Maybe this won't be the "landslide" resembling those of the past, but I think it's going to get close.

[lees1975]

https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2024/08/a-welcome-and-unexpected-turn-of-events.html

During my morning coffee break, while checking the news, I came upon two different sources announcing that the most recent New York Times/Siena College polling data shows Kamala Harris has shifted the national lead, and has equal, four point leads in the "blue wall" states of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. In fact, most news sources are now saying that Harris is in the lead, both nationally and in battleground states that would put her well past the 270 votes she needs to win. The Times/Siena stood out because it has been particularly negative and sharp when it comes to criticism of the President, his administration, and his campaign.

So when I saw the data put out by the Times, I am prompted to start thinking about what is happening in the Democratic party as something we haven't really seen before. Memory does fade over time, but I can't think of any past election since the Second World War that would even compare to what we have been seeing happening over the past three weeks.

We've been damaged heavily by the polarization that has occurred, and by Trump's open use of racism and bigotry to divide and conquer. I really hadn't realized, until he came along, how much reticent racism exists in this country, protected as it is in several cultural institutions, particularly the conservative, Evangelical churches. So I'm not expecting a Johnson-Goldwater kind of election, in which there was a similar political climate.

Ultimately, though, I think the Harris-Walz campaigns themes, especially their joy, and their positive approach to the campaign, and their ability to ignite, activate and move Democratic party constituencies to action will be what wins this election, and it will win it big. Of course, look at what they're running against. That's a losing ticket if there ever was one, and they are showing out big time. And while they do have the advantage of most Americans knowing that Trump is a con artist, a grifter, and, by definition, an antichrist, they also have the advantage of a message with a long list of political advantages which appeal to a clear majority of the electorate.

And---Democrats finally control the political narrative.

[NoRethugFriends]

1. Everyone's way ahead of themselves. How about just a win. As we've seen, things can turn on a dime.

[pat_k]

3. Yes. Trends are good, but it remains a toss up.

The trends are fantastic to see so quickly, but we shouldn't get too far ahead of ourselves. Overconfidence suppresses turnout in a way that can be as damaging as hopelessness and immobilization.

Cook Political Report Ratings here:
https://www.cookpolitical.com/ratings/presidential-race-ratings

Even if you moved MI, PA, and WI from "Toss Up" to "Lean
Dem" we would just make 270.

And the Times Siena poll is actually within the margin of error, which is why those states will remain "Toss Up" until polls get clearer.

But, just yesterday, AZ, GA, and NV were moved from Lean R to Toss Up. A VERY good thing. Before that, we HAD to win all the toss up states to get to 270.

Now, the race really is a toss up.

We are Absolutely heading the the right direction, but let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Paywall-Free Poll Crosstabs:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/08/10/us/elections/times-siena-poll-likely-electorate-crosstabs.html?unlocked_article_code=1.B04.D7Px.G-jreqlblAvM&smid=url-share

Some very interesting stuff in the details.

Re: Margin of Error

The margin of sampling error among registered voters is plus or minus 4.5 percentage points in Michigan, plus or minus 4 percentage points in Pennsylvania, and plus or minus 4.3 percentage points in Wisconsin. In theory, this means that the results should reflect the views of the overall population most of the time, though many other challenges create additional sources of error. When computing the difference between two values — such as a candidate’s lead in a race — the margin of error is twice as large.

[lees1975]

4. That's based on if you believe any of that data.

I don't think any of that is close to accurate even at this point. You won't get accurate forecasts from sources using data mostly funded by Republican sources until its a matter of protecting their credibility a couple of weeks prior to the election, when things will either "tighten," or when we will see exactly how far ahead Harris has surged past Trump.

[pat_k]

5. Hope so.

Nevertheless, the level of overconfidence being expressed needs to be moderated. While polls may reflect a bias in favor of higher numbers for trump, we also have the very real problem of voter suppression. Polls don't estimate number of "likely voter" votes that will be tossed out in the various demographics.

Optimism, hope, and confidence are all good things. But overconfidence is a problem. The notion Hillary was a sure thing lost her votes, particularly in critical areas where too few polling places created long lines.

[lees1975]

10. Oh, we definitely need to avoid overconfidence and make sure everyone votes.

But as I read through a lot of this data, and see the way the media has covered elections since 2016, with the focus on a handful of "must have" battleground states where elections have been close, it appears they are missing how the trends they are seeing are affecting other states. For example, in Texas, Harris' surge among women, black and Hispanic voters has pulled some congressional races into "dead heat" status, the senate race there has been close for a while, 46-46 most recent polling, and the question about whether it has affected the statewide polls haven't been answered because there's not enough data to answer it. The news coming out of reliable sources in Texas, most notably The Texas Tribune, indicates that Texas is as competitive as Arizona or Georgia. Likewise, Florida hasn't gotten a lot of attention either, but things have shifted dramatically there, where there is also a competitive senate race, as there is in Ohio.

I do check some of the more progressive media sources in several states, like the Texas Tribune, and [iThe Ohio Capital Journal]https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/ among others. They seem to be more objective and honest.

[pat_k]

11. Thanks for the encouraging insights! (nt)

[usonian]

6. I was wondering. What does the Harris Poll say?

Just for chuckles if nothing else.

[pat_k]

12. Love it!

And, actually found a bit of information (weeded out the false positives in a google search by including Harvard CAPS)

The Harris Poll has encouraging numbers on Harris!

https://www.aol.com/more-voters-harris-temperament-compared-165218581.html

A Harvard CAPS/Harris poll found 45 percent of respondents said Harris has the right temperament for the job, while 35 percent said the same about Trump. Fourteen percent said neither have the right temperament, and 6 percent said they were unsure.

Respondents also preferred Harris on questions of who is the most trustworthy and honest, who has the right values and who will protect democracy.

More respondents said Harris is trustworthy by a 7-point margin of 42 percent for Harris to 35 percent for Trump; more honest by a 6-point margin of 41 percent to 35 percent; has the right values by a 5-point margin of 44 percent to 39 percent; and will protect democracy by a 4-point margin of 45 percent to 41 percent.

[usonian]

13. That's amazing research!

Of course, I would have expected ratios of 80-20, but ...

[unblock]

2. If the media actually behaves remotely reasonably, Donnie and his fan base will collapse.

His winner/loser worldview is already coming back to bite him.

If harris maintains even a modest lead, republicans will start giving up on Donnie. We're seeing some spiraling already. The more desperate he gets, and he more he looks like a loser, the more he bleeds support; it's a vicious cycle.

[usonian]

7. I'm hoping that simple logic comes to more people.

The "old" argument and others are coming home to roost, and away from the trappings of power, T is just a nutcase.
Contrast with the youth, positive program and well, joy of the Democratic ticket, in a way that the Grestest of All Time, Joe Biden couldn't convey with his statesman-like manner. Even though his speeches and presence were and are forceful, he got zero or negative press. The McCain/Arizona speech was a bombshell. That nobody heard.

My positive thoughts here.
https://democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=19322467

And I remember Goldwater. I signed his papers!

As the nonexistent Adam Baum 💣.

[Think. Again.]

8. That's odd, the general voting public still see's a landslide coming.

Last edited Mon Aug 12, 2024, 05:04 AM - Edit history (1)

Edit to add;

Even the article in the OP says this..

"But it's just the overall enthusiasm of this campaign, and the unity which coalesced within days around Kamala Harris, that makes me think we may be looking at one of the largest popular vote and electoral majorities won by a Democratic candidate in an election this century. I believe we are looking at margins along the lines of Obama's 2008 victory over John McCain, who had integrity and believed in values that escape Trump altogether. "

So I don't understand why the OP title is trying to belittle the success we're about to achieve.

[lees1975]

9. Belittling?

The title of the article referenced by the post is "A Welcome and Unexpected Turn of Events Tells the Tale of a Much Different Election." The post is a quote from the original.

In the article, it is stated that there isn't an expectation of a Johnson-Goldwater size election, which was the last Democratic party "landslide" in terms of election results, but compares it to Obama's win over John McCain in 2008, the best we've done since. Obama won by six points in the popular vote, but carried states Democrats had not won since 1964--Indiana, Virginia and Nebraska district 2, and since 1976--North Carolina. With 365 electoral votes, that was an electoral college landslide for Obama. Comparing this one favorably to that one is not belittling it.

[NoRethugFriends]

14. How did you discern what the general public expects?

[Think. Again.]

15. From the tone of what the general public is saying on...

...media, websites, social media, discussion boards, etc?