POTUS 2024 - Harris vs Trump - General Election Discussion

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

Curious what metrics it uses to measure stress?

Was going to ask that myself. What metrics & device?

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

Curious what metrics it uses to measure stress?

I have no clue. The explanation on the app is pretty vague, only really describing it as the "physical and mental response to maintaining internal activities and responding to external stimuli. The greater the activity exertion, the greater the stress."

It's a Coros Pace 3. Great (and cheap) running watch.

[nickelback]

Good morning my fellow Americans. It’s going to be a glorious day! We are finally unburdened by what has been.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

God I want to go MJ4H on this whole country

That was a funny but pretty weird week or two. Hope he is doing okay.

[GrantDawg]

Watery tart





[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Yep. At this point, to cut our losses, let him continue to enrich himself and family members since he's already blown through all the guardrails on that the first time through, no longer face criminal charges, and hope he leaves the structure of the government intact.

Yeah, that last one is one of my worries, working for a government entity. Will it exist in a year? If it does, will I still be there? Who knows?

[Ksyrup]

Better start studying for the loyalty test! I can only hope "the weave" was more about stream of consciousness campaign BS than an actual plan.

[wustin]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Early analysis of Trump's base vs 2020

Access Denied


The last two surprised me.

Trump's campaign included a bunch of male influencers who have large and engaging young (white) male demographic. Kamala appeared on a Twitch stream and pretended to play video games. Appeared on an NBA basketball podcast whose demographic historically is apathetic to politics.

[bhlloy]

I was wondering at the time if the last minute Rogan podcast was perfect timing or too late given that some of these states aren’t exactly last minute friendly, but I’m guessing those numbers are at least partly a vindication of the approach.

The Latino shift should have been obvious the second Miami-Dade came through. The shift in the Latino and Black vote especially will keep Dems up at night for a very long time.

[HerRealName]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

The Latino shift should have been obvious the second Miami-Dade came through. The shift in the Latino and Black vote especially will keep Dems up at night for a very long time.

It shouldn't since they were focused on suburban white women.

[albionmoonlight]

As more demographic numbers roll in, I'm not sure that there's anything the Dems could have done. The anti-incumbency wave was just too strong. Any R was almost certain to beat any D.

Also, no President in the history of ever will ever again pull us out of a war. Turns out Bush, Obama, and Trump knew what they were doing always "working" to get us out of Afghanistan without actually doing it.

And depressions/recessions bother Americans less than inflation.

[cuervo72]

Democrats should not spend their time placing blame on Harris or her team. People have to accept a big chunk of the country clearly wants to eat junk food and has no interest in the salad bar.

— The Civil Liberal (@cfthepodcast) November 6, 2024

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

As more demographic numbers roll in, I'm not sure that there's anything the Dems could have done. The anti-incumbency wave was just too strong. Any R was almost certain to beat any D.

Maybe, but given a total once in a lifetime mulligan I’m not sure picking the VP who was infinitely more unpopular than the President was for most of the 4 years and tied specifically to a perceived failure on many peoples #1 hot button topic was the right choice either.

[Ghost Econ]

Am I the only one who's been waiting for the Latino shift? The demographic has historically been pretty conservative and the main holdup seemed to be that Conservatives lumped them all in as illegal.

To an extent conservatives still do, but this latest generation of latinos really seems to grab onto the idea that they got theirs, so they're fine with keeping those "others" from trying to take it.

[Ksyrup]

Obviously, there are a lot of decisions and inflection points that could have been handled differently. To albionmoonlight's point, though, it's impossible to know if any of them would have made a difference. I do think, to the extent it might have mattered, the Dems continuing to play by the old political rulebook while the GOP has long since discarded the old guard politics (and the people who subscribe to them), killed them.

What I mean by that is waiting way too long to handle the Biden Problem. There should have been a movement in place a year into his presidency to transition him aside. Even if he wasn't showing obvious signs of aging, we knew Trump was going to be the GOP nominee, so make his age/mental health the issue from the start and have the Dem voters choose a younger person to run that they feel some buy-in with. But no, in politics, the incumbent always gets to run largely unopposed. "That's just the way it is."

And then, to the point of Harris courting centrist voters with Cheney, I don't know if not doing that and moving further left would have helped. Honestly, I think she/they were screwed either way. But the Cheney thing, again, smacks of some naive politics of old where the PTB convinced themselves that the core American wants to see compromise and compassion/understanding, and if we show Dems and GOPers in a kumbaya moment, we're going to get all of the "normies" out to vote for a return to that kind of politics. And it flopped. It flopped because (a) most people are drifting to the extremes, on one or many issues, and (b) the only people the Cheney thing really impressed were the people who were already going to vote for Harris across the aisle. It didn't move the needle. I don't know if it actively hurt/turned off undecided voters, but it was a campaign choice that absolutely did not pay off.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Obviously, there are a lot of decisions and inflection points that could have been handled differently. To albionmoonlight's point, though, it's impossible to know if any of them would have made a difference. I do think, to the extent it might have mattered, the Dems continuing to play by the old political rulebook while the GOP has long since discarded the old guard politics (and the people who subscribe to them), killed them.

A few years ago I started reading Obama's most recent book, which is more-or-less a memoir of his political career.

I got up to the point where he was discussing the ACA fight and he remarks that it became very clear to him that the Republicans had absolutely no interest in actually negotiating or playing by the rules. But did he do anything about it? No.

This was the point where I put the book down and haven't picked it up since.

It's been 16 years but it turns out Sarah Palin was correct, the "hopey, changey thing" isn't really working out for me.

Every Democratic politician who still thinks it's most important to preserve decorum and play by the (political) rules, and that the "correctness" of their policies will win out in the long run and Republicans will return to normal needs to be thrown out of politics and replaced by people who actually believe in something and will fight for it.

Even then, it probably changes nothing. This is a right-wing country comprised mainly of poorly educated and self-interested people who probably aren't interested in those policies anyway.

[wustin]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

I was wondering at the time if the last minute Rogan podcast was perfect timing or too late given that some of these states aren’t exactly last minute friendly, but I’m guessing those numbers are at least partly a vindication of the approach.

The Latino shift should have been obvious the second Miami-Dade came through. The shift in the Latino and Black vote especially will keep Dems up at night for a very long time.

Not only Joe Rogan. xQC campaigned with Trump. Aiden Ross had him on his stream thanks to Barron. They have viewership that regularly donates to them gobs of money. It is an incredibly engaging demographic.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

As more demographic numbers roll in, I'm not sure that there's anything the Dems could have done. The anti-incumbency wave was just too strong. Any R was almost certain to beat any D.

I don't buy that. Trump is running ahead of a lot of downballot Republicans (senate races in Michigan and Pennsylvania to name just a couple of examples).

I think this was a tough but winnable election for the Democrats, in terms of the Presidency. It looks like turnout is going to end up being similar to 2020, but Harris will be somewhere in the vicinity of 6 million or so votes shy of what Biden got.

I want to see the transition letter Biden leaves for Trump. Maybe he can read it in the farewell address. What does he say? "Have fun, I kept the seat warm for you"? "Die in a fire"?

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Even then, it probably changes nothing. This is a right-wing country comprised mainly of poorly educated and self-interested people who probably aren't interested in those policies anyway.

That's why I'm not convinced Harris or anyone else running a far-left campaign fares any better. Harris took a reasonable path (IMO) to court a fairly large right-center group of Americans who they thought either wouldn't vote for Trump or could be persuaded to cross the aisle, and it absolutely failed.

I posted about this in the other thread - Trump basically treaded water by sheer numberof voters compared to 2020. He was down just under 4% (3M voters). But 2020 was an historic turnout year, I think largely due to Covid and opening up voting options, as well as Trump recency bias. She lost 15M Biden voters. The numbers suggest the vast majority of them just didn't vote. Would a left turn have increased her totals by 10M? Doubtful.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

As more demographic numbers roll in, I'm not sure that there's anything the Dems could have done. The anti-incumbency wave was just too strong. Any R was almost certain to beat any D.

It was an uphill battle, but not an impossible one. Barack Obama or Bill Clinton in their primes probably could have pulled it off this year. When you hastily anoint a replacement candidate three months before an election, and who only four years ago dropped out of her own party's primary after finishing with single digit support in the primaries, in retrospect we shouldn't be too surprised at the outcome.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

I think this was a tough but winnable election for the Democrats, in terms of the Presidency. It looks like turnout is going to end up being similar to 2020, but Harris will be somewhere in the vicinity of 6 million or so votes shy of what Biden got.

What numbers are you looking at? Sure, there are numbers left to report, but I don't think that many more. I'm seeing 71M to 66M (Trump to Harris). That's significantly below 2020 (81M Biden to 74M Trump).

[JPhillips]

Nearly half of voters thought Harris was too liberal and only a third thought Trump was too conservative.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by KSyrup

What numbers are you looking at? Sure, there are numbers left to report, but I don't think that many more. I'm seeing 71M to 66M (Trump to Harris). That's significantly below 2020 (81M Biden to 74M Trump).

The current estimates I'm seeing are that 89% of the vote is in to give those numbers. If you extrapolate that proportionally, it ends up around 80M Trump, 74.5M Harris.

Edit: Just as one example, less than 60% of California is in. The % will shift toward Harris when all of that is counted, but there are probably close to 7 million total votes from that alone outstanding.

[larrymcg421]

Why would you extrapolate it proportionally like that? Only 58% of the California vote is in so far.

[Brian Swartz]

Because we were talking primarily about the total vote numbers/turnout, not what % each candidate gets.

[wustin]

Speaking of the devil, Aiden Ross said he is going to stream with Trump in the White House.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Ghost Econ

Also, the only shot the Dems have from current candidates are Mark Kelly, Beshear and Shapiro... and honestly it's probably just Kelly. If the climate is even remotely similar, the Dems cant win with a woman or minority at the top of the ticket.

Their most successful campaigner in maybe the last century is a black man.

[RainMaker]

Did the Tel Aviv vote come in overnight? Were there enough EC points from Israel to push her ahead?

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Did the Tel Aviv vote come in overnight? Were there enough EC points from Israel to push her ahead?

Israel/Gaza had zero affect on the outcome of this election.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Did the Tel Aviv vote come in overnight? Were there enough EC points from Israel to push her ahead?

Nobody cares man. Nobody. The people who didn't vote for her didn't give two shits about it.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Did the Tel Aviv vote come in overnight? Were there enough EC points from Israel to push her ahead?

I hope the fine people of Dearborn will be happy when Bibi turns gaza to glass and Trump deports them.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Israel/Gaza had zero affect on the outcome of this election.

Wrong again

"The Trump campaign’s research found that up-for-grabs voters were about six times as likely as other battleground-state voters to be motivated by their views of Israel’s war in Gaza." This is why Trump/Vance ramped up anti-war rhetoric in last few weeks of campaign…

— Jeet Heer (@HeerJeet) November 6, 2024

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

Nobody cares man. Nobody. The people who didn't vote for her didn't give two shits about it.

The base didn't show up. Maybe running on things that were abhorrent to most of the base was a reason for that.

You ran as diet Republicans at the expense of your base and the Republicans decided they'd just vote for the real thing.

[PilotMan]

That doesn't mean anything.



.24 is 6x as likely as .04.



That didn't swing the vote.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I hope the fine people of Dearborn will be happy when Bibi turns gaza to glass and Trump deports them.

Gaza is already destroyed man. There isn't much left you could do to them. Sorry it didn't engage the base.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The base didn't show up. Maybe running on things that were abhorrent to most of the base was a reason for that.

You ran as diet Republicans at the expense of your base and the Republicans decided they'd just vote for the real thing.

Yes, nothing else mattered except the things that the dems got wrong. There was literally nothing else. It was the only data point, and if that one thing had been different, it would have changed everything.



The base did show up. The ones who didn't were the people in the middle who didn't care anymore. The base always shows up. That's why we call it the base.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

That doesn't mean anything.

.24 is 6x as likely as .04.

That didn't swing the vote.

The base not showing up is what swung the vote. Maybe an ethnic cleansing is not the vote driver you thought. Back to the drawing board.

[PilotMan]

Tired of beating that dead horse yet? You're literally the only person calling it that. I'm happy the world is connected nicely for you and you can see all the lines that join each and every thing so you can know these things. I don't know where we'd be without it.

[albionmoonlight]

If the election had been close, I'd buy into the idea that if Harris had done [this one thing] differently, it would have mattered.

With the benefit of hindsight, not much mattered. The majority of voters voted for what they wanted and they got it.

A theoretically perfect message on [issue A] or [issue B] might have given her a quarter point extra? Would not have mattered.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

If the election had been close, I'd buy into the idea that if Harris had done [this one thing] differently, it would have mattered.

With the benefit of hindsight, not much mattered. The majority of voters voted for what they wanted and they got it.

A theoretically perfect message on [issue A] or [issue B] might have given her a quarter point extra? Would not have mattered.

I agree with this. Seeing the end result, it was not close and ultimately people really did want Trump and got what they wanted.

And Rainmaker just doesnt want to be right, you know he is secretly delighted Trump won as he fights the good fight posting to a message board with fewer than 100 regular users as he helps all the people he talks about.

[RainMaker]

Trump's vote total will largely be the same as 2020 (maybe even down a but). The difference is the Democrats didn't come out and vote for Harris. I would think running as a Republican would do that but I'm sure it's just magic as you all seem to think. No way they could have changed messaging or policy to get more votes.

Biden/Harris saw this polling and decided to keep unconditionally arming Israel pic.twitter.com/uE6StTH1kc

— delaney (@delaney_nolan) November 6, 2024

[Kodos]

Can we all just agree to put RainMaker on ignore? I don't currently have anyone on mine, but I think that it is time for a change. The only way to be rid of him is not to feed him.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The base not showing up is what swung the vote. Maybe an ethnic cleansing is not the vote driver you thought. Back to the drawing board.

Bro, everyone you said the Democrats should've nominated instead of Harris was even more pro-Israel.

[Swaggs]

Earlier in the thread, I had mentioned my county as a potential bellwether, and it ended up pretty much doing it - just not in the way I expected.

Trump got almost the same amount of votes: 20,984 in 2024 (20,803 in 2020)
vs
19,160 for Harris, while Biden got 20,282 in 2020.

I think that is consistent across the country, where Trump got his share and Dems didn't vote and the crossover Republicans and Independents didn't materialize.

Dems need to look at understanding how all the supposed GOTV apparatus failed, despite having so many resources. To me, it sound like they are still working in an old school retail/door-to-door politics world while the GOP has moved much better into digital and targeted advertising that really swayed how voters felt. That's my biggest takeaway.

The questions I have are whether all of the voter suppression tactics that we have heard about worked pretty much as expected and whether it is is just as simple as Americans still having a really hard time seeing a woman as commander in chief. I think there are hundreds of other factors (messaging, urban vs suburban vs rural, minority vote not being taken for granted), but those two are the most interesting for me.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Bro, everyone you said the Democrats should've nominated instead of Harris was even more pro-Israel.

Yeah it's almost like the party has an issue there. Maybe they shouldn't be taking so much money from a genocidal far-right government that goes against the supposed values of your party and voters.

And yes, I think other candidates would have done better than the lady who polled behind Andrew Yang in 2020 and was part of the administration of an incredibly unpopular President. Kind of a reason primaries are important. Oops.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Kind of a reason primaries are important. Oops.

This is 100% in the party for not holding Biden to his 1 term promise, then forcing him out sooner when it was clear he was mentally unfit. So they have to wear it and not having a primary is why we are here.

The irony is Trump is on a noticeable decline and will be like Biden with a year IMO. I also don't see him living out his full term, which means we get Vance.

[Danny]

I think the other candidates would have done better for sure. But thats 99% because of their gender and not being so closely tied to Biden, and not ablut policy. The lack of a primary and Biden holding absolutely doomed the election as it turns out. But I dont think any position Kamala would have taken would have changed things.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

This is 100% in the party for not holding Biden to his 1 term promise, then forcing him out sooner when it was clear he was mentally unfit. So they have to wear it and not having a primary is why we are here.

The irony is Trump is on a noticeable decline and will be like Biden with a year IMO. I also don't see him living out his full term, which means we get Vance.

They would have won if they held a primary. Not only allowed voters to pick who they like best but also which campaign was run the best. Having the Biden folks running Kamala's campaign was a disaster.

[Danny]

I think its time to face it that this country is too misogynistic to elect a female president.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Danny

But I dont think any position Kamala would have taken would have changed things.

This is why Dems lose. The idea that it's never the candidates fault and always outside forces. Not a single lesson learned from 2016.