NYTimes: Trump and Harris Neck and Neck After Summer Upheaval, Times/Siena Poll Finds

Yep I can’t sleep either.

I'm no expert on US politics, but isn't being neck and neck better than Harris having a lead? I say this on the understanding that being neck and neck will get all the Harris voters out on polling day, whereas if she was leading, apathy can set in.

Trump and Harris Neck and Neck After Summer Upheaval, Times/Siena Poll Finds ...

I wish they'd open comments on this story.

r4 Why? It would just be a circlejerk of libs, all despairing over how this felonious orange turd is about to be elected president. You've seen one Trump comment section on NYT, you've seen them all. Hand-wringing isn't gonna get Kamala elected.

I haven't found that to be the case, r5.

Oh really, you've seen deplorables posting in the NYT comment section, r6?

Nice strawman.

Kamala is running into the same problem she did in 2020. As the campaign goes on the initial enthusiasm fades and she struggles to articulate a vision to voters.

Maybe I'm forgetting something, but I don't remember much of that "initial enthusiasm" in 2019, r9

Harris wins if the focus is on Trump. But she loses if the focus is on her lack of a vision. Trump can’t change but she still can.

Fake news. Typiocal NYT trying to make shit up. Really the editor ought to be arrested for fraud.

I saw a "Trump Great Comeback" magazine on sale at the grocery store. They are really going all in with this nonsense.

R10 Well in the early days of the campaign, especially after she went after Biden in the debate, she rose in the polls and was seen as being a contender. But then she fell off when it came to actually selling who Kamala Harris is and what she will do in office.

Horse race!!!

I think most of the enthusiasm for Harris was relief Biden wasn’t running. Harris herself is a lightweight. This is going to be another nail biter. If she loses then the Dems made a big mistake by not having an open convention, it would have been a mess but it would have produced a tougher candidate (including Harris).

I'm getting real fuckign tired of peopele saying Harris has no vision when her policy goals are clear. The problem is they are abominable to Project 2025 GOP, they know it, and they're trying to do to her what they did to Howard Dean by making the enthusiasm seem ungrounded and unhinged. This is FUD (fearm uncefrtainty, and doubt) trolling on a VERY energized base.

She should do a lot of local media in key swing states and podcasts that reach audiences she needs to build.

uncefrtainty can be fatal

But your dropping asshole of a face is permanent.

r18 Gurl, there's only 60 days left. And presumably, she'll have to be in the senate to cast her tiebreak vote once the senate reconvenes, which will again take away from her campaign time.

Sigh. The U.S. is so brutal.

Not being available to the press is hurting her. She really should be out there doing interviews and town halls.

They've created a vacuum, allowing the Trump campaign to define her with some pretty effective commercials.

The debate now has massive importance.

The one thing she has going for her is that she's up against Donald Trump.

The NY Times Sienna Poll has a 3 point margin of error and (as the NY Times article admits, is essentially an unchanged from the July poll. The battleground states mostly show Harris is tied or has a slim ( within the margin of error) lead. The Harris campaign can and will respond to the information in this poll via hard work and strategy. We are far from fucked, but we are on notice: This isn't going to be a walk on the beach and Harris, if you believe her comments on the issue, has always felt that this will be a very tight race, and she is prepared for it.

What I don't see in the Times article is acknowledgement that Harris has retained the support she got that Biden had lost, and she clearly has. In other words, Biden was losing voters to trump, but Harris got them back to a significant degree. Had she not, the race would be much less close if you assume Biden had continued to hemorrhage voters

Polls also have limitations and, as we have seen in recent cycles, have a hard time predicting what will happen on election day. Even in 2020 Biden's win was not as wide as many polls predicted. The so-called Red Wave that was widely predicted but never happened. etc. Polls have a very hard time tracking the opinions of younger voters and are still relying on people answering their phones which remains a selected, usually older sample because younger people don't have landlines generally and don't answer their phones.

The upshot of this poll is basically what everyone, including the Harris campaign, already knew: The race is essentially tied. I don't think the debate is unimportant but fot many people it won't move them one way or another unless there is another unmitigated disaster from either side. Even then, ground game and swing state strategy will trump trump if he manages to have a good debate. I hope he shits himself in a variety of ways, but the perception coming off the debate will have less impact that key state ground game and strategy.

The race is TIED not lost.

It's a horrific national poll for her this close to the election. But still, I trust her campaign is laser-focused on internal polls in the crucial states and will be adjusting her campaign according to those, not the national ones.

Rapist - Traitor - Career Criminal

Can you fucking imagine he loses the EC but wins the popular vote? Like, how would that even happen, unless Caifornia as a whole sat out the election?

I think Kamala will win the popular vote by an even larger margin than Biden did in 2020 r27

[quote]It's a horrific national poll for her this close to the election. But still, I trust her campaign is laser-focused on internal polls in the crucial states and will be adjusting her campaign according to those, not the national ones.

r24 here: Also, important to remember, the voters that the NY Times Sienna poll identified 30% of those polled as "needing to know more about Harris" 30% of undecided, but open to Harris voters are a huge opportunity.

Simply put this is a huge opportunity for either campaign but, if this poll is accurate, these undecided voters say they want more information about HARRIS, they aren't asking for more information about trump which could mean that they've formed an opinion about him that isn't very favorable. In other words, they are open to persuasion and if you haven't bough trumps big bag of bullshit yet, and are shopping, Harris has the advantage.

30% is settable. Harris can at least get half of that IMHO, I don't think trump can.

Many independent/undecided voters are low information voters to begin with. They typically only start to tune in after labor day and by "tune in" I mean they start skimming and grazing the candidates.

r29 I agree with all that, I just fear there's very little time left.

r30, yeah I get it. but by the same metric, when you factor in that Harris has only been at the top of the ticket since mid july and we aren't even 2 months away from that, the fact that she accomplished putting that fat orange mess on his heels and made this race competitive when it wasn't gives me hope.

I also remind myself that virtually nobody predicted Harris would do as well as she has done so far.

Stay strong R24

R23 just can't stop pushing the false GOP narrative that Kamala isn't talking to reporters and people. It's just that they aren't doing it in a way that they want.

Here's Harris talking to reporters about the Cheney endorsement in raw video.

[quote]Here's Harris talking to reporters about the Cheney endorsement in raw video.

LOL. No hon, that's NOT "doing interviews and town halls" as I said at R23.

[quote}Harris talking to reporters about the Cheney endorsement

A subject that no one cares about.

BTW: the whole video clip smells of being carefully staged.

[quote]Sigh. The U.S. is so brutal.

Sigh. The U.S. is so gerrymandered.

Of course NYT has a vested interest in keeping this a nail biter and having Democrats panic read their clickbait articles. Because, frankly, if you're not interested in their lifestyle sections (real estate, Wirecutter, cooking, etc), there's little to entice you.

Trump and Neck and Neck and more Neck.

Bull. The media sell more papers, more clicks, more views when these elections are a ‘horse race’. Smart media critics predicted a year ago that the mainstream media would be using words like ‘horse race’, ‘neck and neck’, ‘tight race’ at this point prior to election day. Been a digital subscriber to the NY Times for over 10 years now. I’ve never been closer to cancelling. If it wasn’t for ‘Connections’….

30% want more information about Kamala before they decide whether this 250-year-old democracy is worth saving. Fuck me.

[QUOTE] 30% want more information about Kamala before they decide whether this 250-year-old democracy is worth saving. Fuck me.

Right? Even Dick Cheney said “I don’t give a fuck, I’m voting for Kamala.”

This is push poll campaigning. Suppress the opposition, rally your base, manifest your outcome.

Would like to see an investigation into the NYT when Kamala wins.

[quote] I'm getting real fuckign tired of peopele saying Harris has no vision when her policy goals are clear.

Oh, dear. Clear? Where?! Her own web site has nothing on it except to send her money. No one knows what the heck she stands for. Everyone knows what Trump stands for.

[quote] The media sell more papers

Papers? Grandpa, sit down.

She should be holding non-stop pressers. Now the debate is make or break for her. That’s all the footage they’re going to have. Kamala is not a good debater.

I'm going to watch the debate but I'm not looking forward to Trump's psycho babble. It confounds me that he's even a contender.

I just hate that the election is decided by a few know-nothings in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Abolish the Electoral College.

Trump is a fucking criminal. How can you even consider him?

10 minutes after the Republicans win a popular vote and lose the Electoral Collage. The Electoral Collage is gone forever!

r46 Right after the civil war ends. Because you KNOW they wouldn't take that shit lying down like the Dems do.

The Scalia-Ginsburg Algorithm: There are absolutely no rules ever unless they give power to Rethugs

R10

[quote] Within twenty-four hours of the announcement, Harris's campaign received over $1.5 million in donations from about 38,000 individuals across all fifty states, with the average donation being $37.[29][30][31][32] At the time, this record amount tied with the one set by U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders during the 2016 election.[33]

[quote] An overflow crowd of over 20,000 attended her formal campaign kickoff event at Frank Ogawa Plaza in her hometown of Oakland, California, on January 27.[34][35] Numerous commentators noted that there were more attendees at Harris's kickoff event than Barack Obama's first presidential campaign kickoff in Springfield, Illinois, in 2007.[36]

Here’s the thing. During the summer months, if a campaign is healthy, like a high-jumper leaping over a 16’ high bar, the campaign goes up and peaks during the Convention. Then, the forces of gravity bring it back down, and once Labor Day hits, both campaigns are firmly no longer in the air, gravity has set in and the race becomes tighter.

R37, I *finally* cancelled on the NYT, and I actuated told them to fuck off because they are TRAITORS. It felt as good as the best orgasm ever. I strongly urge you to reconsider. This is the time to send a strong message by not giving *any* money to *any* business. Hit them where it hurts. Their wallets.

Back to the race…..we always knew this will be extremely tight. The Trump campaign is only buying ads in PA and GA, basically no place else. Which tells me they know they’ve already lost WI, MI, NV, AZ. So all your chips need to go on PA and GA.

And then in Senate races, gives money directly to the campaigns for Senators for PA and MT.

We need boots on the ground canvassing, postcards, pick up the phone with people you know, go TALK with your neighbors, your family. Fight for every single fucking vote. And if you live in a place like GA or TX, join the lawsuits over voter suppression and election interference. Put these fuckers on DEFENSE. Hit them from all sides. Also, please use more mischief and mockery. They really do work!

Nothing will satisfy r33. It will always be something, because that's what cunts do.

R50 It's so hard for some of us to give up on the NYT, which for all of our lives was the journalistic standard for quality reporting. It started with bizarre headline choices, and now it's editorial assignments and content. The NYT is no longer "neutral" in any meaningful sense. Given how information is accessed and disseminated is so different now in the "advanced digital" age. The NYT is no longer the referee in the Public Sphere, it is merely a source of noise like so many other noises.

I guess I'll wait until after the election, but I'll cancel too. There are days I barely read the principal articles now anyway.

Also, all the "oh Biden and Clinton were so much more ahead in 2016 and 2020 at this date!! " worries... nah, it's a completely different year. It's unknown who will win, but simply assessing what's going on now by comparing it to past years isn't helpful at all.

Obama was down even in certain October polls.

I guess it doesn’t matter what filth, lies and incoherent insanity come from his lips every fucking day. That this is even close speaks volumes about the depravity of the American people. It really doesn’t matter about Harris. Trump MUST be stopped, period. I can’t even stand being in a public place crowded with my fellow Americans. This country makes me want to vomit.

The NY/Times Siena poll is the highest rated and most respected of the polling organizations.

Funny, when the poll showed Kamala ahead, everyone was happy with it.

I gave up on the NYT when they endorsed Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar for the Dem nom.

Jesus Christ you with your little gang of straw men.

You = r55.

At the debate, Kamala needs to push Trump's buttons until he goes beserk LIVE.

There is no use in fretting over 1 percentage point.

I agree very much, R17. People who say she has no vision or isn't connecting with the voters are trying to *create* that narrative, not articulate it. Much of this country appears to have a nihilistic bent that loves chaos and self-destruction. Why does it all have to be so fucking dramatic? Vote for the person who seems like they can do the job of being U.S. president and running the government for the next for years, not fulfill some crazy dark prophecy or whatever the fuck they think they're doing.

I don’t think that will make much of a difference, R59. Stop focusing on Trump and focus more on Kamala. How she performs, how she explains her many policy shifts (which the moderators are going to hammer her on), these things will matter far more than Trump.

This election, unfortunately, is turning into a referendum on Kamala Harris. The debate moderators are coming for her neck to prove they’re “balanced” and because they’re reporters who don’t like the way Kamala’s been ducking them. She’ll be battling them AND Donald Trump at the debate. It’s going to be the first debate all over again in that Trump doesn’t really matter. All eyes will be on Kamala, just like they were on Joe Biden in June.

Well, that’s a good thing since she is calm and coherent while Trump is an insane mess.

He won't give a shit if she attacks him on policy, it'll be water off a duck's back. You only get under the skin of a necrotic narcissist like him through personal attacks. But she needs to do it with finesse, so the voters don't perceive her as mean.

The good news is, he'll already be entering the debate spooked because he's never met her before and strong black women put him on edge by default. I know he's watched the 2020 VP debate (he truthed about it), but that can't prepare him for Kamala in person. On the other hand, Kamala is in a similar boat because she also has never met him.

[quote] still relying on people answering their phones which remains a selected, usually older sample because younger people don't have landlines generally and don't answer their phones.

Well, the article says that 96% of the respondents were on cell phones so that's not the flaw in the holy God-Damned [italic]New York Times[/italic] polling strategy. No, their flaw is that they admit their bias toward Shitler when they say:

[quote]we give more weight to respondents from demographic groups that are underrepresented among survey respondents, like people without a college degree.

First, they're saying that they are relying on polling methodology based on polling problems/deficiencies from the last two cycles; second, that demographic groups have not changed as their members have been replaced. Plainly put, the people without degrees in 2016 are now in their late 20s and early 30s, are established, and are being heard from in spades while the new members of these demographic groups are, frankly, more than represented when you look at influencers, the new internet-age pundits who are neither shy, meek nor demure.

The key to understanding this poll is that they ended up with a sample of 1,695 registered voters after nearly 194,000 calls to nearly 104,000 voters. How they massage that data is the critical question. And call me skeptical, but after two solid years of "he's old" stories on the front page (whether print or online), after two years of "but her emails" above the fold in 2016, after story after story after story in which an intrepid reporter trudges to some diner in the middle of nowhere to once again remind us that we just don't pay enough attention to the people who literally get the most attention of anyone in America (if you go by the column inches devoted to them by the holy God-Damned [italic]New York Times[/italic] ), I doubt that we can rely on these polling results being indicative of anything other than the holy God-Damned [italic]New York Times[/italic] conducted what they call a poll.

I'll make one final point: On September 5, 2012, the holy God-Damned [italic]New York Times[/italic] poll called the race between Obama and Romney a dead heat, a complete misreading of the state of the race. In early September of 2016, like everybody else, they said that Hillary was the favorite. In September of 2020, they were back to the horserace characterization. They've been wrong for three cycles, and the one thing I think we can all agree upon is that they are no better at either taking or reading a poll today than they were then.

The latest NYT poll says that 99 percent of America thinks I’m unfuckable.

Some news organization with guts needs to document the wild decline of the NYT. It’s nothing but clickbait these days.

Remember the op-ed this year pronouncing Beyoncé is her own religion?

Good grief, wtf happened?

[quote]Good grief, wtf happened?

AO "I'm not gonna defend democracy" Sulzberger. Nepotism at its worst.

[quote] . Been a digital subscriber to the NY Times for over 10 years now.

You express exactly how I feel, R37.

Not only unfuckable, R66, but now Silver works for Peter Thiel and his online betting venture, so there's no reason to believe that he's impartial or even willing to be neutral. And it's obvious when he continues to claim that Trump has a 62% chance of winning the Electoral College, which just happens to be in line with the odds on Thiel's platform. But it's just a coincidence, I'm sure.

[quote] Been a digital subscriber to the NY Times for over 10 years now. I’ve never been closer to cancelling.

I meant to quote all of R37--the part about cancelling the NYT. I'm sick lof their clickbait crap trying to play off our fear and dread.

You know you can get a Games-only subscription to the NYT right?

This is my favorite quote of the day:

“Trump is veering off script and saying bizarre things that will ensure he gets a smaller share of independents and Republicans in the Pennsylvania suburbs than he did in 2020.”

[quote] 10 minutes after the Republicans win a popular vote and lose the Electoral Collage. The Electoral Collage is gone forever!

How?

[quote] It's so hard for some of us to give up on the NYT, which for all of our lives was the journalistic standard for quality reporting.

That’s a load of horseshit. They beat the drum for the Iraq war and outed CIA agents for Republicans.

The NY Times text alert when I turned on my phone was “Voters need to know more about Harris/Trump still strong despite a rough month.” It fucking ruined my morning.

I am increasingly pessimistic and anxious.

I accepted an invitation to see a movie with a friend on Tuesday night (Beetlejuice Beetlejuice) because I just can’t watch the debate. I’m going to record it and watch it later. It’s just stressing me out.

R78 I counteract that feeling by volunteering. I signed up for a postcard campaign in swing states and even if it’s a drop in the bucket, it’s so satisfying to write and mail them. Get your friends involved and do what you can to mobilize voters. A huge turnout for Kamala is absolutely critical.

[quote]I am increasingly pessimistic and anxious.

Then our plan is working!

Any polling model that still relies on phone calls being answered (cell or landline) is suspect. Any polling model that is "weighted" for any justification is suspect. Polls that rely on old-guard/legacy media sponsorship or participation always have a manipulative narrative to promote and thus are also suspect. I don't care who is designated as"winning" or "losing" in these polls; I ignore them entirely. The only results that matter occur on election day. Everything else is noise and manipulative prodding to generate attention and clicks for advertising. This happens every election cycle, and still, people jump on that hamster wheel of allowing themselves to be manipulated. Incredible.

I'm on the verge if canceling my NYT subscription.

I canceled my NYT subscription then reluctantly renewed it. Thinking of cancelling again after endless manipulative shit like this.

Ditto, R83 - I'm going to miss "Cooking" and "Games."

r85 if you need an alternative to Wordle, I enjoy Quordle.

yawn

Thanks, R87.

You can play all the games without a NYT subscription. I play Connections every day.

I got tired of Connection relatively quickly. It's more of a "guess what I'm thinking" game than an exercise in logic.

I canceled the NYT and have not resubscribed.

I gave "Rampant pro-Trump bias" as my reason.

[quote]At the debate, Kamala needs to push Trump's buttons until he goes beserk LIVE.

His supporters know he's batshit, and THEY. DONT. CARE. They've accepted his hatefulness with open arms. They view him as an outsider battling "the establishment".

People still thinking that there's going to be some big moment where the mask is pulled off and his supporters come to their senses are delusional at this point. It's not happening.

Kamala needs to keep focusing on policy, particularly the economy and reforming the Supreme Court. Policy, Policy, policy, policy.

And for the love of all, distance herself from anything Republican related.

Making a big deal out of the Cheney endorsement is a mistake. It's giving red meat to Trumpers to as well as independents, especially the Jill Stein crowd, who will use it to further their "Both parties are the same" mantra.

If the next NYTimes/Siena poll shows Kamala in the lead, will you all re-subscribe?

No r93. I dropped my subscription years ago when they started normalizing Dump and didn’t call him out for his batshit crazy stuff.

[quote]younger people don't have landlines generally and don't answer their phones.

r24 Facts. I have an app on my phone that blocks calls identified as spam. I'm pretty sure these polling calls are flagged as spam and don't get through. All of the election texts I've been getting have been getting blocked as spam, also.

R93 You're not reading, or something. The "poll" isn't the problem. The "news" is.

The government needs to buy shares in some of these media companies so that an alternative to right wing disinformaiton gets out. None of these media "moguls" is reall that rich.

These are YouTubers. Anyone can start a Youtube channel. There are 10s of thousands of them,

There are YouTubers on the left, on the right and everything in-between.

The necks are the worst features of both.

I cannot fathom HOW they could even be close. What the hell is wrong with people, supporting that lawless bastard? Rhetorical question.

In a sane country, Kamala would win in a landslide. I am cautiously optimistic that she will win.

R100, Trump is very much an American phenomenon who has captured the American right-wing. He has very little appeal outside the United States. If you look at polls in other countries that are allies of the U.S., like Canada and the UK, the large majority of people say they dislike Trump and wouldn't vote for him. America is one of the only countries where Trump has a strong chance of winning. He is hated in most other places.

No, Trump is a right wing populist who came to power because of anti immigration blowback. Take a look at Europe and Canada. They are experiencing exactly the same thing. They just have their own leaders. Trump is NOT an American phenomen. The blowback to immigration is everywhere.

..phenomenon..

[quote]He has very little appeal outside the United States.

I don't know if you're joking or not, but he has extraordinary appeal abroad. He's a big part of the reason QAnon has gone international and believe me or not, they're all waiting for him to return. There are also countless russophiles in my country who are basically praying for him to be elected again because he'll pull Ukraine's aid.

They might technically not be the majority, but he has done what no American president before him had done when it comes to foreign appeal. His strong man clownery is irresistible to a certain percentage of people who crave autocracy. Which is around 20% or so in just about every country.

New ad from the Harris campaign tries to get under Donald's skin in advance of the debate.

Titled “The Best People,” it features clips of media interviews with officials from the Trump administration talking about their decision not to endorse their former boss or warning about the dangers he would pose in a second term.

The ad will run nationally on Fox News and in West Palm Beach — home to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort — and Philadelphia media markets on Tuesday, the day of the debate.

[quote]I don't know if you're joking or not, but he has extraordinary appeal abroad.

Uh-huh.

"As has been the case throughout his presidency, U.S. President Donald Trump receives largely negative reviews from publics around the world. Across 32 countries surveyed by Pew Research Center, a median of 64% say they do not have confidence in Trump to do the right thing in world affairs, while just 29% express confidence in the American leader."

Actually almost 30% is amazingly high for a controversial leader like Trump! Especially because of his strong isolationist beliefs and refusal to placate allies. Most of his rhetoric is xenophobic. His entire platform is America first,

Just change that to Italy first or Germany first and see how popular his policies would be.

[quote]Actually almost 30% is amazingly high for a controversial leader like Trump!

Uh-huh.

Wall Street Journal poll has Harris up 6 points nationally.

It's unbelievble he still has support in the South as a Yankee who is anti-military.

R106 Google Translate is your friend:

" Il 58,4% degli italiani, se vivesse negli Stati Uniti, voterebbe per Donald Trump alla Casa Bianca, mentre il 73,8% è convinto che sia proprio il tycoon l’uomo giusto per mettere rapidamente fine ai conflitti in Ucraina e Medio Oriente."

[Quote] Harris herself is a lightweight.

An attorney, district attorney, senato and vice president, all despite being a POC?

Yes, what a lightweight! Certainly nothing compared to a white guy born with a silver spoon in his mouth who failed at every business venture he ever attempted, other than the one he inherited from his father.

She needs to get on the evening talk shows; it does wonders for regular people to bond with the candidates and see them as human, not just a politician.

Also, is this campaign for the US or for just the battleground states? Wouldn't it be nice if one of the candidates appeared in a state that is close and could be ripe for the plucking?

Walz needs to be unleashed in his " coach" persona and talk to men. Use what he is good at - the down home approach. Progressive media is treating men as all MAGAt, toxic masculinity addled Neanderthals, thereby relying solely on messaging women.

I’m over it. If America wants to elect a nazi, so be it.

[quote]Wouldn't it be nice if one of the candidates appeared in a state that is close and could be ripe for the plucking?

That's called overextending yourself and is exactly how Hillary lost the EC. Every day you spend in a state that could be flipped is a day not spent in a state that you absolutely must win.

R113 Agreed. I have no idea why they don't have Walz doing ESPN sports talk shows or popular sports commentary podcasts/YouTube channels.

Continuing with the curious incapacity of the NYT to do anything these days other than suck Trump's dick: on the day of the debate check the many opinion pieces/stories that "admit" the strength of Trump's base, ideas, strategies. "Kamala Harris Could Be in Trouble" "A Crucial Demographics Emerging in the Election: Begrudging Trump Voters" "Trump Makes No Sense and is Full of Meaning" etc. etc.

For some time in the last couple years I'd read in social media criticisms of the NYT's increasing MAGA-friendly filters and editorial choices. I sort of thought it was just center-left anxiety and frustration about how Trump and MAGA won't just go away. But more recently it's seemed apparent. The vaunted NYT is cahoots with MAGA. Fuck, maybe I've lived too long.

Headlines today on the inflation numbers (lowest rise since 2021):

Washington Post: Inflation eased in September as election nears

New York Times: Consumer Price Increases Cooled, But Not as Much as Expected

to compare

Fox News: Inflation rises 2.4% in September, above expectations

Conclusion - NYT is even more warped/negative than Fox. The world we live in now...

I predict a Democratic landslide of mammoth proportions.

Yeah, clearly the Times will never get over its butthurt that first Biden and now Harris won't rush to make them the chief outlet and the first interview they want to give. Sorry, NYT, not everybody defers to your wisdom and your whole philosophy that both sides are equally to blame for everything, even when one side is clearly crazy and treasonous.

R120 Yeah, I saw a podcast yesterday about how this election cycle confirms how useless the old flagships of mainstream media are to candidates. Harris ignoring the NYT and spending an hour with Howard Stern is indicative of the current world, not anything disparaging the NYT.

The reason this race is even slightly close is a reflection on the media. They are the architects of Trump's normalization, and they're complicit. This is shameful.

It's very much that, R122--the media constantly makes polls with the same results ("Oh, so close!") and prey off the fears of others, all the while continuing to give credence (and attention) to those clowns who are supposedly "undecided." Like fuck they are.

Because without that traitor, r122, they’re irrelevant.

He brings in eyeballs, and the more horrific his bullshit, the better they like it.

It’s just a stupid game to the media. They normalize his treason and he brings them clicks. They’re addicted to each other and I hope they crash and burn together in a white hot blast.

I certainly hope that if Harris gets in the public deserts the mainstream media even faster than it is now. It doesn't have to be to social media, either.

I heard an interesting opinion today about the quickly increasing popularity of podcasts. It was that while the networks all claim the public don't want to hear hoary old experts going on about politics (or anything else), in fact in sport and politics (and anything they're seriously interested in), that's exactly what people DO want. That they are tired of watching the media interview candidates, who either lie outright, do their best not to give a straight answer, or all sound the same because they've had the same media training, because voters don't learn anything useful from that. Face it, all of us only watched the debate in the hope that Kamala would whup Trump, not because we thought we'd learn anything. People are also tired of media personalities giving breezy opinions backed up by nothing in particular, as seen on most of the panel shows. The theory is that they want to hear, directly and unmediated, and at whatever length is most appropriate, from people who have experience or expertise in the area, whom they judge as likely to be telling them the truth, and who are supplying evidence to back their claims. Exactly as per sports, where they want their commentators to be people who really understand how the game works, and who can point out the key moments in a game or key trends in a team's development under a new coach that most people might miss.

Now obviously, some people do just want to read conspiracies on social media and some want to be told what to think by Fox (or MSNBC at the other end), but podcasts, including serious ones, have had a very big rise in popularity in the last couple of years and there might well be something to this. Is the podcast the last bastion of expertise and serious analysis?

This election reminds me of Sophie’s Choice

I don't understand how it can be close, why would people vote for Trump?

Because we live in a country filled with millions of bascially evil people.

This election will not be close at all.

Harris will win in a landslide.

R127, the economy, the woke stuff, and crime. People can’t afford to live. The very rich are making out like bandits. The economy is working out great for them but not every day Americans. The very rich will be voting for Trump too.

You can thank Hollywood and NYC for Trump. NYC should have jailed him decades ago and Hollywood made him an international star. They should be horse whipped.

[quote]I don't understand how it can be close, why would people vote for Trump?

Maybe they feel their lives were better under Trump/Pence than Biden/Harris.

Ever think of that?

Oh, fuck off, r133.

Your boy Trump (and that's what he is - a boy who has been allowed to throw a world-wide temper tantrum) is the luckiest Son-of-a-Bitch ever.

Since the 2008 crash, all economic indicators were slowly, steadily trending up. When Trump was elected, he got to enjoy that high crest of the wave of a positive economy.

ANY POTUS who took office in 2016 would have had that economy. And of course, Trump claimed credit. I

And let me beat you to it. All US Presidents are granted too much credit in a good economy and are given too much blame in a bad one.

The only thing Trump ever did was pass a law that made billionaires wealthier while sticking the poor with the bill.

Then Covid happened and the ignorant bastard screwed the pooch.

But, go ahead, moron. Credit Trump with making you think your life was better when he was the POTUS.

That sounds like about your speed.

See the idiocy of people like R134?

To the question: "I don't understand how it can be close, why would people vote for Trump?"

All I wrote was: "Maybe they feel their lives were better under Trump/Pence than Biden/Harris."

And off she goes on a bizarre rant.

Honey, calm down. People vote for what THEY feel is in THEIR best interests. And this applies to those who vote for Harris as well as those who vote for Trump.

I know this will disappoint you, but it has nothing to do with what YOU think is best for them. Arrogant asshole.

[Quote] Many people vote for what they have been BRAINWASHED into thinking is in their best interests. And this applies to those who vote for Trump almost exclusively.

FTFY r135.

Millions of people tune into Fox “News” every day and are subjected to a torrent of rightwing propaganda that has no equivalent on the center/left side. Despite the economy being in sound shape they’re told things are miserable. They’re told ridiculous lies about immigrants and democrats. Trans people are waiting behind every shrub to groom little Brayden! It’s straight up agitprop and fundamentally dishonest … and it’s all constitutionally protected.

Trump voters are voting the way they’ve been brainwashed into thinking is best for them.

"It's the economy, stupid" - Jim Carville.

Sometimes it's as simple as that.

Fox News....MSNBC.....CNN....blah...blah....blah....

For the most part, people will judge whether their lives were better under Trump/Pence or Biden/Harris.

Not true R133. Trump left office with the lowest approval rating in the history of the nation.

Spare me R137. So many bots telling me that they’re voting for Trump because life was so good in 2016, WHEN OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT. You’d think the troll farm would at least get that detail right. So over this tired trope.

My taxes went UP under that fucking shitstain traitor.

So did everyone else’s who makes less than $50k.

Him, his retarded qult, the kkkoch cunts and that sack of shit Jimmy, can all drop dead.

Trump shouldn't even be allowed to run. Criminal, stupid, crazy and I could go on and on. The worst candidate in the history of my life and I'm old.

[quote] Not true [R133]. Trump left office with the lowest approval rating in the history of the nation.

And today Americans feel that they were better off under Trump than Biden per CNN. The polls don’t lie and Americans have short attention spans, in fact, Trump’s approval right now is higher than it was when he was president and he’s way more popular than Biden. What’s hurting Kamala is Biden. Biden is the most unpopular president in the history of polling.

[quote]What’s hurting Kamala is Biden. Biden is the most unpopular president in the history of polling.

What's hurting Kamala now is the appalling ignorance of half the American public, more than happy to vote against their own interests to put a depraved con man back in the White House.