Pretty convenient how Joe dropped out right after the RNC, immediately endorses Harris, within 24 hours all other Democrats fall in line, within 48 hours she's already secured the delegates. Has a big campaign speech and somehow raises $100 million. All without winning a single primary or vote for that matter. I mean, if I didn't know any better, I would say it was scripted to happen that way. Oops, I do know better. Dems here will be too proud to admit they were disenfranchised. DNC not even attempting to hide it.
Disenfranchised? Funny, Rs now caring about boys votes. Biden ran unopposed, and with Harris on the ticket. The whine from the right and concern from the left was Biden's age. Know what would've happened if Biden fell ill or died? Exactly what happened this weekend. Everyone would've rallied behind Harris. And nobody would be whining about disenfranchisement.
The argument that Democrat voters are being forced to vote for Harris for president denies agency to these voters. The election is in the future. No one, regardless of their party affiliation, has to vote for Harris.
More like $250+ million if you count the major PACs ... But thanks for the great summary of how cool brat things have been the last couple days.
Trump was literally the only possible candidate who could lose to Biden, but the GOP really wanted what he was offering, so they went with the loser instead of one of the many candidates who would have steamrolled Biden. And then brought back the low energy loser again in 2024.
So here’s your chance — make that winning chess move by having Trump now drop out of the race, and put up a better candidate. That’ll show them Dems who’s best!!
That is how the math works, z-score for confidence level times the square root of the variance of the sample proportion. We usually run with a 95% level of confidence, so the z-score is 1.96. The largest variance comes when p is .5, so we can plug that in as a maximum limit. The sample size was 400. 1.96 times the square root of .25/400 gives us 0.049, converted to a percentage is 4.9%, round it off for a non-technical audience and we have a 5 point margin of error with 400 respondents.
Harris border confusion haunts her new campaign https://www.axios.com/2024/07/24/ka...tter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial
t Nikki Haley would have been a far stronger candidate although if I recall on multiple occasions @okeechobee denigrated and ridiculed her for having the audacity to challenge the defeated indicted former president.
Republicans really shot themselves in the foot by not passing the bi-partisan border bill. They could have said that the bill doesn't go far enough but it was the best they could get Democrats to agree to with Biden in charge. If Trump is elected, they'll take more forceful action (which of course would be a lie since they don't have any feasible ideas to fix it but that won't matter to people). Now Kamala and the Dems can just keep pointing to the bill that Trump had them scrap.
So you think a poll using 400 LV is reliable? That was the point of my comment. Obviously more polled means smaller moe in most cases. It should be noted this poll in the past has been more Trump friendly. The cross tabs show they sampled more women than men. I know the norm is women tend to vote more than men but I have no idea the norms for Georgia.
Well she has not been to Europe so why does that matter lol hopefully you know what I’m referring to.
I seem to recall a popular rule of thumb in statistics is a minimum sample size of 30. Perhaps big brain Bret can explain why. Political polls seem to generally go for more like 1000-2000. More random people should get better data. But not sure a sample of “only” 400 is some crazy outlier. It really depends on how they are finding those people, we all now know some polls have issues because they rely on landlines - which itself introduces bias to the data. I suspect that is a much bigger issue for the data geeks running these sort of surveys. I.e. a good sample of n=400 could be more useful vs. a biased landline sample with n=1000 or even 10,000. Not saying that’s the case here, as I have no way of knowing if they are getting a good clean sample. Polls are themselves just data points anyway.
Oh yes, I bet the New York Post has the best sources inside Obama's orbit, who apparently, despite being very close to Obama, don't know that he doesn't endorse until the party does (he was neutral in 2016 and 2020 too). I wonder what those "sources" will say when he comes out to give a rip roaring endorsement of her at the Convention.
