we think is poll movement over the course of a campaign is really just enthusiasm bias, manifested as response bias. I argued, and still argue, that Biden was in a better position than polling showed because voters weren't EXCITED about voting for him again, even if they ultimately would have, so his poll numbers were depressed. It's possible - even probable - that this early voter data is completely real, but let's face it, Trump voters aren't as excited about voting for him as we are for Kamala, they'll just do it because he hates who they hate or because he's a republican, and they may not be excited to tell anyone about it.
@ Ryan. That's probably due to the increased new Dem registrations.... We don't have accurate registration totals.
This reminds me of the election in France three months ago. The pre-election polls showed that the far right party was going to win the most seats. The exit polls of actual voters showed that the progressives would get the most votes. The actual vote totals showed the exit polls were correct. The far right party (Marine LePen's 28-year-old protege) came in third place. Turns out, when real voters vote, they don't like fascism.
Really appreciate your work. The Wash Post averages of the battlegrounds show Trump gaining ground (slightly) almost everywhere. Isn't that a matter of concern?
Even if they had a perfect likely voter model (they don’t) sampling error alone can cause movement like this. That doesn’t include other sources of polling miss (non-coverage, non-response, and measurement).
Add on top that turnout is expected to be very high, enthusiasm is on our side, our campaign organization is very strong, they are weak and underperforming polling since 2022, and they just held a hate rally.
What do you think is more likely: polling is going to miss because the likely voter models are overweighting conservatives or Trump is just a magical being that is inevitable?
I’m going with polling miss.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/10/presidential-polls-unreliable/680408/
If you have a way to read this, please do.
Spot on with other analysis I’ve read. Even the Pew Research Center (who have a vested interest in keeping polling relevant) acknowledge many difficulties.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/08/28/key-things-to-know-about-us-election-polling-in-2024/
Thank you. I somehow missed this very helpful analysis. It was extremely informative, and I just wish more people were aware of the inherent difficulty in relying on polls for predictive information.
Nope, because even curated polling averages like the WaPo ones include right leaning or bad polls from time to time.
Take PA or WI for example. The only polls in the past month that show Trump ahead in these states are from the WSJ (a Murdoch paper) and Quinnipiac (whose polling has been all over the place this cycle).
Plus, most pollsters still use the 2020 election to model their polls and this year’s electorate just won’t look like that, because a looooooot has happened in the past four years.
THIS! I was struck by how much the polls in 2024 look like the 2020 polls --- IF the 2020 polls were done in hindsight. In other words, these polls are using 2020 models - not considering Dobbs. Not considering Jan 6th.
no
I appreciate this succinct response. So Simon!
LOVE THIS
In addition to the other replies, it's also worth noting that historically polls tighten as ED approaches and then votes tend to "break" one way that the late stage polling didn't capture. Polling runs weeks behind the national mood/events.
DMWL and all will be good Dale!
It’s statistical noise
Simon, Dan Turrentine who worked for Hillary Clinton keeps saying Harris is struggling? Why is he saying that? He’s supposed to be a Dem analyst. He’s on the 2Way platform online
Doomers gonna doom. Do more, worry less.
Ben is right! Plus it's "do more" not "doom more"
Because a rag wanting clicks paid him to help them with some clickbait content!
He's still traumatized by 2016. Simon, Bonier, O'Malley and Carville are all pretty honest and realist, so I'll trust what they say.
I can't stand that guy. Sorry. Hate to make it personal. But he was part of the HRC fuck-up in 2016 and has been covering his ass every since, mainly by throwing darts at other Dems. Just a POS in my opinion. His comments over the past week or so have been particularly egregious and unfounded.
The whole HRC campaign was a complete joke. It was lazy, very little effort put into it, a whole "it's her turn" without telling us why, Clinton fatigue and so much baggage with that family, fair or not. It almost set the Democratic Party back a significant amount of time.
HRC won more votes than any other candidate up until Obama at that point. This is an unfair and inaccurate assessment re: 2016 and for millions of us that campaign was "historic," not a joke. You disregard the unknown T factor (he was a "new brand" based on the Apprentice b.s.); misogyny; the horrible and relentless media coverage re: emails and non-stop promotion of his campaign; Russian interference; and finally Comey among other things. Saying "'it's her turn' without telling us why says more about your attitude toward her than the reality that she was incredibly qualified and galvanized millions of voters to see "why" she was ready and willing to blaze that trail. Her efforts, IMO, have made it more possible for voters to see Kamala in the role of POTUS now, and she was the first one after Biden's endorsement to endorse her too. I'd hope for a bit more respect for someone who has dedicated 4+ decades to the Dem Party in a group committed to its advancement.
Thanks Tom. I don't mean to pull focus from the task at hand but felt I had to say something to the reflexive HRC bashing that still exists and definitely don't expect to see it in a group like this. Let's all pull in the same direction, especially now!
If you look back, the bashing was of the campaign and family baggage, not HRC. Let's just take the next week not to snipe at each other like D's love to do and concentrate on electing VP Harris.
On October 2nd, we had an opportunity to spend an evening listening to Hillary Clinton do a Q&A for close to two hours as part of the Colorado Speakers Series here in Denver. She is an amazing attorney, grandmother, former FLOTUS, U.S. Senator from New York, and finally Secretary Of State. She was probably the most qualified candidate for President in 2016 compared to almost any other candidate in history. The misogyny of the US electorate is the reason she lost, nothing else, period. It gave us the biggest (orange) stain on our country's history!
I'll split the difference. I voted for Clinton and would do so again in a heartbeat. That said, I do think she could've have responded to some of her baggage more effectively. More importantly the machinery of her campaign was not well organized. Therefore I do blame the tactical mistakes - and there were many imho - more on those who ran her campaign (Like Robby Mook), as opposed to Clinton herself. There is also no doubt she was the target of terrible media coverage, misogyny and 3 decades of RELENTLESS demonization by the right. She also was the first candidate to run against a troll, in every sense of the word. When you run against a showman, you can try to play your best game of chess, but in reality you're in a gladiator pit. I think anybody running against newly political Trump would've struggled hard. Anyway, that was '16, and this is '24! Let's kick there asses!!!
Beautifully stated, Jarrod :).
I voted for HRC, donated to her, supported her, and yes, she was more than qualified and had to deal with A LOT of obstacles (misogyny, Russia, Comey, no one knew how dangerous Trump was), but that campaign, compared to campaigns of Obama and Harris, which were run like well oiled machines, was a bit of a mess and made a significant amount of mistakes. I can say that while also respecting her legacy, which I do.
Me too.
Agreed….that was an unfortunate and unnecessary hate post leveled at one of our party’s most distinguished and accomplished figures in all our history. We don’t do that here.
Agree and thank you.
Kamala is one of the best. With Obama and Bill Clinton.
Thank you!
Agree 👍
Folks cannot bring rando commentators in here and ask what we think of them. I dont give a flying fuck about what Dan Turrentine says about the election and neither should you. This a method of bringing worry and fear in here, which is not allowed. We do more, worry less. Thank you.
Thanks only positive energy 💙💙
This is not an ex-president with toilet paper stuck to his shoe. Rather, it’s a piece of toilet paper with a huge Orange turd stuck to it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-jYhxUaBbk
🤣🤣🤣🤣
And he's recently stepped in it with the Puerto Rican community. It's really going to hurt his campaign!
READER ENGAGEMENT
1. Uncle Sam needs you! https://www.mobilize.us/ (And me.)
2. Please repeatedly post "not suckers or losers" comments in social media. According to Facebook, there are 4 million veterans and active duty members on Facebook, as well as 12.5 million family members and 242 million friends with veterans or active duty members. Military sites, veterans; organizations, historical sites. Vote vets has already flipped many 2016 and 2020 Trump voters.
And Facebook ceo supports Harris. I guess I have to learn how to use it.
Just comment. Not suckers or losers.
Yes, have been doing this on TikTok! Also finding and reposting these categories of videos as well:
- Personal stories of women affected by Trump Abortion Ban
- Contraception Ban / National Abortion Ban per R's agenda
- Disrespect for Puerto Rico
-Taylor Swift related Kamala endorsements
-Positive or joyful related to Kamala's agenda and candidacy
-"I voted early" videos, mostly happy people with their "I voted" stickers
- Vote on Day One (I managed to get 22 people with tens of thousands of followers to repost a particular video that begins: "Want to Help Dems Win in a Landslide?")
You can view that last one here even if you are not on TikTok:
https://www.voteonday1.org/day-1-videos/want-to-help-dems-win-in-a-landslide%3F
Do you sense that? that’s momentum! Do you feel that? That’s energy! Do you see that? that’s the finish line! Can you visualize that? that’s a victory for Kamala Harris on November 5th. So let’s go, you have five dollars to donate, donate six. you made 20 phone calls today, do 25. You hit 40 doors? Do 50. All gas no brakes, LFG!
Puerto Ricans remember! And on the 5th of November, they’ll take out the trash!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7v3VZgeuYU
Loved Sunny on The View!
"Remember, remember the 5th of November"
Had to throw that in given that the US election this year is on Guy Fawkes night, so burn an effigy of TFG, and wear your Guy Fawkes masks that night (I'll have to dig mine up) as we celebrate the end of a hideous person's political career, the breaking of MAGA and the start of a new and joyous political age!
Priceless!
The fact that this Dan Turrentine has a show with Fox’s Mark Halperin and “alternative facts” Sean Spicer might be all we need to know?
That’s good news for John McCain!
😂
Awwww this explains it.
And guilelessly promotes Tucker Carlson on his Twitter
he is deeply disingenuous
Guys, just remember: if politicial experts like Simon, Jen O‘Malley Dillon, James Carville and David Plouffe (all with decades of experience and first hand knowledge) feel cautiously optimistic about the outcome of the election, so can we. We just to have leave it all on the field in the next couple of days and then we will win this thing.
I get where it’s coming from. 2016, was painful and this time would be worse. Even a small chance of a very negative outcome can drown out the larger chance of a positive one, If you let it.
That said, MAGA wants you depressed. Don’t give it to them. Don’t obey in advance. We have the advantage and need to press it.
It’s okay to be confident even though the outcome is uncertain. Get in your flow state and let your purpose and focus drown out the noise.
Matthew Dowd's analysis also aligns with Simon, James Carville, Jen O'Malley Dillon, and David Plouffe.
Nicolle Wallace calls Matthew Dowd her human Xanax!
Yes. I heard her say that and I agree!
Amazingly, I also find Rick Wilson is in the optimistic camp, and certainly all in on Kamala Harris. He gave an absolutely crucial pep talk on his podcast, The Enemies List, the other day, which I sorely needed with the narrative about Dem “panic,” etc. proliferating on many media sites and outlets. His message is the same as Simon’s, basically - get out there and work your butts off - we’re winning but we haven’t won yet!
Apropos future elections, here is a choice sentence from humor columnist Alexandra Petri’s endorsement of Kamala Harris, after Jeff Bezos blocked The Washington Post from endorsing her:
"I am endorsing Kamala Harris for president, because I like elections and want to keep having them."
– Alexandra Petri
(More than 200,000 people have cancelled their digital subscription after Bezos forced The Post to violate Timothy Snyder’s first rule of fighting tyranny: "Do not obey in advance.")
Agreed! We cancelled two subscriptions in my house — we subscribed even though we subscribe to other local and national daily newspapers because we believed the WaPo under Bezos would continue to shine a light in the news so that “Democracy (won’t) dies(s) in darkness”! We believed Bezos would helm WaPo in tradition of Woodward and Bernstein!
On a lighter note...
. "BEZOS AND MUSK IN FIERCE CONTEST
. TO SEE WHO CAN LOSE MORE CUSTOMERS"
SEATTLE (The Borowitz Report) — A heated battle has erupted between two of the world’s richest men as Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk compete to see who can shed more customers, industry observers reported on Tuesday.
Davis Logsdon, who teaches a course about sociopathic CEOs at the University of Minnesota, said that both men “have what it takes” to send customers fleeing in droves.
“You might think that Musk, endowed with such world-class obnoxiousness, would be unbeatable as a customer-repellent,” he said. “But it’s impressive what Bezos has managed to do through sheer cowardice.”
“In the past 48 hours, for example, hundreds of people have tried to sell their used Teslas in the Washington Post classifieds,” he said. “Unfortunately for them, only 9 people still subscribe to the Washington Post.”
. "Democracy Dies When Cowardly Billionaires Own Newspapers"
https://www.borowitzreport.com/p/bezos-and-musk-in-fierce-contest
Thanks for this. Hilarious!
Simon I hope you’ll talk AZ, NV in next briefing.
We're not "casting" him as a fascist, we are accurately describing him as a fascist!
Trump and his minions are casting themselves that way …
You took the words out of my mouth.
Actually, it was a couple of Trump staff or advisors who said he was a fascist. Harris was ASKED to comment on that.
General John Kelly went through the fascist checkboxes rather well in his NYT interview. Came to the conclusion Trump is a fascist. If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
Always a great start to my day is reading your updates. It seems that polls as of late that are more independent/non-GOP sponsored have Harris up around 3-4 points, which I still think is underselling her advantage. I think it's about 4-6 points all things considered.
Sounds like over 50,000 are going to attend her closing speech. Wow!
DMWL. One week away!!!
From the outset, non-partisan pollsters didn't want to undersell Trump, so when it came time to weight the polls, they placed more value on the assumption that Trump supporters show up no matter what than they did on the fact that women are pissed about Dobbs, that Gen Z will show up like never before, and that we're all pissed about fascism. It's an assumption borne of a laser focus on diners in rural Ohio at the expense of the rest of us, but it's likely not a very good one.
My guess is that 15-20 percent of Republicans will either vote for Harris, vote 3rd party or leave the presidential race blank. They want their party back.
I did some quick math on the vote to date with the actual vote appearing to outpace the voter registration numbers by about 25 points. Let's say 62-38 for the sake of easy math. At 47-44-9, if NPS go 2:1 for Harris, that leaves us with Rs giving us the 9 to make up the difference (47+9+6 = 62). That means 35/44 Rs are going with Trump, which adds up to about a 20% defection rate. This seems pretty plausible given the Haley zombie primary-voting pattern and all that's unfolded since then.
It's hard for us to envision massive realignment because we've never seen it in our lifetimes. Most recently, the 1980 and 2008 elections were very defining and required internal reassessments by political parties. We definitely have the potential for another one now broken along the lines of democracy vs. fascism. Trump and his goons are certainly doing everything they can, comic-book-villain-style, to make it happen.
Well said. Trump is like the Joker if the Joker had dementia.
I vividly remember all the Democrats who in 1980 fled President Jimmy Carter and chose to align themselves with Reagan. Incomprehensible to me and very traumatic!
My wife and I are bringing my 3 and 5 year old girls. We're excited for Madam President!