2024 U.S. Presidential General Election Thread

[ill_will82]

excellent interview. she handled herself remarkably well, with the poise and competency that all citizens should demand of the president.

i viewed this as a preview of the debate, and she didn’t disappoint.

the questions were awful, essentially boiled down to: how do you respond to this bad faith attack from trump and his supporters?

Kamala did what she needed to do in that interview. Now on to the debate.

 

[Payday23]

The same Bouzy who correctly predicted that their wasnt gonna be a red wave in 2022? Yall get on here, say anything and tell on yourselves

He's been correct once
at you playing the race card

 

[Ozymandeas]

Overhead some Hispanic at my job talmbout he's voting for Trump.

Cac he was talking to said "Really, weren't you born in El Salvador though? You're not scared"

Hispanic Breh gonna say "Not me. I'm good. I got my green card already"

SMH.

 

[Payday23]

you tell us just 6 weeks ago, you openly preferred an all-republican cabinet, because of fukking palestine

this is why no one takes progressives seriously how the fukk are you going from "i won't vote for biden", to crying about one republican in the cabinet? what kind of obscenely retarded set of principles is that?

You're rewarding a party that tried to overthrow the government. It's fukking retarded and yet the most democrat thing ever. The GOP is laughing at how weak the Dems are. Didn't Obama did the same stupid thing. Stop appeasing these mfers and step on their necks

 

[BigMoneyGrip]

Dana Bash got sent into the shadow realm, go home and be a family man Dana

 

[BigMoneyGrip]

This Nate Silver thing is exactly what I was frustrated about before. People don't like the message and so suddenly the experts are dumb and don't know what they are doing. It's very MAGA-adjacent.

The dude that has adjusting for bias and modeling around elections for +15 years is suddenly seen as a fraud because people don't like the message. He already has extensive articles on Rasmussen before in 2010 and generally around polling biases last year.

Come on y'all. We Dems are supposed to be the party of reason and data, not a circle-jerk that attacks polls we don't like.

2016 exposed him badly lmaoo it’s over bro let it go.. Nate is Flabby sauce

 

[I Really Mean It]

Dana Bash got sent into the shadow realm, go home and be a family man Dana

would have been nice if she mentioned how trump removed the pandemic response protocols obama established.

but, it was still a great answer.

 

[I Really Mean It]

This Nate Silver thing is exactly what I was frustrated about before. People don't like the message and so suddenly the experts are dumb and don't know what they are doing. It's very MAGA-adjacent.

The dude that has adjusting for bias and modeling around elections for +15 years is suddenly seen as a fraud because people don't like the message. He already has extensive articles on Rasmussen before in 2010 and generally around polling biases last year.

Come on y'all. We Dems are supposed to be the party of reason and data, not a circle-jerk that attacks polls we don't like.

shut up.

nate said he will adjust the model if we get a clearer picture of pennsylvania.

well, we got a clearer picture.

let’s see if he follows through on his word.

if he doesn’t, we know what time he’s on.

 

[Poetical Poltergeist]

Fake tweet

Spoiler

 

[the cac mamba]

You're rewarding a party that tried to overthrow the government.

no, you're appointing qualified individuals to jobs. and "reward" is doing a lot of work here; what policy are you worrying about being affected?

but you make a good point, i know that progressives prefer to choose the cabinet using important factors like sexual orientation

 

[the cac mamba]

the hell is this fake shyt

 

[Long Live The Kane]

You couldn’t get a poll to say 96% of people agree that water is wet now a days…so I know that’s fugazi

 

[Macallik86]

2016 exposed him badly lmaoo it’s over bro let it go.. Nate is Flabby sauce

Come on breh. As normal, you are responding based on how you feel instead of what the data shows.

In 2016, Democratic pollsters were writing thinkpieces around Nate Silver's polls because Nate was an outlier saying that Trump was ~7x more likely to win than other polls (5% vs 35%). In terms of polls/probabilities, that's a huge difference which is why it ruffled so many feathers... Here's a few quotes from a Democratic pollster trying to say Nate was giving Trump too much of a chance:

There is one outlier, however, that is causing waves of panic among Democrats around the country, and injecting Trump backers with the hope that their guy might pull this thing off after all. Nate Silver’s 538 model is giving Donald Trump a heart-stopping 35 percent chance of winning as of this weekend.

He ratcheted the panic up to 11 on Friday with his latest forecast, tweeting out, “Trump is about 3 points behind Clinton ― and 3-point polling errors happen pretty often.”

We’ll have to wait and see what happens. Maybe Silver will be right come Election Day ― Trump will win Florida, and we’ll all be in for a very long night. Or our forecast will be right, she’ll win nationally by 5 or 6, and we can all turn in early.

Here is what Silver said about Clinton having a 95% chance of victory (and therefore Trump having a 5% chance):

“The idea that she’s a prohibitive, 95 percent-plus favorite is hard to square with polling that has frequently shown 5- or 6-point swings within the span of a couple weeks, given that she only leads by 3 points or so now,” he told Politico recently. “[E]verything depends on one’s assumptions, but I think that our assumptions ― a Clinton lead, sure, but high uncertainty ― has repeatedly been validated by the evidence we’ve seen over the course of the past several months.”

Source:

Nate Silver Is Unskewing Polls -- All Of Them. Here's How.

The vaunted 538 election forecaster is putting his thumb on the scales.

www.huffpost.com

 

[taker597]

 

[taker597]