102
submitted 11 hours ago by 101@feddit.org to c/politics@lemmy.world
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 2 points 56 minutes ago

This is the part where "we don't have to vote anymore" comes into play. The republicans are systematically rigging the government. We need to get their asses out of there and bring them to a reasonable size that is actually representative of their population.

[-] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 46 points 8 hours ago

and the country will continue to be held hostage by a crippling, anti-human minority. awesome.

[-] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 14 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Current polling data has Cruz trailing by 1 point, and Scott's lead has fallen to within the margin of error. If either seat is flipped, that changes this article's projected 51/49 Republican senate to a 50/50 senate with the vice president breaking the tie.

[-] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Current polling data has Cruz trailing by 1 point

You're citing the only poll where Cruz is behind, so if we're talking about polling more broadly that's very much not true. His lead has been fairly consistent in the +3 to +5 range for months. Scott's lead is the same or bigger, again with one polling exception.

[-] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

For Cruz, I didn't see a newer poll yet when I checked before commenting, looks like that last one was posted today (or they're lying for SEO). Although the survey ends on the same date, so the data itself isn't actually newer.

And most of the other polls go back into August, so while the poll showing Cruz behind could be an outlier, it could also be reflective of a change in the race. We just don't have a lot of good data to work with here. The Morning Consult polls are the largest ones we have, and the only ones to come from the same firm with the same methodology, allowing an apples to apples comparison. That lends at least a little credibility to the idea that Cruz might be in trouble, and it's definitely a close race either way, but I would definitely want more data backing it up before concluding that Cruz is actually losing.

As for Scott, yeah, most polls have him up by 3 or 4, give or take. He's not losing, but he's definitely vulnerable. And with abortion being on the ballot in Florida this year, I know I'd be sweating a little if I were in his position.

All I was getting at is that both candidates are potentially vulnerable, and either losing would prevent the Republicans from taking the senate as the article predicts.

[-] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Part of me keeps hoping that there's some kind of systemic right-wing bias of modern polling methodologies, and that as time goes on we can count on the gap between polling and election results to get larger in the leftward direction. Gods what I wouldn't give for a systematic, nationwide trouncing of the GOP like the one Dems got from them in 2010. Instead it seems like we keep getting hope dangled in front of our faces and results are always middling, at best, with the rare exception of a Georgia runoff or an Alabama one-off.

I sure hope you're right that Cruz is in trouble. For all our sakes.

[-] Asidonhopo@lemmy.world 6 points 5 hours ago

The Harris campaign better have more tricks up their sleeves, 50-50 isn't good enough. More corporate reform to help labor out? Something widely popular that neither campaign is pushing. They aren't really pushing a charm offensive like they should and are being more self-congratulatory and preaching to the choir.

[-] Speculater@lemmy.world 25 points 8 hours ago

Great, so no presidential nominees for the next two years unless Democrats pull off a miracle.

[-] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

Maybe, but one thing that sets Harris apart from previous Democrats is her willingness to actually fight back against Republican bullshit. Plus there's the fact that the GOP will be in a very rough place if Trump loses. They're not a political party anymore, they're a cult of personality, and that personality is 78 years old, will have lost two Presidential elections and is facing sentencing for 34 felony convictions with several more charges still in play. Their most recent primaries were all about trying to find someone to pass the MAGA torch to and they were completely unable to do so.

The Republican Party's future is very murky and that could lead to GOP Senators placing their own self-interest ahead of party solidarity. If Harris pushes against the red wall this could be the point where it finally breaks.

[-] Nastybutler@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

If Harris wins, I could see the GOP fracture into 2 separate parties, with the more traditional conservatives forming a right center party that swings their votes on certain issues with the Dems and leaves the MAGAs on their own little isolated island of hate

[-] Huckledebuck@sh.itjust.works 52 points 10 hours ago

Vote! Tell your peers to vote.

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

The Conversation - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for The Conversation:

MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - Australia
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://theconversation.com/harris-post-debate-gains-sustained-in-us-polls-but-republicans-likely-to-gain-senate-control-239385
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
102 points (93.2% liked)

politics

18909 readers
3380 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS