https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/interactive/2024/presidential-polling-averages/

Wa po has a polling average where they are more particular about which pollsters they accept. Shoes a tight but consistent lead for Harris.

10/25/2024 8:24:31 PM

Mel Gibson calls Harris dumber than a pole

10/25/2024 10:10:06 PM

I'd never take political advice from a celebrity. Unless our views align, then it's fine.

10/25/2024 10:12:22 PM

I think Mel Gibson saw positive aspects of hitler too lol

10/25/2024 10:29:06 PM

what do you guys think about the state-wide races besides governor? attorney general / commissioners of whatever

10/27/2024 8:08:35 AM

I like Jeff Jackson. "I want to be a non-partisan, independent voice for the people of North Carolina"
Dan Bishop is a terrible person and a worse politician.

I will vote for Jessica Holmes for Auditor, although I do not like the fact that she was appointed and had no prior experience. The Libertarian candidate Bob Drach has far more relevant experience than either the Dem or GOP candidate, but in a FPTP system, gotta prioritize keeping the crazy Republicans out. Dave Boliek campaigns on "leading the fight at UNC to eliminate woke DEI policies and he's a committed Christian" so fuck off with that noise

Ag Commissioner. I like Sarah Taber. Very well qualified, will surely bring some new ideas. Huge potential to make NC agriculture great again. I don't have much of a problem with Steve Troxler, he seems relatively non-partisan, but he's been doing this for 20 years, didn't bother to reply to N&O questionnaire, and in 20 years never (until this year) bothered to do a PBS North Carolina's State Lines candidate interview. The libertarian on the ballot is hilarious. basically just a fill-in candidate. his website doesn't even have anything to do with agriculture. it's just libertarian talking points. weird.

Insurance. Mike Causey is the incumbent GOP. seems reasonable, or at least not extremely partisan. but, he's also pretty buddy-buddy with the insurance industry. 16 rate hikes in a row, no public hearings on those rate hikes in his 8 years in office. (under pressure from his dem challenger) He did his first public hearing like a month ago, which means that the decision won't be made until after the election (how convenient). Natasha Marcus seems well qualified and eager to get to work. Mike looks lost in comparison.

Labor. this is the worst matchup. The Dem candidate Braxton Winston II does not have relevant political experience. He's more of a union member turned activist. The republican candidate Luke Farley of course is even worse though. he does the "far left" fearmongering bit, talks about "climate alarmism" and is overall far too partisan. He also wants to do the Cherie Berry trick of posting his mug in every elevator (free advertising for his political career) 24 years of republican labor commissioner has turned NC into one of the best states for business and one of the worst states for workers.

Sec State. Dem Elaine Marshall has been around forever. She has no online presence though. Her website says "thank you for taking the first step in making a difference in 2020." GOP Chad Brown in a big mark robinson fan so that's pretty much all you need to know.

Superintendent public instruction. Dem candidate Mo Green is very qualified, former superintendent of guilford county schools. GOP Michele Morrow is a qanon nutjob.

Treasurer. Wesley Harris is one of those "too polished" Democrats. whatever. GOP candidate Brad Briner has a single YT video and it's about "woke politics". he's running for treasurer and the only thing he has to say is to trot out the woke boogeyman.

Supreme Court. Allison Riggs I really like. The GOP candidate Jefferson Griffin is pretty decent for a republican. seems like an honorable patriotic guy. he's a "life begins at conception" guy though and I'm not for the government telling people what they can and can't do with their own bodies so no thanks

[Edited on October 27, 2024 at 9:12 AM. Reason : don't forget to like and subscribe]

10/27/2024 9:06:22 AM

^be sure to smash that like button and ring that bell for a well-informed voter!

10/27/2024 9:49:32 AM

Good answer from Kamala here

CBS: "You know that Donald Trump has disavowed Project 2025. He says that is not his campaign plan."

Harris: "As you know, I am a former prosecutor. His DNA is all over it. All over it. His running mate wrote the foreword to the book of the author of Project 2025. I believe Donald Trump's name appears at least 300 times in Project 2025. And it is a blueprint, a detailed blueprint that is about the danger and the detail of what Donald Trump and his allies plan if he is in the White House again."

10/27/2024 1:38:32 PM

I don’t like or trust Cuban but I’m glad he’s saying this so clearly

Mark Cuban: "This is not a normal world. Donald Trump is not a normal candidate. And I think it's not a stretch to call Donald Trump a fascist ... he's talking about the 'enemy within' and going after people using the military. He's talked about mass deportations where they will stop people on the street and check their papers. What does that remind you of?"

10/27/2024 1:42:41 PM

At least he's a real billionaire.

10/27/2024 1:55:53 PM

^^ it's a shame people can't give an actual definition of fascism these days. Trump is absolutely fascist, but folks just don't understand why, and why it is so dangerous.

10/27/2024 8:19:31 PM

I mean....nobody can really define "communist" either and that's not stopping them.

10/28/2024 2:29:40 PM

https://www.npr.org/2024/10/25/nx-s1-5165353/washington-post-presidential-endorsement-trump-harris

Notably, the Washington Post opted not to endorse a candidate this year for the first time in a while. This is causing quite an uproar in this area. A few columnists have quit the paper over this, and waves of people have unsubscribed from the WP.
Bezos, who owns the post, made this call and is largely seen as kowtowing to Trump to not piss him off. A few years ago, Trump played a large hand in making AWS lose out on a cloud computing contract to Microsoft, because Bezos allowed negative news stories on Trump to be written on WP.

Ultimately, I think the $$ that Bezos gets from subscribers to the WP is just a drop in the bucket, and the loss of subscribers won't impact his bottom line much. Still, I can't think of another way to really voice dissatisfaction with this move by Bezos...I'll probably unsubscribe myself. This is kind of the straw that broke the camels back for me.

10/28/2024 2:52:37 PM

I unsubscribed the other day. I know it won't impact Bezos but I'll be god damned if I'm going to pay money for that bullshit. We've already been trying hard to disentangle ourselves from Amazon, though sometimes using it seems unavoidable.

10/28/2024 3:23:31 PM

Supposedly 8% of subscribers cancelled since then (including me).

I think Kamala is going to win though. Shes still ahead in most polling averages in wi and mi just barely, and if you exclude the obviously goofy polls like Rasmussen Shes ahead in Pa too just barely. More national polls are showing her above 50% with a 3-4 point gap which is just enough to win usually.

The big wild card is Pennsylvania. Trump managed to close a big gap there.

I was pretty confident in 2020 Biden was going to win that night, but we might not even have enough data to guess this year, until a few days later— which is a major goal of trumps. This gives all the nut jobs he just Enflamed enough time to cause major issues with the certification process.

[Edited on October 28, 2024 at 4:47 PM. Reason : ]

10/28/2024 4:46:03 PM

my hot take is that Harris is gonna win NC, and that we’ll know the nationwide results earlier than most people think

10/28/2024 5:25:45 PM

I hope she pulls off the win in NC, as this will make PA relatively less critical. Chalk up 5 NC Harris votes from my extended family (it's a small family) including from my Dad who hadn't voted for a Democrat at the top of the ticket since Jimmy Carter in 1976.

10/28/2024 7:04:37 PM

Coz's Dad credibility watch: +1

10/28/2024 7:58:03 PM

^

love to see people breaking decades old bad habits


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/10/28/jeff-bezos-washington-post-trust/
thoughts on Bezos response? I like the Reality is undefeated line. I think he makes a reasonable argument, although I also still can't help but suspect in part that some of this is justification for decision he already made that was mostly a matter of avoiding Trump's potential retribution - he already tangled with the Saudis and lost. he may very well be legitimately risk averse in some such scenarios.

There's already a trend for corporations and universities and other institutions to move away from the practice of making public pronouncements of support or opposition for various causes. I think if newspapers as a whole stopped doing endorsements, nobody would miss them.

[Edited on October 28, 2024 at 8:54 PM. Reason : .]

10/28/2024 8:09:39 PM

Better late than never. He has two granddaughters now. He also voted for Josh Stein and Jeff Jackson. So, don't give up on your boomers!

I disagree entirely that reality is undefeated. Objective reality no longer even exists to half the population. How is that a win for reality?

10/28/2024 9:11:24 PM

This nonsense over the WaPo endorsement is stupid. From a pure business perspective, it was a no brainer. There was nothing to gain by printing an endorsement whatsoever, and Trump is venal enough to punish Bezos for it to the tune of hundreds of millions in legal fees, and arguably other losses. The endorsement would change no one's mind, and it's not like anyone who's paying attention has any question who they support. Folks are making a much bigger deal over this than is necessary.

10/28/2024 10:00:09 PM

Quote :

"I've been mulling aaronburro's list of Democratic positions that drive away a supposed "20-30% of voters who are persuadable." Before talking about it, though, I want to take a moment to point out that this number is based on nothing - the last time there was anything like that difference between popular vote totals was 1984, when Reagan was 19 points above Mondale. That's 40 years ago under what was effectively a different party system. In this century, the widest gulf we've had was 7% (Obama vs. McCain), and the narrowest was .5% (Bush vs. Gore). Those figures aren't proof either way, but they certainly don't suggest a vast swath of the electorate moving back and forth between parties. As to the list, what strikes me is the wild double standard by which Democrats are evidently required to repudiate their extremists in order to be electable, whereas Republicans can ignore or even embrace their own (who I would argue are more dangerous). Pretty much everything on the aaronburro list is a fringe position not widely held in the Democratic party. There are very few elected proponents of these ideas outside of the Squad (which has all of nine members, or 4% of the House Democrats). Essentially none of them are embraced by Kamala Harris. And yet, we are to believe, these positions are insurmountable obstacles to her electability. Meanwhile we could make a comparable list of fringe positions for Republicans, often much more widely held and by much more powerful people, to include those on the Supreme Court and Donald Trump himself: ... So how is it that Donald Trump himself can have these positions with no consequences among the "persuadable" electorate, while Kamala Harris is dragged down by a handful of Representatives and college students? The answer is, in large part, exactly what you're telling us not to blame - Fox News in particular, but also the media more generally, which has spent this election cycle dissecting everything Democrats do while taking Republican madness as a given that doesn't need the same coverage."

Coming back to this after a bit, only cause I have a little time to bloviate about it now. It's not that I'm saying Democrats could win all of that 30% in a landslide. Given our setup, you don't need a 70-30 win for an EC landslide, which is what matters here. 55-45 nationally would do, and it remove any serious concern about losing.
We're not talking about policies which turn off 30%. We're talking about policies and crackpots which drive off 3-4%, one way or another. Among that 30% people fall within different slots, so some are going to be more wary of one party verses the other. So it's not that Cheeto gets a free pass while the Dems are held to a higher standard. Rather, it's that the Dems need to not drive people off needlessly.
By any reasonable standard, this should be a complete landslide. Your opponent is an honest-to-god fascist with clear cognitive decline. You are struggling to beat him. Clearly you are doing something wrong. Part of that is the shitshow that was keeping Biden around, but the other part is plainly the fringe shit that the Cheeto is able to use. Run sane people, denounce the crazies, for fuck's sake don't have to be practically shamed into denouncing a terrorist organization raping women and burning them alive alongside babies. The Dems are captive to their crazies the same as the Pubs, even if the Dems' crazies aren't running the party. That fact is hurting them deeply right now, and it's because they took the gambit that Trump was so distasteful that folks would vote them no matter what; it's not paying off

[Edited on October 28, 2024 at 10:13 PM. Reason : ]

10/28/2024 10:10:42 PM

Quote :

"There's already a trend for corporations and universities and other institutions to move away from the practice of making public pronouncements of support or opposition for various causes. I think if newspapers as a whole stopped doing endorsements, nobody would miss them."

historically, corporations/money tend to side with the fascists when fascism is on the brink

10/28/2024 10:41:43 PM

Quote :

"The endorsement would change no one's mind, and it's not like anyone who's paying attention has any question who they support. Folks are making a much bigger deal over this than is necessary."

Perhaps True, but this should come down from the editorial staff, not the owner squashing an existing endorsement. That calls the entire publication into question. it might as well be twitter where everything they print is just Bezos' personal thoughts

His thesis is that newspapers are losing credibility to Joe rogan-- but how is making the newspaper a plaything for a weird out of touch billionaire supposed to fix this?

Secondly "bias" is a red herring term as it comes to newspapers. All publications are going to be biased, there's nothing wrong with bias. we want bias. We want a paper to be biased towards factual information, and to trust experts and scientists and studies over cranks. We want them to be biased towards democratic ideals and stable society. That's why journalism is a 4yr degree, they have accreditation institutions and codes of ethics. When dan rather published that bogus article on George Bush, as much as he was a beloved anchor, he got fired.

If a paper wants to be biased towards fascism or whatever that's their prerogative but they should be willing to justify and defend their reason for having this bias.

10/28/2024 10:59:37 PM

Yeah, QNTM, I agree. Thanks for your thoughts, you shared some stuff I didn't even know.

It's so funny to me how serious and unserious it all is at the same time. So many rich and smart people and we somehow end up with absolute dumbasses, unqualified, running for positions in charge of millions of people, lol.

I will now rest on that thought

10/29/2024 3:29:36 AM

Quote :

"From a pure business perspective"

This is what is driving journalistic decisions across the country more than ever and is part of the reason media has low approval ratings. Shrinking reporter pools, consolidation of ownership to conglomerates, shuttered local papers, etc

10/29/2024 6:44:25 AM

It would appear that we haven't even seen the draft endorsement that was squashed. It would also appear that we need to go to outside sources (outside of the WP) to even find how many subscribers have been lost in the light of this Bezos non-sense. IMO, this points to the same bias that Bezos sought to avoid, smacks of suppression and censorship, and shares the same attack on press freedom that seemed to be a hallmark of Trump.

Sure, newspapers are biased. That's why we read them. But we assume that any publication worth it's weight in salt does their due diligence to maintain integrity. We assume that they do their research, investigate properly, and form sound opinions. When that doesn't happen, we start to regard that publication as non-trustworthy. Bezos is a businessman that owns a pet-project in the WP - I don't necessarily want to hear his opinion over that of the editors and columnist. I would like to hear Bezos's explanation of how placating an authoritarian is ever a good thing? It almost doesn't matter at this point, because this publication is doomed. There is no coming back from this now.


Also, is just does not stand to reason that the Washington freaking Post is going to bow out of issuing a political opinion about a Presidential race, this close to the election, when an opinion has already been drafted. One has to question the timing of this all. Is the NYT just not going to have an opinion about the economy now?

[Edited on October 29, 2024 at 7:38 AM. Reason : moar]

10/29/2024 7:19:56 AM

^

10/29/2024 7:37:23 AM

Quote :

"thoughts on Bezos response? I like the Reality is undefeated line. I think he makes a reasonable argument"

It would have sounded reasonable in 2023. Hell, it would have sounded reasonable even a few months ago. But to make this decision at this late hour, and only offer a halfway decent defense after, undermines all that extremely.

And it is, at the end of the day, only halfway decent. Newspaper endorsements are not new and they are not rare. Every newspaper ever printed in this country had some degree of bias, often far more overt than the Post. If Bezos is worried about the Post looking biased, the way to fix that was not to make a decision that seems so extremely fucking biased.

And if our concern is reality, then let's face reality: one candidate is obviously better than the other. This is rarely the case, but it is here. Abandoning all rancor and emotional investment, we can look at the stated policies of each candidate and universally accepted principles of economics and determine that one candidate is "meh" and the other one will demolish the economy of this country and probably the rest of the world with it. One candidate says they support the Constitution and the other has outright said they'd like to scrap it, or at least parts of it.

Quote :

"I think if newspapers as a whole stopped doing endorsements, nobody would miss them."

Again, that's fine - if you adopt that policy either very early in an election cycle, or in an off year. To do it two weeks out tells me that a paper I trusted to tell the truth without fear or favor - or at least, without very much of either - now cannot be trusted. I don't give a rat's ass about endorsements, but I care about kowtowing to Kirkland brand Mussolini.

Quote :

"By any reasonable standard, this should be a complete landslide. Your opponent is an honest-to-god fascist with clear cognitive decline. You are struggling to beat him. Clearly you are doing something wrong."

See, I don't think we are. Republicans are doing OK in spite of more prominent, powerful crazies. That tells me that the problem isn't having crazies. It's that a lot of people are more receptive to one kind of crazy than another. Why is that? I'd argue it's in large part because they have been lured into a media environment that tells them to be.

10/29/2024 8:37:20 AM

I guess we need to do a better job of luring then. Anybody know how to lure?

10/29/2024 10:16:34 AM

It all starts with a good trolling motor.

10/29/2024 10:26:21 AM

Quote :

"If Bezos is worried about the Post looking biased, the way to fix that was not to make a decision that seems so extremely fucking biased."

Lol, Bezos isn't worried about the reputation of the paper. He didn't buy a newspaper to push some agenda or do anything noble. He bought it to make money. I'm not sure how hands on he's been, I'll acknowledge that. But this is a pure business decision. The election is tight, there's a damned good chance Trump wins, and Bezos is hedging his bets at this point. Why antagonize a venal man for no discernible gain at this point? Bias has nothing to do with it.

Quote :

"See, I don't think we are. Republicans are doing OK in spite of more prominent, powerful crazies. That tells me that the problem isn't having crazies. It's that a lot of people are more receptive to one kind of crazy than another. Why is that? I'd argue it's in large part because they have been lured into a media environment that tells them to be."

I'd posit that the country is more amenable to right-wing crazies in general, based on our nature. We're a center-right country at our best of times. We have traditionally been socially conservative. Our middle class has borne the brunt of globalization. Those ingredients make us more predisposed to the nationalistic, xenophobic, "return to glory" message of a fascist demagogue. Couple this with Democrats' historic elitism and disdain of social conservatives, and it's not hard to see why Trump's message is alluring. Elements of it appeal to me, for fuck's sake, but I'm just able to see through the bullshit lies of it all.
None of this suggests that Democrats need to adopt right-wing policies. It just means they need to disavow the crazies on their side, plainly and unequivocally, especially when going up against a right-wing populist. But when rioters are burning buildings down and the pols can only call it "mostly peaceful protest?" Who do you think social conservatives are going to flock to?

10/29/2024 11:30:10 AM

Quote :

"He didn't buy a newspaper to push some agenda or do anything noble. He bought it to make money."

I think it's exactly the opposite. He bought it in 2013. Not exactly a moment known for newspapers being a thriving industry with a bright future. And it's also when his success at Amazon was making him more of a national figure, and with that came the need to have influence in politics to protect the interests of not only amazon but also blue origin. What better way for a new money west coast tech genius to do that than buying one of the nation's most prestigious institutions at a firesale price, and also conveniently located in the nation's capital.

10/29/2024 12:20:36 PM

Newspapers started because wealthy people wanted to push their own agendas. It’s why a lot of small towns had multiple papers. They often specifically called out the other paper in the editorials. Go read through the 1800s newspaper archive online from UNC.

Historically papers haven’t been about making money. Over time, they learned to separate the editorials from the news, then the editorials from the owner.

Go to the map view there. Lots of cool insights if you have a few hours to kill. Especially interesting to read stuff from the end of the civil war (there was an ad I saw inviting freed children to join the schools— the concept of black vs white wasn’t as prominent then), then through the rise of Jim Crow
https://www.digitalnc.org/newspapers/



[Edited on October 29, 2024 at 1:01 PM. Reason : ]

10/29/2024 12:56:54 PM

Elon Musk saying he wants to destroy the American economy and rebuild it in his image and trump will help him do it.

https://meidasnews.com/news/trump-ally-elon-musk-warns-of-necessary-economic-collapse-if-trump-elected

Quote :

"Elon Musk has offered a sobering preview of Donald Trump’s economic plan for America if he is re-elected, revealing that a period of intentional “temporary hardship” is on the horizon for American households. Rather than cautioning against it, Musk described this hardship as necessary and inevitable, supporting Trump’s blueprint for restructuring the economy by slashing government programs"

Worth pointing out that lots of madmen leaders in history have thought this, they ignore experts and try to make rash changes, and it has never worked out ever. It always results in mass famine

Musk has gone truly mad. It’s not going to be the billionaires going through hardships, it’s going to be the poor and middle class.

10/29/2024 1:29:41 PM

Quote :

"He didn't buy a newspaper to push some agenda or do anything noble. He bought it to make money."

LOL

LMFAO, even

Yeah man, one of the richest men in history bought a newspaper in 2013 because it's such a cash cow.

Quote :

"We're a center-right country at our best of times. We have traditionally been socially conservative."

Based on what, exactly?

Quote :

"Couple this with Democrats' historic elitism and disdain of social conservatives, and it's not hard to see why Trump's message is alluring."

Again, this doesn't explain shit when Republicans do the exact same shit only worse. The entire modern GOP is built on "Libs are efette dweebs who are beneath your contempt."

10/30/2024 8:34:36 AM

10/30/2024 9:32:29 AM

Quote :

" but I care about kowtowing to Kirkland brand Mussolini."

YOU SHUT YOUR MOUTH ABOUT KIRKLAND PRODUCTS. Kirkland >>> most brands. GTFO here.

10/30/2024 9:48:53 AM

The statement "bezos bought the post to make money" isn't entirely inaccurate imo if you read it as "bezos bought the post to use as a political tool to help make more money in his other business ventures" maybe

10/30/2024 10:20:03 AM

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-virginia-voter-registration-purge-ba3d785d9d2d169d9c02207a42893757

SCOTUS has allowed Virginia to purge voters from the rolls, weeks before the election, at the behest of Gov. Youngkin. This not only violates election law, but upends lower court rulings.

These voters purged are "suspected" non-citizens. Lower courts have already found Virginia's suspected non-citizens voter criteria ensnared eligible voters.

[Edited on October 30, 2024 at 10:55 AM. Reason : moar ]

10/30/2024 10:53:26 AM

Schwarzenegger endorses Kamala

10/30/2024 11:17:07 AM

How is this nut-job supposedly leading the polls? (especially since Mark Robinson is supposedly so far behind)

https://www.wral.com/story/nc-superintendent-race-remains-narrow-as-election-day-approaches-wral-news-poll-finds/21696765/

10/30/2024 11:54:41 AM

Quote :

""

You have said the actual truth.

10/30/2024 2:15:53 PM

biggest snowflakes in the world

10/30/2024 2:24:49 PM

I bet he has a MEAN TWEETS 2024 bumper sticker

10/30/2024 6:54:09 PM

Quote :

"SCOTUS has allowed Virginia to purge voters from the rolls, weeks before the election, at the behest of Gov. Youngkin. This not only violates election law, but upends lower court rulings. These voters purged are "suspected" non-citizens. Lower courts have already found Virginia's suspected non-citizens voter criteria ensnared eligible voters. "

Yeah I am curious as to how that decision was justified. It seems clearly in violation of existing election law and I'm not sure what argument to the contrary you could make that would outweigh it.


The only thing I can think of is that they probably did purge some non-citizens from the rolls. I don't even find it a stretch that a significant majority of those purged were non-citizens--and in VA, you can register to vote even on Election Day itself, so there is a remedy for the erroneous cases.

Still, that still seems like it would be in violation of the plain language and intent of the law, and courts saying "That law is dumb and ignoring it was smart" is legislating from the bench, so it still seems that we'd be in bad territory, and specifically one sort of jurisprudence or another than the conservative justices rightfully take particularly issue with.

[Edited on October 30, 2024 at 7:05 PM. Reason : lacking any other justification, it looks an awfully lot like "might makes right"]

10/30/2024 7:04:02 PM

The new polls out today show Trump with a 92 point lead among the coveted 50+ age rural white male garbage truck drivers subgroup. Kamala is doomed

10/30/2024 9:18:10 PM

^^ I have no idea, the law seems pretty clear. What they are hanging their hat on is that Younkin signed the executive order on the 90th day before the election which ordered them to go looking. But that just doesn't seem to fly with the actual law.

As for how many citizens are getting caught up in these purges of "suspected non-citizens," in at least one state, it's been pretty bad. I think it was 3200 voters were purged, and 2600 turned out to be legit citizens, fucking born here. What I really want to know is the political affiliations of those purged. I'd be willing to bet it's heavily Dem and Ind.

I've been critical of Dem's bitching about Republican voting and registration policies, but all of the Republican's recent moves have been completely beyond the pale. It's hard to find any legitimate reason for these lawsuits and moves, other than just keeping non-MAGAs from voting. What's pissing me off is that there is clear, unequivocal precedent and law against damned near everything they are doing, and the Supreme Court is punting every fucking time. Conservative appeals courts are even calling them out on it, and SC is just overruling them, such as in VA.

10/30/2024 10:20:24 PM