Apply Now!

Kamala Harris

C

coalminer

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Pilgrim said:
I'm still waiting for her to tell us which model Glock she's had "for years". Many are illegal in CA, especially in San Francisco. Also, which McDonald's location did she work in?
Click to expand...
Im not a gun person but my limited knowledge is that a Glock is a handgun, correct? I didnt think that California banned any handguns, only assault rifles. As a prosecutor, she dealt with the worst of the worst, that would absolutely give her a reason to carry a gun, right?

I dont doubt she worked at a McDonalds, why would she lie about that? If Trump wanted to impress me with his working the fryer, he should have worked an entire 8 hour shift in a location that was actually open.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ragman
Pilgrim

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
coalminer said:
Im not a gun person but my limited knowledge is that a Glock is a handgun, correct? I didnt think that California banned any handguns, only assault rifles.
Click to expand...
CA bans all kinds of guns, including many handguns. They have very strict regulations on magazine capacity, safety features, and other design characteristics. Currently Glock has over 50 different models on the market. All of their Generation 4 models are banned in CA. Also, any handgun with magazine capacity over 10 rounds is banned, although some older ones are grandfathered as legal.

Harris's answer to the gun question sounded fake. The vast majority of Glock owners willingly offer the model number and sometimes the Generation, for example - "Glock 19, Gen 5. Harris offered no such detail, and the interviewer conveniently didn't ask for any.
coalminer said:
I dont doubt she worked at a McDonalds, why would she lie about that?
Click to expand...
To reinforce her "middle class" image. People don't forget things about their first jobs, but once again Harris provides no details; location, what she did, name of her store manager, nothing to confirm her story.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Ragman
ATeam

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Georgia Early Voting and Population Shifts: Advantage Harris

With the polls close and the spinners hyperactive about voter registration and early voting, it's been hard to read the tea leaves. In GA, we get a bit of clarity as early voting has closed, and the state has released the numbers as they can so far. We don't know how people voted, but we now know exactly who and how many voted in the early voting period.

One thing that jumps out to me is 55% of GA's eligible voters have now voted. This means that Republican voter suppression efforts are not working. People are highly motivated to vote and they're going to vote. They're turning out by the millions early to do exactly that.

In general, high turnout in elections is good for Democrats. In GA, with this early indicator, and if the high-turnout behavior holds through Election Day, it's advantage Harris.

Another hard-data number that is available is population. From 2020 to 2024, GA's rural population was stable or increased slightly. The urban centers saw population increases at significantly higher rates. Since a higher population can mean more voters, and since urban areas skew Democratic, it's advantage Harris.
 
Last edited:
ATeam

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
More Hard Data

Hard Data: Women have outpaced men in early-voting turnout by nearly 10 percentage points.

Interpretation: Advantage Harris because: "Harris is performing significantly better among women and Trump with men polling has shown. A USA TODAY/Suffolk University poll taken Oct. 14 to 18 found Harris leading nationally 53%-36% with female voters and Trump leading 53%-37% with male voters."

That trend will likely persist through Election Day. In general, women always turn out in higher numbers than men. And in 2024, both a female candidate and abortion rights are on the ballot. Also, sex-offender Trump is pledging to protect women, "whether the women like it or not."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ragman
ATeam

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Liking This

I don't care much for Joe Walsh, and I have no way of knowing if these words of his are true, but I do like the observations he shares. We'll know in a few days how right or wrong he is.

1730591851909.png
 
ATeam

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Now We Can Talk of the Polls

I have said repeatedly in this forum that early polls are meaningless. That's because the snapshots they take at the time do not account for the many variables and developments that will surface before Election Day. Now with early voting well underway, and all voting to conclude just three days from today, the polls can be viewed with less skepticism.

I say less skepticism, not no skepticism. Even the final polls are often off by a few points or more.

I just learned of a poll that is said to be one of the nation's most highly respected. It is not a national poll but a state poll.

In 2024, this final poll shows Harris 47%, Trump 44%; a 3% spread.
In 2020, this final poll showed Trump 48%, Biden 41%; a 7% spread. The actual vote was 53% Trump, 45% Biden; an 8% spread.
In 2016, this final poll showed Trump 46%, Clinton 39%; a 7% spread. The actual vote was 51.1 Trump, 41.7 Clinton; a 9.4% spread.
In 2012, this final poll showed Obama 47%, Romney 42%; a 5% spread. The actual vote was Obama 52%, Romney 46%; a 6% spread.
In 2008, this final poll showed Obama 54%, McCain 37%, a 17% spread. The actual vote was Obama 54%, McCain 44%, a 10% spread.
In 2004, this final poll showed Kerry 48%, G.W. Bush 43%, a 5% spread. The actual vote was Kerry 49.2%, G.W. Bush 49.7%, a 0.5% spread. (Source)

The 2004 result was the one miss out of the five polls listed here. You have to go back 20 years to see this poll miss.

This the famous Iowa Poll sponsored by the Des Moines Register, also known as the Seltzer poll for the pollster who runs it.

Noteworthy Points (from this news report)
  • Neither Trump nor Harris have campaigned in Iowa since the presidential primaries have ended, and neither campaign has established a ground presence in the state.
  • Trump enjoyed solid victories in Iowa in 2020 and 2016. He is behind in the state now.
  • Women — particularly those who are older or are politically independent — are driving the late shift toward Harris.
  • Trump continues to lead with his core base of support: men, evangelicals, rural residents and those without a college degree.
  • The results follow a September Iowa Poll that showed Trump with a 4-point lead over Harris and a June Iowa Poll showing him with an 18-point lead over Democratic President Joe Biden, who was the presumed Democratic nominee at the time.
  • Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has abandoned his independent presidential campaign to support Trump but remains on the Iowa ballot, gets 3% of the vote. That’s down from 6% in September and 9% in June.
My Comments:
  • Trump continues to lead with his core base ... but it's not enough. Trump is going to lose the 2024 election, and it will be women who keep him from the White House and return him to the court house.
  • This is clearly a shocker to both campaigns, since neither one has been actively campaigning in ruby red Iowa. With no ground game from either side, this a massive, organic shift in Harris's favor; a shift suggests the national race may not be as close as many now believe.
  • This shocking shift in a highly respected poll, in a red state that everyone had assumed would stay red will dominate the news on Sunday and maybe beyond. Three days before the election, Trump has lost control of the news cycle. He will instead have to answer everyone who asks, "Are you a loser?"
  • Per the poll, Iowa voters had Trump +17% over Biden, then Trump +4% over Harris. Now they have Harris +3% over Trump. That's a 20% swing since Harris entered the race. It shows she is a phenomenally effective candidate who is crushing Trump.
  • Iowa has 6 electoral votes. If Trump wins Nevada but loses Iowa, his Nevada efforts are canceled out.
This tweet further illustrate the Iowa Poll's accuracy and the reason it is highly respected.

1730608649709.png

Fox News is reporting this story. This news from Fox will shock millions of Republicans that would not otherwise hear it. It will also give Trump plenty to complain about as he panics in front of America when he calls in to Fox and Friends Monday morning.

I have no doubt that Fox will spin this as an outlier, but the headline is out. Trump Lead Evaporates; Red-state Turns Blue. In fact, the poll has been an actual outlier before. It got it right where most others got it wrong.

www.foxnews.com

Shock poll has Harris leading Trump in Iowa with 3-point shift toward vice president in red state

VP Harris leads former President Trump narrowly in the final Des Moines Register Iowa poll, three days ahead of the election in a seven-point reversal.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com

Betting Markets

For those who put stock in the betting markets (I don't):

"The former president's odds of winning fell from a high of 66.9% on Wednesday to 55.2% late Saturday on the betting market Polymarket.

"On rival site Predicitt, Harris now has a 57% chance of winning. As late as Friday, the site showed Trump as the favorite." (Source)

Clearly, the betting markets do not believe the Iowa Poll is an outlier. News of the poll produced an instant and vast shift in the bets.
 
Last edited:
ATeam

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Selzer Accuracy

From ChatGPT. Can be confirmed with other sources:

"In the 2004 presidential election, Ann Selzer's polling in Iowa projected John Kerry to perform well, aligning with the state's previous support for Democrats in presidential elections. However, despite Selzer's reputation for accuracy, George W. Bush ultimately won Iowa by a narrow margin of 0.67%, flipping the state from its 2000 Democratic preference under Al Gore. This deviation underscored the volatility of tight races in swing states like Iowa, although Selzer’s work still highlighted close competition effectively.

"Selzer’s reputation for reliability was reinforced in other instances, such as in the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections. Her 2016 Iowa poll, showing Donald Trump with a significant lead over Hillary Clinton, was considered an outlier at the time as most polls indicated a tighter race. Trump won the state by 9.4 points, validating her projection. Similarly, in 2020, her poll was the only one to show Trump ahead of Joe Biden by seven points in Iowa, accurately reflecting Trump’s eventual 8.2-point victory. These examples solidify her status as a pollster whose outlier results often prove accurate due to her methodical approach and minimal assumptions about the electorate."

Also note her methodology:

"The Selzer poll, conducted by Ann Selzer of Selzer & Company, is highly respected, especially for its accuracy in gauging Iowa's political landscape. Known for its reliability, the poll often gains attention due to its straightforward methodology and consistent accuracy in predicting outcomes in Iowa's caucuses and elections.

"Selzer's approach includes surveying all registered voters and screening them based on their likelihood to participate in events like caucuses. ...
Even today, the poll remains phone-based, despite many pollsters moving online for cost and reach."
 
muttly

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Panic move by Harris to appear on SNL?Look at how NBC gave Harris a free campaign contribution. No equal time for Trump.

IMG_1475.jpeg
 
muttly

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
They should give Trump airtime on Sunday Night Football broadcast.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1482.jpeg
    IMG_1482.jpeg
    501.6 KB · Views: 6
  • IMG_1489.jpeg
    IMG_1489.jpeg
    429.2 KB · Views: 5
Last edited:
ATeam

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Polls Adjusting their Methods After Gold-Standard Iowa Poll is Published

It appears a genuine movement is underway among pollsters to bring their data in line with the Iowa Poll. It's turning out she is not an outlier at all, just a leader with a superior methodology.

=============================================

1730685482677.png
1730686966784.png
Nathaniel Read Silver is an American statistician, writer, and poker player who analyzes baseball, basketball, and elections. He is the founder of FiveThirtyEight, and held the position of editor-in-chief there, along with being a special correspondent for ABC News, until May 2023.

1730688575523.png
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top