2024 US Presidential Elections Megathread

[Gups]

https://x.com/SimonWDC/status/1818759591792177619

Harris leads in 7 new natl polls:
49%-45% (+4) Civiqs
49%-46% (+3) Leger (was +7 Trump)
48%-46% (+2) FAU (was +5 Trump)
46%-44% (+2) Econ/YouGov (was +3 Trump)
45%-43% (+2) Redfield/Wilton
44%-42% (+2) Angus Reid
47%-46% (+1) Morn Consult

Is that all of the polls issued or just the 7 that Harris is leading?

[Josquius]

It does seem she's leading the popular vote overall but most I've seen still put trump as favourite within the system.

[crazy canuck]

That was a perfect interview. Maybe the best ever.

The Daily Show's take

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C-HBHylNZzr/?igsh=YnI2Z2RnY2NrOGZx

[Barrister]

It does seem she's leading the popular vote overall but most I've seen still put trump as favourite within the system.

Yes, but it's close.

Betting odds - 51.6% Trump, 43.6% Harris.

https://www.realclearpolling.com/betting-odds/2024/president

Nate Silver is saying it's a toss-up.

https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model

The main point being - two weeks ago Trump was cruising to an easy victory.  Now, Trump is rattled, the comparison between Harris and Trump looks way more favourable, so who knows what'll happen.

[Tamas]

Probably it's my 2016 PTSD coming out again, but what's your take on the new Democrat "smear" on Trump and Vance, i.e. "weird"? Can't it fire back because it gives the same dismissive "we've already won this" impression that Hillary had in '16?

[crazy canuck]

I think it has been very effective.  It seeks to target Trump, not the people who support him.  The Dems are not making the mistake they made in 16

[Sophie Scholl]

I think the closest comparison is Hillary's "deplorables" comment. That was aimed at the people who vote for Trump, though and was a disaster. The "weird" comments are directed only at those at the top and I think it is working a heck of a lot better. Trump and his ilk rallied around "deplorables" but they are absolutely panicking at "weird".

[grumbler]

Probably it's my 2016 PTSD coming out again, but what's your take on the new Democrat "smear" on Trump and Vance, i.e. "weird"? Can't it fire back because it gives the same dismissive "we've already won this" impression that Hillary had in '16?

I'm not sure hot it gives off a "we've already won this" vibe.  The advantage of the "weird" campaign is that it primes voters to look for weird things in what Trump and Vance say, making it harder for supporters to hide the insanity behind the bullshit.  Trump and Vance DO say lots of weird shit, but haven't paid the proper penalty for that until now.

[Tamas]

Fair, good points.

[Norgy]

So, it will be another Scorsese movie, then. "The Last Walz".

[Syt]

So, it will be another Scorsese movie, then. "The Last Walz".

And if Trump wins it'll be a Last Tango. "Get the butter."

[Norgy]

So, it will be another Scorsese movie, then. "The Last Walz".

And if Trump wins it'll be a Last Tango. "Get the butter."

 

The rape seed oil.

[Valmy]

I think the closest comparison is Hillary's "deplorables" comment. That was aimed at the people who vote for Trump, though and was a disaster. The "weird" comments are directed only at those at the top and I think it is working a heck of a lot better. Trump and his ilk rallied around "deplorables" but they are absolutely panicking at "weird".

Yeah. Shockingly attacking the voters is a bad move in Presidential Elections.

What was most head smacking about that Hillary comment was the Romney had destroyed his campaign by calling American voters "takers" just four years before.

[Josquius]

I dunno. I'd rather be called weird than deplorable. A lot of positive stuff can be spun out of that. A surprise it is working.

[Valmy]

I dunno. I'd rather be called weird than deplorable. A lot of positive stuff can be spun out of that. A surprise it is working.

Trump was not called deplorable. And Trump and Vance are weird, that is why it is sticking.