Kamala Harris will win US election, Telegraph poll predicts

[psyche101]

24 minutes ago, Link of Hyrule said:

Should we change the title of the thread: 

https://nypost.com/2024/09/04/us-news/top-pollster-finds-trump-has-58-chance-of-winning-2024-race/

Edit: "The honeymoon is over", Poll shows "effective tie" between two major candidates. 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-09/poll-shows-effective-tie-between-harris-and-trump/104326760

 

Neither of those publications are The Telegraph. 

 

[+Link of Hyrule]

11 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

 

Neither of those publications are The Telegraph. 

 

This is a discussion forum. Presumably the discussion topic is "who is favoured to win the election"? The alternative is to start a new thread every single time there's a new poll. I could have started two threads instead of replying to this tread - one saying "ABC Australia calls an effective tie between candidates", the other saying "538 Founder suggests Trump has 58% chance of victory". 

Do we really need three threads about the same topic? Hence the question - should we change the thread title to reflect current polls? 

Edited September 9 by Link of Hyrule

[+and-then]

https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump-gains-4-points-to-pull-ahead-nationally-in-splashy-new-nyt-siena-survey/

[psyche101]

1 minute ago, Link of Hyrule said:

This is a discussion forum. Presumably the discussion topic is "who is favoured to win the election"? The alternative is to start a new thread every single time there's a new poll. I could have started two threads instead of replying to this tread - one saying "ABC Australia calls an effective tie between candidates", the other saying "538 Founder suggests Trump has 58% chance of victory". 

Do we really need three threads about the same topic? Hence the question - should we change the thread title to reflect current polls? 

Thread title 

 

Kamala Harris will win US election, Telegraph poll predicts

 

For every link you provided I can provide one as such:

Kamala Harris wins backing from Republicans, leads Trump in new polls

 

So the thread title doesn't need changing. Otherwise we could change it back and forth several times a day. 

Try to read thread titles before commenting on them.

[+Link of Hyrule]

1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

Thread title 

 

Kamala Harris will win US election, Telegraph poll predicts

 

For every link you provided I can provide one as such:

Kamala Harris wins backing from Republicans, leads Trump in new polls

 

So the thread title doesn't need changing. Otherwise we could change it back and forth several times a day. 

Try to read thread titles before commenting on them.

So it's fair to say that there are competing polls with different outcomes? I was under the impression based on the people supporting Harris here that she was an avalanche steamrolling down a mountain, she is unstoppable and gaining ground on Trump all the time and anyone who says otherwise is pulling numbers out of their butt (this is paraphrased, but I can find people who have said ALL of these things in the last 5 days or so every time I have expressed an opinion that Trump is going to win in November - "still denying reality" [post #10] is one example just from this thread alone, another also in this thread said I'm "ignorant, intentionally lying, or both" as the "SS trumptanic sinks" [post #14].... and of course, I can't forget that it was suggested I might be on a "list" somewhere [post #18 ]). And these are just the direct responses to me, it doesn't include the posts from people who have made sweeping statements in this thread about Trump losing, saying that he "isn't even trying to win"..... considering how close they are in the polls, if this is true then Kamala is truly horrific as a candidate if she is slipping in the polls to someone who isn't even trying.

That was less than 3 days ago, now we have all these polls suggesting Kamala is losing the Electoral College. Hubris is a b****!

 

[psyche101]

Just now, Link of Hyrule said:

So it's fair to say that there are competing polls with different outcomes? I was under the impression based on the people supporting Harris here that she was an avalanche steamrolling down a mountain, she is unstoppable and gaining ground on Trump all the time and anyone who says otherwise is pulling numbers out of their butt (this is paraphrased, but I can find people who have said ALL of these things in the last 5 days or so every time I have expressed an opinion that Trump is going to win in November - "still denying reality" [post #10] is one example just from this thread alone, another also in this thread said I'm "ignorant, intentionally lying, or both" as the "SS trumptanic sinks" [post #14].... and of course, I can't forget that it was suggested I might be on a "list" somewhere [post #18 ]). And these are just the direct responses to me, it doesn't include the posts from people who have made sweeping statements in this thread about Trump losing, saying that he "isn't even trying to win"..... considering how close they are in the polls, if this is true then Kamala is truly horrific as a candidate if she is slipping in the polls to someone who isn't even trying.

That was less than 3 days ago, now we have all these polls suggesting Kamala is losing the Electoral College. Hubris is a b****!

 

Right 

Feel better after your rant? 

There are Trump threads where the link would be more appropriate than this thread. It doesn't have to change to conform to your preferences. 

[+Link of Hyrule]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Right 

Feel better after your rant? 

Not really. I don't feel "worse", but feeling better or worse wasn't the reason I posted 😛 

 

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

There are Trump threads where the link would be more appropriate than this thread. It doesn't have to change to conform to your preferences. 

Fits better than most here. If you look beyond the words I wrote and go to the subtext of what I was pointing out, it's that Trump's campaign isn't as dead as certain members here have made it out to be. Specifically members who have literally accused me of being delusional just for suggesting Trump MIGHT win (I didn't even say he WOULD, just commented IF). I apologise if I didn't make that subtext clearer, I hope I've done so now. 

[psyche101]

14 minutes ago, Link of Hyrule said:

Not really. I don't feel "worse", but feeling better or worse wasn't the reason I posted 😛 

Not sure if I've mentioned it, but you talk too much. Anyone else tell you that? 

14 minutes ago, Link of Hyrule said:

Fits better than most here.

Disagree. Trump's 2024 campaign would have been better.

Nothing you posted refers to "The Telegraph".

14 minutes ago, Link of Hyrule said:

If you look beyond the words I wrote and go to the subtext of what I was pointing out, it's that Trump's campaign isn't as dead as certain members here have made it out to be. Specifically members who have literally accused me of being delusional just for suggesting Trump MIGHT win (I didn't even say he WOULD, just commented IF). I apologise if I didn't make that subtext clearer, I hope I've done so now. 

So it's a personal thing against the posters who you disagree with. Some personal vendetta 

That's even more inappropriate.

Edited September 9 by psyche101

[+Link of Hyrule]

7 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Not sure if I've mentioned it, but you talk too much. Anyone else tell you that? 

You certainly have. 

 

7 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Disagree. Trump's 2024 campaign would have been better.

Nothing you posted refers to "The Telegraph".

    

 

7 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

So it's a personal thing against the posters who you disagree with. Some personal vendetta 

That's even more inappropriate.

I'm sharing polls that disagree with the data at the heart of this thread. If you don't like it, Report it. Otherwise my reasoning is pretty clear and succinct. It's not about a vendetta, though that is certainly an interesting interpretation of the discussion and I applaud you for trying. 

[psyche101]

55 minutes ago, Link of Hyrule said:

You certainly have. 

 

    

 

I'm sharing polls that disagree with the data at the heart of this thread. If you don't like it, Report it. Otherwise my reasoning is pretty clear and succinct. It's not about a vendetta, though that is certainly an interesting interpretation of the discussion and I applaud you for trying. 

You singled out poster who disagree with you above did you not?

Have a look around. Other sources are also reporting on the telegraph poll. It's a stand alone subject. Even the Hindustan Times carries the story 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/where-is-trump-vs-harris-race-headed-on-the-poll-of-polls-101725366949975-amp.html

 

There plenty of threads to get your cheerleader gear on. 

[the13bats]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

So it's a personal thing against the posters who you disagree with. Some personal vendetta 

That's even more inappropriate.

Its how it goes on forums especially political forums especially if a person doesnt get down on a bent knee and worship the convicted felon man,

I'm not bashful or a shrieking violet, i think trump is a mess youve seen my lists or his atrocities that arent made up, hes on mental health decline and completely and totally unfit in every way to be potus,

You've likely also seen me list going years back why i believe the majority of the country wants to keep him out 2024 and now that biden is in the rear view mirror and harris is up to bat of course i see harris winning 2024 bigly,

Some maga hate me deeply for feeling the way i do and stating it on here, some are the point of being creepy stalkers, thats a them problem that i live rent free in their heads and my opinion is so very deeply import to them. i dont care what they think of me but will say they need to stop obsessing over me and get a life.

 

Edited September 9 by the13bats

[+Link of Hyrule]

4 hours ago, psyche101 said:

You singled out poster who disagree with you above did you not?

That doesn't invalidate the relevance to this thread. Subtext doesn't invalidate the text, subject suggests layers. As in,  there's the plain meaning of what I wrote (for the regular folks reading) and a special layer for those who wish to dig deeper (specifically the people who called me delusional for saying "what if Trump wins").

If you wish to frame that as a personal vendetta,  that's your choice but it's totally wrong! 

4 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Have a look around. Other sources are also reporting on the telegraph poll. It's a stand alone subject. Even the Hindustan Times carries the story 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/where-is-trump-vs-harris-race-headed-on-the-poll-of-polls-101725366949975-amp.html

 

There plenty of threads to get your cheerleader gear on. 

Not relevant to the fact that polls are basically saying they're tied. Why do you want to limit discussion to just one poll that doesn't seem to reflect current polling data?

[MrAnderson]

10 hours ago, Link of Hyrule said:

I didn't always think he would win, back when he first announced I didn't think he'd beat Ron DeSantis. However, I did make the point that he was more popular back then than the media was making him out to be and that Trump had a stronger chance than many made out. There were people here on UM saying Trump would NOT win the GOP primary, he was a lame duck with zero chance. These are the same people trying to convince us today that Kamala Harris is so far ahead. 

Our local Aussie taxpayer funded ABC has just released an article earlier today, in which they are finally acknowledging that Kamala may not have the numbers to win. Though the article puts a typical ABC spin on the electoral college (yet more evidence why they don't deserve to be funded with tax dollars  - eg, they call the US electoral system "strange" and claims that no other democracy works like that, with most democracies choosing a winner based on a national popular vote - which is a lie if you're talking about Australia as our vote is NOT based on a popular vote, and since this is Australia's taxpayer funded media company, one would think that would be worth pointing out here), the conclusions they make are pretty clear, with the expert they interviewed claiming: "She actually does have a problem. The polling I've seen still has Trump as being a narrow favourite to win the Electoral College even though Harris is clearly ahead on the popular vote. So, it's a real problem". 

Strangely enough, I just checked the odds at the bookmakers, and Trump has gone further ahead (now $1.80) and Harris has fallen further behind (now $2.10). I wonder if these kinds of polls are the reason why. The odds back what Dr Reilly is suggesting, as the democrats are odds on favourites to win the Popular Vote ($1.22 favourites), they are still behind in the overall Electoral College. 

 

I wasn't a big follower of politics back in 2016, so I only kept up with what was happening in the most cursory of ways. 

I won't be surprised if Trump wins the elections even if he doesn't get more votes. It's called the popular vote here. Clinton got more votes than Trump but still lost the election. It's a good possibility and now it's difficult to predict who will win. Back in 2016 Clinton was the favourite by all standards.

[MrAnderson]

5 hours ago, psyche101 said:

You singled out poster who disagree with you above did you not?

Have a look around. Other sources are also reporting on the telegraph poll. It's a stand alone subject. Even the Hindustan Times carries the story 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/where-is-trump-vs-harris-race-headed-on-the-poll-of-polls-101725366949975-amp.html

 

There plenty of threads to get your cheerleader gear on. 

That article is nothing more than a report on the article that I posted from the Telegraph.

But this is a very tight race for which you cannot be sure about anything. Last time in the 2016 elections Clinton was the absolute favourite to win and it didn't happen even if she got more votes in the end.

Harris will most likely get more votes (popular vote) than Trump but it doesn't mean she will win the election. I think it's more or less a given that Harris will eventually get more votes. I don't see how Trump cwn win the popular vote but elections are not decided by the popular vote.

 

[MrAnderson]

6 hours ago, Link of Hyrule said:

You certainly have. 

 

    

 

I'm sharing polls that disagree with the data at the heart of this thread. If you don't like it, Report it. Otherwise my reasoning is pretty clear and succinct. It's not about a vendetta, though that is certainly an interesting interpretation of the discussion and I applaud you for trying. 

There is nothing to be reported. You can share what you like from whatever source you like. This is just one piece of reporting on a poll by the Telegraph. The poster seems to try to pick up fights in various threads if he can't push his narrative which it usually doesn't happen. But debates don't work this way.

[psyche101]

12 hours ago, Link of Hyrule said:

That doesn't invalidate the relevance to this thread. Subtext doesn't invalidate the text, subject suggests layers. As in,  there's the plain meaning of what I wrote (for the regular folks reading) and a special layer for those who wish to dig deeper (specifically the people who called me delusional for saying "what if Trump wins").

If you wish to frame that as a personal vendetta,  that's your choice but it's totally wrong! 

Not relevant to the fact that polls are basically saying they're tied. Why do you want to limit discussion to just one poll that doesn't seem to reflect current polling data?

You want to drive discussion because you like to think you're in charge. That's why you wanted to change the title and fuelled by your leftie vendetta. Boring.

Good chat. I've said my piece. Not interested in discussion. Just pointing out that you are a wannabe control freak. 

[+Link of Hyrule]

43 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

You want to drive discussion because you like to think you're in charge. That's why you wanted to change the title and fuelled by your leftie vendetta. Boring.

Good chat. I've said my piece. Not interested in discussion. Just pointing out that you are a wannabe control freak. 

Do you know what "hyperbole" is? I didn't literally want to change the thread title, I was using the thread title as a way to show that this is just one poll and the other polls that are out there right now seem to suggest that either it's a dead heat (tie) or Trump is slightly ahead (do you recall the "Joe Biden worst president ever" thread? The one that several times people called for the title to be changed to "Trump, worst president ever" - why not call them control freaks? Because they were making a comment to support their point of view to explain their beliefs).

Even The Conversation (the left wing arm of the already left wing ABC Australia) has started to report that Harris is struggling.

Quote

The most important swing state is Pennsylvania, with 19 electoral votes. Silver’s aggregate gives Harris just a 0.3% lead in that state. Harris leads in Georgia (16 electoral votes) by 0.1% and in Michigan (15 electoral votes) by 1.2%. The Electoral College is biased to Trump, with Harris needing to win the national popular vote by at least two points to be the Electoral College favourite.

Harris’ Electoral College win probability has dropped in Silver’s model in every day’s update since August 27, and Trump now has a 64% chance to win, his highest since Silver started his Harris vs Trump model in late July. Harris’ win probability peaked at 57% on August 14.

 The author suggests in the article that "with her current weakening poll numbers, it’s Harris that will need to perform best" in tomorrow's debate. 

Edited September 9 by Link of Hyrule

[the13bats]

I dont need a poll i know the desire of decent Americans the majority will keep the convicted felon out again, harris will win.

[MrAnderson]

2 minutes ago, the13bats said:

I dont need a poll i know the desire of decent Americans the majority will keep the convicted felon out again, harris will win.

Do you say that decent Americans will only vote for Harris and not Trump. If you do then let me see the reasoning please.

[+Link of Hyrule]

1 hour ago, the13bats said:

I dont need a poll i know the desire of decent Americans the majority will keep the convicted felon out again, harris will win.

We'll find out on November 6, I guess, after America chooses  

[Freez1]

I seem to remember Hilary Clinton almost 100% sure she was winning. So much so even Bill did a victory dance a bit too soon. But regardless who wins I’m ready for it to be over. Kamala can’t even settle with what race she is. She’s a liar and just another puppet to fill a seat. Trump on the other hand didn’t let anyone pull his strings which caused Biden to fill his spot. Have you people not been paying attention to it all?

[+and-then]

5 hours ago, Link of Hyrule said:

it’s Harris that will need to perform best" in tomorrow's debate

The media reporting will certainly push the idea that she "won" and won big.  I think that if Trump manages to control his mouth and stick to policy discussions he should do very well.  If he allows her to prick his pride and he goes off, she could benefit in a big way.  It should be interesting to watch.

[acidhead]

45 minutes ago, Freez1 said:

I seem to remember Hilary Clinton almost 100% sure she was winning. So much so even Bill did a victory dance a bit too soon. But regardless who wins I’m ready for it to be over. Kamala can’t even settle with what race she is. She’s a liar and just another puppet to fill a seat. Trump on the other hand didn’t let anyone pull his strings which caused Biden to fill his spot. Have you people not been paying attention to it all?

lol, how about this classic from Hillary a few days before the '16 election. 

Never count your chickens before they hatch!

😂

 

Edited September 10 by acidhead

[acidhead]

11 minutes ago, and-then said:

The media reporting will certainly push the idea that she "won" and won big.  I think that if Trump manages to control his mouth and stick to policy discussions he should do very well.  If he allows her to prick his pride and he goes off, she could benefit in a big way.  It should be interesting to watch.

I would not want to be Kamala tomorrow night.  There isn't an individual alive right now who could get on stage one on one with Big-T and come out unscathed. 

[psyche101]

7 minutes ago, acidhead said:

I would not want to be Kamala tomorrow night.  There isn't an individual alive right now who could get on stage one on one with Big-T and come out unscathed. 

There is now.

She will be looking forward to tearing him a new one. I wonder if he will back out at the last second. 

We both know what he's doing right now. He's at Tulsi's house taking notes, but screwing that up too 

The hyena will rip apart the orangutan.