I’m scared now I’ve realised this

[Pickandmixmood]

I was thinking that the US public wouldn’t vote for Trump now that it is so apparent he is such a fascist. It’s terrifying to realise that they already know that and that is why they are going to vote for him.
I’m scared for the world.

Oh, well if Semenya calls his underdeveloped male genitalia due to an enzyme defect a “vagina” then that’s what it is, isn’t it?

If abnormal male anatomy “identifies” as a vagina, it doesn’t matter that it’s not actually that female sex organ at all.

Semenya might think he has a vagina but he doesn’t. He is probably doing the lay person thing where they call their vulva a vagina. Semenya’s external genitalia may resemble a vulva, but it isn’t a vulva either, it’s under developed male external genitalia. It’s not surprising that someone whose life is dependent on people thinking he’s a woman would make such a claim.

That anybody could not see this man is totally unfit for any public office, let alone the leader of a large, economically important nation, is the height of delusion. It's one thing to think Kamala is not a particularly good candidate, which I happen to agree with, but she is not mentally unfit to serve. The choice should be crystal clear regardless of your politics when one candidate is dangerously demented, with violent rhetoric and ever increasingly bizarre behaviour.

Her closing ad.

Thought you'd enjoy this.

Harris grabs unexpected last-minute lead over Trump in Iowa poll | US elections 2024 | The Guardian

https://x.com/politics_polls/status/1852869055713046952?s=46&t=QsLZWw4AAriTG0o1SOp6SQ

With the Iowa poll countered immediately after by the atlas swing state one 🤷‍♀️.

It’s going to be so interesting next week.

I don’t think a shock poll result that has just been revealed and is completely unexpected is a strong basis for confidence she’s going to flip several non-swing states.

It’s great to be optimistic, but that’s what it is based on, optimism. This poll news might give more credence to that claim, if is verified and seen in other non-swing states and isn’t subject to the 3% poll error analysts see.

Absofuckinglutely. On this we are in total agreement, sister. ✊

(Interestingly local 6pm news didn't show the full clip)😹

This news is not the basis for my belief she is highly likely to flip other states than those deemed necessary.

Iowa was not even on my radar.

Ok, on what basis do you think that, other than optimism? The reason the poll in Iowa is a headline is because it’s so unexpected. I’m interested to know why you believe with such confidence that Harris will flip other states when analysts are treating the news about Iowa as a massive shock. What are you basing this on? Which other states? I am genuinely interested.

Simple on the ground stuff, like voters from multiple previously red states commenting on the vast amount of pro-Kamala signage in their areas. Stuff like the huge swell in women voting. Stuff like increasing numbers of Republicans crossing party lines to vote. Rally attendance and feel. And also the way - given they have their own internal polls - Trump is increasingly losing his marbles.

This is an interesting read.

Inside the Ruthless, Restless Final Days of Trump’s Campaign - The Atlantic

Ok, so that is your own optimism based on a variety of little things you’ve picked up on, it’s not based on any analysis of data. And that’s fine, but it’s not a position anyone with any expertise in political analysis shares.

So my assertion that the election will be decided by just several thousand voters in swing states holds more water than your assertion that Harris will flip red states and win comfortably.

I'm not Nostradamus! Even the pollsters don't really know.

but I trusted Alan Lichtman earlier on, when he was saying Kamala Harris was going to win, according to his 13 keys.

My view is based on observation. And the signs on the ground are actually strong for a surprising result - even as others join him and say they forsee a Harris win now.

Two Trump may return headlines this morning from UK press surprised me, BBC and another which is usually more against him

But you didn’t say she would win. I agree she will probably win. You said she would win comfortably and flip red states. I think we can agree that’s a bold claim with no data to back it up, just observation and hope. Here’s hoping.

Yes, I believe she will win more than comfortably. It is looking as if she has already flipped Iowa. And there is good data to back that up! The data analysis for Iowa was done by the head of what is considered the best polling firm in the country. (She's been very accurate, when others were way out, in 2016 and 2020, also.) The ramifications of that are already clear for some.

I'm not sure why you are picking my words apart so insistently. I guess I am saying what you don't want to hear?

This is my post from well before the Iowa news broke. I stand by it.

Beware the shock poll favouring Harris.

Three things.
Dems vote earlier.
Turnout is everything. Rumours of a good showing for Harris at this point run the risk of depressing the Dem vote on the day and encouraging Trump voters out.
Polls suggesting Harris is going to win Iowa make me worry about methodology and whether they have the right sample or whether Trump voters are declining to participate (due to conspiracy theory type ideas)

I really really hope I'm wrong and Trump doesn't win and there is a Harris landslide but I do have significant doubts. I still think it likely to be on a knife edge.

But you had nothing to base that on. And now FiveThirtyEight is predicting it for Trump 53 times out of 100 based on polls, taking into account the Iowa poll.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/

And Nate Silver is skeptical of the Iowa poll.

https://www.natesilver.net/p/a-shocking-iowa-poll-means-somebody

It’s fine to have hope, a feeling, optimism of a Harris landslide but at least admit it’s based on those things, not objective analysis of reality and data.

I'm not sure why you are picking my words apart so insistently. I guess I am saying what you don't want to hear?

No, I am interested to know what gives you the confidence to make such a bold call on the election outcome of a comfortable Harris victory with flipping of red states which is contradictory to all the view of election analysts, including the ones you posted.

It’s not “what I don’t want to hear”. As much as Harris is embedded in gender ideology, I actually want her to win and despise Trump and would love for what you’re claiming to be true. All you’ve produced so far to back it up is your feeling about things. It’s not sufficiently persuasive and I find your optimism warming but your view to be hubris.

I agree Trump is totally unfit for office. This seems clear.

Problem is the massive Republican Party have selected him - this must carry some weight & endorses him as fit for office.

It's all a crazy mess.

I don't believe for a second that they'll allow Trump to be president. So all those that hate or fear trump don't need to worry about him.
Kamala will be named president regardless. And you'll get more of the same as you did under Biden, Obama. Clinton.

The worry isn’t just about Trump becoming President which I don’t think he will again

but it’s the aftermath of this election and this issue of such a divided nation and will the voters decision be accepted

I truly hope Harris wins with a comfortable majority

Hubris! Thank you very muchly.

I am sorry you lack the ability to form opinions of your own based on observation and the ability to draw conclusions. Also that you feel the need to insult me when I have tried to answer your incessant questions honestly.

I am not trying to persuade you. I made a statement, which you have been picking apart from many angles, for reasons I still don't entirely understand.