USA 2024 US Presidential Election: Trump vs Harris (pt II)

[Baldur]

He can't. Similarly, you and also any economist will not be able to explain why it will increase inflation.

Trump's proposing replacing income tax with tariffs, that alone impacts millions of variables and their interactions.

Increased tariffs --> cost passed on to consumers is an unrealistic reductionist NPC way of thinking.

Economists are the astrologists of finance. Put simply, if they had even a 1% edge in their predictions and forecasts, they would clean out every market. I don't recommend putting any stock on what they say. If you back tested their predictions prior to every market cycle, you'd find they are always wrong.

It can be explained but you are clearly incapable of understanding it. It actually is as simple as trade war and increased costs. But never argue with an idiot as they will simply repeat their simple rubbish as they are incapable of understanding the reality.

Ignore button do your thing.

 

[Blue1980]

Was that before or after he offered her a tour, sushi and poker with 'da boysch ??

I think shortly before that offer. I think because Tim doesn’t have an ideological bone in his body he sees these battles as just for sport; so can have a beer after the game, so to speak.

Plus he was thinking this was a way to impress her.

 

[Chadwiko]

Elon Musk is an illegal immigrant.

MSN

Considering the things he's been the most vocal about are things he himself is guilty of, this is extremely unsurprising.

 

[Chadwiko]

Increased tariffs --> cost passed on to consumers is an unrealistic reductionist NPC way of thinking.

Economists are the astrologists of finance.

lol what kind of 'head in sand, fingers in ears lalala' nonsense is this.

Tarriffs absolutely increase the cost of items. That's literally what they're designed to do.

 

[Blue1980]

Came across this article (did a media bias check on them).
Overall, we rate Brooking Institution Left-Center biased based on donations to primarily Democratic candidates and policy advocacy that slightly favors the left. We also rate them Very High for factual reporting due to strong sourcing and a clean fact check record.

Not sure enough has been reported on the gender gap and most polls I have seen don't go that deep on who was polled.

This year’s election puts the gender gap front and center for three reasons—one of the candidates could be the first woman president of the United States; the abortion issue has especially high salience for women and could increase their already high turnout; and the election in swing states is incredibly close.

The closeness of the election has created a daily torrent of speculation about which subgroups are leaning to which candidate.

In the last presidential election, women accounted for 54.7% of the electorate and men accounted for 44%. And of course, there are simply more adult women than men in the population, especially among the elderly.2 In the seven swing states we looked at for this analysis, women composed a larger share of the electorate in 2020 than men, with one exception, Wisconsin, where, according to exit polls, 50% were men and 50% were women.

Pennsylvania. In a recent Marist poll, women supported Harris by 55% to 43% for Trump, while men supported Harris by 44% and Trump by 54%. In the 2020 presidential election in Pennsylvania, women accounted for more votes than men—they were 53% of the electorate, and men were 47%. There were a total of 6,915,283 ballots cast in Pennsylvania in 2020, most of which were cast by women, amounting to 3,665,100 votes.

In North Carolina, Harris is currently getting 54% of the women’s vote, and Trump is getting the exact same percentage (54%) of the men’s vote. If men and women voted in the same numbers, these votes would cancel each other out.

Michigan, where the presidential gender gap and the turnout gender gap is large, the results can be impressive. In Michigan, a Marist poll finds 56% of the women currently favor Harris and 52% of men currently favor Trump.

In Wisconsin, (according to a Marist poll) women currently favor Harris by 56%, and men favor Trump by 53%.

In Nevada, 53% of women currently favor Harris and 52% of men currently favor Trump, according to a poll by Emerson.

Georgia and Arizona are the only swing states where the 2024 gender gap in presidential preference favors Trump, and in both states, the gender gap in turnout is not large enough to help Harris. In Georgia, a CBS poll found there seem to be more men planning to vote for Trump (56%) than women voting for Harris (53%).

This exercise shows that if the composition of the electorate between men and women remains the same as it was in 2020, Harris could win Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada—all states Biden won in 2020. She could also win North Carolina (which Biden lost in 2020) but by a very narrow margin. Trump would win Arizona and Georgia, two states Biden won in 2020. This would result in a Harris win in the Electoral College.

Of course, the assumptions in this analysis could easily change next month. The abortion referendum in Arizona, for instance, has the potential to boost the women’s vote past what it was in 2020, and that could be good for Harris. What will not change is that the importance of the gender gap in presidential preference is highly dependent on the existence of a gender gap in turnout. The reality of both gender gaps has hit the Republican Party hard; candidates across the board are scrambling to soften or even repeal their former statements on abortion

So moral of the story for MAGA is women should be denied the right to vote.

Or they will blame single women then say only women with children should vote.

 

[big_e]

He can't. Similarly, you and also any economist will not be able to explain why it will increase inflation.

Trump's proposing replacing income tax with tariffs, that alone impacts millions of variables and their interactions.

Increased tariffs --> cost passed on to consumers is an unrealistic reductionist NPC way of thinking.

Economists are the astrologists of finance. Put simply, if they had even a 1% edge in their predictions and forecasts, they would clean out every market. I don't recommend putting any stock on what they say. If you back tested their predictions prior to every market cycle, you'd find they are always wrong.

I don't think I've ever seen someone use NPC and not be a massive bellend. But I digress....

The problem with this proposal is that it's not a proposal - it's a thought bubble. And that's no way to govern a country.

 

[Blue1980]

With the polls and everything I am still confident of the Dems winning.

Pollsters pretty much openly admit now the boost the trump vote as they got it wrong previously, it seems everyone is just assuming the polls are wrong in GOPs favour all the time.

So now people think these polls which they are trying to correct are still wrong which is why many think a Trump win is inevitable.

They will also use this as a reason if they lose to prove it’s “stolen”. Though by the same logic if it’s done on polls and betting markets, Trump stole 2016 and tried to steal 2020 (well he did, after the event).

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

A couple of the MAGA trolls/spammers have quit it seems.

The Ignore function working for the good of humanity.

 

[Crankyhawk]

He can't. Similarly, you and also any economist will not be able to explain why it will increase inflation.

Trump's proposing replacing income tax with tariffs, that alone impacts millions of variables and their interactions.

Increased tariffs --> cost passed on to consumers is an unrealistic reductionist NPC way of thinking.

Economists are the astrologists of finance. Put simply, if they had even a 1% edge in their predictions and forecasts, they would clean out every market. I don't recommend putting any stock on what they say. If you back tested their predictions prior to every market cycle, you'd find they are always wrong.

So, lets presume he has complete replacement of income tax with tarriffs (apologies if I have misconstrued the post)
Then overseas countries go "**** this, we will sell to Europe/ Australia and pay no tarriffs"
Tarrif income falls to nothing

Income taxes don't get removed, and maybe even increased to compensate for deficit. Or do they increase sales tax instead? which again will increase cost of items and services.

 

[pjcrows]

Pollsters pretty much openly admit now the boost the trump vote as they got it wrong previously

I'd be interested in a source for this?

 

[Crankyhawk]

I don't think I've ever seen someone use NPC and not be a massive bellend. But I digress....

The problem with this proposal is that it's not a proposal - it's a thought bubble. And that's no way to govern a country.

its a thought bubble with less thought than Duttons nuclear plan. That' show poor a thought bubble it is

 

[Crankyhawk]

With the polls and everything I am still confident of the Dems winning.

Pollsters pretty much openly admit now the boost the trump vote as they got it wrong previously, it seems everyone is just assuming the polls are wrong in GOPs favour all the time.

So now people think these polls which they are trying to correct are still wrong which is why many think a Trump win is inevitable.

They will also use this as a reason if they lose to prove it’s “stolen”. Though by the same logic if it’s done on polls and betting markets, Trump stole 2016 and tried to steal 2020 (well he did, after the event).

I'm not confident. That partly is my psychological make up - expect the worst and you get less upset.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Do trump supporters actually believe schools are performing transition surgeries without parental consent?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

They will believe literally anything as long as it fits their definition of “too woke”.

(The human race has come to this.
It’s been great folks, but don’t expect anything better in the future anymore.)

 

[Chadwiko]

The problem with this proposal is that it's not a proposal - it's a thought bubble. And that's no way to govern a country.

It's a 'concept of a plan'.

 

[swingdog]

Some interesting stuff beneath the surface of the polls:

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/26/michelle-obama-harris-michigan-dems-00185701

 

[Randomizor]

He can't. Similarly, you and also any economist will not be able to explain why it will increase inflation.

Trump's proposing replacing income tax with tariffs, that alone impacts millions of variables and their interactions.

Increased tariffs --> cost passed on to consumers is an unrealistic reductionist NPC way of thinking.

Economists are the astrologists of finance. Put simply, if they had even a 1% edge in their predictions and forecasts, they would clean out every market. I don't recommend putting any stock on what they say. If you back tested their predictions prior to every market cycle, you'd find they are always wrong.

So you’re saying that businesses will be paying more to import goods and they will just… eat that cost? Out of the goodness of their hearts? I wanna live in whatever utopia you live in!

Let’s pretend for a moment we replace income taxes with tariffs.

Now let’s pretend that the tariffs do what their goal ultimately is and all manufacturing moves back the US (as it’s now cheaper than importing goods).

Now you have: no tariffs being paid. No income tax being received. Where the **** is the government getting its money from? Congratulations Trump, you’ve just bankrupted another place you lead.

 

[Romeoh1]

Do trump supporters actually believe schools are performing transition surgeries without parental consent?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Yes - that is how wilfully stupid they are. They want to believe all this rubbish, they want to invest in trump world so they commit to it wholeheartedly. If they actually stopped and used their minds, or gathered actual facts- then they’d see it was all nut job stuff, but the grim thing is they want to go with it. I’m wondering if it’s all just about racism when you par it back - trump talks immigration up as the big boogie man and maybe that why they go with him. Not very Christian of course- dunno how they rationalise that.

 

[Randomizor]

I know they're skewed by fake RWNJ polls (or whatever the current theory is) but RCP now have Trump in favoured to win the popular vote by 0.1% - possibly a post JRE sugar hit. On this date in 2020 Biden was +7.8 and in 2016 Clinton +5.4

2024 National: Trump vs. Harris | RealClearPolling

2024 National: Trump vs. Harris | RealClearPolling

www.realclearpolling.com

My love to you all, sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

Polls don’t move that fast mate.

Ultimately what polls show is what the state of play was 1 - 2 weeks ago. Either candidate could be up +10 by election day, and the polls wouldn’t even reflect that until mid-November.

It’s all about the votes now.

 

[Maggie5]

With the polls and everything I am still confident of the Dems winning.

Pollsters pretty much openly admit now the boost the trump vote as they got it wrong previously, it seems everyone is just assuming the polls are wrong in GOPs favour all the time.

So now people think these polls which they are trying to correct are still wrong which is why many think a Trump win is inevitable.

They will also use this as a reason if they lose to prove it’s “stolen”. Though by the same logic if it’s done on polls and betting markets, Trump stole 2016 and tried to steal 2020 (well he did, after the event).

Read a few articles on that and tend to agree, they are over correcting based on getting 2016 and 2020 wrong.

The following was a surprise to me - Rasmussen polling:

Friday, October 25, 2024

Vice President Kamala Harris has pushed into the lead over former President Donald Trump in the latest daily tracking poll of the 2024 presidential election.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that, if the election were held today, 48% of Likely U.S. Voters would vote for Harris and 47% would vote for Trump. Two percent (2%) say they’d vote for some other candidate and three percent (3%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

In the previous survey, Trump led by two points, with 49% to Harris’s 47%. This is the first time Harris has led since Rasmussen Reports began its daily tracking poll on October 15. Each daily result reflects a four-night average of nightly samples.

 

[Mick F]

More money in chaos, definitely.

Anything to suggest that the perpetually aggrieved will switch from Fox to MSNBC?

 

[GreyCrow]

Some interesting stuff beneath the surface of the polls:

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/26/michelle-obama-harris-michigan-dems-00185701

I mentioned before how the targeted polling by the In House Dems would inform them of where to go and what to say.

Its interesting - given the above men v women by Maggie5 - that Michelle specifically mentioned men .

But the other thing to note is

Democrats are encouraged by voting statistics so far in Michigan, where the large volume of ballots already cast has defied expectations that early voting would drop off in the post-pandemic era. Turnout in Wayne County, home to Detroit, where Democrats need to run up the score to win the state, is nearing 20 percent, according to state data. And those tracking statewide returns through modeling and publicly available data say women and Black voters have cast early ballots at a higher share at this point than in 2020.

Now I dont know if more and more people are comfortable with early voting and are taking advantage of the opportunity - or there is a grass roots movement we arent hearing about

 

[Randomizor]

Read a few articles on that and tend to agree, they are over correcting based on getting 2016 and 2020 wrong.

The following was a surprise to me - Rasmussen polling:

Friday, October 25, 2024

Vice President Kamala Harris has pushed into the lead over former President Donald Trump in the latest daily tracking poll of the 2024 presidential election.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that, if the election were held today, 48% of Likely U.S. Voters would vote for Harris and 47% would vote for Trump. Two percent (2%) say they’d vote for some other candidate and three percent (3%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

In the previous survey, Trump led by two points, with 49% to Harris’s 47%. This is the first time Harris has led since Rasmussen Reports began its daily tracking poll on October 15. Each daily result reflects a four-night average of nightly samples.

Wow this was always Trump’s safety pollster. Whenever a poll came out showing him losing, he’d get his staff to print out the latest Rasmussen poll to show to him instead.

McConnell and Rand Paul speaking out against Trump. Rasmussen hedging. Trumps internal polling must be awful.

 

[Seeds]

You reckon the media has stopped opposing Trump?

This is how it starts. I didnt say its finished.

 

[Seeds]

It's strange that Bezos and Zuck have hinted that they're on the Trump train after previously despising the guy. Even Musk used to be a Trump critic m8. I haven't seen any articles that dig deep into what's going on there. People will simplify it down to "billionaires want more money and power" - which is true of course - but I think there's more nuance behind the scenes.

I've heard Thiel be described as "the Soros of the right" and perhaps that's true and the selection of Vance as VP has been what got these guys to jump ship. I've mentioned here previously that Musk announced his endorsement for Trump a couple of days before the VP pick was announced and probably was not a coincidence.

Do keep in mind that the Harris campaign are outspending the Trump campaign 3 fold. They have no shortage of billionaire donors and lobbyists themselves m8, they're just a bit more subtle than Musk running around paying people to sign a petition.

Vance jones from cnn made a good point on this the other night.

Democrats are telling people men are bad, white people are bad and billionaires are bad. This is why some white male billionaires are switching to trump. They think the democrats dont want them.

In saying that. Bezos is refusing to allow his editors to back harris not because he supports trump but because he is a coward and scared of retribution from trump. Trump Is threatening retribution against people in the media who have opposed him. Are you ok with that?

 

[100action]

So, lets presume he has complete replacement of income tax with tarriffs (apologies if I have misconstrued the post)
Then overseas countries go "**** this, we will sell to Europe/ Australia and pay no tarriffs"
Tarrif income falls to nothing

Income taxes don't get removed, and maybe even increased to compensate for deficit. Or do they increase sales tax instead? which again will increase cost of items and services.

1. The American market is lucrative. For context NVIDIA, an American tech company is bigger than the entire economies of Germany and Italy combined. California is marginally smaller than the Japanese economy and would be the fifth or sixth biggest economy in its own right. Many exporters will happily eat tariffs because the profit is still worth it.

2. Tariffs will allow some local suppliers to spin up and compete. This will mitigate some of the supply issues (the most relevant market for this would be EVs, Tesla will suffer significant market share loss to Chinese car makers without tariffs).

3. If the tariffs don't work, it'll be abandoned before taxes are hiked id think.

4. Inflation isn't just supply and demand of goods and services. Wittgenstein's Ruler applies. If the federal reserve elects to reduce interest rates and engage in quantitative easing, seignorage and expansion of the money supply will mean a general increase in cost of goods across the board regardless.

If the federal reserve adopts a hawkish monetary policy with rate hikes, theres generally a contraction of the money supply as it becomes too expensive to borrow and investors park their cash in bonds and tbills rather than goods/service based investments. Consumers also spend less as repayment on mortgages increase. Inflation falls like a rock under this scenario.

What Trump is proposing (both tariffs and tax hikes) has wide ranging ramifications for the economy affecting many of the indicators the federal reserve uses in its monetary policy decision making. It's difficult if not impossible to fathom where things will go. My point is that no one can predict this with any level of confidence.