2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
Unfortunately, what the assassination attempt (the first one) told us is that using DEI to hire people can have tragic consequences, which we already knew on the right, and which the left still even in the face of a security disaster caused by DEI practices coming from the top doesn't want to admit so we didn't improve from the event the way we could have.
Secondo attempt seems to have been managed reasonably though
I assume by this logic that you'll be grateful to me if I rob your house for highlighting weaknesses in your home security system.
I assume by your logic you aren't aware of white hat hackers and why they are useful, nor you can imagine similar mechanisms existing in "real life".
Lmao. White hat hackers and pen testers are indistinguishable from (attempted) assassins and burglars and robbers now. Because you know, white hat hackers and pen testers are mostly known for stealing stuff and trying to kill people.
I see you decided to pick up today on the same note as you left off yesterday. Crack on.
that post would work if the Dem supporters werent doing that exact thing.
or worse, bc they were apoplectic the first guy missed bc they knew Biden would lose. now they dont care if he gets shot bc they think Kamala will win.
You are not describing my reaction to either attempt. In fact, I had quite the opposite reaction and made that clear.
Lmao. White hat hackers and pen testers are indistinguishable from (attempted) assassins and burglars and robbers now.
This. Obviously.
As an aside, I knew that my post would elicit a ludicrous comparison to white hat hackers. I should have made that prediction on the record so that I could earn some Nostradamus points.
You are not describing my reaction to either attempt. In fact, I had quite the opposite reaction and made that clear.
most either dont care that he was shot at or wanted a different outcome.
at the very least I would guess that every one of them except you would be much more appalled and outraged at an attempt on Kamala. thats fine and all but I just point out their hypocrisy.
Not quite spiraling.
Yesterday it was 58 out of 100 at 538.com
Today there was a Likely Voter (LV) ipsos poll that came out with Harris ahead by 6%. Its the same as the last ipsos poll... There were two other LV polls that had Kamala ahead by 4% where prior polls by the same pollster were at 3%.
So some progress, but toss up states are still toss ups...
Well now its gone up another point to 61 out of 100. So that would be 7 points in 6 days.
An LV poll ending 9/15 had Kamala up by about 7.25%. But Big Village (the pollster) had a prior poll at 7% and one at a few points lower.
Swing state polls are still fuzzy. PA recent polls are basically an actual toss up. MI getting close to even as well. Other states though are looking good for Kamala. MN, NH, NM, VA now look out of reach for Trump. IA and AK look ridiculously close (4% and 5% respectively) but still unlikely. And FL also seems almost reachable (but Trump would have to lose ground). GA and NC are not improving and have gone slightly in Trump's favor recently, while NV seems to be slightly in Kamala's favor.
Just so you know, Nate Silver currently has it at about 59.2% for trump.
Well now its gone up another point to 61 out of 100. So that would be 7 points in 6 days.
An LV poll ending 9/15 had Kamala up by about 7.25%. But Big Village (the pollster) had a prior poll at 7% and one at a few points lower.
Swing state polls are still fuzzy. PA recent polls are basically an actual toss up. MI getting close to even as well. Other states though are looking good for Kamala. MN, NH, NM, VA now look out of reach for Trump. IA and AK look ridiculously close (4% and 5% respe
A good quality PA poll with Harris +3 just came out, that should improve harris chances in most models significantly
most either dont care that he was shot at or wanted a different outcome.
at the very least I would guess that every one of them except you would be much more appalled and outraged at an attempt on Kamala. thats fine and all but I just point out their hypocrisy.
Here is what I said after the first assassination attempt:
This is a negative for the country even if you believe both Trump and Biden are unfit to be president.
This isn't complicated for me. I don't want to normalize violence directed at presidential candidates, regardless of what effect the violence may have on an imminent election.
This isn't complicated for me. I don't want to normalize violence directed at presidential candidates, regardless of what effect the violence may have on an imminent election.
I don't think anyone is normalizing violence toward presidential candidates. What we don't know though is how often in the present and in the past attempts haven't been made because security was tight enough.
We don't even know if things are worse these days (in the potential, threat sense) than in the past, which could be true, but maybe there were always people willing to try to kill candidates, but they didn't manage to get close enough , or they scouted areas and saw no options available.
Or not, but basically we have no idea of the trend or lack thereof.
I don't think anyone is normalizing violence toward presidential candidates. What we don't know though is how often in the present and in the past attempts haven't been made because security was tight enough.
We don't even know if things are worse these days (in the potential, threat sense) than in the past, which could be true, but maybe there were always people willing to try to kill candidates, but they didn't manage to get close enough , or they scouted areas and saw no options available.
Or n
I was referring to what the public reaction should be.
I'm sure that security is much more sophisticated than it was a fifty or a hundred years ago. But our guns are better and more numerous now, and our baseline level of crazy may be higher now, which makes it hard to compare risk in different generations. I would guess that you are safer as a presidential candidate now than you would have been in 1920, but I'm certainly not an expert.
A good quality PA poll with Harris +3 just came out, that should improve Harris chances in most models significantly
That Likely Voter (LV) Heads Up (HU) poll was from Morning Consult which ended 9/8 and whose prior poll (ending 8/26) was also at 3% for Harris.
A day after that poll was taken (9/9) Redfield & Wilton came out with a LV HU poll that was even (they hadn't done a PA poll before) and the two days prior (9/6) there were two polls: co/efficient (also first PA poll) had a LV HU poll where Trump was up by 2% and YouGov (also first PA poll) had a LV HU poll that was even at 50% to 50%...
The only other September poll (which ended 9/3) had Trump ahead by 1% but it was a Registered Voter (RV) HU poll.
in PA 538.com has Kamala up by 0.6% (more or less the same as it has been since about 9/4 and Nate Silver has her up by 0.2% which is close to what it's been since about 9/8 (when it was Kamala by 0.3%).
When I look at weekly averages the LV HU 7 day avg is even, 14 day avg is Kamala by 0.3% and 21 day avg is Trump by 0.3%. In RV HU polling the 7,14, and 21 day averages are literally exactly even. (I edited this because my prior comments were based on 9/15 data and I updated it to 9/17...)
There hasn't been a poll in PA for over a week so it will be interesting to see what happens...
That Likely Voter (LV) Heads Up (HU) poll was from Morning Consult which ended 9/8 and whose prior poll (ending 8/26) was also at 3% for Harris.
A day after that poll was taken (9/9) Redfield & Wilton came out with a LV HU poll that was even (they hadn't done a PA poll before) and the two days prior (9/6) there were two polls: co/efficient (also first PA poll) had a LV HU poll where Trump was up by 2% and YouGov (also first PA poll) had a LV HU poll that was even at 50% to 50%...
The only other S
I am referring to this, not sure if you had it already or not
Suffolk/USA TODAY PA Likely Voter Polls
Statewide and 2 BW Counties:
Statewide - KH 49, DT 46, Others 1, Und 5
Erie - KH 48, DT 44, Others 3, Und 5
Northampton - KH 50, DT 45, Others 1, Und 4
All 3 polls show huge gender advantage for KH
KH winning Northampton Hispanics 60-25
1:59 AM · Sep 17, 2024
·
1.9M
Views
Sept 11 to 15 if i read correctly
I am referring to this, not sure if you had it already or not
Suffolk/USA TODAY PA Likely Voter Polls
Statewide and 2 BW Counties:
Statewide - KH 49, DT 46, Others 1, Und 5
Erie - KH 48, DT 44, Others 3, Und 5
Northampton - KH 50, DT 45, Others 1, Und 4
All 3 polls show huge gender advantage for KH
KH winning Northampton Hispanics 60-25
1:59 AM · Sep 17, 2024
·
1.9M
Views
Sept 11 to 15 if i read correctly
I have not seen that poll so this will make a difference in PA (as you noted). My guess is 538.com will jump to about 1% Kamala but I hope I'm wrong and its more...
It is also Suffolk/USA Today's first PA poll.
I am referring to this, not sure if you had it already or not
Suffolk/USA TODAY PA Likely Voter Polls
Statewide and 2 BW Counties:
Statewide - KH 49, DT 46, Others 1, Und 5
Erie - KH 48, DT 44, Others 3, Und 5
Northampton - KH 50, DT 45, Others 1, Und 4
All 3 polls show huge gender advantage for KH
KH winning Northampton Hispanics 60-25
1:59 AM · Sep 17, 2024
·
1.9M
Views
Sept 11 to 15 if i read correctly
I have not seen that poll so this will make a difference in PA (as you noted). My guess is 538.com will jump to about 1% Kamala but I hope I'm wrong and its more...
It is also Suffolk/USA Today's first PA poll.
The PA polls have just been updated at 538.com and while the 3% Kamala lead in the Suffolk LV MultiCandidate (MC) poll was significant, there was a LV HU poll the next day by Insider Advantage that has Trump up by 2%. Now this is Insider Advantage's 2nd PA poll and their last one was Trump ahead by 1%.
538.com increased Kamala's lead in PA by 0.1% to 0.7% overall. For now.
The other thing that is happening is that National Polls have been substantially increasing for Kamala. The LV HU weekly average is now 3.9%, 2 weeks is 3.4% and 3 weeks is 3.1%. So that may also slightly affect 538.com's PA standing at the end of the day.
most either dont care that he was shot at or wanted a different outcome.
at the very least I would guess that every one of them except you would be much more appalled and outraged at an attempt on Kamala. thats fine and all but I just point out their hypocrisy.
Dem supporter here. Any assassination is bad, obviously, but I think Trump being assassinated would ultimately be worse for the country than Kamala because it would massively stoke the fires of right wing conspiracy theories that have already become somewhat mainstream.
Yeah. I'm not bothered that someone I consider a terrible person and an existential threat was almost shot, so apparently I also shouldn't be bothered if his opponent is almost shot. Because that's how logic works when you are a very smart person.
lol existential threat. I got some news for you, Trump was already president once.
I want some government I am not an anarchist, I am what these days is called a minarchist, but can also be called a Classic liberal.
as I said more than once, I want the count of government which was common in late 19th century in the USA or Australia.
btw an oligarchy will always happen no matter the orga izational system, it's an inherent byproduct of pyramidal hierarchy which is an unavoidable element of all complex societies.
a few people will always have a disastrously large influence in socie
Not really sure how to respond to this beyond... ya, ok. I think pretty much everyone understands this. That's kind of the whole point of democracy, homie. To put a check on centralized wealth, which the wealthy have fought at every step of countries becoming democratized. The wealthy hate democracy.
Now take it one step farther, and you're almost there. Ask yourself again, why do Republican talking points align so closely w/ with how to limit democracy, and government in general?
You can do it.
And just so there's no confusion. Democrats have plenty of people bought off as well, but they are the only opposition party to no holds barred oligarchy. What you're seeing happen right now in America didn't happen overnight. It happened from decades of think tank apparatuses, grooming of judges from early law school on, aimed at allowing the free flow of money into politics, via rulings like Citizens united, Buckley vs Velejo, McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, etc... removing regulations and allowing for consolidation of industries to remove competition.
They don't want democracy. The "deep state" came out of those think tanks, like the Heritage foundation, Cato institute, etc... and their media networks. Democracy is pointless if there's a deep state that doesn't play by the rules. You obviously can't remove it via the levers of democracy, so democracy has to be thrown out.
That's where we're at.
That's kind of the whole point of democracy, homie. To put a check on centralized wealth, which the wealthy have fought at every step of countries becoming democratized. The wealthy hate democracy.
gonna have to ask you to show your work on this one, perhaps even start a new thread so it doesn't take this one too far off topic
but nothing i've seen would ever confirm that to be true and most examples of mine even counter it
the founding fathers themselves were all insanely wealthy people
gonna have to ask you to show your work on this one, perhaps even start a new thread so it doesn't take this one too far off topic
but nothing i've seen would ever confirm that to be true and most examples of mine even counter it
the founding fathers themselves were all insanely wealthy people
Just to be clear, I'm not saying all wealthy people. But nearly all do. The founding fathers were mostly against democracy. This was a huge point of contention. Just read some of the Federalist papers, especially by Madison. Haven't you watched Hamilton? 😉 What do you think the compromises were to ensure that wealthy landowners still had mostly had the greatest say? Hint, hint... it's a big topic today.
I don't think this needs it's own topic. It honestly really should be common sense if you just listen to what these people are asking for. All you have to do is read any proposed legislation by ALEC, and ask yourself... who benefits, what's the short term and long term goal of this proposed legislation?
It's not difficult to sleuth through this. What do most people w/ insane amounts of wealth want?
