• mad_asshatter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    148
    ·
    7 months ago

    True story: half the country doesn’t even know she’s in yet.
    Had to tell 3 peeps at dinner yesterday what’s up.
    I’m not alone.

    • MeekerThanBeaker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      70
      ·
      7 months ago

      I get how there are people who don’t follow politics, but man… how do you avoid news like this?

      I mean, technically, she’s not in until the convention… but you would think it would be common knowledge unless you’re a recluse or a child who doesn’t know most people by name.

      • mad_asshatter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        53
        ·
        7 months ago

        Someone more famous than I (Meryl Streep?) once suggested that upon graduation, one should be mandated to drive a taxi for a year, just to see what it’s “really like” out there.
        You’ll have to take my word for it, she’s so right.

        People still talk about litter boxes in schools for the furries - with a phone attached to their palms 24/7 that’ll PROVE to them in seconds that it never happened…and, yet…

        • MelodiousFunk@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          7 months ago

          People still talk about litter boxes in schools for the furries - with a phone attached to their palms 24/7 that’ll PROVE to them in seconds that it never happened…and, yet…

          …yet they find that one thread on Nextdoor where one person claimed that it happened in their child’s classroom and a lot of self-righteous pearl clutching. Therefore, that must be the truth.

        • Snowclone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          7 months ago

          I just worked customer service for a decade. After awile you just take it in stride when an adult is functionally illiterate. Leaving aside the people who think Democrat and Republican have to do with the dictionary definitions of Democracy and Republic and nothing else.

    • BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      That does kind of explain a lot.

      I know we’re all in our own occasionally overlapping echo chambers, but the betting odds and prediction markets still tend to favor Trump, some of the larger ones pretty heavily. It’s very disconnected from the narrative I’ve been seeing about Kamala here and elsewhere, I hope that narrative is right, but still doesn’t line up.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        7 months ago

        Why do I keep seeing people putting stock in “betting markets”? … Somehow professional gamblers became respected replacements for polls some and I do not get it

        • nfh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          I think the justification is that people will be more honest/rational when betting their own money.

          It’s probably less irrational than stock markets, since there’s a very clear time horizon people are betting on, and data like polls can be pretty good. But since they’re looking at essentially the same data as pundits, it’s unsurprising they tend to do about as well.

        • BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          It’s real easy to make polls go whichever way you like if you try and it may be in someoned best interest to make sure only the ‘correct’ polls are widely known. We’re spoiled in that we’ve been able to expect the organizations involved to be trustworthy and not do that, but I think a lot of us feel that that’s been less and less true.

          For the betting markets, their success relies almost solely on them predicting odds correctly and consistently. Our respect here is for the people who dedicate their lives to making sure the gamblers lose. Could obviously still be manipulated, but in this case doing so is at least contrary to the purpose of the organization instead of in the previous case potentially actually supporting it…

          Not going to lie though, is a weird shift, I get it.

      • ImADifferentBird@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        We’re a week into Kamala’s candidacy. Things are going to change around very quickly.

        For now, this is a promising sign, but it doesn’t mean Trump is done. There’s still a long way to go until November.

      • mad_asshatter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        2 weeks, and she’s erased polling deficits!

        #maga is drooling in fear through their “tooths”, like Pavlov’s dog, bc they’re hearing the Ding! Ding! Ding! from the electorate.

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    Those margins are all uncomfortably close - “wipes out” is needlessly bombastic.

    • dave881@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think that “wipes out” here is referring to the lead that Trump had in the polls previously. All the states went from a clear lead for Trump over Biden, to basically even, with one exception showing a clear lead.

      I think that it suggests a competitive race, rather than one side coasting to victory. It is hard to draw concrete conclusions still, but the clear lead is definitely gone

    • someguy3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think it was John Stewart said we’re happy to have gone from Trump lead to statistical tie.

  • Null User Object@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    I’d like to remind everyone that 8 years ago, the polls showed Hillary was going to trounce Trump pretty handedly. There was tons of discussion after the election about how the polls could be so wrong.

    I think Fivethityeight’s explanation went something like…

    If a candidate is only polling 40% to their opponents’s 60%, and you were to run the election 10 times with a different sampling of voters each time, it doesn’t mean that the candidate will lose by 60% every time. It means they’re going to win four times out of ten.

    Don’t let polls lull you into either complacency or despair. The only thing polls are really good for is giving pundits something to talk about in the 24 hour news cycle. Polls don’t decide the election. Only actual votes on actual ballots that are actually submitted in time decide the election.

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      And this messaging is a large part of what led to low democrat turnout when Hillary was running for office. Her early campaign had basically been “lol don’t worry about this, he’s an idiot who doesn’t gave a chance of winning.” It wasn’t until about a month before the actual election that someone in her campaign team realized this would lull voters into a false sense of security. Suddenly, their entire tone changed from “he has no chance of winning” to “oh for fucks sake please go vote”. But it was too little, too late. Democrat voters stayed home, and handed the win to Trump.

    • Snowclone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Very very true, I put time and money into Bernie Sanders second bid, the polling made it look like he was going to win the primary in a devistating landslide. It never materialized, his base, if they ever were serious weren’t serious enough to actually make it to a polling place on the day of. Very disappointing. Never think the polling will match the voting, they can be very different animals.

  • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    7 months ago

    I’m not sure the country is ready for a gay VP, but my god Pete would destroy JD in the debate.

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Let’s just get the orange turd defeated, we’re already pushing boundaries enough here. Pick a safe VP that calms the boomers and carry on later.

  • nifty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 months ago

    This is awesome, the momentum looks like it’s going to keep up! The +11 point lead in MI is nothing to doubt, let’s go President Harris!

    I hope her campaign keeps reminding voters everywhere of project 2025, and exactly how it’s going to negatively impact their lives.

    • BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      538 shows the same result, Kamala +11, for the specific Morning Consult poll cited in the chart.

      But you are correct that this poll is an outlier compared to other polls, and we probably need more data and for the race to settle a bit before we have a sense of the actual margin.

      I’m hesitant to put too much stock in any numbers a single week into her candidacy. It also bears repeating that no poll matters unless people vote.

  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Wow that’s a long poll. I got to 100 questions before I stopped counting, and “who would you vote for” is in the second half. Did they ask every respondent all the questions?