US election 2024

[Herman]

So does Trump. His campaign team does not.

Trump does better when mics are turned off when he's not speaking.

[Thiel]

Trump does better when mics are turned off when he's not speaking.

I hope the rules for the ABC debate are not changed.

[Shen Li]

I read on my Asian versions of Quora that the election not a lock for Hairyass. They are already getting ready to blame Russia if they lose.

[Brent]

The American University historian who has correctly predicted the outcomes of nine of the last ten presidential elections tells Fox News Digital that the Democrats "finally got smart" by rallying around Kamala Harris as their candidate – and that is one of the reasons why he thinks she will be November's winner.

The formula Allan Lichtman has used to correctly predict nearly every presidential race since 1984, his "Keys to the White House," was developed in 1981 with mathematician Vladimir Keilis-Borok and is based on their analysis of presidential elections dating back to 1860. The "keys" consist of 13 true or false questions, parameters that, if true, favor stability.

[JOE]

NYTimes/Sienna Poll says Trump and Harris are in a virtual tie with Trump leading by 1 point:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/08/us/politics/trump-and-harris-times-siena-poll.html

...However, Harris appears to be ahead in the Swing States

[JOE]

Why you upset with my last post...Lokmeer?!

It actually shows Trump slightly ahead in that poll.

He hasn't been out in front fer as long time...Bud!

Must be RFK Jr exiting outta the race that must have help him.

[Lab Flaker]

Why you upset with my last post...Lokmeer?!

It actually shows Trump slightly ahead in that poll.

He hasn't been out in front fer as long time...Bud!

Must be RFK Jr exiting outta the race that must have help him.

Shhhhhhhhhhh Joe...Trump is going to make a complete mockery of Harris! She's stupid after all. Duh??

[DKG]

A new nationwide poll indicated Sunday that Vice President Kamala Harris has lost her edge and may soon lose a great deal more.

The latest New York Times/Siena College poll asked nearly 1,700 registered voters between Sept. 3 and 6 whom they would vote for if the election were held today: 48% said they'd vote for President Donald Trump; 47% said Harris.

With minor candidates included, Trump has a two-point lead (48%-46%) over Harris.

Whereas only 12% of respondents said they needed to learn more about Trump, 31% said the same about Harris. 63% of respondents specified that they would like to know about her policies and plans.

While voters appear keen to know more about Harris' agenda, prominent Democrats have suggested in recent weeks that their candidate should continue to ignore the "nitty gritty" and focus instead on "vibes."

The Times' swing-state polling averages suggested the two candidates are now tied in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina. Harris supposedly has a three-point edge in Wisconsin, a two-point edge in Michigan, and a one-point lead in Pennsylvania.

Last week's YouGov/CBS News poll indicated that Harris and Trump were tied in Pennsylvania and that the Democrat had a two- and one-point lead in Wisconsin and Michigan, respectively.

The Times/Siena poll also acknowledged that Trump is more popular now than polling data suggested he was previously ahead of both the 2016 and 2020 elections. Overall, 46% of likely voters said they had a somewhat or very favorable view of Trump. By way of comparison, 45% of likely voters said the same of Harris.

Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung told Newsweek in a statement, "Polling shows President Trump is dominating both nationally and in the battleground states because voters want a return to pro-America policies that actually work, not the weak, failed, and dangerously liberal policies of Comrade Kamala."

The Times suggested the result was surprising because it is "the first lead for Mr. Trump in a major nonpartisan national survey in about a month."

[Biggie Smiles]

A new nationwide poll indicated Sunday that Vice President Kamala Harris has lost her edge and may soon lose a great deal more.

The latest New York Times/Siena College poll asked nearly 1,700 registered voters between Sept. 3 and 6 whom they would vote for if the election were held today: 48% said they'd vote for President Donald Trump; 47% said Harris.

With minor candidates included, Trump has a two-point lead (48%-46%) over Harris.

Whereas only 12% of respondents said they needed to learn more about Trump, 31% said the same about Harris. 63% of respondents specified that they would like to know about her policies and plans.

While voters appear keen to know more about Harris' agenda, prominent Democrats have suggested in recent weeks that their candidate should continue to ignore the "nitty gritty" and focus instead on "vibes."

The Times' swing-state polling averages suggested the two candidates are now tied in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina. Harris supposedly has a three-point edge in Wisconsin, a two-point edge in Michigan, and a one-point lead in Pennsylvania.

Last week's YouGov/CBS News poll indicated that Harris and Trump were tied in Pennsylvania and that the Democrat had a two- and one-point lead in Wisconsin and Michigan, respectively.

The Times/Siena poll also acknowledged that Trump is more popular now than polling data suggested he was previously ahead of both the 2016 and 2020 elections. Overall, 46% of likely voters said they had a somewhat or very favorable view of Trump. By way of comparison, 45% of likely voters said the same of Harris.

Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung told Newsweek in a statement, "Polling shows President Trump is dominating both nationally and in the battleground states because voters want a return to pro-America policies that actually work, not the weak, failed, and dangerously liberal policies of Comrade Kamala."

The Times suggested the result was surprising because it is "the first lead for Mr. Trump in a major nonpartisan national survey in about a month."

48% to 47% is still disturbing

47% of people are really this stupid?

[DKG]

48% to 47% is still disturbing

47% of people are really this stupid?

It is disturbing, I agree and so do some Democrats. Former Hillary Clinton adviser Mark Penn agrees, painting the problem with her support in the stark terms it demands: "No three debates. No two years of primaries, coalition building, no detailed policy development, and no daily press briefings. Or tests of leadership."

[Biggie Smiles]

It is disturbing, I agree and so do some Democrats. Former Hillary Clinton adviser Mark Penn agrees, painting the problem with her support in the stark terms it demands: "No three debates. No two years of primaries, coalition building, no detailed policy development, and no daily press briefings. Or tests of leadership."

YOu really have to wonder what has to happen to get those people to frown upon democrats

[DKG]

As the venerable Mark Hemingway writes in the Federalist, "Explaining yourself is the bare minimum of what stewarding democracy, nuclear weapons, and trillions of dollars demands, but Harris' handlers have decided that even doing that much is too risky."

[JOE]

48% to 47% is still disturbing

47% of people are really this stupid?

Harris is very weak on specifics.

And her unwillingness to be interviewed alone with a panel of journalists without Tim Walz at her side is baffling Biggie Smiles Bigly.

What is she afraid of?

How hard is that?!

What is she holding back?

Is she afraid that some journalist is gonna ask her if she knew about Biden's declining mental faculties and she covered up?

As the poll news story from the liberal NY Times pointed out her unwillingness to meet the press US already hurting her.

All she really has to do is provide some rehearsed canned answers.

If she can't or is unwilling to meet the press, even a friendly reporter from a liberal publication then her qualification for the job seems rather questionable.

[JOE]

Whether someone likes the Democrats or not, Tim Walz seems like he'd make a better President than Kamala Harris.

I suspect if they won he'd probably end up running the show for their team as the kinda de facto President.

This arrangement is actually quite common in many corporations where the VP runs the show and the President or CEO is just the PR person or figurehead. This may have been the case with Bush Cheney

[Brent]

As the venerable Mark Hemingway writes in the Federalist, "Explaining yourself is the bare minimum of what stewarding democracy, nuclear weapons, and trillions of dollars demands, but Harris' handlers have decided that even doing that much is too risky."

Just vote for her and she will come up with answers to those questions after she wins. Trust her, she will.