Call it . . .

[Regiomontanus]

Both candidates are terrible, at least on the issues I care about the most. I will vote for Harris, though, because she is the least ****ty option.

Harris will win, though it will be an ugly time and we will not have an officially declared winner until later in the week. MAGA will fight the result until...forever.

Standing in line to vote right now (Pennsylvania). I prefer to vote in person.

Edit: I ended up voting Green party...but just for attorney general

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Then comes the reclamation of our country and to see if life actually gets better for all citizens then it is right now.

This is a frequent trope from you, so I'll assume that you're thinking of your own situation and standard of living, which you wish were better. Let me remind you that government is more about providing opportunity than directly improving that standard of living. Government can support supply chains, for example, and keep the shelves of your markets full of a lot of choices, and it may be able to keep those prices from inflating rapidly, but it won't make them affordable for you if they're not now.

YOU have to do that if it can be done. Your income stream and how efficiently you spend it are your responsibility. If you smoke cigarettes, eat a lot of fast food or other restaurant food rather than cook, or drink out regularly, YOU can improve your spending ability in ways the government can't approach by modifying your lifestyle.

What can presidents do for you? Life won't "get better for all citizens" under either candidate as president. But there are differences.

Harris will help many if given the chance, even if not everybody. If one needs drug prices capped or help with child or elder care, or is a first-time home buyer, for example, they'll likely get some help, but as I alluded, government isn't likely to do much more than it presently does for the average citizen. She's pledged to fight to keep or bring down the cost of living (I forgot which), but unless she can identify and undo some of the recent price gouging, I don't see that fight translating into anything palpable.

It's remarkable that you still think Trump cares about you or America. Regarding "reclaim[ing] of our country," you don't seem to understand that Trump would consider America HIS country.

Trump wouldn't help you at all just like he didn't help you last time, although you probably got a Covid check, but he was anticipating running for reelection then. He wouldn't have that incentive as president this time, so you probably wouldn't even get a FEMA check if you needed one after a blizzard or hurricane for example, especially since you live in a blue state (NY).

And his tariffs would increase your cost of living significantly and possibly send America into a recession according to economics experts, but I don't imagine that their opinions mean much to you.

Your profile says that you're 59 yo. I don't know if you're still working, retired, on disability or welfare, being supported, or whatever other possibilities there are, nor do I know anything about whether you rent or own, or have savings or a retirement plan, but whatever the answer, your situation is unlikely to be affected by Harris if she is elected, and likely to worsen under Trump.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I think it was the 80s when my dad first told me that the thing you need to remember about the United States to understand it is that it's really two countries that just share a physical space.

At the time, he was talking about the disparity between the rich and the poor, but it seems to me that the advice works in different ways in different eras.

In the segregation era (and beyond), the two countries were divided along racial lines. These days, the divide is political.

... but there's always been some sort of divide. "E Pluribus Unum" is an ideal that was never achieved.

I was thinking more as to the differences between states, as to laws - such as AOC, death penalty, gun laws, etc. But I must admit, I haven't checked other nations to see if many others are similar.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That adds up to 99%. Hmmmm.......

Rounding errors and uncertainty. I am not sure if everyone puts down "male" or "female".

 

[Subduction Zone]

I feel a blue wave. I may be terribly disappointed. But that is what I sense..

 

[Watchmen]

Just stumbled across this tool from the NYT. It's a "live" presidential forecast . . . a needle that moves left and right as the votes are counted. As of 6:58 p.m. pacific time, the needle is at "lean" Trump.

The Needle: Live 2024 Presidential Election Forecast

Follow our real-time estimates to see who’s ahead in the race between Kamala Harris and Donald J. Trump.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Mock Turtle]

A chap on a TV programme here, calling in, told how he had bet £4000 on Trump losing, and expecting to win about £10,000. I had a sinking feeling, and it looks like he has lost this money.

I didn't stay up watching the results unfold. Good luck America.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I'll set aside what I would prefer to happen and focus only on what I think is more likely to actually happen: I think Trump may win primarily due to winning one or two swing states by an extremely narrow margin. I also think the Democratic Party and some of its supporters have been dangerously overconfident, which reminds me of the 2016 election fiasco. I hope my prediction about this is thoroughly proven wrong.

I don't have any predictions regarding congressional elections.

Sadly, my prediction wasn't proven wrong except in that Trump won even more swing states than I thought he would.

The overconfidence in the predictive ability of polls and the "Harris will win by a landslide!" predictions in some media outlets both seemed to me extremely reminiscent of 2016, and they did turn out to largely be a rerun of that, unfortunately.

 

[anna.]

I lean towards her getting more than Biden. I'm cautious because I don't feel like another 2016, even though I 100% don't expect it.

Here's what I think: the polls are (again) skewed right, which is why there wasn't even a dribble of a red wave in 22 and there won't be in 24.

Women may very well carry this election. It would be wise not to underestimate them.

Harris has run a tight, disciplined ground game with over a billion dollars raised in a few months and ~100K-strong canvassing team of passionate volunteers. Trump's campaign had none of that.

An interesting thought - how much split tickets may come into play.

The media desperately wanted a horse race. Again, they're gonna be caught flat-footed. They, like the Trump campaign, are starting to see the handwriting on the wall, and they're floating some CYA out there already.

Trump is tired, and everyone but his base is tired of him. His base alone can't win this for him.

I'm sure there's more, but I'm multi-tasking at the moment.

Welp. 2016 again. Only worse.

 

[Revoltingest]

I predict a Trump win yesterday.

 

[Watchmen]

Since I was curious about what the wisdom of the crowd would be on this, I took an average of everyone's predictions so far.

A few caveats:

- if you didn't give a number at all, you aren't reflected in the average.

- for people who guessed things like "well over 300" for Harris or that Harris would do "better than Biden," I arbitrarily put these guesses in at 310 for Harris (and a corresponding 228 for Trump).

So on the morning of election day, RF's collective prediction is 292.4 for Harris, 245.6 for Trump.

Looks like left-leaning RF was widely off base. The last few months I've tried to explain why the Left had issues and could lose, but was often shutdown. Oh well.