Not really Alexandrite when it comes to 2020 ... They had Biden winning and he won. 2022 polling had Republicans taking back the House (they did get a bit cocky and were incorrect towards the end on certain Senate races) this is why I rely upon RealClear instead of 538.
#20 | Posted by Bluewaffles

Matthew Dowd
@matthewjdowd
let me relate how bad the RealClear average of polls has been because they include junk polls: in 2022, realclear had Whitmer only winning by 1, she won by 11; had Fetterman in PA losing by 1, he won by 5; had AZ Gov race Dem losing by 3, Dem won by 1; Nevada Sen. had Dem losing by 4, Dem won by one.
3:49 PM Oct 24, 2024

In swing states like WI, a vote for Stein is a vote for Trump, and the GOP and Trump himself know it.

Any non citizen commiting any crime should be gone forever and never again allowed here for any reason.
#6 | Posted by Robson

The question becomes why didn't Trump deport the criminals who were there when he was in office:

The data, covering roughly 13 years from June 1, 2011, through Sept. 30, 2024, represents "the minimum number of crimes associated with criminal illegal noncitizens" charged with committing state offenses.

This is the same tactic he is employing when it comes to operations for transgender prisoners. He accuse the Biden/Harris administration of doing what his administration also did.

It isn't just Kelly who is saying Trump is unfit for office. See my post #6 above.

Yes, Trump's four years in office were just a horror - RIGHT???
#11 | Posted by MSgt

Trump was prevented by people like Kelly and others inside his adminstration from becoming the dictator he wanted to be. If there is another Trump adminstration, those guardrails will no longer be in place, either within the adminstration or outside of it. The Supreme Court's rulling in the Trump immunity case made sure of that.

Dirk Schwenk:

In light of the new reporting that Tr u mp is a Hxtler supporter and outright fascist, I want to revisit Justice Roberts decision in Trump v. United States. A THREAD.

We all grew up in a country where it was flatly illegal for a POTUS to turn the military against the citizenry. There was never any question about that. It was a sure thing. That country is gone.
It has been repeatedly confirmed that Trump asked "his" generals to shoot protesters. And that they refused. THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN. Trump wants generals that are loyal, and if we put him in power, that is what he (and we) will get.

What changed? Roberts held that POTUS Article II powers cannot be limited or reviewed by any other branch of government. What are Art II powers? Commanding the Armed Forces and granting pardons are the Big 2.

Also included - APPOINTING SCOTUS JUSTICES and foreign policy.

SCOTUS has also found, and Roberts just vastly expanded, that firing people in executive agencies is a core Art. II function.

So Art. II gives POTUS the power to wield military force; pardon anyone; appoint SCOTUS justices, and fire anyone else. POTUS can institute a loyalty test and give military orders. DID CJ ROBERTS FIND ANY LIMITS TO THESE POWERS? No. It's unrestrained by courts or Congress.

So POTUS can order, without any review or restraint, military action against US citizens on US soil. And he can fire anyone that refuses. And he can pardon anyone that follows the order. And neither SCOTUS or Congress has any power to review or limit such actions.

SO LISTEN HERE EVERY LIVING SOUL. A vote for Trump is a vote for a person who wants to be a dictator. And if he wins, HE IS A DICTATOR ON DAY ONE. And there are no legal ways to stop him. None. Zero. THIS IS NOT A DRILL.

Dirk out.

It is true that Congress can deny funding for the military. And if you think that will pose a barrier, well ha ha the jokes on you. Anyone opposing will be in the camps.

Has anyone contacted the FCC? Is anyone calling for Fox News to have its broadcast license taken away?

I'm not saying it never happens, but I don't anyone who has retained 40 years of personal tax returns.

Many Democrats are anxious, some are despairing. I get it. I really do. Democrats are not Republicans, many of whom are still predicting the Trump landslide victory they thought they had in the bag back in early July when Biden was still in the race. But what if there was reason for Democrats to have hope? What might that case look like?:

The Case for Optimism for Kamala Harris

FTA:

Green Party nominee Jill Stein is now the most prominent third-party candidate, but others--including independent Cornel West and Libertarian Party candidate Chase Oliver--are also still running. Meanwhile, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has since withdrawn and endorsed Trump, will still appear on a couple of key ballots.

"But the fact still remains, she said something and nobody can provide evidence. Regardless of your political affiliation, that's called a lie (until it can be proven)..."

Who the hell has receipts for the jobs they did 40 years ago when they were in college?

Sarah Longwell:

When a former Trump official comes out with a story demonstrating Trump's unfitness for office, nihilistic Trump defenders leap into action, questioning the motives, context, or credibility of the individual making the claim. They're doing this right now with General Kelly.

They want you to forget the cumulative weight of the accusations against Trump coming from a raft of his own former employees. Kelly is far from alone in warning the American people that Trump is a threat to the country. Let's start with Trump's former Vice President:

"The American people deserve to know that President Trump asked me to put him over my oath to the Constitution. ... Anyone who puts himself over the Constitution should never be president of the United States." - Mike Pence

"His use of the Presidency to destroy trust in our election and to poison our respect for fellow citizens has been enabled by pseudo political leaders whose names will live in infamy as profiles in cowardice." - Gen. Mattis

"I think he's unfit for office. ... He puts himself before country. His actions are all about him and not about the country. And then, of course, I believe he has integrity and character issues as well." -Mark Esper

Donald Trump is "fascist to the core" and "The most dangerous person to this country." - General Mark Milley

"This will be a retribution presidency. And it will not be just against extreme left wingers, it will be against people who are Republicans and conservatives who stood against Trump. And it will be against people in the military, like Mark Milley." -John Bolton

"Someone who engaged in that kind of bullying about a process that is fundamental to our system and to our self-government shouldn't be anywhere near the Oval Office." -Bill Barr

"The President undermined American democracy baselessly for months. As a result, he's culpable for this siege, and an utter disgrace." -Tom Bossert, Homeland Security Adviser

"He has never cared about America, its citizens, its future or anything but himself. In fact, as history well shows from his divisive lies, as well as from his unrestrained contempt for the rule of law and his related crimes, his conduct and mere existence have hastened the demise of democracy and of the nation." -Trump's White House Lawyer Ty Cobb

I could keep going but you get the point. Let me ask you: Are they all lying? You know how we know they're telling the truth? Because we see the unfitness with our own eyes!

Are we supposed to be skeptical that Trump called soldiers "suckers" and "losers" when he said as much out loud about John McCain?

Are we supposed to be skeptical that Trump praised Hitlers generals when he dined with white supremacist Nick Fuentes and calls people "vermin" and talks about immigrants "poisoning the blood" of America?

Trump is dangerous and unfit and all the responsible people who served in his last term have told us as much. The dead-eyed Trump sycophants like @LindseyGrahamSC or @ScottJenningsKY who gaslight Americans about Trump in the face of a mountain of evidence should be dismissed with prejudice.

The Trump defenders are going to circle the wagons. They're going to say these stories are unsourced rumors, despite Kelly being on the record and on tape. They'll try to dismiss him as disgruntled or lying. But why would he lie? What does he gain?

And his voice is just one among many all telling us the same damning story. Despite all this evidence, I'm still begging all these former officials to call a press conference and say it straight to the American people. Do it together. I promise, it will make all the difference.

Speaking of Stuart Stevens:

And your comment ("Don't get discouraged, don't give up already, don't hyperventilate, vote.") dovetails nicely with the first 9 posts in this thread.
#2 | Posted by Hans

Excellent series of posts, Hans.

Kelly is finally weighing in more forcefully this late in the election cycle. Better late than never? I'm not so sure. I think he should have spoken up in this way months if not years ago. Bottom line though, if Trump is re-elected, and turns into the dictator he has always wanted to be, we can't say we weren't warned.

FTA:

"In many ways, the polling debate of 2024 comes down to this dilemma. On the one hand, pollsters undercounted Donald Trump's vote in 2016 and 2020. On the other, in 2022, some of the averages, fed by GOP data, inspired certain observers to discern the infamous red wave that never materialized. So the question now is: Will 2024 be more like 2016 and 2020, presidential elections in which there was a hidden Trump vote, or will it be more like 2022, a midterm campaign but the first post-Dobbs election when at least some observers missed the Democratic vote that turned out in no small part in response to the Supreme Court taking away the right to an abortion?"

Personally, I think the race will be very close again this year, and the results could go either way. The only thing to do now is to vote and to get your family and friends to vote as well. Obama always says, Don't boo. Vote." To that I'll just add, "Don't get discouraged, don't give up already, don't hyperventilate, vote."

Combining the 2 segments, with the Face the Nation excerpt not included in the 60 Minutes clip in bold:

Bill Whitaker: The events of the past few weeks have pushed us to the brink, if--if not into an all--out regional war in the Middle East. What can the U.S. do at this point to stop this from spinning out of control?

Vice President Kamala Harris: Well, let's start with October 7. 1,200 people were massacred, 250 hostages were taken, including Americans, women were brutally raped, and as I said then, I maintain Israel has a right to defend itself. We would. And how it does so matters. Far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed. This war has to end.

Bill Whitaker: We supply Israel with billions of dollars in military aid, and yet Prime Minister Netanyahu seems to be charting his own course. The Biden-Harris administration has pressed him to agree to a ceasefire. He's resisted. You urged him not to go into Lebanon. He went in anyway. Does the U.S. have no sway over Prime Minister Netanyahu?

KAMALA HARRIS (Vice President of the United States (D) and U.S. Presidential Candidate): The aid that we have given Israel allowed Israel to defend itself against 200 ballistic missiles that were just meant to attack the Israelis and the people of Israel.

And when we think about the threat that Hamas, Hezbollah presents, Iran, I think that it is without any question our imperative to do what we can to allow Israel to defend itself against those kinds of attacks.

Vice President Kamala Harris: [Now]The work that we do diplomatically with the leadership of Israel is an ongoing pursuit around making clear our principles.

Bill Whitaker: But it seems that Prime Minister Netanyahu is not listening.

Vice President Kamala Harris: We are not gonna stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end.

Bill Whitaker: Do we have a--a real close ally in Prime Minister Netanyahu?

Vice President Kamala Harris: I think, with all due respect, the better question is do we have an important alliance between the American people and the Israeli people. And the answer to that question is yes.

Having watched how 60 Minutes has responded I want to update my original theory.
I believe the editing was done to make her look less incoherent. I still believe that but the reason they're hiding the transcript is twofold. They are still protecting her but they are also protecting themselves. They can't reveal the whole interview as they would expose themselves in the process. So they've put it in a box tied up with a Gordian knot.
#20 | Posted by BellRinger

If CBS was trying to hide something, why would they have put out a different version on 60 Minutes than they did on Face the Nation? Wouldn't they have made both versions parallell each other?

Face the Nation:

Good morning, and welcome to Face the Nation.

As we begin this broadcast, the airstrikes from Israel into Gaza and Southern Beirut are ongoing, and there is no end in sight to the war that is about to enter its second year.

The question of just how effective U.S. leadership has been and potentially would be in a new administration when it comes to Israel is one raised frequently on the campaign trail.

For a special election edition of 60 Minutes that will air Monday, our Bill Whitaker sat down with Vice President Harris and asked her about U.S. influence with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

(Begin VT)

BILL WHITAKER: We supply Israel with billions of dollars in military aid, and yet Prime Minister Netanyahu seems to be charting his own course. The Biden/Harris administration has pressed him to agree to a cease-fire. He's resisted.

You urged him not to go into Lebanon. He went in anyway. He has promised to make Iran pay for the missile attack, and that has the potential of expanding the war. Does the U.S. have no sway over Prime Minister Netanyahu?

KAMALA HARRIS (Vice President of the United States (D) and U.S. Presidential Candidate): The aid that we have given Israel allowed Israel to defend itself against 200 ballistic missiles that were just meant to attack the Israelis and the people of Israel.

And when we think about the threat that Hamas, Hezbollah presents, Iran, I think that it is without any question our imperative to do what we can to allow Israel to defend itself against those kinds of attacks.

Now, the work that we do diplomatically with the leadership of Israel is an ongoing pursuit around making clear our principles, which include the need for humanitarian aid, the need for this war to end, the need for a deal to be done which would release the hostages and create a cease-fire.

(End VT)

60 Minutes:

Kamala Harris has been a candidate for president for just two-and-a-half months and the post convention "honeymoon" is over. With the election just 29 days away, Harris and her running mate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz face unrelenting attacks from Donald Trump, and the race remains extremely close.

We met the 59-year-old vice president this past week on the campaign trail and later at the vice president's residence in Washington, DC. We spoke about the economy and immigration, Ukraine, and China, but we began with the escalating war in the Middle East, one year after the Hamas terror attack on Israel.

Bill Whitaker: The events of the past few weeks have pushed us to the brink, if--if not into an all--out regional war in the Middle East. What can the U.S. do at this point to stop this from spinning out of control?

Vice President Kamala Harris: Well, let's start with October 7. 1,200 people were massacred, 250 hostages were taken, including Americans, women were brutally raped, and as I said then, I maintain Israel has a right to defend itself. We would. And how it does so matters. Far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed. This war has to end.

Bill Whitaker: We supply Israel with billions of dollars in military aid, and yet Prime Minister Netanyahu seems to be charting his own course. The Biden-Harris administration has pressed him to agree to a ceasefire. He's resisted. You urged him not to go into Lebanon. He went in anyway. Does the U.S. have no sway over Prime Minister Netanyahu?

Vice President Kamala Harris: The work that we do diplomatically with the leadership of Israel is an ongoing pursuit around making clear our principles.

Bill Whitaker: But it seems that Prime Minister Netanyahu is not listening.

Vice President Kamala Harris: We are not gonna stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end.

Bill Whitaker: Do we have a--a real close ally in Prime Minister Netanyahu?

Vice President Kamala Harris: I think, with all due respect, the better question is do we have an important alliance between the American people and the Israeli people. And the answer to that question is yes.

While the war in the Middle East has dominated recent headlines, it's the economy that most concerns American voters this election year, as always.

Here is the information CBS has released:

A Statement from 60 Minutes

Former President Donald Trump is accusing 60 Minutes of deceitful editing of our Oct. 7 interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. That is false.

60 Minutes gave an excerpt of our interview to Face the Nation that used a longer section of her answer than that on 60 Minutes. Same question. Same answer. But a different portion of the response. When we edit any interview, whether a politician, an athlete, or movie star, we strive to be clear, accurate and on point. The portion of her answer on 60 Minutes was more succinct, which allows time for other subjects in a wide ranging 21-minute-long segment.

Remember, Mr. Trump pulled out of his interview with 60 Minutes and the vice president participated.

Our long-standing invitation to former President Trump remains open. If he would like to discuss the issues facing the nation and the Harris interview, we would be happy to have him on 60 Minutes.

Again Rein, why was the betting market correct in 2020 but wrong now in 2024?
#15 | Posted by Bluewaffles

The betting market was wrong in 2016, btw, and could very well be wrong now:

The Wall Street Journal had a major piece on Polymarket yesterday, writing:

Over the past two weeks, the chances of a Trump victory in the November election have surged on Polymarket, a crypto-based prediction market. Its bettors were giving Trump a 60% chance of winning on Friday, while Harris's chances were 40%. The candidates were in a dead heat at the start of October.

Trump's gains on Polymarket have cheered his supporters, and they have been followed by the odds shifting in Trump's favor in other betting markets. Elon Musk flagged Trump's growing lead on Polymarket to his 200 million X followers on Oct. 6, praising the concept of betting markets. "More accurate than polls, as actual money is on the line," Musk posted.

But the surge might be a mirage manufactured by a group of four Polymarket accounts that have collectively pumped about $30 million of crypto into bets that Trump will win.

That's cool, now explain the swing state polling.
#2 | Posted by Bluewaffles

Swing states are where the rightwing/red wave polling is the worst:

[I]t is time for those who analyze polls to start acknowledging that there is now a third type of poll --the red wave, right-aligned narrative polling that only exist for a single purpose--to move the polling averages to the right. They are exploiting the "toss it in the averages and everything will work out philosophy" of these sites to once again launder these polls and game the averages--and thus our understanding of the election. Party leaders should expect them to keep these polls coming, and keep working the averages until it looks like Trump is winning in all polling averages. It is what they did in 2022, and it worked. They are doing it again this time, and once again it is working as the averages are moving and everyone is treating this movement like an organic rather than a deeply corrupt process.

Since late August more than 70 right-aligned polls have been dropped into the polling averages. The two states that have been worked the hardest are North Carolina and Pennsylvania. In October of the 27 Presidential polls released in Pennsylvania, 16 are from right-aligned pollsters, a majority. Since August 31st of the 41 Presidential polls released in North Carolina, 21, a majority have home come from right aligned pollsters. . . .

The red wave campaign this year is on a much greater scale than 2022. It started much earlier, has many more actors and has produced far more polling. It needed to be bigger for in general election years there is more polling. So to move the averages more polls were needed, and they got to work earlier doing so. And this is important. In 2022 the campaign began late, in mid-October. They had less time to move the averages so their polls were often 3-4 points to the right of the polling as they needed these bigger margins to move the averages in a shorter time period. This time, because they started earlier and are producing more polls their polls are often only 1-2 points to the right of the polling average or independent polls. They are working the averages more carefully this time, over using the time and volume to move them gradually so the op is not as crude and as easy to see as last time. If Harris leads by 2.5 points and you drop 5 polls showing the race tied or her ahead by 1 or even 2 points the averages moves and it looks like she is losing altitude.

One of the hazards of mucking around with the ministerial duty to certify election results. electionlawblog.org
#33 | Posted by et_al

Yes, if the state attorney general brings the charges. In the case you link to in Arizona, the state attorney general, Kris Mayes, is a Democrat.

FTA you linked to:

"The danger is real, but much of the speculation about mechanisms Trump or his allies might use to overturn election results risks unnecessarily raising the anxiety level of voters."

and:

"There is no way to make the system entirely failsafe against all risks. I'm particularly worried that Pennsylvania and Wisconsin will have long delays in getting to a definitive result, given that their laws still " unconscionably--refuse to permit their election officials to start processing absentee ballots until election day. If the results of the election cannot be known for several days, this will almost inevitably spawn suspicion and distrust, fueled by social-media conspiracy theories, and might lead to major efforts to disrupt the vote-counting process."

"Trump is for he/him. Kamala is for us."

Andy Ostroy
@AndyOstroy
Every #Trump supporter should watch this new @ProjectLincoln ad. He's riling you up about prison sex-change surgeries, but it was HIS administration's policy that paid for them. Watch the ad, read this NY Times article, and discover the truth...

Was Kemp cowed by Trump's attacks on his wife? If Trump does win, not even Republicans want to be on his enemies list:

Trump's attacks on Kemp, his wife reverberate across party

In fiery speech, former president assails state's top Republican for disloyalty'

It was a stunning display of venom aimed at Georgia's Republican governor by the party's presidential nominee.

On Saturday, at a campaign rally in Atlanta, Donald Trump referred to Brian Kemp at least twice as "little Brian." He described him as a "very average governor." He said, "Atlanta is like a killing field, and your governor ought to get off his ass and do something about it."

Most bitterly of all, Trump accused Kemp, state first lady Marty Kemp and Secretary of State Brian Raffensperger of "disloyalty"--in particular, the governor and secretary of state for failing to secure election victory in Georgia in 2020 and accusing them of "doing everything possible to make 2024 difficult for Republicans to win."