2024 ELECTION THREAD

he's a one man human centipede?

This one?

Funny how the actual claim that was made was a lot more couched than the one that you said that she said… which is exactly why I don’t trust you in interpreting science because you disregard the epistemic modesty that scientists tend to have in practice.

lol it was a false claim without caveats

On an individual basis? Always.

I find this topic interesting because I kind of agree. There are biological markers for sex, and when it comes to gender expression, it seems there are also biological markers that play into that. However, if there is a spectrum, it still seems to be rooted in biology. If that's true, we should try to specify the traits that define each end.

I give a **** about you, whether you like it or not.

it literally had caveats in there “the data suggests”

maybe you just can’t read english well, which is fine, you’re bilingual (multilingual?) so wouldn’t expect you to have strong english language skills

Coordi, any movement on your assessment that this guy is smart?

1 day away. This is my analysis of the last 3 weeks and 538.com and Nate Silver (NS) current status. My analysis only includes the latest Likely Voter (LV) poll for all pollsters. I also count a Multi-Candidate (MC) poll over a HeadsUp (HU) poll by any pollster on the same date. Because of the extremely right leaning polls by Rebublican paid pollsters I do a correction to the left for all states but GA. For some reason in GA the Red pollsters are actually slightly to the left of everyone else...

So here we go for 2024 in the swing states:

AZ: I have Kamala trailing by 1.7% (3.3% Un) 538 is at -2.2% and NS is at -2.4% (with only 2% Un). 5 of 26 polls are by Rep paid pollsters all with Trump winning.

GA: I have Kamala trailing by 1.2% (3.1% Un), 538 is at -1.3% and NS is at -1.2%. 5 of 22 polls are by Rep paid pollsters (now we have 1 tie and 1 with Kamala winning by close to 1%). Kamala has gained 1.5% since 10/21 so momentum has shifted radically. Recently published polls shifted Kamala +0.5% since what I reported yesterday...

MI: I have Kamala up by 2.4% (3.8% Un), 538 is at 1% and NS is at 1.2%. I would have been at 2% without adjustments. 4 of 30 polls are by Rep paid pollsters (now 3 ties and Atlas Intel at -2%). There was a Kamala shift after 10/21 but recently its back down to where it was before. Recently published polls shifted Kamala +0.5% since what I reported yesterday (like in GA)...

NC: I have Kamala trailing by 1% (2.7% Un), 538 is at -0.9% and NS is at -1.1%. I would have been at -1.3% without adjustments. 4 of 20 polls are by Rep paid pollsters (all with Trump ahead). Only NYT and CNN have Kamala ahead. Kamala has lost some ground since 10/21 with momentum looking like it is going against her.

NV: I have Kamala up by 0.1% (4.2% Un), 538 is at -0.3% and NS is at -0.4%. I would have been at -0.2% without adjustments. 5 of 18 polls are by Rep paid pollsters (2 ties and the others have Trump winning now only by 3%). Other pollsters: 6 have Kamala leading and 3 have Trump leading with 4 ties. Its about the same as 10/21 with now only one pollster thinking Trump will win big by 6% and one with Kamala winning by 4%.

PA: I have Kamala up by 0.5% (3% Un), 538 has Trump up by 0.2% and NS has Trump up by 0.3%. I have Kamala ahead by 0.2% without adjustments. 7 of 33 polls are by Rep paid pollsters (Trump up in 5 with 3 by 2% and 2 by 1%, with 1 tie and 1 with Kamala up by 2%). Other pollsters: 6 have Trump winning (5 by 1% and 1 by 5%), 7 ties, and 13 between 1% and 3% Kamala leads. Kamala has dropped about 0.5% since 10/21 but has gone up a little the last few days. Looks to me like it will be very very close. This is unlike 2020 because a few people will get this right or everyone will be wrong if the winner is by more than 3%. If it is close to a tie then almost everyone will have gotten very close.

WI: I have Kamala up by 1.6% (3.3% Un), 538 is at 0.9% and NS is at 1%. I would have been at 1.2% without adjustments. 6 of 27 polls are by Rep paid pollsters (4 Trump up by 1%, 2 Kamala by 1%) Other pollsters: 2 have Trump up <=1%, 6 ties, and 13 have Kamala up between 1% and 6%. I have Kamala gaining about 1% since 10/21 (very recent polls have favored Kamala) so she has momentum. This is really not like PA in 2020 because of the 6 ties. It could be very close knowing WI. But in the past when the Republican pollsters have predicted a Trump win by 1% he hasn't won.

This is what I am seeing:
1) No way to know what is going to happen yet. Kamala is currently trailing in electoral college votes re 538 and NS by the state of PA. For me she is still slightly ahead. But I would say in the last day the polls that have come out have moved Kamala up by a bit in every state. The odd thing is that the polls that came out today are for 10/26 through 11/4. Pollsters sometimes take time to publish their results...
2) If Kamala loses PA she will have to win NC and NV. And MI and WI...
3) My gut says Kamala will lose AZ and GA. Not sure though. Both states may have people who will shift by election day. AZ because of the recent Puerto Rico comments, and GA for Obama and Lebron James reasons. GA though has changed since yesterday. It is now possible that there is a shift happening. Not so likely in AZ.
4) Trump is looking really bad in public. Saying super nasty things and at times looking like he is not all there. His people will come out to vote anyway. But undecideds leaning right may just stay home as a result. Also physically he is looking bad. Like really old and somewhat deranged. His events also aren't completely filled...
5) In all likelihood we will not know the outcome of the election on election night. Some states like WI won't have all tallies counted. Maybe until the weekend if it is super close.
6) NC is still out there. There has been a lot of early voting in what must be cities. Hurricane had caused a lot of rural damage so unclear if those people will even vote.
7) What I am hearing is that women favor Kamala by almost 20% and men favor Trump by like 16%. Up until now women seem to be voting early at a higher rate than men...
8) Based on the numbers in MI, PA, and WI it looks like some of the pollsters may have gotten it really right. I doubt Kamala will win any of those states by more than 2% but if she wins any by 1% then a lot of pollsters will have been within 1%.
9) I just saw Steve Kornacki (SK) on MSNBC and his numbers are a lot closer to mine than 538.com and NS. I have Kamala slightly ahead of his numbers in AZ, MI (well here I am 0.6% ahead of SK), NC, PA, and WI and SK is slightly ahead of me in GA and NV. And by slightly I mean by between 0.1% and 0.3%. So SK may also believe that the Republican paid pollsters are not being totally straight with us.

Who do I believe help me CNN says harris likely to win and FOX NEWS says trump likely to win

whch is it??

gender is made up.

I posted elon musks take via his meme. I made that clear in my response to cordi

I then explained this to you because you demonstrated you needed it to be explained to you. Even after I explained it to you you're demonstrating that the smallest of hurdles are still a challenge for you.

You're really good at internetting. So good you earned your own under title

I think I'm just overawed by your irresistible conservative masculinity, it's clearly wreaking havoc with my liberal hormones and causing my little feminine brain to malfunction.

so she has a study that says 90% reduction 2 weeks from the second dose, and goes in national tv claiming CDC data suggests 100% efficacy against infection.

the **** up was so insane the CDC had to later "clarify".

https://thehill.com/changing-america/wel...

and to be clear, everyone knew that 90% protection was going to get lower with time, as the exact same happened to people who got infected and the immunitary response triggered by vaccination was identical to that triggered by infection.

so it's not "only" about rounding up a 90% to 100%. it's rounding up to 100% a 90% that you know will decrease fast.

it's lying, with no caveats, as an expert, about crucial stuff.

and she wasn't kicked with infamy after this ...

she stayed, and later attempted a violent unconstitutional order which was quickly put to rest by SCOTUS.

these people are the reason non leftists lost all trust in "experts".

so the CDC itself can't read English well because they had to correct her claim, and several actual experts did the same and I linked the article

wait for the data

It seems weird to you because he views life from a different perspective. One of faith. I don't believe Tucker is claiming to 100% know why God does what He does, it's speculation. There are examples of sin being punished in the Bible and that is what he is referring to. If you believe in God you will see all of the actions people take against Him. Without this perspective, he looks like he belongs in a rubber room.

Gender expression is not equal to gender. Gender transcends biology.

if there are 2 focal points at the extreme of a spectrum with extremely low numbers of cases in between that's actually what is binary in nature allowing for imperfections in DNA transcription, development in the uterus and so on.

some people are born with failed organs, but it doesn't mean that you can clain that humans are born with a number of kidneys that is on a spectrum.

My question is, why are these platforms claiming that their candidate will win? My thought is that it would be beneficial for them to say their candidate is slightly losing so their base will be more inclined to vote.

If you start from a point of crazy beliefs not being crazy, then they don't seem that crazy at all! Deep.

This is funny because:

CNN does polling (all recent) and they have Kamala crushing it by like 5% in MI and WI and winning in AZ and NC by 1% and losing in GA and NV by 1% and a tie in PA. So their polling supports what they are saying though it is within a margin of error.

Fox News pays Beacon Shaw / Research to do polling. They oddly have Kamala winning in GA (late Sept) and MI (recently). They have Trump leading in AZ (in late Sept) and NC (recently). They have a tie in PA (recently). No polling whatsover in NV or WI. So I wouldn't believe anything Fox News says. because they are not going with the pollster they paid to do their polling.
.

Yeah, I was just about to edit, but I'll respond to this instead. I mean that there are some traits that are masculine and others that are feminine. However, individuals can encompass one, the other, or both, and that can vary from trait to trait. Culture may play a role, but given that differences between the sexes have emerged throughout history and cultures, it seems that the biological foundation precedes culture, otherwise the differences would never have come about in the first place.

What can I say, he managed to trick me for 60 seconds