|
There’s certainly an argument to be made that Haley pulling decent numbers despite having all this loser energy is a bad sign for Trump. There’s also a bunch of exit polls with a significant chunk of her voters suggesting they wouldn’t vote for trump. It’s two states and one her home state so you can’t read too much in. But it’s there if you want to make the case. And I think that’s why the GOP are so desperate for Haley to drop out. She poses no real threat to Trump winning the nomination and she’s made no indication that she’ll make substantive attacks on Trump. So calling for her to drop out after decent showings in 2 head to head primaries is ridiculous and feels pointless. But I think they don’t like the look of a split party when everyone is supposed to be united around their king and savior.
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 15:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 10:16 |
|
|
I wouldn't read too much into Haley's SC numbers. There was a *big* push among local democrats to vote Haley to spite Trump. Like, everyone I know in the local democratic party organization was posting "bet you wonder how I got in this situation" type stuff on Facebook as they displayed their "I voted" stickers. People were begging their church groups to support Haley, the works. It was a genuinely big push. That said she did win every SC County where the people outnumber the cows (joke, I haven't done the math)
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 16:00
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I wouldn't read too much into Haley's SC numbers. There was a *big* push among local democrats to vote Haley to spite Trump. Like, everyone I know in the local democratic party organization was posting "bet you wonder how I got in this situation" type stuff on Facebook as they displayed their "I voted" stickers. People were begging their church groups to support Haley, the works. It was a genuinely big push. 5% of the electorate in SC were Democrats. Slightly lower than the 6% in NH.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 16:02
|
|
|
I generally think the "other party comes to gently caress stuff up" thing is more of a political science fantasy than a significant thing. But for sure New Hampshire and South Carolina are unique states so far for Haley. Still they're also the only two states she's gone head to head with Trump in so that she has done decently and there are some scary numbers for Trump stand as the evidence we have at the moment. We'll see how things shape up down the line but I feel like there's not going to be a classic "coalescing around the front runner" thing here. Trump will win but you already love or hate Trump well before you started thinking about Nikki Haley. So I think as long as she's the last "alternative" standing she will draw a relatively significant number. But we'll see.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 16:07
|
|
|
Someone a while back made a post about how they thought Trump increasingly had the stink of a loser on him, which I paraphrased earlier, and I'm starting to agree with it. His strategy of throwing poo poo at the wall to see what sticks might finally be catching up with him. Nearly every person or group of people, including many on the right, has a reason to view him negatively due to some of his statements and behavior. If you care about the US projecting geopolitical power, he keeps undermining that by disparaging NATO and promoting isolationism. If you are a woman (or just not a piece of poo poo), he has a long history of misogyny and sexual assault. If you care about the constitutional order and rule of law, he set a dangerous precedent by unjustifiedly disputing the results of the 2020 election. And so on, the list is long. It's not enough to shake his loyal MAGA base, but it could be enough to repel some people who are not as personally committed to him or his ideology (such as it is) and who might otherwise have voted Republican. I could of course be completely wrong come November, especially considering the polling. Hating the other side so much that you vote for your guy no matter what just seems to be the default in American politics right now. But I think he's not going to win. And if he does flame out and they finally discard him, Haley will have excellent credentials to become the next Republican frontrunner. She's probably thinking long-term, bearing the temporary humiliation of losing to Trump even in her home state for that reason.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 16:17
|
|
|
If the presidential election was just straight-up popular vote, I would be a lot more confident in Trump losing. But because of the dumbass electoral college, all Trump has to do is peel off a handful of rust belt rubes for a victory. Again. Which could happen
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 16:28
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I generally think the "other party comes to gently caress stuff up" thing is more of a political science fantasy than a significant thing. But for sure New Hampshire and South Carolina are unique states so far for Haley. Still they're also the only two states she's gone head to head with Trump in so that she has done decently and there are some scary numbers for Trump stand as the evidence we have at the moment. We'll see how things shape up down the line but I feel like there's not going to be a classic "coalescing around the front runner" thing here. Trump will win but you already love or hate Trump well before you started thinking about Nikki Haley. So I think as long as she's the last "alternative" standing she will draw a relatively significant number. But we'll see. the amount of organization to do that, instead of using the energy, time, and resources to help bolster your candidate should make it a fantasy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 21:45
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:5% of the electorate in SC were Democrats. Slightly lower than the 6% in NH. Not shocking that this is pretty close to the amount by which Trump keeps "underperforming polls".
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2024 00:06
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I wouldn't read too much into Haley's SC numbers. There was a *big* push among local democrats to vote Haley to spite Trump. Like, everyone I know in the local democratic party organization was posting "bet you wonder how I got in this situation" type stuff on Facebook as they displayed their "I voted" stickers. People were begging their church groups to support Haley, the works. It was a genuinely big push. I don't know if we should read too much into South Carolina in general. Trump won the primary and he's going to win the state by a landslide in the general. I'd be surprised if either candidate voluntarily visits the state again. Now that Haley's funding is gone she'll have to give into reality sooner than later, which means Trump can stop spending what little money he has left on primary campaigning and can focus it onto general/hiding it from his debitors.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2024 00:42
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:If the presidential election was just straight-up popular vote, I would be a lot more confident in Trump losing. Agreed. Winner takes all is one thing, but I never quite understood why the US uses electoral districts (mostly corresponding to states) for straightforward presidential elections to begin with. There's absolutely no reason, and it just leads to these absurd outcomes where someone can be elected president despite trailing his competitor by millions of votes. Anyway, despite generally coming across as a mediocre candidate and president, I do think Biden has advantages in this particular match-up. He's done things like supporting striking UAW members, and his image of being a more old school type of Democrat, complete with a 'questionable' (from a strictly left-wing perspective) voting record, is probably a net positive in these crucial Rust Belt states. That's why I rate his chances favorably. I am, of course, prepared to eat poo poo, in the same way that no one saw 2016 coming
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2024 14:46
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:Agreed. Winner takes all is one thing, but I never quite understood why the US uses electoral districts (mostly corresponding to states) for straightforward presidential elections to begin with. There's absolutely no reason, and it just leads to these absurd outcomes where someone can be elected president despite trailing his competitor by millions of votes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2024 20:28
|
|
|
Why are the Kochs even spending money to defeat Trump they basically agree with him on everything? Do they just think he's going to lose or would they actually prefer Biden
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2024 22:56
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:Agreed. Winner takes all is one thing, but I never quite understood why the US uses electoral districts (mostly corresponding to states) for straightforward presidential elections to begin with. There's absolutely no reason, and it just leads to these absurd outcomes where someone can be elected president despite trailing his competitor by millions of votes. vote by (as it turned out) 3/5ths of the number of slaves. It has persisted because the constitution was deliberately made quite difficult to change, and states that benefit from the EC system have their influence over constitutional amendments increased as well, also it almost never matters so people against the system don't have much motivation for the fight.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2024 23:01
|
|
|
The remaining Koch brother is a business lolbertarian not a full on Maga rear end in a top hat I believe. Think gorsuch not alito.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2024 23:02
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Why are the Kochs even spending money to defeat Trump they basically agree with him on everything? Think he will lose, mad about tariffs, and they had personal beef in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2024 23:02
|
|
|
Ahhh right tariffs that makes sense
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2024 23:05
|
|
|
I have no idea how good or bad McDaniel’s stewardship of RNC funds was, but isn’t her sacking basically scapegoating her for the fact that Trump has made the GOP entirely about himself and recent election results reflect the country doesn’t want to buy what he’s selling?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2024 23:07
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:I don't know if we should read too much into South Carolina in general. Trump won the primary and he's going to win the state by a landslide in the general. I'd be surprised if either candidate voluntarily visits the state again. Her funding isn't gone until the last billionaire admits defeat which is not happening before next Tuesday
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 00:13
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:I have no idea how good or bad McDaniel’s stewardship of RNC funds was, but isn’t her sacking basically scapegoating her for the fact that Trump has made the GOP entirely about himself and recent election results reflect the country doesn’t want to buy what he’s selling? She's being sacked because she didn't hand over as many dollars as Trump's daughter-in-law will. Trump just is unable to hold back from kicking someone who toadied up to him when they are no longer worth abusing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 02:10
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Historical reasons, slavery mainly. The slave states feared a popularly elected president because the votes of free blacks in the North would count, while the massive Southern slave populations would not. By apportioning electoral votes to the states they could inflate the Southern (The winner-take-all system is basically there because states want to maximize their own importance. They think it's better that whoever wins the majority in their state gets the maximum advantage possible toward being the president.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 04:46
|
|
|
OneEightHundred posted:Electors were also envisioned to be independent representatives, which is the whole reason they are in the process in the first place instead of just voting for president. Party slates, pledged electors, and winner-take-all system are all completely against the original vision. This whole system makes perfect sense when you take into account the overland speed of a horse. It might take months to ride all the way out to Washington and the guy you were going to vote for might be dead of typhoid so you're sending a bunch of reliable delegates to go and figure poo poo out and make deals on their own initiative with guys who you have only maybe sent letters to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 05:56
|
|
|
Trump still underperforming his polls https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1762670772768665992?s=20
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 13:34
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Trump still underperforming his polls https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1762670772768665992?s=20 Kind of seems like if this is happening with every single state primary there's reason to expect that his general election polling is gonna be skewed similarly by what I would assume is response bias. I suppose state primary polls tend to be smaller sample sizes and lower reliability anyway, so maybe this isn't a lock, but I'm not really sure how polling is going to get better from here. Definitely going to be miserable year if we have to keep hearing "Biden down by 10" every week, so hopefully I'm wrong or the polling companies get it together
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:12
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Trump still underperforming his polls https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1762670772768665992?s=20 1. Polls are not nearly as accurate as the people who make money off them pretend they are. They make for a great news story that's cheap to write though. 2. It doesn't matter, Trump is going to win unless something out of the blue happens. Maybe a heart attack or a dementia moment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 15:24
|
|
|
daslog posted:It doesn't matter, Trump is going to win unless something out of the blue happens. Maybe a heart attack or a dementia moment. I'm not as sure about this. I think he could win. But there was an interesting thing I heard on an Atlantic podcast where they believed a lot of his current strength in polls is because he's too distracted by his court cases to campaign. Nor does he actually have to at this point. Once he actually starts campaigning and talking and holding rallies, a small but substantial enough amount of people are going to remember "Oh, yeah, this dude SUCKS," and vote accordingly. It's not like 2017-2020 was some amazing age of enlightenment. It was a bunch of yelling and fighting and being governed by Twitter, capped off with a pandemic. The after effects of it are still being felt. Let's not bring back the disease.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:35
|
|
|
blackmet posted:I'm not as sure about this. I think maybe the post you were responding to was saying Trump is definitely going to win the GOP primary barring illness or death or jail. It is a little bit hard to tell from the way the post is written. If they were talking about the general election then yeah, I would totally disagree that Trump is certain to win that, although he has a far better chance at that than he deserves and a far better chance than I would like.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:40
|
|
|
Sorry I was referring to the general election and I do think Trump is going to win. Probably best for another thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:49
|
|
|
blackmet posted:I think he could win. But there was an interesting thing I heard on an Atlantic podcast where they believed a lot of his current strength in polls is because he's too distracted by his court cases to campaign. Nor does he actually have to at this point. I was wondering about this. If Trump just kind of floats around and doesn't get that much deep media coverage amplifying any truly objectionable stuff he says, isn't that a net positive for him? He just gets to ride a wave of discontent against Biden and the status quo. It'd be almost 2016 again, where the media makes more hay out of Biden's age or whatever (they way they did with Hillary's e-mails). He still has to do debates against Biden, right? Seems like a no-lose proposition for him since the expectations for him are always rock bottom.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 18:04
|
|
|
blackmet posted:I'm not as sure about this. Trump never stopped doing rallies. He can't live without that sweet, sweet adulation bump. It's just that the media isn't breathlessly covering them or airing them from empty podium to finish anymore.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 21:25
|
|
|
daslog posted:1. Polls are not nearly as accurate as the people who make money off them pretend they are. They make for a great news story that's cheap to write though. Polls are calibrated in a way that have been more or less accurate for the past while. But trying to make Primary polls fit some general election narrative is really pointless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 21:27
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:Agreed. Winner takes all is one thing, but I never quite understood why the US uses electoral districts (mostly corresponding to states) for straightforward presidential elections to begin with. There's absolutely no reason, and it just leads to these absurd outcomes where someone can be elected president despite trailing his competitor by millions of votes. The US was thirteen independent countries working out a supernational government. While Southern protection of slavery was a factor, the small states like Rhode Island were equally worried that entering into the union would allow Virginia to dominate them, so concessions had to be made to get them to agree. The electoral college was also supposed to serve as a final check to prevent failson princes from Europe coming over and buying their way to the presidency. Plus the problems with travel and communication back then that others brought up. Basically a bunch of stuff that made sense at the time, but now we're running a global empire on the text written to manage thirteen rural colonies huddled up to the Atlantic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2024 08:06
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Why are the Kochs even spending money to defeat Trump they basically agree with him on everything? The Koch (David’s been dead since 19) is libertarian conservative and like actually that. There are Charles Koch liberation parables (No really). He assembled a libertarian canon. He runs his business on his libertarian principles, they rather literally post them on the walls. Trump (and Bannon was a big part of this) basically stole out a large part of the Koch fundraising Network from under them in 2016 election. He definitely hates him. But lol he’ll never support a democrat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2024 23:08
|
|
|
Primary polls suck and always have sucked. I think they can have some bearing on the general election though. Clinton underperforming her polls severely in Michigan compared to Sanders was arguably a sign of trouble. Trump underperforming compared to generic republican could be a sign of weakness. Biden underperforming compared to an empty chair in Michigan could be a sign of weakness.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2024 03:46
|
|
|
Did Trump call Haley to congratulate her on winning DC? Did he give a gracious concession speech? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2024 05:16
|
|
|
DC is probably the primary he gladly would have let her win, if he had to pick one. I told you those globalist elites love Haley!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2024 14:36
|
|
|
Specific candidates almost always poll behind “generic party candidate” because everyone assumes the generic candidate will be closer to their own preferences and has no real world baggage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2024 15:59
|
|
|
Perfectly spherical candidate in a vacuum.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2024 21:47
|
|
|
dpkg chopra posted:Perfectly spherical candidate in a vacuum. Chris Christie: Astronaut?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2024 21:52
|
|
|
Super Tuesday. Not expecting any surprises, but maybe the margins will be telling.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2024 17:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 10:16 |
|
|
Will Haley win a state? Stayed tuned.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2024 20:35
|
|
