The House GOP just gave Biden’s campaign a huge gift: Roughly 80 percent of House Republicans just lined up behind a plan to cut Social Security and ban all abortions

MicroWave@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world – 692 points –
The House GOP just gave Biden’s campaign a huge gift
vox.com

Donald Trump would be on track to win a historic landslide in November — if so many US voters didn’t find him personally repugnant.

Roughly 53 percent of Americans have an unfavorable opinion of the former president. And yet, when asked about Trump’s ability to handle key issues — or the impact of his policies — voters routinely give the Republican candidate higher marks than President Biden

In a YouGov survey released this month, Trump boasted an advantage over Biden on 10 of the 15 issues polled. On the three issues that voters routinely name as top priorities — the economy, immigration, and inflation — respondents said that Trump would do a better job by double-digit margins. 

Meanwhile, in a recent New York Times/Siena College poll, 40 percent of voters said that Trump’s policies had helped them personally, while just 18 percent said the same of Biden. If Americans could elect a normal human being with Trump’s reputation for being “tough” on immigration and good at economics, they would almost certainly do so.

Biden is fortunate that voters do not have that option. But to erase Trump’s small but stubborn lead in the polls, the president needs to erode his GOP rival’s advantage on the issues.

160

You are viewing a single comment

He lost by an extremely thin margin in 2020 and that was on the back of COVID and before people had a chance to experience four years of Biden. I have no idea how you're this confident. Does this look promising to you?

And before you all jump down my throat thinking I want Trump to win: I hate that fucker and hope he dies before the election.

Has a chance? Sure.

"On track to win a historical landslide"? Not at all. Zero evidence for that.

That picture does not look promising or relevant.

Don't cast your assumptions on me to attack them; make up whatever throat-jumping stories you like, but leave me out of them.

"On track to win a historical landslide"? Not at all. Zero evidence for that.

The article doesn't claim that. It claims that a generic Republican would be on track to win a historical landslide. But not Trump because of his unfavorability.

I don't know which article you read, but:

"Donald Trump would be on track to win a historic landslide in November — if so many US voters didn’t find him personally repugnant."

That's exactly the case the article is making, and that case has no legs to stand on.

What? Did you read it? It shows generic R polling vs. Biden winning big but Trump v. Biden polling low. That indicates that the majority of Americans would be open to a Republican Presidency, just not a Trump presidency. They make the case with polling data.

Wow, hyperbolic polling "data" that is consistently inaccurate and being constantly manipulated and interfered with hypothesizing a fictional republican representative with zero adverse character traits?

Weird that people aren't giving that more weight...

Wow, hyperbolic polling “data” that is consistently inaccurate

Citation needed.

Did you read that article? Their first example of a polling "miss":

The average poll in the week before election day had Mehmet Oz beating John Fetterman by nearly 1% in Pennsylvania when in reality Fetterman beat Oz by nearly 5%

Pollsters were actually calling that race a toss up (also 538's page ). There were several polls that predicted a slim Oz and several that predicted a slim Fetterman. Even the Republican leading pollster that was predicting a 1% the wrong way has a confidence interval of +/- 2.5 and had 4.9% other/undecided factor in the poll.

People are angry that they can't read polls. They're angry that a toss up is just that.

Did you read it? It goes on to describe larger polling errors(14%) that resulted consistently in multiple elections going the opposite way of the polls.

Polls are consistently inaccurate.

You can read the whole article instead of the first sentence.

The Siena poll found that “independents, especially women, are swinging to the G.O.P. despite Democrats’ focus on abortion rights. …The biggest shift came from women who identified as independent voters. In September, they favored Democrats by 14 points. Now, independent women backed Republicans by 18 points–a striking swing given the polarization of the American electorate and how intensely Democrats have focused on that group and on the threat Republicans pose to abortion rights.”

This is the chunk you're complaining about? They didn't even refute the poll they just don't like that data. And that's after consistently complaining about polls that were marked as toss-ups.

Like please respond to the first one. Because the polls got Oz vs. Fetterman largely correct and it's the first example of a miss which should be the strongest one.

No, it isn't, and i responded to your first reply four days ago when you originally replied.

If you are expecting every single pull to be inconsistent by the exact same amount, you're going to be disappointed.

Some polls are off by 1% some are off by 15% some are off by more.

They're not all from identical elections, and there's not always an identical number of people voting or people being polled.

Polls are consistently inaccurate,is the point here.

If a pill has a +- of 5-7 percent with 90% confidence. And you have ten polls, You would expect at least one to be off by more that 5-7%. What your describing is expected.

6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...