Yep, and it’s already started again on Polymarket. Harris trimmed it to 53/47 and now all a sudden it’s back up to 58/42 despite zero credible polls showing any good news for Trump. Lol.
While I do not have a great deal of confidence that Harris can flip Iowa it's now a real possibility. Once again Selzer is a well respected pollster and although it's been over 16 years she was considered an extreme outlier when she predicted that Obama would defeat Hillary Clinton in the 2008 Iowa caucuses.
I would think that the Harris campaign would have done at least a couple events in Iowa if their internal polls were seeing something similar. It would have been a good news story for them as they could say they are going on offense and make the Trump campaign play defense there and expend limited resources. Harris has a big edge in campaign funds and this would have been an opportunity to exploit that edge. We will see what is what tomorrow.
Agree. Who knows if she flips it, but that poll suggests that there is some serious erosion in the red rural wall of voters - likely women.
Not your comment but the tweet you posted... He never said there was "zero enthusiasm on the ground" for Harris. That was added by the tweeter to make it seem like it. Axel just said its close and you cant tell what will happen.
Yep that's my takeaway too. Doesn't get any whiter than Iowa. If its even close there it could bode very well for Harris
It doesn't need to be in play, but if Trump wins Iowa by 5 or less then doesn't bode well for him in some of the surrounding states and Harris will easily win the election
There is zero chance in hell Kamala wins Iowa. It's silly that we're even discussing it. If Kamala wins Iowa, in a year from now, I'll come back here and post for the next year about how awesome @VAg8r1 is at least once a day. Come on, guys.....this is worse than the people on the football forum musing about Napier beating 2+ out of the 4 gauntlet teams this year.
Anyone that doesn't think Trump wins Iowa by 7%+ is drinking the Kool aid that agenda poll was meant to produce. She might barely win WI but Iowa is a 100% lock for a 7+ Trump win. FL is also a lock for a +10 or more Trump win.
I was mainly focused on the video of Axelrod talking about how much uncertainty there is. I do not agree with that comment but I could not find another account tweeting that clip after looking for a couple minutes.
Im guessing there won’t be much story here. First, I still haven’t evidence of manipulation. Mostly what we have is Trump’s odds going up, and some people can’t explain why. But market movement is often inscrutable, so this is hardly convincing. Second, even if the polymarket whale was not trying to make money but instead make the odds look lopsided, I’m not sure this even breaks any of polymarket’s rules, or any US rules. Polymarket is a private enterprise, so I don’t think anything they do has much to do with US election integrity. Now if Trump was found guiding people to place bets on him and fudge polls explicitly as a long term strategy to make the upcoming election seem fraudulent, it seems like that should break some US law (though I am not sure which), but the key features of that crime likely would include (1) Trump’s involvement and (2) explicit motivation to later cast doubt on the election. We currently have neither of these.
Axelrod is clearly tempering expectations. He's a pretty straight shooter. He obviously has concerns, but doesn't want to throw in the towel so as to hurt Kamala's chances even more. Their issues are two-fold: Harris turnout and the high turnout for Trump.
I think there is probably some very minor manipulation going on Polymarket. No different than the stock market or more aptly, the crypto markets. But the overall message still holds true. The betting markets are clearly pointing to a Trump victory. I suppose it could be a heavy influx of Kamala supporters thinking they're getting great odds on her, but more likely there are some Trump whales who are selling their no's and buying them back at a lower price. Or some other form of gamesmanship to earn an extra buck. It's normal for betting markets to tighten closer to an event like this, but that also leaves it open for some whales to make a few extra trades and become even larger whales as a result.
You need to look at RCP's multi-candidates polls. The entire page are Trump victories. Cannot convince me Kamala is going to win this thing with a +2 edge in the popular vote when Biden needed a +4.4 point edge in 2020. And the one poll showing her +2 is the outlier of the bunch. RCP estimated 2.7 points too high for Biden in 2020. They'd have to be over 3.0 points too high for Trump this year for him to lose. It's just not going to happen, bro.
lol, there is clearly some herding and CYA’ing here, but imagine if this were close to accurate? We will still be here talking about who won in a week.
Update from Ralston: Democrats likely need the final turnout to get to 1.4M to have a chance to over come the current R early voting advantage which is currently around 30k votes. The early voting blog, 2024 - The Nevada Independent
