"Trump leads Harris among swing-state voters, 50% to 39%, on who is best able to handle Russia’s war in Ukraine and has a wider advantage, 48% to 33%, on who is better suited to handle the Israel-Hamas war."
The Wall St. Journal is paywalled, so I don't know whether this is a poll of reg…
"Trump leads Harris among swing-state voters, 50% to 39%, on who is best able to handle Russia’s war in Ukraine and has a wider advantage, 48% to 33%, on who is better suited to handle the Israel-Hamas war."
The Wall St. Journal is paywalled, so I don't know whether this is a poll of registered or some modeling of "likely" voters.
All that said, I think we ought to be very cautious about assuming Harris will win, given that voters seem to trust Trump more on the economy, immigration, and now on wars. They are seriously, dangerously wrong, but they will determine who wins the election in each state unless the Supreme Court annuls their votes or there is some other kind of theft. This poll may have the same problems as others, and their models may be flawed, but if they're not, we should consider Harris in danger and act accordingly.
Here's the question I keep coming back to. In how many states did the Republicans do better in 2012 than in 2010? As far as I can remember, the answer is very few, if any.
It's why my predictions are still these: https://www.270towin.com/maps/07k6W. Only maybe 30-40% of this is based on polls - the rest is fundamentals, previous election results, fundraising/ground game, etc. (meaning that these predictions are very unlikely to change before the election). It's really hard for me to see how Dems can do so well in MI/PA in 2022, despite low urban and minority turnout, and yet somehow lose those states this year when Democratic turnout will be much higher.
That is crazy - he will give the Ukraine to Putin (leading to more offensive attacks by him; he will let Netanyahu annihilate the Palestinians in Gaza . Neither of these paths will lead to peace. They will encourage strong men to attack the vulnerable.
And to pre-emptively respond to a comment that Mark27 (I can't help but still call him that) may make, higher educated turnout in midterms does not necessarily mean higher Democratic turnout. Mark likes to point out that there was higher turnout among educated voters in 2022, and tries to claim that this means there will be a surge in turnout among voters without a college degree, a surge that he assumes will be heavily Republican. However, it is difficult to square that assumption with the fact that, despite any education-related trends, Republican turnout was still higher than Democratic turnout in 2022. If you look at precinct election results in MI, PA, or almost any state, turnout in heavily Republican precincts was higher than turnout in heavily Democratic precincts (sometimes by significant margins). In a presidential election, there will be much less of a gap, and the voters who didn't vote in 2022 but will vote this year will still be heavily Democratic, if maybe not quite as much as those who voted in 2022 (i.e. a heavily minority, working-class precinct that voted 80-20 Dem in 2022 might see their new voters this year vote only 75-25 Dem, but that's still an increase in the overall Dem vote margin).
I think so, yeah. And it's tough for me to see how voters who were persuaded to vote for Dems in 2022 thanks to our anti-Trump or pro-choice messaging would vote for Trump now.
I know we shouldn't discount any polls we don't like but I refuse to take seriously any poll/pollster connected to Murdoch...he has his agenda and will do what he needs to do in order to control the dialogue.
Is there any record of Wall Street Journal polls being manipulated? Fox News polls are reputable, in spite of the organization. I don't think we should assume guilt by association.
Not directly related to your post, but imo fox(and the other right-wing outlets) will run that same 'RED WAVE' !!!!! BS from the last cycle; so maybe not the polling side of fox, but definitely the 'news' side will act disreputable
Do you think anyone reading needs to be convinced that an entertainment organization with "news" in its name that's had to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for libel is disreputable?
it says right there that the pollster Wall Street Journal used is a Democratic pollster and Fabrizio/Lee Associates. Fabrizio is Trump’s internal pollster. There have been many polls that Fabrizio has been jointly putting out recently to affect the narrative
https://politicalwire.com/2024/10/12/trump-has-clear-edge-on-handling-israel-ukraine-wars/
Per a Wall St. Journal poll:
"Trump leads Harris among swing-state voters, 50% to 39%, on who is best able to handle Russia’s war in Ukraine and has a wider advantage, 48% to 33%, on who is better suited to handle the Israel-Hamas war."
The Wall St. Journal is paywalled, so I don't know whether this is a poll of registered or some modeling of "likely" voters.
All that said, I think we ought to be very cautious about assuming Harris will win, given that voters seem to trust Trump more on the economy, immigration, and now on wars. They are seriously, dangerously wrong, but they will determine who wins the election in each state unless the Supreme Court annuls their votes or there is some other kind of theft. This poll may have the same problems as others, and their models may be flawed, but if they're not, we should consider Harris in danger and act accordingly.
Here's the question I keep coming back to. In how many states did the Republicans do better in 2012 than in 2010? As far as I can remember, the answer is very few, if any.
It's why my predictions are still these: https://www.270towin.com/maps/07k6W. Only maybe 30-40% of this is based on polls - the rest is fundamentals, previous election results, fundraising/ground game, etc. (meaning that these predictions are very unlikely to change before the election). It's really hard for me to see how Dems can do so well in MI/PA in 2022, despite low urban and minority turnout, and yet somehow lose those states this year when Democratic turnout will be much higher.
Go out on a limb! Do you think KH will win any of the 3: AZ, GA, NC? Even WSJ/Murdoch pollster has KH winning with 278 EVs!
Imo AZ>GA>NC
I suspect Arizona will be so close that we won't know election night, and possibly for several days after. I suspect Arizona could see violence.
I think the violence might depend somewhat on the outcomes in the other battlegrounds
Mark me down for all 3.
That is crazy - he will give the Ukraine to Putin (leading to more offensive attacks by him; he will let Netanyahu annihilate the Palestinians in Gaza . Neither of these paths will lead to peace. They will encourage strong men to attack the vulnerable.
They don't think so because "wars didn't happen when he was President."
Except that we were still at war in Afghanistan.
They don't blame Orange Slob for that. If anything it was "inherited from Obama."
Those are issue where we would typically expect Republicans to be better regarded.
Why would we expect Trump to be better regarded on war?
Because voters think Republicans are tough and Democrats are weak. Voters are morons.
Not because voters are isolationists?
That is a good point, and probably plays into it as well.
Again because "wars didn't happen during his Presidency." They blame Harris for the messes in Iran, I/P, and Ukraine.
That's absolutely stupid. Does anyone understand what Vice President really means?
She's Biden's VP though. They blame her because "Biden started the wars."
And to pre-emptively respond to a comment that Mark27 (I can't help but still call him that) may make, higher educated turnout in midterms does not necessarily mean higher Democratic turnout. Mark likes to point out that there was higher turnout among educated voters in 2022, and tries to claim that this means there will be a surge in turnout among voters without a college degree, a surge that he assumes will be heavily Republican. However, it is difficult to square that assumption with the fact that, despite any education-related trends, Republican turnout was still higher than Democratic turnout in 2022. If you look at precinct election results in MI, PA, or almost any state, turnout in heavily Republican precincts was higher than turnout in heavily Democratic precincts (sometimes by significant margins). In a presidential election, there will be much less of a gap, and the voters who didn't vote in 2022 but will vote this year will still be heavily Democratic, if maybe not quite as much as those who voted in 2022 (i.e. a heavily minority, working-class precinct that voted 80-20 Dem in 2022 might see their new voters this year vote only 75-25 Dem, but that's still an increase in the overall Dem vote margin).
By all means, continue to call me Mark27! I tried to claim that name again but Substack said it was already taken (yet "Mark" wasn't?).
Your point is well-taken about blue county versus red county turnout in 2022.
Can you change it to Mark27a or something like that? I've done that before.
Or how about The Real Mark27?
Sounds like a DJ
That's why the GOTV advantage we have is so important(as to farming the Republican gotv out to grifters like Charlie kirk)
Correct me if I’m wrong but wasn’t turnout among core Ds in 2022 really bad? Like, 2010/14 bad, but we won on persuasion?
I think so, yeah. And it's tough for me to see how voters who were persuaded to vote for Dems in 2022 thanks to our anti-Trump or pro-choice messaging would vote for Trump now.
2010/14 level of bad turnout only in certain areas in certain states. Everyone remembers Florida and New York?
Also very bad for minority voter dominated areas. Most city centers, rural Black Belt, etc.
I know we shouldn't discount any polls we don't like but I refuse to take seriously any poll/pollster connected to Murdoch...he has his agenda and will do what he needs to do in order to control the dialogue.
Is there any record of Wall Street Journal polls being manipulated? Fox News polls are reputable, in spite of the organization. I don't think we should assume guilt by association.
Not directly related to your post, but imo fox(and the other right-wing outlets) will run that same 'RED WAVE' !!!!! BS from the last cycle; so maybe not the polling side of fox, but definitely the 'news' side will act disreputable
Do you think anyone reading needs to be convinced that an entertainment organization with "news" in its name that's had to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for libel is disreputable?
just me but I don't trust them
Do you also not trust Fox News polls?
don't they use a different polling company? one that is supposedly bi-partisan?
It's the same one they've had forever(pretty sure)
it says right there that the pollster Wall Street Journal used is a Democratic pollster and Fabrizio/Lee Associates. Fabrizio is Trump’s internal pollster. There have been many polls that Fabrizio has been jointly putting out recently to affect the narrative
https://www.newsweek.com/kamala-harris-swing-state-poll-trump-1967690