That tracks. Trump has effectively vilified mail-in and early voting to reduce Republican participation.
If he’s losing, his strategy is to undermine mail-in votes, attempt to characterize them as fraudulent, and get as many of them thrown out as possible. Even if he can’t get them tossed, he will claim that Democrats are using illegal immigrants and other ineligible voters to steal the election, stirring up his base for more extreme actions. He will point to the “impossible” Democratic bias in those votes as evidence of fraud. If those votes weren’t overwhelmingly Democratic, this strategy wouldn’t be as effective.
Along with other tactics, such as challenging certification and having armed militias patrol polling places, this is part of his campaign’s multi-pronged approach to undermine the election if he’s losing, and they haven’t exactly been hiding their plans.
Doesn’t matter. Get out and vote, america! And for all you other people, call america out for the bullshit that is it’s politics.
So a lot more people would vote Trump if the only thing that changed in their policy was the stance on abortion? That’s disappointing, considering the policies and the plan of Project 2025.
I think it’s more along the lines of “more people would be apathetic” and just wouldn’t be bothered to vote.
Don’t listen and vote. Talk to friends and family an urge them to vote.
There is no guarantee of a Harris win, and it may come down to a few thousand votes. People need to get out and vote!! GOP might pull another GW Bush v Gore on us, which would be even worse, so there can’t be anything other than ensuring voter turnout is high. Dems always win with higher voter turnouts, at least that’s what we’ve seen historically.
The Dems don’t just need to win the popular vote, and they don’t just need to win enough states to dominate the electoral college—they need to win by enough of a margin that victory cannot be snatched away from them by any kind of dirty tricks. No battleground state officials Chewbacca-defencing refusing to accept the vote and getting bailed out 6-3 by the Supreme Court, no Brooks Brothers Riot 2.0, no flood of bogus lawsuits delaying certification until the deadline passes and it falls on the House of Representatives to choose the President, and no other shenanigans they might come up with. Because this time, the apparatus is in place to steal the election if it’s at all close.
I want to believe, but I just don’t see it happening. I live in a swing state rural area and I’ve seen easily 3-4x more trump signs in yards than I have in elections previous, and I’m livid.
Won’t be satisfied until she wins 2-1
Most crosstabs in polling that specifically ask, “what single issue is so important to you that it will drive your vote?” or something similar, show that the single biggest issue (plurality, not majority) is abortion.
I think women are going to show up. I don’t think this gamble with young men is going to match polling. Women as a group outnumber men, out-register men, and always show up to the polls in greater numbers.
Last I checked Harris has a larger lead with women than does Trump with men, with a smaller population size to boot.
I had someone come to my door to make sure I was voting, and they asked me what my number one issue was and I couldn’t pick one. They listed off things like abortion, the economy, foreign affairs, etc. and I still couldn’t pick. It’s all fucked.
No “all of the above” choice? Haha… Hah…:(
It would be a surprise if some states that were Republican in these elections became Democratic.
I really hope some states flip blue or at least purple as a wakeup call
Always good to start your day with some good news.
2 - 1, wow
This is actually pretty dangerous news. Hillary was also leading in the polls.
Gah! Why does everyone bring this up? Was no one around in October 2016?!
James Comey, Director FBI, publicly announced they were reopening the investigation into Clinton’s emails, 3 weeks before the election.
Liberals are always saying, “But her emails, hurr!” Yes, her emails. This was explosive news and handed the election to Trump. Doesn’t matter that Clinton later faced no consequences, all the public heard was, “Meh. Maybe she is a criminal. We’re having another look.”
The polls were right, Clinton would have won if not for this absolute bombshell at the 11th hour.
And she did still win the popular vote.
The polls still had her winning up to election night.
These poll numbers are at best worthless, and at worse they’ll make people not vote because it appears that Harris has it in the bag.
Eh sort of. She was favored to win but the odds weren’t a clear dunk peopre keep insisting.
This is early voting, not really a poll. People are interviewed upon exiting the polls and that data set is linked to the registration data for the precinct. So, there is no data model applied as there is in the polls you are familiar with.
That’s literally a poll, though.
I think the point is that this isn’t an advance poll to see how people might vote, where people might end up changing their minds. It’s instead people who have just voted saying who they actually voted for.
It’s still a poll, and all polls have inherent biases. These sorts of announcements are a bad thing because they lead to people not voting.
Yeah, you have a point there.
But, real data is used. There is not a turn out model of past elections. This is real people and real numbers being my point.
Every time you vote, your name is checked off on precinct rolls. There’s no guessing on who has voted. Quite handy when it comes to GOTV
But just because you vote doesn’t mean you take the poll. You can easily walk past or say no. It’s still a poll, yes it’s taken at an election facility, but it is not the same data set as the actual votes
Sure, you can refuse an exit poll. But, they are surprisingly accurate.
USA Today - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for USA Today:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
