2024 US Presidential Election

[awty]

[Kitan Etos]

The last few elections have made me quite skeptical of the polls.

Worse is the fact that still half the damn people in this country think Trump is the man for the job.

Especially since the EC can choose to elect Trump over Harris.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

^I expect a more significant polling bump after the Walz-Vance debate.

Boru

Walz, as VP candidate, doesn't have as much pressure to be, or as much to lose by not being, as calm, cool, collected, and honestly, Presidential, as Harris was, and had to be. He can make the jabs at Vance, and even Trump, that Kamala can't, as he already has with his "if Vance can get off his couch" comment. I think Vance will be running just as fast and as far away from further debates as Trump is.

Vance is the second worst thing to happen to Trump after Biden stepped down, and it's entirely self-inflicted, where picking Walz seems to be the second best, after Biden stepped, down for Harris.

The last few elections have made me quite skeptical of the polls.  

Worse is the fact that still half the damn people in this country think Trump is the man for the job.

Especially since the EC can choose to elect Trump over Harris.

It’s not really a ‘choice’.

Boru

[Angrboda]

At a rally in Michigan headlined by Ms. Harris’s running mate, Tim Walz, supporters on Thursday broke out into chants of “We’re not eating cats,” to the tune of Ms. Harris’s common refrain: “We’re not going back.”

- New York Times

[Angrboda]

Ms. Swift’s endorsement of Ms. Harris in an Instagram post after the debate accounted for more than half of the roughly 727,000 visitors to Vote.gov from Tuesday to Wednesday, according to a government spokeswoman. The debate itself also is likely to have driven interest; the site averaged only about 30,000 visitors a day for the prior week. The League of Women Voters said the number of people using its Vote411.org site had more than doubled since Tuesday, and Vote.org, another resource, said the number of people it helped register more than doubled Wednesday compared with preceding days.

- New York Times

[Ravenshire]

Walz, as VP candidate, doesn't have as much pressure to be, or as much to lose by not being, as calm, cool, collected, and honestly, Presidential, as Harris was, and had to be. He can make the jabs at Vance, and even Trump, that Kamala can't, as he already has with his "if Vance can get off his couch" comment. I think Vance will be running just as fast and as far away from further debates as Trump is.

Vance is the second worst thing to happen to Trump after Biden stepped down, and it's entirely self-inflicted, where picking Walz seems to be the second best, after Biden stepped, down for Harris.

Especially since the EC can choose to elect Trump over Harris.

It’s not really a ‘choice’.

Boru

Actually, in many states it is:
Faithless Electors:

As of 2024, 38 states and the District of Columbia have laws that require electors to vote for the candidates for whom they pledged to vote, though in half of these jurisdictions there is no enforcement mechanism. In 14 states, votes contrary to the pledge are voided and the respective electors are replaced, and in two of these states they may also be fined. Three other states impose a penalty on faithless electors but still count their votes as cast.[1]

Colorado was the first state to void an elector's faithless vote, which occurred during the 2016 election. Minnesota also invoked this law for the first time in 2016 when an elector pledged to Hillary Clinton attempted to vote for Bernie Sanders instead.[9] Until 2008, Minnesota's electors cast secret ballots. Although the final count would reveal the occurrence of faithless votes, it was impossible to determine which electors were faithless. After an unknown elector was faithless in 2004, Minnesota amended its law to require public balloting of the electors' votes and invalidate any vote cast for someone other than the candidate to whom the elector was pledged.[10]

Washington became the first state to fine faithless electors after the 2016 election, in the wake of that state having four faithless elector votes. In 2019, the state changed its law for future elections, to void faithless votes and replace the respective electors instead of fining them.[11]

There are enough states where faithless elector voting is allowed, or there is no enforcement of the law against it, that the choice by a few electors could change the outcome in a close electoral race. It's never happened, and it's not likely to, but it certainly can.

[Thumpalumpacus]

^I expect a more significant polling bump after the Walz-Vance debate.

Boru

I will watch that debate. I know much less about these two. It won't change my vote -- I will never vote for Trump + whomever -- but I'd like to see the bench on either side.

I'm not sure it will provide any real bump to either side given it's VP debating. That rarely if ever swings anything.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Vance is the second worst thing to happen to Trump after Biden stepped down, and it's entirely self-inflicted, where picking Walz seems to be the second best, after Biden stepped, down for Harris.

Agreed completely. Trump picked an anchor; Harris picked a sail.

[Deesse23]

Richard Grenell, former US ambassador to Germany responded with (translated back from German to english)"The blatant manipulation of the US election by the german government is worse than the russian and iranian one". How does stating facts equal influencing elections? Germany DOES expand its "clean energy" strategy and we DO NOT eat cats and dogs (well, not afaik).

[awty]