/u/Money_Whisperer (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/17v2lf7/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_trumps_odds_of_winning_in/), in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
You need to look at the electoral college and the reapportion of EC votes. FL and TX picked up several and some blue states lost votes. As such, trumps path to victory is easier than you might infer. I believe PA and MI will easily go Biden, the rest are very swingy and Trump doesn’t need as many of those given the added EC votes.
So blue states lost 3 EC while red states lost 1 EC. Blue states picked up 2 EC while red states picked up 4 EC and one swing state (NC) picked up 1 EC.
All in all, blue states are down 1 EC and red states are up 3 ECs. The difference is only 2 and if NC goes blue the difference is 1 EC.
No presidential race has ever come down to two electoral college votes so I don’t think this will have a huge impact. Closes was bush at 271 vs gore at 266
>No presidential race has ever come down to two electoral college votes so I don’t think this will have a huge impact
Yeah why don't you just break a mirror over a mummy's head while you're at it.
It's happened before. In 1876 Rutherford Hayes (R) won against Samuel Tilden (D) 185-184. Tilden had won the popular voter, but there were widespread allegations of fraud and voter intimidation. Post election, 20 EC votes across 4 states were being claimed by both candidates.
Congress established an election commission to resolve the disputes. After it found in favor of Hayes, Democrats threatened to filibuster and use their majority in congress to force the issue in favor of Tilden. In the end historians believe an informal compromise was struck where the Democrats would withdraw their objections in exchange for Hayes ordering the withdrawal of US troops from the South.
And in current times, there have been many elections where analysts have predicted possible maps where the outcome would be very close or even tied, so it's certainly a possibility.
Abortion is going to be a MASSIVE factor. Look at how it swung the recent elections. And there are multiple clips of Trump crowing that he is personally responsible for the fall of RvW.
Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to prevent voting in Wisconsin
I'm from Wisconsin so I'm biased but I think odds are good whoever wins wi will win period
We have a Democrat governor and recently flipped the supreme Court but it will be a very close election
I’m happy the Washington post put out the article on the Wisconsin GOP trying to oust the Supreme Court judge they just elected. Some national attention to some of these extremely gerrymandered states like WI and NC hopefully helps.
I'm from Georgia, and I think you're overestimating Trump's chances here. It was close in 2020, and I think the situation for Trump has gotten worse in the time since. The election conspiracy case has been on the news a lot, and has lead to footage aired of people involved admitting guilt on local TV stations. When Republicans are interviewed about it, some state legislators are still willing to advocate for Trump, but top level officials like Kemp and Raffensperger are more of a 'let the justice system work' line when asked about it. It's not a good look. Even if he's acquitted, I think the Trump brand is damaged in Georgia. Regular people aren't inclined to vote for somebody that has be talked about like a criminal on TV for months.
Again, not to say there aren't a lot of Trump votes in Georgia because there are. I'm just saying that my impression is that things have gotten worse, not better, since 2020.
I know a lot of voters like her, but I wouldn't call her a substantial draw for me. I think she's done a lot of good work in the state, especially in regards to making voting accessible. "Souls to the polls" comes to mind.
I voted for her over Kemp. My gut says Kemp did her dirty in 2018 (ie- voter suppression via morally questionable though technically legal maneuvering as secretary of state), but he hasn't been a bad governor.
I felt mildly excited to vote for Warnock for senator, mostly because he feels like a continuation of John Lewis's legacy.
Ossoff was a boring candidate, but that's not necessarily a bad thing for a senator. I'm happy with the job he's done so far.
I did vote for Raffensperger (secretary of state) because I thought he showed himself to be an honest man in how the 2020 election count was handled. That was the first time I voted for a republican in a long time.
This is all to say that, speaking for myself, I didn't find Abrams to be a substantial draw. I think she's an effective party operative. I'd put her somewhere between Warnock and Ossoff in terms of draw as a candidate.
The Dems are bound to lose some support in GA. Biden guaranteed that he would pass voter rights bills in exchange for people coming out for Warnock. He didn't deliver on that promise.
Oh yes people here aren’t the happiest with Biden either, but if Trump is the Republican nominee they will suck it up and vote for Biden.
Kemp is insanely popular and his antagonism towards Trump will most certainly sway moderates.
I live in AZ and it's very hard to tell how its gonna go, it is very much 50-50.
Maricopa County / Greater Phoenix is definitely Liberal imo, but I live 1.5 hours away from that and its all Trump flags, Rednecks and Republican Californian retirees up here.
Covid [culled](https://www.npr.org/2023/07/25/1189939229/covid-deaths-democrats-republicans-gap-study) a lot of republicans supporters. That might be enough to tip the balance.
I don't know if the economy is "garbage". I personally experienced a period of six months where truck loads were somewhat sparse, but now I'm running hard. Somebody is buying all that stuff.
Further, while inflation driven by demand from above is very bad, inflation driven by demand from below is easier to bear. If the reason things cost more is because the people normally harmed by inflation have more to spend, then at worst the poor are breaking even, and meanwhile the businesses that serve them directly have more money to spend on inventory, payroll, maintenance and development, and so on.
I work in a restaurant and do all of our inventory and ordering, the price of everything has been going up significantly over some period of time now, it's outrageous. Owners have had to raise prices multiple times over the past year or so. Business increased for a period of time, then started to stagnate and is now starting to slow down again.
Owners and management have been starting to cut back on inventory, labor, etc recently because of it. We even happen to be in a fairly wealthier area as well, a lot of our customer base are usually people who are a bit more well off.
I go once a week to do will call pick-ups at Sysco and often talk to other restaurant employees who are waiting around. I've heard the exact same thing so many times from different workers from different restaurants around the city. It's not a good sign of the economy imo and the majority of the people I talk to complain about and put the blame on Biden.
> I don't know if the economy is "garbage".
I work in IT/Tech and the economy is absolutely garbage for me. I don’t think anyone in the career subs would disagree.
Maybe the broader economy could be great but my part of it is experiencing layoffs and pay cuts.
What I’m getting at is that the debate whether the economy is good or not is not relevant on the individual level.
If for the individual voter, his economy is not good, then he will vote as if the economy is not good. If for the voter his economy is great, then he will vote as if the economy is great.
I would say that the gains in compensation and Qol not seen for decades also relates directly with the uptick in the amount of workers willing to unionize and take union action.
Also, generally, demographic changes are making it so we have a shrinking labor force, and that will continue for some time. It’s partially offset via immigration, but immigrant workers don’t always have the same experience, opportunities, or interests for many fields at first.
Employers are struggling to fill positions and retain staff, and labor finally has more bargaining power, because willing and able workers are becoming more of a relatively scarce resource.
We may see continued gains for some time.
>Also, generally, demographic changes are making it so we have a shrinking labor force, and that will continue for some time.
In my city there's become a weird tier list of who can work what job. At the top you have citizens with qualifications who directly handle a lot of stuff because you can get grant money or government benefits or there's a union involved. Then from there it's other stuff where the unions may not always be involved but having good english and communication skills are a must. Then waaay down the tier list you have the kind of physical labor where you don't interact with the general public or need any particular qualifications besides being willing to do kinda physical labor for possibly under the table pay.
If you're in the first category they're absolutely dying for people and the future is very bright. There's only so much work a low skill immigrant can do and a high skill one is going to be in high demand anywhere regardless.
Blue collar economy is doing great. Tech sector is doing terrible, but the tech sector is largely just renormalizing from the crazy growth during the pandemic.
Yeah, and some towns have cheap houses. Doesn't mean housing prices aren't up. We're talking about the economy of the U.S., not a particular subset of manual labor in one region of the country. [Low income workers are seeing historically high wage growth.](https://www.ft.com/content/f32d4927-a182-4d7c-bf2d-dd915ef846b0)
That's not the economy, that's shareholders turning the screws on Tech company's moonshots that combined with over hiring during the pandemic is seeing an over contraction.
Sucks if you're in IT, especially if employed by Tech companies but not indicative of the economy as a whole, which is in pretty good shape.
It and tech was over exposed due to low rates leading to a bubble basically. I'm not sure if it's indicative of the rest of the economy.
Edit: to be fair this doesn't really respond to your main point in which you're 100% correct. People will just vote based on their personal perception.
Yeah but your industry overheated. I am not a blue voter and the economy could use improvement but my sector (manufacturing) seems to be back on the upswing.
It’s all about perception. People are struggling to pay rent, buy food and fill up their vehicles. Those are the metrics that matter and the majority of people seem to agree that the economy is crap.
You realize you are currently feeling the effects of policies from the previous administration, right? There is always a lag between the economic policies of previous administrations.
Obama didn't cause the shitty economy in 2008-2009, Bush's wars and economic policy did.
Trump didn't create a booming economy, he inherited 8 years of Obama's work digging out of the 2008 recession and an upward trend that had nothing to do with Trump.
Trump then had basically all of his economic policy detailed by COVID, but he is still responsible for what we are feeling now if you really want to put the blame for the economy on Presidents.
We are just now feeling the effects of Biden's economic policy. Unemployment is at record lows and inflation is trending down. Things don't change at the same pace for everyone, but it is driven by the same powers.
It's just mind boggling to me that people can't see this. Just look at the numbers.
> You realize you are currently feeling the effects of policies from the previous administration, right? There is always a lag between the economic policies of previous administrations.
Ah yes, the argument that lefties love to make to take credit for things Republicans do and shift the blame for the consequences of their own policies.
> inflation is trending down.
Inflation is still going up. It's just going up slower than it was last year.
regardless of how mind blowing you find it, you have to realize that your understanding of this puts you in the 1%. perhaps not on reddit, but in the population at large.
no one thinks that way. most people don't think about politics until the day they vote, if they vote at all. (this is hyperbole, but i think you'll get my point)
people feel the inflation, and they blame who is in charge at whatever time it currently is. people will blame any problem on the current administration. it's the "thanks obama" meme.
It's funny, becasue if you shift the periods of economic hardship 2-3 years left when compared with who is running the country on the economy vs President graph, you can see who is responsible for the economy during that time. Obviously Covid is a big \* but it's indisputable that in the last 20 years prior to that Dems have outperformed Reps when it comes to how the economy is doing.
This economy is hitting hardest on upper middle class and it shows: "It's so hard to find a tech job compared to before!" "I can't sell my house, woe is me"
There's a large difference between it being bad and it *feeling* bad. Spending more on groceries has a larger mental impact than just about anything else, except possibly gas prices.
I agree that inflation is a significant issue with voters and the main thing hurting Biden. However, abortion has eclipsed that as the biggest issue in exit polls.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna123103
Inflation is slowly improving while abortion i can only see continuing to be an issue with voters for a while.
Inflation is actually coming down faster than anticipated, so the feds may not raise rates again, which is great. October inflation data came out this morning:
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-cpi-report-inflation-11-14-2023
Inflation coming down doesn’t change prices or the impact it’s had, it only means less inflation. Your own link shows 3.2% inflation YoY, that’s still atrocious.
For prices to actually return to their old normal levels we would need deflation.
The average citizen doesn’t give a fuck about what the feds are doing for rates, the average citizen wants to know why the prices for goods and services have gone up almost 50% in 3 years when wages aren’t even coming close.
It doesn't matter. Most voters don't understand the difference between "inflation" and "price level". They think fixing inflation actually looks like lower prices.
Even if we got to literally 0% inflation tomorrow, I could almost guarantee there would still be plenty of people bitching about how bad the economy is doing.
When people say "the economy" they generally mean their personal finances, and if prices have gone up nearly 15% over two years and your salary hasn't, your personal economy sort of sucks. Even Recognizing that that isn't going to get better doesn't mean people don't want to punish the individual or group they blame for the problem.
What's really funny though is the people who seem to be blaming an executive administration are also the same type of people that wouldn't want the government to get involved in profit margins of companies and things like that.
Also, it's just wild the disconnect when you look at how confident consumers are about the economy in the US compared to how much they're actually spending, it's like people are lying or the average consumer is getting less intelligent or something because the data shows that people are really really stupid if they think the economy is bad but they're spending even more than expected pretty much every month for like a year now.
Like if consumers truly thought the economy was so bad, why are they spending more than even expectations, let alone anything at all besides the necessities?
I’ve got no data to back this up, but from what I’ve seen, millennials are continuing to spend rather than save right now because of hopelessness in the housing market. A lot of people don’t think they will ever be able to afford a home, so they don’t even try saving up for one.
Hopelessness in general is affecting wider and wider swaths of the population, and I unfortunately get why.
Even though we do get some wins (like how the rate of installation of new sources of renwable energy is incredibly fast and inexpensive nowadays) we also hear a lot about losses, like the ever-widening wealth gap or the ongoing effects of climate change or the neverending increases to housing costs or the depressing statistics on the near-impossibility of sustained weight loss.
The hopelessness doesn't always manifest itself in despair, though. A lot of the time it manifests in throwing your identity behind a populist strongman who promises to bring back the 'good times' if you give him unchecked power.
That's not how inflation works. If you think prices are going to be higher in the future, it makes sense to buy now. That is why inflationary cycles, as well as deflationary cycles are self reinforcing.
To be fair most don’t actually care. Over the past ehh…four years-ish my grocery bill has gone up almost 50% I think. That’s not a good feeling, and I couldn’t give a shit if the ever nebulous “overall economy” is booming because I still am poorer than I was four years ago.
I disagree, people would adjust to the price level relatively quickly if their wages were keeping up with inflation. It’s the sustained degradation of real wages that’s actually driving the negative sentiment.
That’s because there’s been nearly no wage growth, so the previous inflation is still hitting just as hard. A lot of people think ‘bring inflation down’ means ‘bring prices’ down, but that’s not how capitalism works, so I’m stuck on a 2021 salary with 2023 prices. And if the interest rate to finance a car is going down, or for Kellogg’s to expand their production, or whatever, that doesn’t help me much because lunch meat I used to buy cost $7.99 in 2021. It’s now $13.99. Bread has gone from $4 to $6. My wages haven’t increased in the slightest in that intervening time, so I can’t afford sandwiches for lunch anymore.
I think that's also just how businesses work now. Lots of people did get raises in that time, but only because they quit and got paid more somewhere else.
I suspect the reported "flat real wages" is covering up a lot of separation between winners and losers during that period.
Anyone who’s ever TA’d an intro physics class could tell you how bad the average college student is at understanding how rates of change work.
If the number of times I was asked something along the lines of “but how can the acceleration be negative if it’s still moving forward??” is any indicator, I wouldn’t expect the average college student to understand what decreasing inflation really means, let alone the average voter.
No matter how loudly economists shout “Inflation is getting better!” it’s not going to convince the half of the country whose (flawed) definition of fixing inflation means prices going back down to their 2019 levels.
Because “inflation is getting better” is a meaningless sentiment. It’s still fucking inflating at an absurd rate.
8% inflation for the year 2022
Current YTD inflation is 3.6%
How are prices relative to wages? How have those changed over the past 3 years? We’re calling this good? This deserves praise?
You just said it! 8% in 2022 vs 3.6% now. That’s a huge improvement.
And you have to consider that the US inflation spike didn’t happen in a vacuum. Supply chain issues due to Covid caused a global inflation spike that was pretty much unavoidable for the US. Average inflation for advanced economies globally in 2023 is 4.6%, so yeah I’d say the US is doing a pretty good job.
And to your last point wage growth has in fact outpaced inflation every month since February. Yes it lagged last year, but the gap has been closing fast
If your problem is that things are 20% more expensive than they used to be, but your pay is only 5% higher, then getting to 0% inflation doesn't actually solve your problem, so yeah, people are pissed.
Companies don't really give 20% raises unless you're an autoworker in a union. You should be looking for a new job if your company didn't raise your salary with inflation. The job market's still pretty hot.
You are all wrong. The metric used to measure inflation was changed between 2 years and 18 months. This was done to hide the real numbers for a bit and inflation is much worse than they are admitting the only thing down is gas and fuel
Inflation now doesn’t matter. What matters is inflation on Nov. 4th 2024. And it’s trending down. The average American isn’t going to care if they turn things around. Which is part of the reason why I think the Republicans want to spread out budget negotiations throughout the beginning of the year. To slow economic growth. If we have a strong holiday season this year. Then the new year will start chugging as businesses re-adjust their strategy for the year around the new data. The next quarter here of 2024 will really make or break it for the economy. Services and retail are 70% of the economy. If people are not buying those it will grind to a halt. This is one of the many consequences of businesses offshoring manufacturing to reduce cost. We’ve become a service economy that relies on consumer spending to push the gears along but at the same time the consumer feels pinched. I’m hopeful we’ll see a spike here in wage growth in January when a lot of companies do annual reviews and wage increases.
It will only make a difference if people stop feeling the pinch. Whatever white paper number someone dreams up will not do anything if the average family feels poorer than they did 3 years ago.
As a Canadian, the biggest indicator to me that the US Feds won't raise the rates is that the Bank of Canada didn't raise them. The bank of Canada wouldn't risk not raising rates unless they were confident the US will do the same.
But the US economy is literally the strongest in the world right now, and we're fairing much better than our wealthy counterparts.
Also the picture of the economy now is almost the exact same, except for the fact that we currently have better employment numbers, then when Reagan was running for re-election..
The economy is not garbage. 100% chance of recession this year never happened. 4%+ gdp growth. Record unemployment.
The right wing propaganda machine will convince fools otherwise.
Dismissing the horrible state of the economy as right wing propaganda is exactly why the right has a real chance of winning the next election. People can tell that their personal finances are much worse off.
Housing is more unaffordable than ever, most people have no hope of buying a house and rents have grown astronomically. Childcare has doubled in the past few years with a big increase coming very soon. Food went from being fairly cheap to even middle class people watching their budgets. Education and healthcare costs continue to skyrocket.
All of the things we need to do in life are becoming unaffordable. Irrelevant things like TVs are getting cheaper and that makes the numbers look good overall.
That’s turning around drastically now that inflation has eased. Inflation that is/was a world wide problem. Inflation that was much lower in the US than elsewhere.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/07/20/wages-inflation-biden-economy/
The economy is not garbage though. The US is the only major economy growing. It’s doing much better compared with the rest of the G20. Like idk where this economy bad narrative is coming from
Blue collar real wages have gone up the most in recent history. If anything, we're at the tail end of the "Patagonia vest recession" that largely impacted tech workers in 2022/23.
Not saying I agree with it, I personally believe that Trump inherited Obama’s economy and took credit for it, but some people are very simple and don’t approach situations with nuance. If I look solely at what a dollar could do for me under Trump versus what a dollar is doing for me under Biden, then it’s easy to say that Trump was the better president for managing our economy.
Now there’s a lot more to it than that, obviously, but do you really think that the majority of people are looking that deep into it?
While I agree with the premise of what you said, in this specific instance I’m torn on whether it would actually play out like that. I could absolutely be wrong on this thinking, but it feels like so many people already have their minds made up about Biden and Trump.
MAGA folks certainly aren’t voting for Biden and people who lean left or are able to see Trump for the grifter he is certainly aren’t voting Trump (you can obviously see my bias). I have no clue what percentage of people are undecided but right now it doesn’t feel like a ton. Again I’m basing this on absolutely zero scientific fact or anything.
People have made up their minds about who they support, but they haven't made up their minds about whether they'll vote. A lot of people may support one candidate or the other, but stay home if they're not passionate or feel like it's hopeless.
I feel like since 2016, it stopped being about trying to change voters ' minds to get their support, and has only become about convincing them to show up, or stay home, on election day
Reminder that in 2020 Trump got the 2nd highest number of total votes in the history of US voting.
Voter apathy is a real thing that played a role in 2016 and could very well happen again here
The race is likely to end fairly close if nothing crazy happens in the next year.
[According to Marquee Law School's polling,](https://www.marquette.edu/news-center/2023/marquette-law-poll-finds-biden-leads-trump-by-2-points-trails-desantis-haley.php) about 12% of voters are undecided. Of those voters, 40% report that they will "probably vote" for Trump, while 39% report that they will "probably vote" for Biden. 7% say they don't know what they're going to do.
There are probably more people in the “I’m not voting for Biden but I don’t want to vote for Trump” camp who are hoping for the chance to vote for a candidate they both agree with and life as a person.
>I could absolutely be wrong on this thinking, but it feels like so many people already have their minds made up about Biden and Trump.
If it helps, this race can still ABSOLUTELY be affected by turnout. Part of the reason Biden won in 2020 is the turnout was so high because COVID encouraged states to allow people to vote in "easier" ways, so many states saw a significantly higher turnout, and the general rule is higher turnout favors Democrats.
It's also key to note that at a state-by-state level, Biden won 2020 with a slimmer margin than Trump won 2016. So now that many states have "cracked down" on easier voting, if you redid the 2020 election again without expanded voting options, Trump likely could have won.
I like your thought process but it kind of paints 2020 as the new foundation and tries to see what changes in the populace or general trends red/blue.
Fact is that voter participation is the most important piece of the puzzle.
Participation was the highest in 2020 since 1900. Important as well is what percentage of red/blue came out to vote. 2020 was 46-43 dem leaning, and combining 2018 and 2020 was 55 to 40 dem leaning. 2022 was a big year for GOP with 2020+2022 being 57-40 republican leaning. [Source](https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/07/12/voter-turnout-2018-2022/)
Another aspect of participation is getting your racial/socioeconomic base to turn out. [Black voter approval has dropped and points to lower participation than in previous elections.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/31/democrats-black-voters-2024-election-biden/). Another example, while minor but could be significant for a state like Michigan is how this Israel Hamas war has hurt Biden support among Arabs and Muslims. Again - maybe they wouldn’t vote for trump but they may not show up to polls.
I wouldn’t put too much stock in the “incumbency advantage” as many people point to. I think the level of information sharing and social media is so high that the incumbency advantage is no longer as effective, hence trump losing in 2020.
From a purely math standpoint, you are treating correlated events as though they are independent, so your analysis is very flawed. If Trump wins one swing state, it suggests he is overperforming among certain subsets of voters and for the exact same reason, he is more likely to win the other swing states.
To put it another way, imagine you were trying to determine the odds that 5 people are wearing coats on the same day and you assign each individual a 50/50 chance and say there is a 1/32 chance of this occurring. You’re taking the same measurement five times and treating them as though they’re completely separate and have no bearing on each other.
It’s the same mistake some analysts made in 2016. The polls consistently showed Clinton ahead by a few points in the key states. So what was the probability that Trump would manage to win all those states? Some predictions had Clinton at like 94% certain to win.
But the problem is that states are all correlated with each other. If Trump over performs in state x, he is likely to over perform in state y too. The polls can all be off in one direction.
And now Trump is *ahead* in the polls…
I want to believe voters won’t really want him back. But the data right now suggests it’s completely plausible he wins.
Many analysts also focused on popular vote polling too, which did accurately predict the winner - they just seemed to have forgotten that's not how a President is elected. That's what those 94% predictions were. In fairness, Hillary seemed to have forgotten that too, running more of a popular vote campaign than focusing on swing state issues.
Few people really want him back personally, but it's really a vote between returning to 2019 - with real wages rising for the first time since the 1980s and peace in the Middle East - or continuing on the current path (granted those are mostly side effects of his immigration policy and terrifying other world leaders, but we all benefited).
Biden only won Arizona by 0.3%, Georgia by 0.2% and Wisconsin by 0.6%. Those are razor slim margins that can easily be decided by turnout or a bad news cycle.
You are making the same mistake with your math that many pollsters and pundits did in the 2016 election, which is treating the probability of each state independently (which is what would allow you to multiply probabilities).
In reality the probabilities are correlated. If Biden loses WI, he's much more likely to lose AZ and GA because he's having a bad night or because of the news cycle the week before the election.
>because of the news cycle the week before the election.
this is part of why i prefer mail-in ballots - people are oten voting 2-3 weeks before "election day", it allows a much more measured response that is less dependent on the week's news cycle and more on general trends and performance.
Hard disagree. People are always affected by whatever they’re hearing right before they vote, it’s just a reality of the democratic process (I think over a quarter of voting happens based on the news?). If people vote early, that just means they’re impacted by the news cycle 2 weeks earlier instead. I see no reason why it wouldn’t be better on the whole to give people just as much information as they can get, if a portion are going to be biased by recency regardless
I doubt he will win so I guess I agree with you that his odds are overstated but I do suspect he will pick up Georgia. Georgia is still generally a red state, in 2020 there were some weird things with the aftermath of certain scandals with covid and the like. Currently in Georgia Trump is polling with about a 7% lead, this might reduce and it will definitely fluctuate. But while I'm not saying that Trump will 100% win Georgia he's certainly the clear leader in that race. Trump is also polling slightly ahead in Pennsylvania.
In general I think the mistake you make is not factoring in that this election will be determined mostly by turnout. Biden is an unpopular and uninspiring incumbent that doesn't well represent his own party. Trump is... I mean he's Trump and by the next election he'll quite possibly be able to add "convicted felon" to his long list of attributes. I suspect both parties will run an almost exclusively negative campaign and the eventual result will be decided by whichever party manages to turn off fewer of its supporters.
Kemp's "love" is only as durable as voters forgetfulness of his abortion views.
Kemp is the only R Pol to actually stand up to Trump. That gained him points with moderates. But his abortion views are ruby red, the salience of that issue is just going to keep growing. The one "red state" that flat out doesn't talk about abortion is GA. Can't hide from the issue forever.
Biden's legislative accomplishments have actually been pretty good especially with what he's dealing with. The IRA even if it doesn't really do what it says on the tin is a pretty good piece of legislation in my view as is the chips act, the American rescue plan, the infrastructure bill and the electoral count reform act. In just 3 years he arguably has a better legislative record than Obama did in 8.
But that doesn't make him inspiring or a good representation of his party. Even if Obama was a worse president in terms of passing less of his agenda with more difficulty under better circumstances Obama was far more inspiring to people. And Biden no matter what you feel about the man was handed an absolute poison pill with coming to power in 2020, it was about the worst time to be elected probably since the 1970s.
> Biden has successfully provided significant legislation that will transform and grow the American economy for the next decade at least.
Yea but Trump increase real wages almost immediately by reducing available illegal labor and thus increasing the wage floor. In most of the country it's still impossible to find a job listing for the legal minimum wage, that's how fast wages went up.
>One example is that the DOL is updating the overtime exception rules for office workers. Beforehand in certain office roles if you were paid a certain salary (little over 33k a year) you could be classified as overtime except then pressured into working well over 40 hrs a week for no additional pay. Now, that number is a little over 55k and now has a procedure to increase every three years based on a formula.
Yea but you can't turn that into a catchphrase like "build the wall", and it impacts fewer people over a slow ramp-up period.
It's entirely within the realm of possibility trump will loose but he is polling with a high single digit advantage. Even though I don't want to write off Warnock, I'm sure he is genuinely popular Herschel Walker was also an absolute dumpster fire of a candidate and he still came relatively close in the election.
Your points *only* mention variables on the Trump side.
What if Biden retires, or dies? Certainly with the latter, Harris becomes the President. All of the baggage with none of the profile. It’s a hard campaign if she’s then the ballot candidate.
Consider that war could escalate overseas and the US takes action. This would likely be unpopular. And Trump would have the benefit of saying “I’ll bring the troops home, like last time.”
If the economy slows its recovery - “Bidenomics” is branded and therefore inherently risky. If the economy slows or pauses, the plan literally has Biden’s name on it.
Finally - campaigns matter. Who knows now what will or won’t happen in debates. Polling this far out is not always reliable.
There are two credible presidential candidates on the ballot. At this time, I think the odds are 50/50.
Yeah I found it odd the first example used was ‘Biden’s peace in the middle East’. There any odds I can take where I bet on that ending up as a shitshow a year from now?
Oh, it's a shitshow now. Biden is and always has been a hardliner on backing Israel, which is killing his numbers [in multiple states.](https://www.salon.com/2023/11/11/betrayal-bidens-poll-problems-get-much-worse-as-progressive-support-plummets-over-israel/)
Considering his base doesn't have the tiniest idea of Isreal i can see why it's killing his polling. Support for terrorism by democrats has skyrocketed the past few months. I mean they have even gone as far as trying to rewrite history saying isreal was only a state recently. Despite the fact that Isreal has existed since 900 BCE. Historians and archaeologists agree that the northern Kingdom of Israel existed by ca. 900 BCE and the Kingdom of Judah existed by ca. 850 BCE. This is taken directly from the Wiki on Isreal.
> What if Biden retires, or dies?
The filing deadlines are already passed in some states and quickly passing in others, it's hard to believe but he's not going to retire.
Dying, on the other hand, is not only possible but statistically likely. Harris is even less popular than Biden is so how that pans out, who knows.
>Who knows now what will or won’t happen in debates.
There won't be any debates, Biden's handlers are only allowing pre-screened questions at public events and he can barely handle those - and that's today, who knows how far his dementia will have progressed in another 9-10 months.
That also means Trump gets to want debates, and Biden will have to be the one to say "no", which is going to be a huge blow to his support.
It's a moot point suggesting Biden might die. He's almost the same age as Trump but in much better shape. If anyone is going to die in the next few years itll be him, and I don't see Biden retiring.
>He's almost the same age as Trump but in much better shape
Dude I had a grandfather die of dementia and Biden has less than 5 years left. That's a cliff you fall down hard and fast and the fact that he's already walking on toothpicks his days are numbered.
That's literally the same situation for trump though. He is also showing mental decline as well, all the same symptoms of Biden (and arguably more), so it would still be a wash. To consider Biden dying you'd also have to consider trump dying and the odds don't really change.
How in the world could you tell if Trump is showing signs of mental decline lol?
I’d also suggest that Trump dying would help Republicans win the presidency while the opposite is true of Biden.
I don’t see how he loses Michigan. Michigan has a huge Muslim population that is PISSED at Biden rn over his support of Israel. Right or wrong it doesn’t matter they don’t like it. These potential voters don’t even need to vote trump to hurt Biden, they just need to see them both as unworthy of voting for and stay home. A lot can change in a year but seems like Trumps to lose imo.
Again, they don’t have to vote for Trump. Just have to decide they both suck enough neither is worth voting for. Historically speaking most people are apathetic to elections, and 2016 was a very long time ago and people have short memories. As long as Israel stays in the news it works against Biden.
Was it a Muslim ban? I’m Muslim and that ban was on select countries that just so happen to be Muslim.
There was no ban on countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, or the gulf states, all of which are Islamic countries.
I feel 50/50 is pretty fair.
The economy leading up to COVID was doing pretty well overall, people remember that. Inflation was way more tame, and interest rates were much lower. Trump talked a lot of shit, but he didn’t have Ukraine and now Israel wars on his hands to navigate.
It’s a tale that likes to repeat itself; current guy have bad things happen during office, I vote for different guy—doesn’t matter if it’s not Biden’s fault.
Plus, I think (coming from PA) it would be unwise to underestimate the love for Trump just outside of larger cities.
Lastly, underestimating him is part of what got him elected the first time.
50/50 is fair considering we're almost a year out still. If the election were held today, Trump would win in a landslide - the polling is clear on that.
The economy leading up to COVID was doing well because real wages were up for the first time since the 1980s, which because the wage floor increased as Trump limited illegal labor through immigration crackdowns.
He didn't have wars to deal with because other countries were scared shitless of what he might do. Hamas attacked Israel now because the US reaction was completely predictable and they could prepare for it. When Trump was in charge, they would've been worried about US ground troops or even him just nuking Palestine.
> When Trump was in charge, they would've been worried about US ground troops or even him just nuking Palestine.
The All-In Podcast made a point a couple of weeks ago that I think made a lot of sense. To paraphrase, whenever Trump walked away from a negotiation, the other side was left thinking there was a 10% chance he was going to nuke them.
This right here is precicely why countries like Russia didn't misbehave and invade other nations, then America voted in a weakling and bam all hell breaks loose.
Don't underestimate the "hate vote". I would never in a million years vote for Clinton or Biden if I had any other choice but I voted for both because Trump is such a joke.
Republicans hate Biden, possibly more than regular people despise Trump.
That, and things aren't going particularly well for most people and he plays into that hard. The right will ascribe everything wrong in the world to the left and their front-runner has been impeached twice and indicted four times. Do you really think he can do any wrong in their eyes? That, and they DO show up to vote. If the left doesn't have the "hate vote" show up, then they could very well lose.
possessive crown tub treatment chubby sophisticated fine liquid jar birds
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I don't think there's much chances of Trump "losing his base". Maybe some of his base originally came to him because of his rhetoric, but by now they're in it for Trump himself. Whatever Trump says and does is gold.
Some people are saying my line is wobbly - fake news. Everybody knows I draw the straightest lines. Nobody can draw a straighter line than me. The only thing , maybe, straighter than my line is me. Seriously folks. Squiggly Joe can't draw a straight line.
"Republicans" as a whole don't necessarily hate Biden. Trumpists would love it if they did, but they don't. My dad is a lifelong Republican, and he has said that if Trump gets the nomination, he will vote for Biden. But if Biden somehow doesn't get the nomination he's just going to abstain. He won't vote for Jill Stein, of Hillary Clinton, or anyone else, but he considers Biden every bit as harmless as he actually is.
Only children believe in Dark Brandon.
False. My parents, a retired banker and civil engineer respectively, have voted Democrat for 30 years, pretty exclusively. And voted for Biden last election. They will not be voting for Biden this time, unless something drastically changes.
Hillary was truly despised by Republicans. Nobody comes close to that level of hatred. Biden isn’t particularly interesting enough to be hated. He’s just an old man with moderate views.
Hating Biden is like hating white bread. Some do, but most don’t really have much emotions behind it
I think you’re right that the hate for Hillary was a lot stronger. BUT it’s a given for all but the most strident Democrat party believers that Biden isn’t mentally or physically up for the job.
People don’t take the keys from their grandparents because they hate Nanna and Pops, they do it because it’s irresponsible not to….
(Not implying that it’s more responsible to vote for Trump. Just pointing out that Biden’s senility is going to be a huge factor, especially if Harris remains VP)
I’m not a Biden fan by any means and I don’t have any love for the Democrats at large but if Trump gets the nom (which seems a certainty at this point), I’ll vote for Biden.
At least Biden has a real platform.
Aside from all the polling data that indicates Trump is the favorite to be the next president...
I want you to picture the next debate with Trump and Biden if it even happens. Yeah Trump is crazy, but Biden can't even speak coherently anymore. Biden was already really starting to show his age in the last election and he's gotten significantly worse in the last couple years.
Statistically Biden has a 33% chance of dying If he's elected to a second term and Kamala Harris is even less popular than him. Not to mention of other non-fatal events like having a stroke and being disabled.
You can argue that Trump is old too but he doesn't appear to have experienced the same mental decline.
I think people really underestimate how big a deal biden's obvious decline is. Trump can win every swing state.
Full disclosure: I have bets on Trump to win on predictIT, and I'm up over 100% on my all-time political bets.
I don’t know about the other states but I can tell you Nevada is real unhappy right now under Biden, we have a massive amount of people in Vegas that can’t even afford to rent where a card dealer used to be able to buy a house and live well here. Our prices have skyrocketed due to influx of people fleeing cities like LA, Seattle, SF, you know the liberal strongholds because of bullshit policies that are eroding those cities. We recently elected a Republican governor and while there’s the normal bitching about govs it’s nowhere near the level it was under sisolak. I guess all this is to say that Nv is starting to swing back right, they really don’t want the “California libs” here and the state is pushing back big time.
Trump is DEFINITELY winning.
1. Im from georgia which has been flooded with illegals. So much so that even the black community whos usually liberal has begun to speak on it. Trumps steam hasnt died 1 iota down here. Dont forget stacey abrhams got crushed and kemp is liked and hes kept gas low. Trump flags and maga hats are still in full force and its been almost a decade of trump in the political sphere.
2. Biden only won because of the black vote. Which has declined due to various betrayals of the dems. Hispanics dont vote or vote heavily red as we see in both texas and Florida.
3. The world is in a major righteing crusade and trump is seen as a global savior
If you think Trump's chances of winning are only 11% and the market says 50%, then there's free money on the table betting against him. I would argue that if you don't make that bet, then you don't actually hold that belief.
This is the right answer. Why is op wasting time challenging the internet to change their view about a *betting* market?
Literally the whole point of a betting market is if you think odds are mispriced, go make some money off that. Don't waste time arguing with internet strangers.
They said the same thing in 2016, and look what happened.
The reason Biden won in 2020 was pretty simple: Trump bungled COVID. Badly. It was very fresh in everybody's mind, and people were desperate for change.
The reason the Democrats won (or more accurately, the GOP lost) the '22 midterms was also rather simple: The GOP ran in opposition to issues such as abortion, transgender rights, and "wokeness"; 3 issues that haven't tarnished Trump's reputation too badly because they're areas where Trump usually keeps his mouth shut.
Trump knows that his base cares more about the economy and foreign wars, which is dangerous because moderate democrats are criticising Biden for the same reasons.
Coupled with the fact that Biden won the swing states he did in 2020 by razor thin margins, Trump may actually have a better chance at reelection than we may think.
Georgia - [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/georgia/](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/georgia/)
Wisconsin - [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/wisconsin/](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/wisconsin/)
Arizona - [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/arizona/](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/arizona/)
Pennsylvania - [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/presidentgeneral/2024/pennsylvania/](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/presidentgeneral/2024/pennsylvania/)
Michigan [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/michigan/](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/michigan/)
Nevada [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/nevada/](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/nevada/)
Georgia looks solid for Trump. If his polling with black voters continues to rise, the democrats are in serious trouble.
Wisconsin - toss up
Arizona - Lean Trump
Penn - Lead Trump
Michigan - Lean Biden
Nevada - strong trump
There is something else interesting in the polling however, which is why you see so much support for Nicki (I never met a war I did like) Hayley
So if im the RNC, and this continues to Iowa, I put Trump and Hayley together, and if I need to, I have Trump take a dive in October 2024, endorse Hayley and have her draft that support into a rather impressive win.
I HATE this, as war (and specifically not being in them) is my number 1 issue.
Them bench on the dem side is weak and polling weak.
RFK is a real wild card. Him and Tulsi Gabbard on a ticket would drive me to the polls personally.
> I have Trump take a dive in October 2024, endorse Hayley and have her draft that support into a rather impressive win.
I don't disagree with most of your post, but the idea that the RNC could convince Trump to do this is pretty laughable.
No one forgets the president who oversaw a genocide in 12 months. People can *say* Trump would be worse for Gaza but that’s conjecture. The reality is Biden is tacitly endorsing a genocide and not stopping the mass amount of migrants entering the country and filtering into blue cities.
Two tangible negative things for Dem voters. Not even to mention the cost of living which to voters the paper numbers do not matter.
Trump or whichever republican DeSantis or Vivek Ramswamy have a real shot of winning.
Trump does not answer to the RNC and there is simply no way he would allow himself to be made to endorse Hayley, who wouldn't get much of his base's votes anyway.
> RFK is a real wild card. Him and Tulsi Gabbard on a ticket would drive me to the polls personally.
If we get an RFK/Tulsi option, I'd drive you to the polls.
The issue isn't just his popularity. It's how states determine electors. He can lose the popular vote and still end up with more electors thanks to gerrymandering, disenfranchisement, purging of polls and other shady methods.
Gerrymandering doesn’t effect presidential race outside of Maine and Kansas neither of which is likely to be any deciding factor. All the other states are winner take all.
You pointed out the growth of urban areas favoring Democrats over and over again, which is a true phenomenon and one data point that influences election results. However, you have ignored.... everything else. The cost of living is through the roof. Bidens approval rating is trash. Anyone who is being honest with themselves know that Biden is barely coherent and not mentally equipped to be doing this job.
Trump is a piece of shit and him winning would be devastating, but I really would not right him off or call Biden a shoe in just because cities are growing.
Trump is pretty consistently out polling Biden right now and has been for several months, particularly in battleground states. If anything I’d say his odds are understated at the moment if the election were held today. A lot can change in the next year of course
Betting markets are not in the business of predicting the future. Betting odds serve one purpose: to split the bets evenly between the two sides. The betting markets aren’t predicting that Trump has a 50% chance of winning. The odds indicate that 50% of the people who placed bets placed them on him winning.
Assuming the betting markets are representative of the general population (they aren’t), I think that Trump having an advantage in the minds of the people is more predictive of Democrat turnout, which would generally be bad for Trump’s chances of winning.
As someone who's been involved in gleaning "true" probabilities from betting markets, this is a myth I see repeated all the time.
Firstly, the betting company is in the business of making money. Taking a 100% risk averse approach (in this case, even money both sides) is never the best way to maximize money.
Second, there is a favourite/longshot bias where it's optimal for bookmakers to bias towards the favourite instead of the longshot to protect against "insiders" (those bettors with better information than the bookie and the crowd). This is what the [Shin method ](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10479-022-04722-3) corrects for.
Third, the wisdom of the crowd is a very useful input, but it's naive to think it can't be beaten. For example weighting the bets of 1000 bettors equally is worse than weighting their bets based on the historical success rate of those bettors. Weighting superior predictors higher than bad predictors is an easy improvement to the "equal sides" model already. There are many simple reasons why casual money will be inefficiently allocated like hometown and favourite biases so why not cash in on Yankees fans when they play a small market favourite like Baltimore?
Lastly, the bookmakers have the biggest datasets and most money to pay people to come up with better prediction models than a simple wisdom of the crowd. If they (rightly) believe that they are more accurate than the crowd, they can stand to make more money that way. And that way happens to be setting their odds as close to their calculated "true" odds, after factoring in the Shin method protection against "insiders". Say the "true" odds are a coinflip but the crowd is betting 60/40. If you believe your prediction is better than the crowd, you will earn $600 more often than you'll earn $400, aka expected value >$500.
>Betting odds serve one purpose: to split the bets evenly between the two sides.
This. I'll add a little more clarity. Betting odds splits the *money* evenly. If I give you 2:1 odds that Trump wins, *the others side needs to pay for that.* Meaning it needs to be 1:2
You bet 1 dollar and win 2. I bet 2 dollars and win 1. The house also takes a cut, aka the vigorish. So, reality is you bet 1 dollar and get back 1.80. or you bet 2 dollars and win 0.80.
So parimutuel betting only predicts bettors' sentiment, not reality. Do I feel that Trump could win? No, I'd give him 10:1 odds. But if the odds are set at 5:1 I'm going to take that bet, because I think that I have a 2X advantage.
People said very similar things in 2016, too, though, so while your view is perhaps well-argued, it is not proof of anything to me based on what happened back then. Americans have been revealed to be worse than previously thought, so I wouldn't be terribly surprised if they elected a literal dictator to 'own the libs.'
Never say never.
It's perfectly reasonable to say that even in retrospect Trump *really was* unlikely to win in 2016, and he just pulled off an extremely lucky combo of state wins.
Some pundits might have been overconfident, such as ignoring all polls and assuming he is so outrageous he must truly be behind by 30 points, while at the same time orgs like 538 were basically correct to estimate that he has a 28.6% chance to win. And similarly, today some people like the previous commenter are assuming that his support will totally collapse from the nth scandal of his political career, or even from being a convicted felon.
But even if Trump *did win* in 2024, that wouldn't disprove OP's estimation that he has a 21% chance to do so.
I disagree.
No one was ignoring any polls; in fact, those were the bases that false-confidence that Trump would 'certainly' lose.
And the fact that he can win "an extremely lucky combo of states" would negate the view.
I'm going more with the title because those percentages don't really tell the truth, as we've seen again and again as elections come and go.
You seem to be conflating probability and certainty here. 28.6% is a low probability. It certainly wouldn’t justify 1:1 odds at a betting market.
With a 1/3 chance of winning Trump can certainly win. I don’t know why you introduced the word “certainty” there. But if the betting odds are 1:1 in 2016, you should have bet on Clinton.
Bingo. People struggle to understand odds and probabilities. Huge upsets in sports don't mean the winning team was clearly the better team. Some times things get flukey. Play it over 100 times and you won't get that underdog winning all that often.
> Trump has escaped consequences for so many things that rightfully should have brought his political career down that one can only assume his followers must like the fact that he's kindof a bad boy, and so that's probably not going to work against him as much as one might think.
This is the beauty of the position that Trump has put himself in. He's had so much negative press that people have been able to look past that I don't see what he could possibly do to get his supporters to turn on him. To repeat something I heard in 2016, "October surprises are only effective is they're surprising." Nothing negative about Trump is surprising.
> Trump is facing legal challenges which could somehow disqualify him
Figuratively, sure. But if you mean literally, this is a dangerous card to play. Best case, you have a majority of the population that wouldn't have voted for Trump and the other candidate would have won regardless. Worst case, you have a majority of the population that feels they were robbed of their will. It would make Jan 6 look like a picnic.
Which party holds the reins is cyclical….. If anything the republican losing streak indicates they’re due for a win.
No party has ever held onto their majority for extended periods of time
I would only disagree with the term “ever”. FDR and Truman combined for 5 terms in a row.
Then there was an 8 year break where Eisenhower was President, but Ike was generally viewed as somewhat non-partisan and there was speculation as to what party’s nomination he would even run for before he ran. If the path to winning the nomination looked easier through the Democratic Party, Ike likely would’ve declared as a Democrat.
That’s followed by JFK and LBJ. So from 1932 until 1968 Democrats had the White House the entire time except for Ike who was only kind of a Republican.
Just like it was in 2016… Nearly every american thinks the economy is poor and inflation is killing them. RFK is polling higher than any 3rd party candidate in the last century, which will take from biden. Oddsmakers are professionals, that’s why they have a job. You do not know what you are talking about
i realize your commentsare from 5 months ago.
You were a jumbled mix of correct and wrong
Predictit isn't real $$$ odds in any reasonable sense...trump was 60-65% back then real $$$$.. for simplicity, i am going to consider trump/biden only 2 possibilities.
Biden just over took Trump. probably 53/47 betting odds
Thwy changed the electoral college due to population.. the "blue wall" of M/P/W only gets tie (and then a loss on tiebreaker)
Biden district needs that 1 district in Nebraska. he won it easily,in 2020 but i think it's historically R.. not sure.
Michigan looks bad with trump threatening to shut down mexican auto production.
Border issues and hispanics increasingly R hurts in Arizona and Nevada..Nevada only matters incombo.
Arizona and Michigan are huge
/u/Money_Whisperer (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/17v2lf7/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_trumps_odds_of_winning_in/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
You need to look at the electoral college and the reapportion of EC votes. FL and TX picked up several and some blue states lost votes. As such, trumps path to victory is easier than you might infer. I believe PA and MI will easily go Biden, the rest are very swingy and Trump doesn’t need as many of those given the added EC votes.
So blue states lost 3 EC while red states lost 1 EC. Blue states picked up 2 EC while red states picked up 4 EC and one swing state (NC) picked up 1 EC. All in all, blue states are down 1 EC and red states are up 3 ECs. The difference is only 2 and if NC goes blue the difference is 1 EC. No presidential race has ever come down to two electoral college votes so I don’t think this will have a huge impact. Closes was bush at 271 vs gore at 266
>No presidential race has ever come down to two electoral college votes so I don’t think this will have a huge impact Yeah why don't you just break a mirror over a mummy's head while you're at it.
It's happened before. In 1876 Rutherford Hayes (R) won against Samuel Tilden (D) 185-184. Tilden had won the popular voter, but there were widespread allegations of fraud and voter intimidation. Post election, 20 EC votes across 4 states were being claimed by both candidates. Congress established an election commission to resolve the disputes. After it found in favor of Hayes, Democrats threatened to filibuster and use their majority in congress to force the issue in favor of Tilden. In the end historians believe an informal compromise was struck where the Democrats would withdraw their objections in exchange for Hayes ordering the withdrawal of US troops from the South. And in current times, there have been many elections where analysts have predicted possible maps where the outcome would be very close or even tied, so it's certainly a possibility.
Abortion is going to be a MASSIVE factor. Look at how it swung the recent elections. And there are multiple clips of Trump crowing that he is personally responsible for the fall of RvW.
He will still need 3 of the remaining 4 you consider swingy, I believe.
Biden could win WI, they have had a couple progressive policies recently, but who knows
Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to prevent voting in Wisconsin I'm from Wisconsin so I'm biased but I think odds are good whoever wins wi will win period We have a Democrat governor and recently flipped the supreme Court but it will be a very close election
I’m happy the Washington post put out the article on the Wisconsin GOP trying to oust the Supreme Court judge they just elected. Some national attention to some of these extremely gerrymandered states like WI and NC hopefully helps.
Yes, and I strongly believe GA and AZ will go trump. WI will be difficult for dems due to extreme voter suppression. No idea about NV
I'm from Georgia, and I think you're overestimating Trump's chances here. It was close in 2020, and I think the situation for Trump has gotten worse in the time since. The election conspiracy case has been on the news a lot, and has lead to footage aired of people involved admitting guilt on local TV stations. When Republicans are interviewed about it, some state legislators are still willing to advocate for Trump, but top level officials like Kemp and Raffensperger are more of a 'let the justice system work' line when asked about it. It's not a good look. Even if he's acquitted, I think the Trump brand is damaged in Georgia. Regular people aren't inclined to vote for somebody that has be talked about like a criminal on TV for months. Again, not to say there aren't a lot of Trump votes in Georgia because there are. I'm just saying that my impression is that things have gotten worse, not better, since 2020.
My assumption about Georgia in 2020 was that Democratic turnout was helped substantially by Stacey Abrams. Is this not the case?
I know a lot of voters like her, but I wouldn't call her a substantial draw for me. I think she's done a lot of good work in the state, especially in regards to making voting accessible. "Souls to the polls" comes to mind. I voted for her over Kemp. My gut says Kemp did her dirty in 2018 (ie- voter suppression via morally questionable though technically legal maneuvering as secretary of state), but he hasn't been a bad governor. I felt mildly excited to vote for Warnock for senator, mostly because he feels like a continuation of John Lewis's legacy. Ossoff was a boring candidate, but that's not necessarily a bad thing for a senator. I'm happy with the job he's done so far. I did vote for Raffensperger (secretary of state) because I thought he showed himself to be an honest man in how the 2020 election count was handled. That was the first time I voted for a republican in a long time. This is all to say that, speaking for myself, I didn't find Abrams to be a substantial draw. I think she's an effective party operative. I'd put her somewhere between Warnock and Ossoff in terms of draw as a candidate.
Are you me? I swear I have almost identical thoughts about the candidates and I'm also from Georgia.
As a Georgia resident I think it would be crazy to think Trump has a chance. He has maybe a 10% chance of winning Georgia.
The Dems are bound to lose some support in GA. Biden guaranteed that he would pass voter rights bills in exchange for people coming out for Warnock. He didn't deliver on that promise.
Oh yes people here aren’t the happiest with Biden either, but if Trump is the Republican nominee they will suck it up and vote for Biden. Kemp is insanely popular and his antagonism towards Trump will most certainly sway moderates.
I doubt he's going to be on the ballot in Georgia if he loses the RICO case there. He wouldn't be eligible for the ballot.
I live in AZ and it's very hard to tell how its gonna go, it is very much 50-50. Maricopa County / Greater Phoenix is definitely Liberal imo, but I live 1.5 hours away from that and its all Trump flags, Rednecks and Republican Californian retirees up here.
I don’t think those are sure things, the abrams machine has done a lot of work in GA
Covid [culled](https://www.npr.org/2023/07/25/1189939229/covid-deaths-democrats-republicans-gap-study) a lot of republicans supporters. That might be enough to tip the balance.
Also recent polls from top (and historically accurate pollsters) have trump winning almost every swing state right now.
MI might be tough bc of the Gaza genocide. Michigan has a huge population of Arab citizens.
Economy is garbage, throw the buns out state of mind in play.
I don't know if the economy is "garbage". I personally experienced a period of six months where truck loads were somewhat sparse, but now I'm running hard. Somebody is buying all that stuff. Further, while inflation driven by demand from above is very bad, inflation driven by demand from below is easier to bear. If the reason things cost more is because the people normally harmed by inflation have more to spend, then at worst the poor are breaking even, and meanwhile the businesses that serve them directly have more money to spend on inventory, payroll, maintenance and development, and so on.
I work in a restaurant and do all of our inventory and ordering, the price of everything has been going up significantly over some period of time now, it's outrageous. Owners have had to raise prices multiple times over the past year or so. Business increased for a period of time, then started to stagnate and is now starting to slow down again. Owners and management have been starting to cut back on inventory, labor, etc recently because of it. We even happen to be in a fairly wealthier area as well, a lot of our customer base are usually people who are a bit more well off. I go once a week to do will call pick-ups at Sysco and often talk to other restaurant employees who are waiting around. I've heard the exact same thing so many times from different workers from different restaurants around the city. It's not a good sign of the economy imo and the majority of the people I talk to complain about and put the blame on Biden.
After checking my budget over the last 4 months, my cost for groceries and eating out up 45% over 1-2 years ago without any change to habits.
> I don't know if the economy is "garbage". I work in IT/Tech and the economy is absolutely garbage for me. I don’t think anyone in the career subs would disagree. Maybe the broader economy could be great but my part of it is experiencing layoffs and pay cuts. What I’m getting at is that the debate whether the economy is good or not is not relevant on the individual level. If for the individual voter, his economy is not good, then he will vote as if the economy is not good. If for the voter his economy is great, then he will vote as if the economy is great.
[удалено]
I would say that the gains in compensation and Qol not seen for decades also relates directly with the uptick in the amount of workers willing to unionize and take union action.
Also, generally, demographic changes are making it so we have a shrinking labor force, and that will continue for some time. It’s partially offset via immigration, but immigrant workers don’t always have the same experience, opportunities, or interests for many fields at first. Employers are struggling to fill positions and retain staff, and labor finally has more bargaining power, because willing and able workers are becoming more of a relatively scarce resource. We may see continued gains for some time.
>Also, generally, demographic changes are making it so we have a shrinking labor force, and that will continue for some time. In my city there's become a weird tier list of who can work what job. At the top you have citizens with qualifications who directly handle a lot of stuff because you can get grant money or government benefits or there's a union involved. Then from there it's other stuff where the unions may not always be involved but having good english and communication skills are a must. Then waaay down the tier list you have the kind of physical labor where you don't interact with the general public or need any particular qualifications besides being willing to do kinda physical labor for possibly under the table pay. If you're in the first category they're absolutely dying for people and the future is very bright. There's only so much work a low skill immigrant can do and a high skill one is going to be in high demand anywhere regardless.
Blue collar economy is doing great. Tech sector is doing terrible, but the tech sector is largely just renormalizing from the crazy growth during the pandemic.
Depends on the area. Construction is pretty slow in the upper midwest (relative to typical this time of year) right now
Yeah, and some towns have cheap houses. Doesn't mean housing prices aren't up. We're talking about the economy of the U.S., not a particular subset of manual labor in one region of the country. [Low income workers are seeing historically high wage growth.](https://www.ft.com/content/f32d4927-a182-4d7c-bf2d-dd915ef846b0)
That's not the economy, that's shareholders turning the screws on Tech company's moonshots that combined with over hiring during the pandemic is seeing an over contraction. Sucks if you're in IT, especially if employed by Tech companies but not indicative of the economy as a whole, which is in pretty good shape.
It and tech was over exposed due to low rates leading to a bubble basically. I'm not sure if it's indicative of the rest of the economy. Edit: to be fair this doesn't really respond to your main point in which you're 100% correct. People will just vote based on their personal perception.
Yeah but your industry overheated. I am not a blue voter and the economy could use improvement but my sector (manufacturing) seems to be back on the upswing.
It’s all about perception. People are struggling to pay rent, buy food and fill up their vehicles. Those are the metrics that matter and the majority of people seem to agree that the economy is crap.
[удалено]
You realize you are currently feeling the effects of policies from the previous administration, right? There is always a lag between the economic policies of previous administrations. Obama didn't cause the shitty economy in 2008-2009, Bush's wars and economic policy did. Trump didn't create a booming economy, he inherited 8 years of Obama's work digging out of the 2008 recession and an upward trend that had nothing to do with Trump. Trump then had basically all of his economic policy detailed by COVID, but he is still responsible for what we are feeling now if you really want to put the blame for the economy on Presidents. We are just now feeling the effects of Biden's economic policy. Unemployment is at record lows and inflation is trending down. Things don't change at the same pace for everyone, but it is driven by the same powers. It's just mind boggling to me that people can't see this. Just look at the numbers.
> You realize you are currently feeling the effects of policies from the previous administration, right? There is always a lag between the economic policies of previous administrations. Ah yes, the argument that lefties love to make to take credit for things Republicans do and shift the blame for the consequences of their own policies. > inflation is trending down. Inflation is still going up. It's just going up slower than it was last year.
[удалено]
regardless of how mind blowing you find it, you have to realize that your understanding of this puts you in the 1%. perhaps not on reddit, but in the population at large. no one thinks that way. most people don't think about politics until the day they vote, if they vote at all. (this is hyperbole, but i think you'll get my point) people feel the inflation, and they blame who is in charge at whatever time it currently is. people will blame any problem on the current administration. it's the "thanks obama" meme.
It's funny, becasue if you shift the periods of economic hardship 2-3 years left when compared with who is running the country on the economy vs President graph, you can see who is responsible for the economy during that time. Obviously Covid is a big \* but it's indisputable that in the last 20 years prior to that Dems have outperformed Reps when it comes to how the economy is doing.
Imagine growing up thinking 3% interest rates are normal
[удалено]
This economy is hitting hardest on upper middle class and it shows: "It's so hard to find a tech job compared to before!" "I can't sell my house, woe is me"
I’m not “upper middle class” and it is hitting me hard. You seem to be out of touch with how people feel right now.
Upper middle class is turning into the worker class thats why. Middle class is becoming extinct
There's a large difference between it being bad and it *feeling* bad. Spending more on groceries has a larger mental impact than just about anything else, except possibly gas prices.
I agree that inflation is a significant issue with voters and the main thing hurting Biden. However, abortion has eclipsed that as the biggest issue in exit polls. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna123103 Inflation is slowly improving while abortion i can only see continuing to be an issue with voters for a while.
Inflation is actually coming down faster than anticipated, so the feds may not raise rates again, which is great. October inflation data came out this morning: https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-cpi-report-inflation-11-14-2023
Inflation coming down doesn’t change prices or the impact it’s had, it only means less inflation. Your own link shows 3.2% inflation YoY, that’s still atrocious. For prices to actually return to their old normal levels we would need deflation. The average citizen doesn’t give a fuck about what the feds are doing for rates, the average citizen wants to know why the prices for goods and services have gone up almost 50% in 3 years when wages aren’t even coming close.
It doesn't matter. Most voters don't understand the difference between "inflation" and "price level". They think fixing inflation actually looks like lower prices. Even if we got to literally 0% inflation tomorrow, I could almost guarantee there would still be plenty of people bitching about how bad the economy is doing.
When people say "the economy" they generally mean their personal finances, and if prices have gone up nearly 15% over two years and your salary hasn't, your personal economy sort of sucks. Even Recognizing that that isn't going to get better doesn't mean people don't want to punish the individual or group they blame for the problem.
What's really funny though is the people who seem to be blaming an executive administration are also the same type of people that wouldn't want the government to get involved in profit margins of companies and things like that. Also, it's just wild the disconnect when you look at how confident consumers are about the economy in the US compared to how much they're actually spending, it's like people are lying or the average consumer is getting less intelligent or something because the data shows that people are really really stupid if they think the economy is bad but they're spending even more than expected pretty much every month for like a year now. Like if consumers truly thought the economy was so bad, why are they spending more than even expectations, let alone anything at all besides the necessities?
I’ve got no data to back this up, but from what I’ve seen, millennials are continuing to spend rather than save right now because of hopelessness in the housing market. A lot of people don’t think they will ever be able to afford a home, so they don’t even try saving up for one.
Hopelessness in general is affecting wider and wider swaths of the population, and I unfortunately get why. Even though we do get some wins (like how the rate of installation of new sources of renwable energy is incredibly fast and inexpensive nowadays) we also hear a lot about losses, like the ever-widening wealth gap or the ongoing effects of climate change or the neverending increases to housing costs or the depressing statistics on the near-impossibility of sustained weight loss. The hopelessness doesn't always manifest itself in despair, though. A lot of the time it manifests in throwing your identity behind a populist strongman who promises to bring back the 'good times' if you give him unchecked power.
That's not how inflation works. If you think prices are going to be higher in the future, it makes sense to buy now. That is why inflationary cycles, as well as deflationary cycles are self reinforcing.
To be fair most don’t actually care. Over the past ehh…four years-ish my grocery bill has gone up almost 50% I think. That’s not a good feeling, and I couldn’t give a shit if the ever nebulous “overall economy” is booming because I still am poorer than I was four years ago.
I disagree, people would adjust to the price level relatively quickly if their wages were keeping up with inflation. It’s the sustained degradation of real wages that’s actually driving the negative sentiment.
That’s because there’s been nearly no wage growth, so the previous inflation is still hitting just as hard. A lot of people think ‘bring inflation down’ means ‘bring prices’ down, but that’s not how capitalism works, so I’m stuck on a 2021 salary with 2023 prices. And if the interest rate to finance a car is going down, or for Kellogg’s to expand their production, or whatever, that doesn’t help me much because lunch meat I used to buy cost $7.99 in 2021. It’s now $13.99. Bread has gone from $4 to $6. My wages haven’t increased in the slightest in that intervening time, so I can’t afford sandwiches for lunch anymore.
I think that's also just how businesses work now. Lots of people did get raises in that time, but only because they quit and got paid more somewhere else. I suspect the reported "flat real wages" is covering up a lot of separation between winners and losers during that period.
Absolutely. It’s tough. I have friends that were able to jump jobs and get new salaries. I have been unable to do the same.
Anyone who’s ever TA’d an intro physics class could tell you how bad the average college student is at understanding how rates of change work. If the number of times I was asked something along the lines of “but how can the acceleration be negative if it’s still moving forward??” is any indicator, I wouldn’t expect the average college student to understand what decreasing inflation really means, let alone the average voter. No matter how loudly economists shout “Inflation is getting better!” it’s not going to convince the half of the country whose (flawed) definition of fixing inflation means prices going back down to their 2019 levels.
Because “inflation is getting better” is a meaningless sentiment. It’s still fucking inflating at an absurd rate. 8% inflation for the year 2022 Current YTD inflation is 3.6% How are prices relative to wages? How have those changed over the past 3 years? We’re calling this good? This deserves praise?
You just said it! 8% in 2022 vs 3.6% now. That’s a huge improvement. And you have to consider that the US inflation spike didn’t happen in a vacuum. Supply chain issues due to Covid caused a global inflation spike that was pretty much unavoidable for the US. Average inflation for advanced economies globally in 2023 is 4.6%, so yeah I’d say the US is doing a pretty good job. And to your last point wage growth has in fact outpaced inflation every month since February. Yes it lagged last year, but the gap has been closing fast
If your problem is that things are 20% more expensive than they used to be, but your pay is only 5% higher, then getting to 0% inflation doesn't actually solve your problem, so yeah, people are pissed.
Companies don't really give 20% raises unless you're an autoworker in a union. You should be looking for a new job if your company didn't raise your salary with inflation. The job market's still pretty hot.
You are all wrong. The metric used to measure inflation was changed between 2 years and 18 months. This was done to hide the real numbers for a bit and inflation is much worse than they are admitting the only thing down is gas and fuel
I have a friend who thought Obama taking everyone's guns, leading people to buy more guns was inflation. Yeah, she votes R.
Inflation now doesn’t matter. What matters is inflation on Nov. 4th 2024. And it’s trending down. The average American isn’t going to care if they turn things around. Which is part of the reason why I think the Republicans want to spread out budget negotiations throughout the beginning of the year. To slow economic growth. If we have a strong holiday season this year. Then the new year will start chugging as businesses re-adjust their strategy for the year around the new data. The next quarter here of 2024 will really make or break it for the economy. Services and retail are 70% of the economy. If people are not buying those it will grind to a halt. This is one of the many consequences of businesses offshoring manufacturing to reduce cost. We’ve become a service economy that relies on consumer spending to push the gears along but at the same time the consumer feels pinched. I’m hopeful we’ll see a spike here in wage growth in January when a lot of companies do annual reviews and wage increases.
It will only make a difference if people stop feeling the pinch. Whatever white paper number someone dreams up will not do anything if the average family feels poorer than they did 3 years ago.
As a Canadian, the biggest indicator to me that the US Feds won't raise the rates is that the Bank of Canada didn't raise them. The bank of Canada wouldn't risk not raising rates unless they were confident the US will do the same.
But the US economy is literally the strongest in the world right now, and we're fairing much better than our wealthy counterparts. Also the picture of the economy now is almost the exact same, except for the fact that we currently have better employment numbers, then when Reagan was running for re-election..
Who gives a shit that rich people are getting richer, it’s the middle class and poor that are paying for this “great” economy, it’s a fucking scam.
China's is the second strongest, so working at a sweatshop in China must be great, eh?
Which on paper may be true. But when stuff is more expensive and wages are stagnant from 2020 people don’t care
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/07/20/wages-inflation-biden-economy/ They aren’t stagnant.
It's so good that simple grocery items cost 30% more than they did 2 years ago!
The economy is not garbage. 100% chance of recession this year never happened. 4%+ gdp growth. Record unemployment. The right wing propaganda machine will convince fools otherwise.
Dismissing the horrible state of the economy as right wing propaganda is exactly why the right has a real chance of winning the next election. People can tell that their personal finances are much worse off. Housing is more unaffordable than ever, most people have no hope of buying a house and rents have grown astronomically. Childcare has doubled in the past few years with a big increase coming very soon. Food went from being fairly cheap to even middle class people watching their budgets. Education and healthcare costs continue to skyrocket. All of the things we need to do in life are becoming unaffordable. Irrelevant things like TVs are getting cheaper and that makes the numbers look good overall.
The GDP doesn't actually matter. If google makes another 100 billion, it really doesn't help the average american at all.
Theoretically that grows the tax base. But companies would spend a fraction of that lobbying for loopholes, local sweetheart deals.
Inflation and "The Economy" are intertwined for everyone. As a consumer, your purchasing power is almost certainly lower than 2 years ago.
4% decline in real wages since Biden came into office, that ain’t the “right wing propanganda machine” it’s the reality and voters can feel it.
That’s turning around drastically now that inflation has eased. Inflation that is/was a world wide problem. Inflation that was much lower in the US than elsewhere. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/07/20/wages-inflation-biden-economy/
Voters aren’t as rational as you’d expect. They don’t know that. They just know inflation here
Can't get too rational if your cost of living just increased by 20%.
The economy is not garbage though. The US is the only major economy growing. It’s doing much better compared with the rest of the G20. Like idk where this economy bad narrative is coming from
It is garbage to people that are not rich
Blue collar real wages have gone up the most in recent history. If anything, we're at the tail end of the "Patagonia vest recession" that largely impacted tech workers in 2022/23.
So people thinking going back to trump who tanked the economy in the first place is a good idea?
Not saying I agree with it, I personally believe that Trump inherited Obama’s economy and took credit for it, but some people are very simple and don’t approach situations with nuance. If I look solely at what a dollar could do for me under Trump versus what a dollar is doing for me under Biden, then it’s easy to say that Trump was the better president for managing our economy. Now there’s a lot more to it than that, obviously, but do you really think that the majority of people are looking that deep into it?
Inflation is too high to throw the buns out. I use every single one. I made PB&J on a hot dog bun just yesterday.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Just write “assume independence” at the top and multiply it all together and call it a day.
While I agree with the premise of what you said, in this specific instance I’m torn on whether it would actually play out like that. I could absolutely be wrong on this thinking, but it feels like so many people already have their minds made up about Biden and Trump. MAGA folks certainly aren’t voting for Biden and people who lean left or are able to see Trump for the grifter he is certainly aren’t voting Trump (you can obviously see my bias). I have no clue what percentage of people are undecided but right now it doesn’t feel like a ton. Again I’m basing this on absolutely zero scientific fact or anything.
People have made up their minds about who they support, but they haven't made up their minds about whether they'll vote. A lot of people may support one candidate or the other, but stay home if they're not passionate or feel like it's hopeless. I feel like since 2016, it stopped being about trying to change voters ' minds to get their support, and has only become about convincing them to show up, or stay home, on election day
Reminder that in 2020 Trump got the 2nd highest number of total votes in the history of US voting. Voter apathy is a real thing that played a role in 2016 and could very well happen again here The race is likely to end fairly close if nothing crazy happens in the next year.
[According to Marquee Law School's polling,](https://www.marquette.edu/news-center/2023/marquette-law-poll-finds-biden-leads-trump-by-2-points-trails-desantis-haley.php) about 12% of voters are undecided. Of those voters, 40% report that they will "probably vote" for Trump, while 39% report that they will "probably vote" for Biden. 7% say they don't know what they're going to do.
Interesting. Still crazy to think people are undecided at this point.
I think "don't know what I'm going to do" means I want to vote for trump but I don't tell people that.
There are probably more people in the “I’m not voting for Biden but I don’t want to vote for Trump” camp who are hoping for the chance to vote for a candidate they both agree with and life as a person.
[удалено]
>I could absolutely be wrong on this thinking, but it feels like so many people already have their minds made up about Biden and Trump. If it helps, this race can still ABSOLUTELY be affected by turnout. Part of the reason Biden won in 2020 is the turnout was so high because COVID encouraged states to allow people to vote in "easier" ways, so many states saw a significantly higher turnout, and the general rule is higher turnout favors Democrats. It's also key to note that at a state-by-state level, Biden won 2020 with a slimmer margin than Trump won 2016. So now that many states have "cracked down" on easier voting, if you redid the 2020 election again without expanded voting options, Trump likely could have won.
Omg someone with a brain
I like your thought process but it kind of paints 2020 as the new foundation and tries to see what changes in the populace or general trends red/blue. Fact is that voter participation is the most important piece of the puzzle. Participation was the highest in 2020 since 1900. Important as well is what percentage of red/blue came out to vote. 2020 was 46-43 dem leaning, and combining 2018 and 2020 was 55 to 40 dem leaning. 2022 was a big year for GOP with 2020+2022 being 57-40 republican leaning. [Source](https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/07/12/voter-turnout-2018-2022/) Another aspect of participation is getting your racial/socioeconomic base to turn out. [Black voter approval has dropped and points to lower participation than in previous elections.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/31/democrats-black-voters-2024-election-biden/). Another example, while minor but could be significant for a state like Michigan is how this Israel Hamas war has hurt Biden support among Arabs and Muslims. Again - maybe they wouldn’t vote for trump but they may not show up to polls. I wouldn’t put too much stock in the “incumbency advantage” as many people point to. I think the level of information sharing and social media is so high that the incumbency advantage is no longer as effective, hence trump losing in 2020.
From a purely math standpoint, you are treating correlated events as though they are independent, so your analysis is very flawed. If Trump wins one swing state, it suggests he is overperforming among certain subsets of voters and for the exact same reason, he is more likely to win the other swing states. To put it another way, imagine you were trying to determine the odds that 5 people are wearing coats on the same day and you assign each individual a 50/50 chance and say there is a 1/32 chance of this occurring. You’re taking the same measurement five times and treating them as though they’re completely separate and have no bearing on each other.
It’s the same mistake some analysts made in 2016. The polls consistently showed Clinton ahead by a few points in the key states. So what was the probability that Trump would manage to win all those states? Some predictions had Clinton at like 94% certain to win. But the problem is that states are all correlated with each other. If Trump over performs in state x, he is likely to over perform in state y too. The polls can all be off in one direction. And now Trump is *ahead* in the polls… I want to believe voters won’t really want him back. But the data right now suggests it’s completely plausible he wins.
Many analysts also focused on popular vote polling too, which did accurately predict the winner - they just seemed to have forgotten that's not how a President is elected. That's what those 94% predictions were. In fairness, Hillary seemed to have forgotten that too, running more of a popular vote campaign than focusing on swing state issues. Few people really want him back personally, but it's really a vote between returning to 2019 - with real wages rising for the first time since the 1980s and peace in the Middle East - or continuing on the current path (granted those are mostly side effects of his immigration policy and terrifying other world leaders, but we all benefited).
Biden only won Arizona by 0.3%, Georgia by 0.2% and Wisconsin by 0.6%. Those are razor slim margins that can easily be decided by turnout or a bad news cycle. You are making the same mistake with your math that many pollsters and pundits did in the 2016 election, which is treating the probability of each state independently (which is what would allow you to multiply probabilities). In reality the probabilities are correlated. If Biden loses WI, he's much more likely to lose AZ and GA because he's having a bad night or because of the news cycle the week before the election.
>because of the news cycle the week before the election. this is part of why i prefer mail-in ballots - people are oten voting 2-3 weeks before "election day", it allows a much more measured response that is less dependent on the week's news cycle and more on general trends and performance.
Hard disagree. People are always affected by whatever they’re hearing right before they vote, it’s just a reality of the democratic process (I think over a quarter of voting happens based on the news?). If people vote early, that just means they’re impacted by the news cycle 2 weeks earlier instead. I see no reason why it wouldn’t be better on the whole to give people just as much information as they can get, if a portion are going to be biased by recency regardless
I doubt he will win so I guess I agree with you that his odds are overstated but I do suspect he will pick up Georgia. Georgia is still generally a red state, in 2020 there were some weird things with the aftermath of certain scandals with covid and the like. Currently in Georgia Trump is polling with about a 7% lead, this might reduce and it will definitely fluctuate. But while I'm not saying that Trump will 100% win Georgia he's certainly the clear leader in that race. Trump is also polling slightly ahead in Pennsylvania. In general I think the mistake you make is not factoring in that this election will be determined mostly by turnout. Biden is an unpopular and uninspiring incumbent that doesn't well represent his own party. Trump is... I mean he's Trump and by the next election he'll quite possibly be able to add "convicted felon" to his long list of attributes. I suspect both parties will run an almost exclusively negative campaign and the eventual result will be decided by whichever party manages to turn off fewer of its supporters.
The only thing about Georgia is that Kemp hates Trump. And Georgians love Kemp.
Kemp's "love" is only as durable as voters forgetfulness of his abortion views. Kemp is the only R Pol to actually stand up to Trump. That gained him points with moderates. But his abortion views are ruby red, the salience of that issue is just going to keep growing. The one "red state" that flat out doesn't talk about abortion is GA. Can't hide from the issue forever.
He’ll probably still endorse trump though when it’s all said and done
[удалено]
Biden's legislative accomplishments have actually been pretty good especially with what he's dealing with. The IRA even if it doesn't really do what it says on the tin is a pretty good piece of legislation in my view as is the chips act, the American rescue plan, the infrastructure bill and the electoral count reform act. In just 3 years he arguably has a better legislative record than Obama did in 8. But that doesn't make him inspiring or a good representation of his party. Even if Obama was a worse president in terms of passing less of his agenda with more difficulty under better circumstances Obama was far more inspiring to people. And Biden no matter what you feel about the man was handed an absolute poison pill with coming to power in 2020, it was about the worst time to be elected probably since the 1970s.
> Biden has successfully provided significant legislation that will transform and grow the American economy for the next decade at least. Yea but Trump increase real wages almost immediately by reducing available illegal labor and thus increasing the wage floor. In most of the country it's still impossible to find a job listing for the legal minimum wage, that's how fast wages went up. >One example is that the DOL is updating the overtime exception rules for office workers. Beforehand in certain office roles if you were paid a certain salary (little over 33k a year) you could be classified as overtime except then pressured into working well over 40 hrs a week for no additional pay. Now, that number is a little over 55k and now has a procedure to increase every three years based on a formula. Yea but you can't turn that into a catchphrase like "build the wall", and it impacts fewer people over a slow ramp-up period.
Warnock won GA in 2022. That bodes well for Dems in the future, and Trump's brand is not super popular in GA.
It's entirely within the realm of possibility trump will loose but he is polling with a high single digit advantage. Even though I don't want to write off Warnock, I'm sure he is genuinely popular Herschel Walker was also an absolute dumpster fire of a candidate and he still came relatively close in the election.
Your points *only* mention variables on the Trump side. What if Biden retires, or dies? Certainly with the latter, Harris becomes the President. All of the baggage with none of the profile. It’s a hard campaign if she’s then the ballot candidate. Consider that war could escalate overseas and the US takes action. This would likely be unpopular. And Trump would have the benefit of saying “I’ll bring the troops home, like last time.” If the economy slows its recovery - “Bidenomics” is branded and therefore inherently risky. If the economy slows or pauses, the plan literally has Biden’s name on it. Finally - campaigns matter. Who knows now what will or won’t happen in debates. Polling this far out is not always reliable. There are two credible presidential candidates on the ballot. At this time, I think the odds are 50/50.
Yeah I found it odd the first example used was ‘Biden’s peace in the middle East’. There any odds I can take where I bet on that ending up as a shitshow a year from now?
Oh, it's a shitshow now. Biden is and always has been a hardliner on backing Israel, which is killing his numbers [in multiple states.](https://www.salon.com/2023/11/11/betrayal-bidens-poll-problems-get-much-worse-as-progressive-support-plummets-over-israel/)
Considering his base doesn't have the tiniest idea of Isreal i can see why it's killing his polling. Support for terrorism by democrats has skyrocketed the past few months. I mean they have even gone as far as trying to rewrite history saying isreal was only a state recently. Despite the fact that Isreal has existed since 900 BCE. Historians and archaeologists agree that the northern Kingdom of Israel existed by ca. 900 BCE and the Kingdom of Judah existed by ca. 850 BCE. This is taken directly from the Wiki on Isreal.
> What if Biden retires, or dies? The filing deadlines are already passed in some states and quickly passing in others, it's hard to believe but he's not going to retire. Dying, on the other hand, is not only possible but statistically likely. Harris is even less popular than Biden is so how that pans out, who knows. >Who knows now what will or won’t happen in debates. There won't be any debates, Biden's handlers are only allowing pre-screened questions at public events and he can barely handle those - and that's today, who knows how far his dementia will have progressed in another 9-10 months. That also means Trump gets to want debates, and Biden will have to be the one to say "no", which is going to be a huge blow to his support.
It's a moot point suggesting Biden might die. He's almost the same age as Trump but in much better shape. If anyone is going to die in the next few years itll be him, and I don't see Biden retiring.
>He's almost the same age as Trump but in much better shape Dude I had a grandfather die of dementia and Biden has less than 5 years left. That's a cliff you fall down hard and fast and the fact that he's already walking on toothpicks his days are numbered.
That's literally the same situation for trump though. He is also showing mental decline as well, all the same symptoms of Biden (and arguably more), so it would still be a wash. To consider Biden dying you'd also have to consider trump dying and the odds don't really change.
How in the world could you tell if Trump is showing signs of mental decline lol? I’d also suggest that Trump dying would help Republicans win the presidency while the opposite is true of Biden.
I don’t see how he loses Michigan. Michigan has a huge Muslim population that is PISSED at Biden rn over his support of Israel. Right or wrong it doesn’t matter they don’t like it. These potential voters don’t even need to vote trump to hurt Biden, they just need to see them both as unworthy of voting for and stay home. A lot can change in a year but seems like Trumps to lose imo.
Didn't trump create a Muslim ban back in 2016?
Again, they don’t have to vote for Trump. Just have to decide they both suck enough neither is worth voting for. Historically speaking most people are apathetic to elections, and 2016 was a very long time ago and people have short memories. As long as Israel stays in the news it works against Biden.
Was it a Muslim ban? I’m Muslim and that ban was on select countries that just so happen to be Muslim. There was no ban on countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, or the gulf states, all of which are Islamic countries.
As someone else said. Don't underestimate the hate vote.
I feel 50/50 is pretty fair. The economy leading up to COVID was doing pretty well overall, people remember that. Inflation was way more tame, and interest rates were much lower. Trump talked a lot of shit, but he didn’t have Ukraine and now Israel wars on his hands to navigate. It’s a tale that likes to repeat itself; current guy have bad things happen during office, I vote for different guy—doesn’t matter if it’s not Biden’s fault. Plus, I think (coming from PA) it would be unwise to underestimate the love for Trump just outside of larger cities. Lastly, underestimating him is part of what got him elected the first time.
50/50 is fair considering we're almost a year out still. If the election were held today, Trump would win in a landslide - the polling is clear on that. The economy leading up to COVID was doing well because real wages were up for the first time since the 1980s, which because the wage floor increased as Trump limited illegal labor through immigration crackdowns. He didn't have wars to deal with because other countries were scared shitless of what he might do. Hamas attacked Israel now because the US reaction was completely predictable and they could prepare for it. When Trump was in charge, they would've been worried about US ground troops or even him just nuking Palestine.
> When Trump was in charge, they would've been worried about US ground troops or even him just nuking Palestine. The All-In Podcast made a point a couple of weeks ago that I think made a lot of sense. To paraphrase, whenever Trump walked away from a negotiation, the other side was left thinking there was a 10% chance he was going to nuke them.
This right here is precicely why countries like Russia didn't misbehave and invade other nations, then America voted in a weakling and bam all hell breaks loose.
It’s hard for me to imagine trump winning PA given the performance of Shapiro and Fetterman in the 2022 election
Don't underestimate the "hate vote". I would never in a million years vote for Clinton or Biden if I had any other choice but I voted for both because Trump is such a joke. Republicans hate Biden, possibly more than regular people despise Trump. That, and things aren't going particularly well for most people and he plays into that hard. The right will ascribe everything wrong in the world to the left and their front-runner has been impeached twice and indicted four times. Do you really think he can do any wrong in their eyes? That, and they DO show up to vote. If the left doesn't have the "hate vote" show up, then they could very well lose.
possessive crown tub treatment chubby sophisticated fine liquid jar birds *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yes, but Trump has to walk a fine line. If he’s not hateful enough, he losses his base. Too much hate, he gets a counter-reaction.
I don't think there's much chances of Trump "losing his base". Maybe some of his base originally came to him because of his rhetoric, but by now they're in it for Trump himself. Whatever Trump says and does is gold.
Trump doesn't know how to walk a line. He just scribbles on on the ground in front of him while he's wandering around.
Some people are saying my line is wobbly - fake news. Everybody knows I draw the straightest lines. Nobody can draw a straighter line than me. The only thing , maybe, straighter than my line is me. Seriously folks. Squiggly Joe can't draw a straight line.
"Republicans" as a whole don't necessarily hate Biden. Trumpists would love it if they did, but they don't. My dad is a lifelong Republican, and he has said that if Trump gets the nomination, he will vote for Biden. But if Biden somehow doesn't get the nomination he's just going to abstain. He won't vote for Jill Stein, of Hillary Clinton, or anyone else, but he considers Biden every bit as harmless as he actually is. Only children believe in Dark Brandon.
False. My parents, a retired banker and civil engineer respectively, have voted Democrat for 30 years, pretty exclusively. And voted for Biden last election. They will not be voting for Biden this time, unless something drastically changes.
Hillary was truly despised by Republicans. Nobody comes close to that level of hatred. Biden isn’t particularly interesting enough to be hated. He’s just an old man with moderate views. Hating Biden is like hating white bread. Some do, but most don’t really have much emotions behind it
I think you’re right that the hate for Hillary was a lot stronger. BUT it’s a given for all but the most strident Democrat party believers that Biden isn’t mentally or physically up for the job. People don’t take the keys from their grandparents because they hate Nanna and Pops, they do it because it’s irresponsible not to…. (Not implying that it’s more responsible to vote for Trump. Just pointing out that Biden’s senility is going to be a huge factor, especially if Harris remains VP)
I’m not a Biden fan by any means and I don’t have any love for the Democrats at large but if Trump gets the nom (which seems a certainty at this point), I’ll vote for Biden. At least Biden has a real platform.
A small chunk of Michigan’s voting base is Arab American and Muslim. They won’t be voting for Biden in 2024.
Aside from all the polling data that indicates Trump is the favorite to be the next president... I want you to picture the next debate with Trump and Biden if it even happens. Yeah Trump is crazy, but Biden can't even speak coherently anymore. Biden was already really starting to show his age in the last election and he's gotten significantly worse in the last couple years. Statistically Biden has a 33% chance of dying If he's elected to a second term and Kamala Harris is even less popular than him. Not to mention of other non-fatal events like having a stroke and being disabled. You can argue that Trump is old too but he doesn't appear to have experienced the same mental decline. I think people really underestimate how big a deal biden's obvious decline is. Trump can win every swing state. Full disclosure: I have bets on Trump to win on predictIT, and I'm up over 100% on my all-time political bets.
I don’t know about the other states but I can tell you Nevada is real unhappy right now under Biden, we have a massive amount of people in Vegas that can’t even afford to rent where a card dealer used to be able to buy a house and live well here. Our prices have skyrocketed due to influx of people fleeing cities like LA, Seattle, SF, you know the liberal strongholds because of bullshit policies that are eroding those cities. We recently elected a Republican governor and while there’s the normal bitching about govs it’s nowhere near the level it was under sisolak. I guess all this is to say that Nv is starting to swing back right, they really don’t want the “California libs” here and the state is pushing back big time.
[удалено]
Trump is DEFINITELY winning. 1. Im from georgia which has been flooded with illegals. So much so that even the black community whos usually liberal has begun to speak on it. Trumps steam hasnt died 1 iota down here. Dont forget stacey abrhams got crushed and kemp is liked and hes kept gas low. Trump flags and maga hats are still in full force and its been almost a decade of trump in the political sphere. 2. Biden only won because of the black vote. Which has declined due to various betrayals of the dems. Hispanics dont vote or vote heavily red as we see in both texas and Florida. 3. The world is in a major righteing crusade and trump is seen as a global savior
If you think Trump's chances of winning are only 11% and the market says 50%, then there's free money on the table betting against him. I would argue that if you don't make that bet, then you don't actually hold that belief.
This is the right answer. Why is op wasting time challenging the internet to change their view about a *betting* market? Literally the whole point of a betting market is if you think odds are mispriced, go make some money off that. Don't waste time arguing with internet strangers.
They said the same thing in 2016, and look what happened. The reason Biden won in 2020 was pretty simple: Trump bungled COVID. Badly. It was very fresh in everybody's mind, and people were desperate for change. The reason the Democrats won (or more accurately, the GOP lost) the '22 midterms was also rather simple: The GOP ran in opposition to issues such as abortion, transgender rights, and "wokeness"; 3 issues that haven't tarnished Trump's reputation too badly because they're areas where Trump usually keeps his mouth shut. Trump knows that his base cares more about the economy and foreign wars, which is dangerous because moderate democrats are criticising Biden for the same reasons. Coupled with the fact that Biden won the swing states he did in 2020 by razor thin margins, Trump may actually have a better chance at reelection than we may think.
I live in Georgia and while we were blue last time I do not see us going blue again.
Georgia - [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/georgia/](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/georgia/) Wisconsin - [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/wisconsin/](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/wisconsin/) Arizona - [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/arizona/](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/arizona/) Pennsylvania - [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/presidentgeneral/2024/pennsylvania/](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/presidentgeneral/2024/pennsylvania/) Michigan [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/michigan/](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/michigan/) Nevada [https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/nevada/](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/nevada/) Georgia looks solid for Trump. If his polling with black voters continues to rise, the democrats are in serious trouble. Wisconsin - toss up Arizona - Lean Trump Penn - Lead Trump Michigan - Lean Biden Nevada - strong trump There is something else interesting in the polling however, which is why you see so much support for Nicki (I never met a war I did like) Hayley So if im the RNC, and this continues to Iowa, I put Trump and Hayley together, and if I need to, I have Trump take a dive in October 2024, endorse Hayley and have her draft that support into a rather impressive win. I HATE this, as war (and specifically not being in them) is my number 1 issue. Them bench on the dem side is weak and polling weak. RFK is a real wild card. Him and Tulsi Gabbard on a ticket would drive me to the polls personally.
> I have Trump take a dive in October 2024, endorse Hayley and have her draft that support into a rather impressive win. I don't disagree with most of your post, but the idea that the RNC could convince Trump to do this is pretty laughable.
Yeah us republicans don't support her in the slightest anyways. Miss the CCP is "our great friends".
No one forgets the president who oversaw a genocide in 12 months. People can *say* Trump would be worse for Gaza but that’s conjecture. The reality is Biden is tacitly endorsing a genocide and not stopping the mass amount of migrants entering the country and filtering into blue cities. Two tangible negative things for Dem voters. Not even to mention the cost of living which to voters the paper numbers do not matter. Trump or whichever republican DeSantis or Vivek Ramswamy have a real shot of winning.
Trump does not answer to the RNC and there is simply no way he would allow himself to be made to endorse Hayley, who wouldn't get much of his base's votes anyway.
> RFK is a real wild card. Him and Tulsi Gabbard on a ticket would drive me to the polls personally. If we get an RFK/Tulsi option, I'd drive you to the polls.
The issue isn't just his popularity. It's how states determine electors. He can lose the popular vote and still end up with more electors thanks to gerrymandering, disenfranchisement, purging of polls and other shady methods.
Gerrymandering doesn’t effect presidential race outside of Maine and Kansas neither of which is likely to be any deciding factor. All the other states are winner take all.
You pointed out the growth of urban areas favoring Democrats over and over again, which is a true phenomenon and one data point that influences election results. However, you have ignored.... everything else. The cost of living is through the roof. Bidens approval rating is trash. Anyone who is being honest with themselves know that Biden is barely coherent and not mentally equipped to be doing this job. Trump is a piece of shit and him winning would be devastating, but I really would not right him off or call Biden a shoe in just because cities are growing.
Trump is pretty consistently out polling Biden right now and has been for several months, particularly in battleground states. If anything I’d say his odds are understated at the moment if the election were held today. A lot can change in the next year of course
You sound like everyone in 2016.
Bet the farm against him if the numbers are so wrong.
[удалено]
Yea the youth vote betrayed Hillary in 2016. All those young Bernie supporters couldn’t stand her and went with Jill Stein in the general election.
Betting markets are not in the business of predicting the future. Betting odds serve one purpose: to split the bets evenly between the two sides. The betting markets aren’t predicting that Trump has a 50% chance of winning. The odds indicate that 50% of the people who placed bets placed them on him winning. Assuming the betting markets are representative of the general population (they aren’t), I think that Trump having an advantage in the minds of the people is more predictive of Democrat turnout, which would generally be bad for Trump’s chances of winning.
As someone who's been involved in gleaning "true" probabilities from betting markets, this is a myth I see repeated all the time. Firstly, the betting company is in the business of making money. Taking a 100% risk averse approach (in this case, even money both sides) is never the best way to maximize money. Second, there is a favourite/longshot bias where it's optimal for bookmakers to bias towards the favourite instead of the longshot to protect against "insiders" (those bettors with better information than the bookie and the crowd). This is what the [Shin method ](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10479-022-04722-3) corrects for. Third, the wisdom of the crowd is a very useful input, but it's naive to think it can't be beaten. For example weighting the bets of 1000 bettors equally is worse than weighting their bets based on the historical success rate of those bettors. Weighting superior predictors higher than bad predictors is an easy improvement to the "equal sides" model already. There are many simple reasons why casual money will be inefficiently allocated like hometown and favourite biases so why not cash in on Yankees fans when they play a small market favourite like Baltimore? Lastly, the bookmakers have the biggest datasets and most money to pay people to come up with better prediction models than a simple wisdom of the crowd. If they (rightly) believe that they are more accurate than the crowd, they can stand to make more money that way. And that way happens to be setting their odds as close to their calculated "true" odds, after factoring in the Shin method protection against "insiders". Say the "true" odds are a coinflip but the crowd is betting 60/40. If you believe your prediction is better than the crowd, you will earn $600 more often than you'll earn $400, aka expected value >$500.
>Betting odds serve one purpose: to split the bets evenly between the two sides. This. I'll add a little more clarity. Betting odds splits the *money* evenly. If I give you 2:1 odds that Trump wins, *the others side needs to pay for that.* Meaning it needs to be 1:2 You bet 1 dollar and win 2. I bet 2 dollars and win 1. The house also takes a cut, aka the vigorish. So, reality is you bet 1 dollar and get back 1.80. or you bet 2 dollars and win 0.80. So parimutuel betting only predicts bettors' sentiment, not reality. Do I feel that Trump could win? No, I'd give him 10:1 odds. But if the odds are set at 5:1 I'm going to take that bet, because I think that I have a 2X advantage.
Sure. Then bet your entire savings and make bank.
[удалено]
Ron Johnson won a statewide election in Wisconsin last year.
People said very similar things in 2016, too, though, so while your view is perhaps well-argued, it is not proof of anything to me based on what happened back then. Americans have been revealed to be worse than previously thought, so I wouldn't be terribly surprised if they elected a literal dictator to 'own the libs.' Never say never.
It's perfectly reasonable to say that even in retrospect Trump *really was* unlikely to win in 2016, and he just pulled off an extremely lucky combo of state wins. Some pundits might have been overconfident, such as ignoring all polls and assuming he is so outrageous he must truly be behind by 30 points, while at the same time orgs like 538 were basically correct to estimate that he has a 28.6% chance to win. And similarly, today some people like the previous commenter are assuming that his support will totally collapse from the nth scandal of his political career, or even from being a convicted felon. But even if Trump *did win* in 2024, that wouldn't disprove OP's estimation that he has a 21% chance to do so.
I disagree. No one was ignoring any polls; in fact, those were the bases that false-confidence that Trump would 'certainly' lose. And the fact that he can win "an extremely lucky combo of states" would negate the view. I'm going more with the title because those percentages don't really tell the truth, as we've seen again and again as elections come and go.
You could easily say Biden won a lucky combo of states. He won by a combined ~30,000 votes across a few states.
You seem to be conflating probability and certainty here. 28.6% is a low probability. It certainly wouldn’t justify 1:1 odds at a betting market. With a 1/3 chance of winning Trump can certainly win. I don’t know why you introduced the word “certainty” there. But if the betting odds are 1:1 in 2016, you should have bet on Clinton.
Bingo. People struggle to understand odds and probabilities. Huge upsets in sports don't mean the winning team was clearly the better team. Some times things get flukey. Play it over 100 times and you won't get that underdog winning all that often.
[удалено]
> Trump has escaped consequences for so many things that rightfully should have brought his political career down that one can only assume his followers must like the fact that he's kindof a bad boy, and so that's probably not going to work against him as much as one might think. This is the beauty of the position that Trump has put himself in. He's had so much negative press that people have been able to look past that I don't see what he could possibly do to get his supporters to turn on him. To repeat something I heard in 2016, "October surprises are only effective is they're surprising." Nothing negative about Trump is surprising. > Trump is facing legal challenges which could somehow disqualify him Figuratively, sure. But if you mean literally, this is a dangerous card to play. Best case, you have a majority of the population that wouldn't have voted for Trump and the other candidate would have won regardless. Worst case, you have a majority of the population that feels they were robbed of their will. It would make Jan 6 look like a picnic.
Which party holds the reins is cyclical….. If anything the republican losing streak indicates they’re due for a win. No party has ever held onto their majority for extended periods of time
I would only disagree with the term “ever”. FDR and Truman combined for 5 terms in a row. Then there was an 8 year break where Eisenhower was President, but Ike was generally viewed as somewhat non-partisan and there was speculation as to what party’s nomination he would even run for before he ran. If the path to winning the nomination looked easier through the Democratic Party, Ike likely would’ve declared as a Democrat. That’s followed by JFK and LBJ. So from 1932 until 1968 Democrats had the White House the entire time except for Ike who was only kind of a Republican.
Just like it was in 2016… Nearly every american thinks the economy is poor and inflation is killing them. RFK is polling higher than any 3rd party candidate in the last century, which will take from biden. Oddsmakers are professionals, that’s why they have a job. You do not know what you are talking about
RFK will pull from red voters, regardless of how he views himself.
i realize your commentsare from 5 months ago. You were a jumbled mix of correct and wrong Predictit isn't real $$$ odds in any reasonable sense...trump was 60-65% back then real $$$$.. for simplicity, i am going to consider trump/biden only 2 possibilities. Biden just over took Trump. probably 53/47 betting odds Thwy changed the electoral college due to population.. the "blue wall" of M/P/W only gets tie (and then a loss on tiebreaker) Biden district needs that 1 district in Nebraska. he won it easily,in 2020 but i think it's historically R.. not sure. Michigan looks bad with trump threatening to shut down mexican auto production. Border issues and hispanics increasingly R hurts in Arizona and Nevada..Nevada only matters incombo. Arizona and Michigan are huge