When the paper of record, The New York Times, starts making sense of Trump's "word salad" you know there's a conservative bias in the media. Add to that our history of gerrymandering (manipulating the boundaries of an electoral constituency to favor one party or class) and voter suppression of marginalized communities and you see Trump and Harris tied in the polls.
There's also the US's antiquated electoral college creating swing states when we've had the technology to count every vote individually for over 100 years. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by nearly 2.9 million in 2016, but who's counting? In New York State, which is overwhelmingly Democratic, my vote doesn't really count as much as in a swing state vote like New Hampshire and Pennsylvania.
Let's not forget about campaign finance loopholes and the lack a set period of time for campaigning. Our system favors he (and occasionally she) who can raise the most amount of money in an unlimited amount of time. Candidates waste millions of taxpayer dollars in primaries alone, and some even drop out before the primary.
Maybe we'll make it into the 20th century one of these days (yes, I know it's the 21st century, but we're 100 years behind), but until then I'll saddle up my horse drawn cart after Sunday church services and make the long trek into town where I can sell my harvest on the first Tuesday in November and cast my vote while I'm at it.
Oy, I had to figure out your electoral college system back in 2016 because I couldn't figure out how Hilary lost. I'm beginning to think the only way to make things even is to have Democrats start moving to some of these swing states! But, then I suppose, the Republican-led state governments would gerrry-mander the boundaries. Egad, this is why I hope against hope there is a decisive victory for Kamala. No more squeekers.
Glad you're casting your vote. Somehow, when I think of you clutching your pearls Amy, it doesn't involve Sunday church or harvesting. 🤭 😉
Please understand that the US media has been mostly and recently bought out by rich billionaire conservatives, and they have a motive to keep us on edge and keep DJT in the news. I don't buy it for a minute!! More people see through DJT than ever before, there's just no logical way it is still deadlocked. Nope. Doesn't mean we let up, just means we go harder.
I asked my husband this exact question this morning. Americans are ones to keep their vote close to the chest. A preliminary poll and the real vote are two different things but I, too ,cannot understand ( esp women) how they can be undecided. If we ever want to be able to vote again, there is only one choice. Or have power over decisions about our bodies for that matter
I am hoping and praying the real vote is much, much different. A resounding victory so there's no talk of stolen elections or whatever else they Trump'ers might come up with. Although I suppose that won't stop them.
It is beyond my capabilities to understand how anyone can be undecided in this election. It's not as if these two candidates are similar in any way. Esp not if you fact-check them and realize that one of them is lying his head off!
When I've seen her get fact checked, it's more a matter of "requires context" than bold face lying like Trump. Definitely couldn't be a starker choice.
Good stuff, Kim. And as an American, I walk around every day without a clue about why such an enormous segment of our population would vote for this indecent dictator-in-training. I don’t get it. I’ve never missed a vote in my life. Not local, not national. I don’t get why anyone would give up a chance to make a difference. It’s a small action that means so much when everyone takes part.
I'm for Kamala big time, which since I live in New York, a safe state for her ,means not just voting but putting dollars behind Democrats in the swing states.
That said, I think that she has been overly cautious in her rhetoric about the economy. More people think trump will do a better job than her on the economy. I don't think that's true at all, but I'm the type of strange person who subscribes to the Wharton Budget Model Center.
But if that's the perception she should do something about changing the perception. I don't think she has. She has had far too few media appearances.
That's my opinion. And I think Brett Stephens is hoping that his column helps convince her and her advisors to get her out more and answer more questions.
I'm so glad you're helping where you can David, especially in the swing states where it's really going to matter. I would describe her answers to the economy questions as "economy lite." She's answering them, but perhaps not as robust as some would like. But, it's not like she's had a long time to map out her policy platform either. I too hope she can do more, but that still wouldn't prevent me from voting for her.
As for Stephens' column, where I really take issue is that he said he wasn't going to vote if she didn't win him over. I feel that's a cop-out and isn't a particularly helpful message. So if he doesn't like her answers, he's just not going to vote? You think Trump will be any better on foreign policy.
As a former media relations person working for Harris types, I would argue that she's got more to lose than gain by putting herself out there in a hostile media-environment. I suspect that is what her comms people are trying to control. Oprah is a good strategy and I hope Oprah asks the questions that we are all hoping Harris will drill down on.
But, do you really think if she provides more specifics on the economy (for example) that will help win over those that are just using it as an excuse not to vote for her? Do you think more detail will sway them? I guess we'll see. Looking forward to hearing more from her, but won't be surprised if it's in very carefully orchestrated environments until November.
I don’t know what’s right. My instinct is that playing defensively is not the best strategy. She’s had almost eight years as VP so I don’t buy the argument that she hasn’t had enough time.
In any case, we are hoping and perhaps praying fro the same result so anything critical i say is based on what i think maximizes her chances of winning.
Well said Kim! Watching from the UK and am also struggling to see what there is to be undecided about. Incidentally I've just been writing about the 'authority gap' for my Substack tomorrow. Basically why women are taken less seriously than men.
Wow, this! You said it perfectly. It’s so infuriating to watch such a capable human being struggle to be taken seriously while her male opponents continue to fail up.
I would like to see the raw numbers and demographic data that says this race is deadlocked or as close as "they" say it is. Compare the two candidates on any dimension of who makes sense and who doesn't, on decency of character, on truth versus lies, on age, energy and vitality, on being in touch with people and being out of touch and not caring, and tell me its deadlocked. I'm not buying what they're selling and that we have to wait and see the real numbers in November is annoying. Corporate media isn't reporting as it should be because it's no longer news, it's sensationalism that sells and contributes to their bottom line profits. Publicity stunts and outrageous statements that grab attention may get votes from those who like watching the drama. But for anyone who has a brain that's engaged, it's an instant turn off.
Yes. that's the hope and beyond hoping, taking action where we can between now and then will help those numbers in November. Reading the signs, listening to those who have changed since 2016, and summing it all up, I come out on the side of a big win. It's a projection and a prediction, but as one wiser than I said, "It's very hard to make predictions, especially about the future."
When the paper of record, The New York Times, starts making sense of Trump's "word salad" you know there's a conservative bias in the media. Add to that our history of gerrymandering (manipulating the boundaries of an electoral constituency to favor one party or class) and voter suppression of marginalized communities and you see Trump and Harris tied in the polls.
There's also the US's antiquated electoral college creating swing states when we've had the technology to count every vote individually for over 100 years. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by nearly 2.9 million in 2016, but who's counting? In New York State, which is overwhelmingly Democratic, my vote doesn't really count as much as in a swing state vote like New Hampshire and Pennsylvania.
Let's not forget about campaign finance loopholes and the lack a set period of time for campaigning. Our system favors he (and occasionally she) who can raise the most amount of money in an unlimited amount of time. Candidates waste millions of taxpayer dollars in primaries alone, and some even drop out before the primary.
Maybe we'll make it into the 20th century one of these days (yes, I know it's the 21st century, but we're 100 years behind), but until then I'll saddle up my horse drawn cart after Sunday church services and make the long trek into town where I can sell my harvest on the first Tuesday in November and cast my vote while I'm at it.
Oy, I had to figure out your electoral college system back in 2016 because I couldn't figure out how Hilary lost. I'm beginning to think the only way to make things even is to have Democrats start moving to some of these swing states! But, then I suppose, the Republican-led state governments would gerrry-mander the boundaries. Egad, this is why I hope against hope there is a decisive victory for Kamala. No more squeekers.
Glad you're casting your vote. Somehow, when I think of you clutching your pearls Amy, it doesn't involve Sunday church or harvesting. 🤭 😉
🤣😘
Please understand that the US media has been mostly and recently bought out by rich billionaire conservatives, and they have a motive to keep us on edge and keep DJT in the news. I don't buy it for a minute!! More people see through DJT than ever before, there's just no logical way it is still deadlocked. Nope. Doesn't mean we let up, just means we go harder.
Good point Beth. But, yes, don't let up. Just in case!
I asked my husband this exact question this morning. Americans are ones to keep their vote close to the chest. A preliminary poll and the real vote are two different things but I, too ,cannot understand ( esp women) how they can be undecided. If we ever want to be able to vote again, there is only one choice. Or have power over decisions about our bodies for that matter
I am hoping and praying the real vote is much, much different. A resounding victory so there's no talk of stolen elections or whatever else they Trump'ers might come up with. Although I suppose that won't stop them.
It is beyond my capabilities to understand how anyone can be undecided in this election. It's not as if these two candidates are similar in any way. Esp not if you fact-check them and realize that one of them is lying his head off!
When I've seen her get fact checked, it's more a matter of "requires context" than bold face lying like Trump. Definitely couldn't be a starker choice.
Good stuff, Kim. And as an American, I walk around every day without a clue about why such an enormous segment of our population would vote for this indecent dictator-in-training. I don’t get it. I’ve never missed a vote in my life. Not local, not national. I don’t get why anyone would give up a chance to make a difference. It’s a small action that means so much when everyone takes part.
I wish more people were like you Nan. I won’t ever take voting for granted again. And I don’t even get a vote in your election. 😂
Thank you Nan. I feel the same way. I just don't get it, especially women.
I'm for Kamala big time, which since I live in New York, a safe state for her ,means not just voting but putting dollars behind Democrats in the swing states.
That said, I think that she has been overly cautious in her rhetoric about the economy. More people think trump will do a better job than her on the economy. I don't think that's true at all, but I'm the type of strange person who subscribes to the Wharton Budget Model Center.
But if that's the perception she should do something about changing the perception. I don't think she has. She has had far too few media appearances.
That's my opinion. And I think Brett Stephens is hoping that his column helps convince her and her advisors to get her out more and answer more questions.
I'm so glad you're helping where you can David, especially in the swing states where it's really going to matter. I would describe her answers to the economy questions as "economy lite." She's answering them, but perhaps not as robust as some would like. But, it's not like she's had a long time to map out her policy platform either. I too hope she can do more, but that still wouldn't prevent me from voting for her.
As for Stephens' column, where I really take issue is that he said he wasn't going to vote if she didn't win him over. I feel that's a cop-out and isn't a particularly helpful message. So if he doesn't like her answers, he's just not going to vote? You think Trump will be any better on foreign policy.
As a former media relations person working for Harris types, I would argue that she's got more to lose than gain by putting herself out there in a hostile media-environment. I suspect that is what her comms people are trying to control. Oprah is a good strategy and I hope Oprah asks the questions that we are all hoping Harris will drill down on.
But, do you really think if she provides more specifics on the economy (for example) that will help win over those that are just using it as an excuse not to vote for her? Do you think more detail will sway them? I guess we'll see. Looking forward to hearing more from her, but won't be surprised if it's in very carefully orchestrated environments until November.
I don’t know what’s right. My instinct is that playing defensively is not the best strategy. She’s had almost eight years as VP so I don’t buy the argument that she hasn’t had enough time.
In any case, we are hoping and perhaps praying fro the same result so anything critical i say is based on what i think maximizes her chances of winning.
Oh yes. Praying is on the table. Everything helps!
Well said Kim! Watching from the UK and am also struggling to see what there is to be undecided about. Incidentally I've just been writing about the 'authority gap' for my Substack tomorrow. Basically why women are taken less seriously than men.
I'll watch for it Denyse!
Good morning! (Afternoon here in the UK).
Here’s my latest Substack where I discuss the ‘authority gap.’
https://denysewhillier.substack.com/p/women-playing-by-their-own-rules
Your latest Substack gets a mention because seriously…???
Wow, this! You said it perfectly. It’s so infuriating to watch such a capable human being struggle to be taken seriously while her male opponents continue to fail up.
Signed, Also Watching From The Sidelines 🇨🇦
Exactly!
I would like to see the raw numbers and demographic data that says this race is deadlocked or as close as "they" say it is. Compare the two candidates on any dimension of who makes sense and who doesn't, on decency of character, on truth versus lies, on age, energy and vitality, on being in touch with people and being out of touch and not caring, and tell me its deadlocked. I'm not buying what they're selling and that we have to wait and see the real numbers in November is annoying. Corporate media isn't reporting as it should be because it's no longer news, it's sensationalism that sells and contributes to their bottom line profits. Publicity stunts and outrageous statements that grab attention may get votes from those who like watching the drama. But for anyone who has a brain that's engaged, it's an instant turn off.
I hope you’re right Gary and the end result at the real polls in November tell a different story.
Yes. that's the hope and beyond hoping, taking action where we can between now and then will help those numbers in November. Reading the signs, listening to those who have changed since 2016, and summing it all up, I come out on the side of a big win. It's a projection and a prediction, but as one wiser than I said, "It's very hard to make predictions, especially about the future."
Thank you, Kim, for this! You can count on me!
Amen
I cannot believe it, either.
If you fail to favor tax breaks for the wealthiest, then you probably may have not earned their vote. But a little oral sex never hurt.
I hope you don't use a pager.