Elections What's your final prediction in who wins in the US 2024 election?

[PEB]

Republican in fighting already having an effect on their support as seen by Kevin McCarthy calling Matt Gaetz a p-e-d-ophile. Republicans fought each other in a state senate and in the house with fists not with their mouth. A noted Republican from Texas of all places complained on the house floor that he was not selected to get nothing done. It goes on and on yet little push back on the democratic side because they understand they need to be the less likely to get pointed at for something unlike the Republicans getting slammed on even Newsmax and Fox for their problems.

​

 

[Mack Yancy]

I just think the election was fraudulent. Same way Dems think the 2000 and 2016 elections were.

Who won really won 2020? Trump or Biden?

 

[jeremyemilio]

If the election was today, it would very likely go to whoever picks up Pennsylvania... which is very nearly a toss up. I feel like Kamala is the razor thin favourite there, still. But then you do have an outside shot of Trump getting Wisconsin or Michigan instead, so I think overall I give him ethe razor thin advantage? It shouldn't be a close race. Both parties need to take a good hard look at themselves. Had the Republicans nominated anyone halfway normal they would probably be a heavy favourite right now. Likewise, the Democrats have shot themselves in the foot with Biden making that run and leaving them with Harris. But since then they've done an amazing job of keeping it together and rallying around Harris and making this a dead heat.

 

[UFCUCF]

I went with Trump as my prediction. I think the polls under sample him by about 3-4 points depending on the state. Given her much higher favorability, the late deciders are likely to break for Kamala. I just don’t think there are enough of them to secure her the win.

 

[Dr Curtis Love]

Trump wins with 320-350 electors is my guess.

I guess it could change since we're still a month away from the election but something huge would have to happen for there to be any large changes.

And when he doesn't, will you scream stolen election like the other mouth breathers?

 

[Jack V Savage]

If the election was today, it would very likely go to whoever picks up Pennsylvania... which is very nearly a toss up. I feel like Kamala is the razor thin favourite there, still. But then you do have an outside shot of Trump getting Wisconsin or Michigan instead, so I think overall I give him ethe razor thin advantage? It shouldn't be a close race. Both parties need to take a good hard look at themselves. Had the Republicans nominated anyone halfway normal they would probably be a heavy favourite right now. Likewise, the Democrats have shot themselves in the foot with Biden making that run and leaving them with Harris. But since then they've done an amazing job of keeping it together and rallying around Harris and making this a dead heat.

Sigh. What's your objection to Harris?

I think it's obvious that bothsidesism is more of a religion than an observation. There's a dogmatic belief that there can never be a clear choice so if Republicans nominate an incompetent crook, the Democratic candidate is presumed to be horrible with no basis.

 

[Barteh]

And when he doesn't, will you scream stolen election like the other mouth breathers?

If the Arizona voting machines malfunction in only the red areas again and they take another 3-4 weeks to count the votes, then I probably will point out the obvious, yes.

 

[jeremyemilio]

Sigh. What's your objection to Harris?

I think it's obvious that bothsidesism is more of a religion than an observation. There's a dogmatic belief that there can never be a clear choice so if Republicans nominate an incompetent crook, the Democratic candidate is presumed to be horrible with no basis.

I honestly have no objection to Harris.

I was only commenting on the lack of a primary to pick the candidate with the most support from the most people. The Dems have done a fantastic job of uniting behind Harris who, in the scenario that played out, was the only path possible. It's very possible that had Biden not run for a second term, and had there been a Democratic primary, Harris would have still been the nominee. But my sense is that there are others in the party that enjoy a broader base of support with both the Democrats and the general public.

As for the "bothsidesism," there's clearly no comparison between Trump and Harris, nor did I suggest as much, except in the sense that both Republicans and Democrats have found themselves running candidates that are about as likely to lose as they are to win.

 

[Grassshoppa]

Wish I could remember the thread and poster, but someone posted that it doesn't matter who wins because they think the reset is too far in motion at this point to stop. Unfortunately, I'm somewhat of a pessimist and feel the same. I think the shadow government isn't going to let the plan stop. Everything is working in their favor to destroy and control. Medical, education, financial, military, federal law enforcement, media, election, voting machines, voter ID, etc.

I actually have to stop myself from watching any news and even the war room for a while otherwise it can really affect my day to day mentality.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I honestly have no objection to Harris.

What was this: "It shouldn't be a close race. Both parties need to take a good hard look at themselves. ... Likewise, the Democrats have shot themselves in the foot with Biden making that run and leaving them with Harris."?

I think the idea that you can nominate a candidate that 60%-plus of the country would agree is good is silly. It doesn't matter if it's Trump or Roseanne or Nick Fuentes who wins the GOP nomination--Republicans will almost all prefer their nominee, bothsidesists will almost all say that they're equally bad, and Democrats will prefer their nominee. You can't realistically expect a difference of more than 2% in how different candidates in the same party would perform. That difference can be decisive in the race, but it won't affect the fact that the races are going to be close.

I was only commenting on the lack of a primary to pick the candidate with the most support from the most people. The Dems have done a fantastic job of uniting behind Harris who, in the scenario that played out, was the only path possible. It's very possible that had Biden not run for a second term, and had there been a Democratic primary, Harris would have still been the nominee. But my sense is that there are others in the party that enjoy a broader base of support with both the Democrats and the general public.

Doesn't relate to the point at all.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Wish I could remember the thread and poster, but someone posted that it doesn't matter who wins because they think the reset is too far in motion at this point to stop. Unfortunately, I'm somewhat of a pessimist and feel the same. I think the shadow government isn't going to let the plan stop. Everything is working in their favor to destroy and control. Medical, education, financial, military, federal law enforcement, media, election, voting machines, voter ID, etc.

I actually have to stop myself from watching any news and even the war room for a while otherwise it can really affect my day to day mentality.

I think this might be taken as an insult, but I don't mean it that way. You sound like you have a kind of serious mental-health issue that you should look into.

 

[Spam On Rye]

Israel

 

[jeremyemilio]

What was this: "It shouldn't be a close race. Both parties need to take a good hard look at themselves. ... Likewise, the Democrats have shot themselves in the foot with Biden making that run and leaving them with Harris."?

I think the idea that you can nominate a candidate that 60%-plus of the country would agree is good is silly. It doesn't matter if it's Trump or Roseanne or Nick Fuentes who wins the GOP nomination--Republicans will almost all prefer their nominee, bothsidesists will almost all say that they're equally bad, and Democrats will prefer their nominee. You can't realistically expect a difference of more than 2% in how different candidates in the same party would perform. That difference can be decisive in the race, but it won't affect the fact that the races are going to be close.


Doesn't relate to the point at all.

But Jack, it does relate to the point, because by "leaving them with Harris" that's literally all that I meant. Not that I have any issues with her, which is what you seemed to take it for, but that the Democrats literally let a scenario play out in which the only plausable choice they had as an exit plan away from Biden was to rally behind their VP, who happened to be Harris. Had it been anyone else, they'd have been left with that person as the exit plan from Biden.

As for the argument that it really doesn't matter who runs against Trump, the fact that they needed an exit plan from Biden calls that into question. Nobody is talking about 60% of the vote, but Trump is an extremely flawed and beatable opponent, and somehow the Democrats haven't been able to make him look like that.

Edit: Just wanted to add, I hope that you aren't applying the "bothsidesism" label to me. Not only do I not see Trump and Harris as being "equally bad," but I don't see Harris as being "bad" at all. That's not to say that she's the best the Dems have to offer, but she looks to be someone who would be a reasonable and respectable President. Trump is almost entirely bad and entirely unreasonable. That the two were anywhere in the same ballpark wasn't at all what I was saying.

 

[Jack V Savage]

But Jack, it does relate to the point, because by "leaving them with Harris" that's literally all that I meant. Not that I have any issues with her, which is what you seemed to take it for, but that the Democrats literally let a scenario play out in which the only plausable choice they had as an exit plan away from Biden was to rally behind their VP, who happened to be Harris. Had it been anyone else, they'd have been left with that person as the exit plan from Biden.

As for the argument that it really doesn't matter who runs against Trump, the fact that they needed an exit plan from Biden calls that into question. Nobody is talking about 60% of the vote, but Trump is an extremely flawed and beatable opponent, and somehow the Democrats haven't been able to make him look like that.

Does it, though? You saw the part where I said the difference could be small but still decisive, right? The reason I added that was that I think the difference can be small but still decisive. Harris minus 2 points would be a huge underdog. But the point is that it's going to be a very close call no matter what, and people who are unwilling to admit that Harris is much better than Trump (not talking about committed Republicans here) would be unwilling to admit that any nominee is because it's not a conclusion but an assumption that there isn't a big gap in quality. We saw it with Clinton, Biden, and now Harris (in 2012 and 2008 I think most people acknowledged that both candidates were strong).

Edit: Just wanted to add, I hope that you aren't applying the "bothsidesism" label to me. Not only do I not see Trump and Harris as being "equally bad," but I don't see Harris as being "bad" at all. That's not to say that she's the best the Dems have to offer, but she looks to be someone who would be a reasonable and respectable President. Trump is almost entirely bad and entirely unreasonable. That the two were anywhere in the same ballpark wasn't at all what I was saying.

OK

 

[Rob Battisti]

Been away for a few weeks.

Going to go away until after the election.

The deep state is real.

Anyway, here is my prediction.

I think it will be wrapped up before 9 PM EST on election night when Trump wins NC, GA and PA.

 

[degoj99]

Harris wins, then blames the coming major recession on Trump.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Harris doing worse than Clinton with union voters in Michigan and Penn (both lost in 2016) is a good indicator that Trump holds a slight edge. He seems to over perform in the ec compared to polling but Harris doesn't have a strong lead as is. Factor that and current betting odds, I think the toss up leans a bit to Donald

 

[Patof]

I think this might be taken as an insult, but I don't mean it that way. You sound like you have a kind of serious mental-health issue that you should look into.

Nah, someone just convinced him that Klaus Schwab wants to force him to eat bugs or something.

 

[Mack Yancy]

And when he doesn't, will you scream stolen election like the other mouth breathers?

I'm not a dipshit election denier. If @Barteh is then he's a moron as is @PhitePhan

But I have a sig bet that Trump will win. If you're very convinced that Kamala will win, then there is still time to make an Avatar bet with me.

 

[Mack Yancy]

Been away for a few weeks.

Going to go away until after the election.

The deep state is real.

Anyway, here is my prediction.

I think it will be wrapped up before 9 PM EST on election night when Trump wins NC, GA and PA.

Same prediction although I do think there is a chance she wins georgia.