@@Deafulttressady I have similar feelings in Arkansas, but generally, even if I know my vote doesn't matter, I still wanna put down my vote into the number tally of the person I'd rather have win, even if it's meaningless. Additionally, there are usually some other offices that might matter, like statewide races, state supreme court justices, etc.
If the media wasn't trying so hard to sanewash Trump and offer disingenuous double standard criticism of Harris, I don't think this would be a close election at all.
@@dylanclevelandwell that’s how polarized Americans are, as I completely agree with him, but I also understand why you think that’s insane, Americans are so divided the partisan opinions seem like they are from an alternate universe
The electoral college was critical to the union being formed in the first place. Smaller states didn't want to be dominated by larger ones, much as red states don't want to be ruled by California and New York today. The electoral college is still doing exactly what it was designed to do. The only thing the founders wouldn't like is the amount of power that's been consolidated in the executive branch.
@@destroyerofnuggets3644 You don’t know what you are talking about. The Electoral College was created to be its own independent, deliberative body that would nominate, discuss, and choose candidates. It was never meant to be some weird way to elect a candidate that is incapable of ever getting a majority of the country to support him.
That California New York line bothers me. NYC and LA county together have less than 18 million people, in a country of 330 million plus. The idea without the college candidates would only visit those two cities is ridiculous. If anything getting rid of the college would be better in this aspect. Instead of only campaigning in 7 swing states candidates would go everywhere since all votes matter the same. Democrats in Alabama, Republicans in California. Safe states are a problem because they’re ignored, the college makes their votes meaningless against whatever swing states exist in an election.
@@donaldwobamajr6550 it's not exactly a novel interpretation. You can find effectively the same verbiage in the wiki. Smaller states pushed for the electoral college because it favored their lower population (since electors are apportioned according to representatives) , and agrarian powers like Virginia even worked in the 3/5ths compromise such that they would get more electors. They considered direct democratic presidential elections and rejected it, albeit for numerous reasons in addition to the one I provided. The fixed number of senators per State is also a consequence of the founders anti-populist tendencies.
@@donaldwobamajr6550 Correct, the Founding Fathers didn't want any vote from the people. The electoral college was intended to simply select the best man for job. Protest by not voting like they intended.
True all it takes is one interview where someone says something stupid. Economics seems to be getting slightly better. Israel situation is not. GOP has not really forced Harris to get specific on the gender identity issue and that makes lots of MAGA types very nervous. Imagine in late October Trump says "schools are making students dress in drag for Halloween" then harris has to respond saying that it's not true and then has to explain the difference between drag, and other forms of cross dressing or gender expression.
talking about what polls are doing obviously does not equivocate telling people not to vote. I doubt anyone who cares enough to watch this video and can vote isn't going to vote, you're making a useless point
I also wanna point out that that the later we’ve gotten into this election the less we’ve though of North Carolina as a crazy possibility for the dems and more as a real possibility for them
Now I don’t wanna seem too arrogant and snarky but I do feel the need to point out that despite everything, Trump gives the vibe that he’s asleep at the wheel. He seems like he doesn’t care that the tide is turning against him and he doesn’t care that there’s a chance he could loose. I think he will never get over Joe dropping out and the fact he can’t beat him.
Here's how it looks from another angle... Harris hasn't done anything but word salads since the debate. Even to this day, she cannot answer questions coherently in a recorded setting. All she did was bait Trump and while it worked, she was not fact checked, nor did she discuss any real policy. Now she's attempting to run an Obama style campaign on hopes/dreams/aspirations/holistic whatever, only she lacks any charisma that Obama had.
I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that his campaign staff are telling him that there’s no chance he’ll lose. Or that he believes it because it’s a right-wing narrative that he likes
the great Robert Caro, in his books about Lyndon Johnson, teaches a couple extremely valuable lessons on politics. My favorite one is this: that, in politics, the only sin is optimism. Edit: but like honestly? Phew. Panic receding slightly lmao.
Well, it’s about time! The numbers say what they say, but I’m looking at the emotion and enthusiasm of the campaign. I’m a strong believer people are letting the upset of 2016 color their view and hold back their optimism, and so I think we need to be saying more that Harris has so much of the same energy that brought Obama to the White House for two terms… even more so in some cases. And frankly, I don’t imagine we’re losing MI or WI with Tim Walz on the ticket. I don’t care what conventional wisdom is.
Harris' emphasis that they are running as the underdog is very intentional, to maintain the sense of urgency, which is entirely essential to an effective victory. They are ahead because people support them, but support isn't votes. The margin of victory and down-ballot effects are critically important in this election.
@@dylanclevelandShhhhh, don’t tell these idiots that. They’ll believe she’s still winning, even though literally every poll has massively downplayed Trump since 2016.
imo when harris became the nominee she was the only one who could actually change the results since everyone knows who trump is already but not so for harris so there is room for growth in this regard. unless something super extreme happens (like trump dies or something) as long as she plays her cards right she will be likely to win
Yeah, the "big email scandal" (which was a nothing burger) was one of the biggest reasons of clinton loss to trump in 2016 As long as kamala doesn't have similar event happening, she has good chances, if everyone goes to vote
5:06 Tbh I’ve never seen any poll where NC is more red than PA is blue. NC on average is about 0.5 points leaning red where PA is averaging 1.5 pts lean blue
Yes, as much as I hate their rhetoric and believe their more entertainment than news, their poll are good and sometimes even accurate. I mean look at 2020 when they called Arizona for Biden.
I’m not really sure how much stock I’d put in 538’s odds estimates. Their ‘most likely scenarios’ in the last two elections have ended up being way off from reality. Then, the model gets defended by those saying ‘well, it was a _% chance, it could’ve happened, it’s not a big deal’. But if you were in the prediction profession, you would want your ‘most likely scenario’ to match the end result as closely as possible. Another way to put it is that 538’s models are better at tracking where the polls are at than where the election itself is at, even though they say they use demography & other information in their assessments. Maybe they will be more accurate this time, maybe not. But I think their methodology is suspect based on the past.
Agree with this, Harris is the favorite. And the way her campaign has been run vs Trump's constant rakestepping, i think shes on a relatively competent track. Shouldn't be complacenct, but i think the dooming im seeing on lib twitter is unwarranted. But hey, I voted already, hope the rest of the electorate shows up.
I believe Trump is convinced everyone has decided, and also convinced the polls are wrong... which is possible. In practice, I don't think anyone can speak with certainty. 2016 the polls were horrendously wrong. In 2020, the polls were less wrong, but had Biden up by a lot more than he won by. Vote for your candidate, everyone wants the race to appear as close as possible for financial gain.
2:25 I think you're too much into the weeds. Because GA and AZ are 60% + Trump while MI is 65% Harris. Functionally its a 226 to 219 race with 7 swing states. It really is about Pennsylvania, the winner of Pennsylvania has a 90+ % chnace of winning
Personally the optimism for Harris comes from Texas and Florida being in play with good voter turnout efforts. Both are expected to go to Trump by around 3% but they have so many EVs (40+30) you just need young people to turn out as similar rates as old ppl (also old ppl tend to hate Trump more nowadays b/c of COVID, social security, coup attempts, etc.
@@ckq I think calling those two states in play is extremely optimistic and ignores how polling has gone lately. Trump always outperformed his polling by a significant amount, especially in states where it's expected to not be in play. but last election he did 2% better or more in almost all of the current actual battlegrounds.
i will say zelensky impressed the hell out of scranton, PA so i have to imagine that's a bit of a blow to trump, as he is historically a putin stan. it's a bit of a jump but GOP has been so weirdly pro russia and putin that last few years that i dont think it's that outlandish. but also, no, keep reminding people that the race isnt over until it's OVER
Pro Russia is a stretch. As taxpayers we are funding this war. It's really tough to justify a war in Europe when many people are struggling here. We should be looking for an exit.
@@adamr9444 1) nope, I've literally seen pro-russia people. 2) dude, it is not that easy and simple. These are our allies, and this is Russia. This is the entire reason NATO exists. You do not just pull out of alliance promises without big consequences, especially considering this is technically the first major test of NATO since the whole thing was founded to ward off Russia. There were other reasons too of course, but that was the main one
@@adamr9444 they were and are still working towards it with majority support. Russia didn't like that. and the point of NATO was still to combat expansion of Russia/USSR so this falls under that purview, them trying to take over Ukraine and all
American elections are decides by points - first to 270 points. Each state has a set number of points depending on their population. So a presidential candidate can win 55% of the vote ( the popular vote ) but not win the election, they have to win the states (The electoral college) It's a stupid corrupt system that can be manipulated via state legislature- it's also a reason why Americans don't think their votes count, because sometimes they don't.
The electoral votes are an entirely different issue. The reason to use percentage points rather than just percent is that percent can be ambiguous. In a theoretical state with 200,000 voters, if I say that "Harris gained four percent in this week", it could mean that Harris was expected to get 100,000 votes and now she's expected to get 4% more relative to what she had before, so 104,000. OR it could mean that she is expected to get an additional 4% of the total votes cast, so 108,000. Because of this potential confusion, pollster normally talk in terms of percentage points, which are always relative to the total electorate (i.e., the second meaning).
Lol dude, what are your sources to come up with this theory? People aren't getting off their butts to go vote for Kamala dude. Also, there's a good chance Kamala isn't even black but in her book there are some discrepancies regarding her father and grandmother where the dates aren't lining up with Kamala's birth. I think Kamala as a person would be a lot of fun to have drinks with but she's just awful as a politician with zero strengths.
Remember: Polls and odds don’t mean anything if people don’t go out and vote 💯
what happened to #innovemberweremember
Complacence is a vice.
But doomerism isnt useful either
@@Jimmukun_this isn’t “doomerism” unless trump wins
Can anyone give me a reason why I should even bother voting in Louisiana? I prefer Harris to Trump but I don’t really like Harris either lol
@@Deafulttressady I have similar feelings in Arkansas, but generally, even if I know my vote doesn't matter, I still wanna put down my vote into the number tally of the person I'd rather have win, even if it's meaningless. Additionally, there are usually some other offices that might matter, like statewide races, state supreme court justices, etc.
@@Deafulttressady It sends a message that there are democrats in your state who deserve representation when they eventually reform the voting system
If the media wasn't trying so hard to sanewash Trump and offer disingenuous double standard criticism of Harris, I don't think this would be a close election at all.
This comment is from an alternate universe lol. Sanewash? They're still peddling misinfo like the "very fine people" comment.
@@dylanclevelandwell that’s how polarized Americans are, as I completely agree with him, but I also understand why you think that’s insane, Americans are so divided the partisan opinions seem like they are from an alternate universe
If the founders could see what the Electoral College has become, they never would have created it.
The electoral college was critical to the union being formed in the first place. Smaller states didn't want to be dominated by larger ones, much as red states don't want to be ruled by California and New York today. The electoral college is still doing exactly what it was designed to do. The only thing the founders wouldn't like is the amount of power that's been consolidated in the executive branch.
@@destroyerofnuggets3644 You don’t know what you are talking about. The Electoral College was created to be its own independent, deliberative body that would nominate, discuss, and choose candidates. It was never meant to be some weird way to elect a candidate that is incapable of ever getting a majority of the country to support him.
That California New York line bothers me. NYC and LA county together have less than 18 million people, in a country of 330 million plus. The idea without the college candidates would only visit those two cities is ridiculous. If anything getting rid of the college would be better in this aspect. Instead of only campaigning in 7 swing states candidates would go everywhere since all votes matter the same. Democrats in Alabama, Republicans in California. Safe states are a problem because they’re ignored, the college makes their votes meaningless against whatever swing states exist in an election.
@@donaldwobamajr6550 it's not exactly a novel interpretation. You can find effectively the same verbiage in the wiki. Smaller states pushed for the electoral college because it favored their lower population (since electors are apportioned according to representatives) , and agrarian powers like Virginia even worked in the 3/5ths compromise such that they would get more electors. They considered direct democratic presidential elections and rejected it, albeit for numerous
reasons in addition to the one I provided. The fixed number of senators per State is also a consequence of the founders anti-populist tendencies.
@@donaldwobamajr6550 Correct, the Founding Fathers didn't want any vote from the people. The electoral college was intended to simply select the best man for job. Protest by not voting like they intended.
37 days is an eternity in American national politics. That is all I will say.
True all it takes is one interview where someone says something stupid. Economics seems to be getting slightly better. Israel situation is not. GOP has not really forced Harris to get specific on the gender identity issue and that makes lots of MAGA types very nervous. Imagine in late October Trump says "schools are making students dress in drag for Halloween" then harris has to respond saying that it's not true and then has to explain the difference between drag, and other forms of cross dressing or gender expression.
No let's not. Kamala stops being the favorite if people get cocky about her win and don't go vote
talking about what polls are doing obviously does not equivocate telling people not to vote. I doubt anyone who cares enough to watch this video and can vote isn't going to vote, you're making a useless point
I also wanna point out that that the later we’ve gotten into this election the less we’ve though of North Carolina as a crazy possibility for the dems and more as a real possibility for them
Now I don’t wanna seem too arrogant and snarky but I do feel the need to point out that despite everything, Trump gives the vibe that he’s asleep at the wheel. He seems like he doesn’t care that the tide is turning against him and he doesn’t care that there’s a chance he could loose. I think he will never get over Joe dropping out and the fact he can’t beat him.
Here's how it looks from another angle... Harris hasn't done anything but word salads since the debate. Even to this day, she cannot answer questions coherently in a recorded setting. All she did was bait Trump and while it worked, she was not fact checked, nor did she discuss any real policy. Now she's attempting to run an Obama style campaign on hopes/dreams/aspirations/holistic whatever, only she lacks any charisma that Obama had.
I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that his campaign staff are telling him that there’s no chance he’ll lose. Or that he believes it because it’s a right-wing narrative that he likes
@@diepie5144 very true I really have a hard time believing that he has anything but yes men standing around him rn
love you kangaroo man
Thank you eagle person 🦅
@@Msloan98🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅🦅 democracy! Not learning a second language! Freedom!🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
@@Msloan98 This is how we must identify all nationalities from now on
@@aislingclarke4347 but are Canadians moose, geese, or beaver people?
the great Robert Caro, in his books about Lyndon Johnson, teaches a couple extremely valuable lessons on politics. My favorite one is this: that, in politics, the only sin is optimism.
Edit: but like honestly? Phew. Panic receding slightly lmao.
Well, it’s about time!
The numbers say what they say, but I’m looking at the emotion and enthusiasm of the campaign. I’m a strong believer people are letting the upset of 2016 color their view and hold back their optimism, and so I think we need to be saying more that Harris has so much of the same energy that brought Obama to the White House for two terms… even more so in some cases.
And frankly, I don’t imagine we’re losing MI or WI with Tim Walz on the ticket. I don’t care what conventional wisdom is.
Harris' emphasis that they are running as the underdog is very intentional, to maintain the sense of urgency, which is entirely essential to an effective victory. They are ahead because people support them, but support isn't votes. The margin of victory and down-ballot effects are critically important in this election.
You should unbutton another button every video
😒
I still think it's a bit early for this assumption but it is trending towards harris
I don’t know about early, early voting has already begun but I understand your hesitance, we all have to vote, period.
It's not though. All or almost all of the swing states have trended away from her post-debate on 538.
@@dylanclevelandShhhhh, don’t tell these idiots that. They’ll believe she’s still winning, even though literally every poll has massively downplayed Trump since 2016.
Complacency breeds failure
I LOVE HER❤
WI will vote to the right of PA again. Why they don't go for the easiest target is beyond me.
A candidate that no one loves
Anything above 40% for Trump is a toss up
imo when harris became the nominee she was the only one who could actually change the results since everyone knows who trump is already but not so for harris so there is room for growth in this regard. unless something super extreme happens (like trump dies or something) as long as she plays her cards right she will be likely to win
Yeah, the "big email scandal" (which was a nothing burger) was one of the biggest reasons of clinton loss to trump in 2016
As long as kamala doesn't have similar event happening, she has good chances, if everyone goes to vote
5:06 Tbh I’ve never seen any poll where NC is more red than PA is blue. NC on average is about 0.5 points leaning red where PA is averaging 1.5 pts lean blue
It’s just down to PA. Has been for a while
It is so funny some guy from Sydney or whatever is so invested in this
Aussies are obsessed with US politics. look at Sky News Australia
Any dem is the favor as they have more voters
Certified banger❤
Fwiw FOX News polls are consistently really good. They have the best pollsters of any cable news polling. They’re really good.
Yes, as much as I hate their rhetoric and believe their more entertainment than news, their poll are good and sometimes even accurate. I mean look at 2020 when they called Arizona for Biden.
I’m not really sure how much stock I’d put in 538’s odds estimates. Their ‘most likely scenarios’ in the last two elections have ended up being way off from reality. Then, the model gets defended by those saying ‘well, it was a _% chance, it could’ve happened, it’s not a big deal’. But if you were in the prediction profession, you would want your ‘most likely scenario’ to match the end result as closely as possible.
Another way to put it is that 538’s models are better at tracking where the polls are at than where the election itself is at, even though they say they use demography & other information in their assessments.
Maybe they will be more accurate this time, maybe not. But I think their methodology is suspect based on the past.
Agree with this, Harris is the favorite. And the way her campaign has been run vs Trump's constant rakestepping, i think shes on a relatively competent track. Shouldn't be complacenct, but i think the dooming im seeing on lib twitter is unwarranted. But hey, I voted already, hope the rest of the electorate shows up.
Him: “We’re at a turning point.”
Also him, a minute later: “You might still die though.”
Cool bro. Cool. 😑
I believe Trump is convinced everyone has decided, and also convinced the polls are wrong... which is possible. In practice, I don't think anyone can speak with certainty. 2016 the polls were horrendously wrong. In 2020, the polls were less wrong, but had Biden up by a lot more than he won by. Vote for your candidate, everyone wants the race to appear as close as possible for financial gain.
Do NOT get complacent if you dont wanna get a repeat of 2016. GET OUT AND VOTE!!! 💙💙🌊🌊🌊
But thoughts on trump always overshooting on the polls?
Remember to vote
I think it's a lock for Kamala. I'm in Pittsburgh and decided to take a vacation that week (so I'll miss polling day) but I'm not worried
Please please vote one way or another. Whether you vote early or by mail. But your vote matters so much dont get complacent go out and vote
be very worried because Donald Trump can still easily win PA if people have your attitude.
Get and vote, or else we'll get a repeat of 2016, but only worse
Can I ask what an ms loan is
it's where you do a gf swap. if you're married it's a mrs loan.
Current record is 85% participation. Let's beat this 🎉🎊🎊🎉🎉🎊 🗳🗳🗳💙💙💙🇵🇸🇱🇧🇺🇦🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️🏳️⚧️🏳️🌈🇺🇦🇱🇧🇵🇸🇵🇸🇱🇧🇺🇦🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️🇺🇦🇱🇧🇵🇸💙💙💙🗳🗳🗳
i don’t buy it
2:25 I think you're too much into the weeds. Because GA and AZ are 60% + Trump while MI is 65% Harris.
Functionally its a 226 to 219 race with 7 swing states.
It really is about Pennsylvania, the winner of Pennsylvania has a 90+ % chnace of winning
Personally the optimism for Harris comes from Texas and Florida being in play with good voter turnout efforts.
Both are expected to go to Trump by around 3% but they have so many EVs (40+30) you just need young people to turn out as similar rates as old ppl (also old ppl tend to hate Trump more nowadays b/c of COVID, social security, coup attempts, etc.
@@ckq I think calling those two states in play is extremely optimistic and ignores how polling has gone lately. Trump always outperformed his polling by a significant amount, especially in states where it's expected to not be in play. but last election he did 2% better or more in almost all of the current actual battlegrounds.
Here from the future. Sorry dude
Thanks for letting me know future man 😔
i will say zelensky impressed the hell out of scranton, PA so i have to imagine that's a bit of a blow to trump, as he is historically a putin stan. it's a bit of a jump but GOP has been so weirdly pro russia and putin that last few years that i dont think it's that outlandish. but also, no, keep reminding people that the race isnt over until it's OVER
Pro Russia is a stretch. As taxpayers we are funding this war. It's really tough to justify a war in Europe when many people are struggling here. We should be looking for an exit.
@@adamr9444 1) nope, I've literally seen pro-russia people. 2) dude, it is not that easy and simple. These are our allies, and this is Russia. This is the entire reason NATO exists. You do not just pull out of alliance promises without big consequences, especially considering this is technically the first major test of NATO since the whole thing was founded to ward off Russia. There were other reasons too of course, but that was the main one
@@QuestionableLifeChoices Ukraine is not NATO. Never was.
@@adamr9444 they were and are still working towards it with majority support. Russia didn't like that. and the point of NATO was still to combat expansion of Russia/USSR so this falls under that purview, them trying to take over Ukraine and all
@@QuestionableLifeChoices Once again, Ukraine is not NATO. This conversation is over. See you in November.
why do you say points instead of percent?
American elections are decides by points - first to 270 points. Each state has a set number of points depending on their population. So a presidential candidate can win 55% of the vote ( the popular vote ) but not win the election, they have to win the states (The electoral college)
It's a stupid corrupt system that can be manipulated via state legislature- it's also a reason why Americans don't think their votes count, because sometimes they don't.
The electoral votes are an entirely different issue. The reason to use percentage points rather than just percent is that percent can be ambiguous. In a theoretical state with 200,000 voters, if I say that "Harris gained four percent in this week", it could mean that Harris was expected to get 100,000 votes and now she's expected to get 4% more relative to what she had before, so 104,000. OR it could mean that she is expected to get an additional 4% of the total votes cast, so 108,000. Because of this potential confusion, pollster normally talk in terms of percentage points, which are always relative to the total electorate (i.e., the second meaning).
Polls don't determine the "favorite", it's about Trump being a President before that makes him the favorite in the race.
Didn’t help him in 2020.
Lol dude, what are your sources to come up with this theory? People aren't getting off their butts to go vote for Kamala dude.
Also, there's a good chance Kamala isn't even black but in her book there are some discrepancies regarding her father and grandmother where the dates aren't lining up with Kamala's birth.
I think Kamala as a person would be a lot of fun to have drinks with but she's just awful as a politician with zero strengths.
Trump 2024, fight, fight, fight
Harris 2024 💙🌊🌊