CaribbeanCricket.com - Polls were wrong. Harris never led Trump

Casper 11/28/24, 2:49:58 PM

debut: 11/9/18
7,282 runs

But she came close in 107 days to beating him.

A senior adviser to Vice President Kamala Harris' presidential campaign said their own internal polling never showed her leading President-elect Donald Trump, and they were "surprised" when public polls put her ahead.

"We were behind, I mean, I think it surprised people because there were these public polls that came out in late September, early October, showing us with leads that we never saw," senior campaign adviser David Plouffe said on the politics podcast "Pod Save America" that aired Tuesday.

Harris lost decisively to Trump, 78, earlier this month after he swept all seven battleground states, winning the Electoral College and the popular vote, the first time a Republican has done so since former President George W. Bush won in 2004.

- edited -

Casper 11/28/24, 2:56:45 PM

debut: 11/9/18
7,282 runs

7 Charts and maps where Harris lost to Trump

About 4.2 million fewer Americans voted for president in the 2024 US election than did so in 2020
Vice President Kamala Harris received about 6.8 million fewer votes than Joe Biden in 2020, while President-elect Donald Trump gained around 2.8 million compared with 2020.

Stupid Americans stayed home and did not vote. They deserve whatever they get from Trump

nickoutr 11/29/24, 10:25:56 AM

debut: 3/21/08
12,361 runs

The campaign was a scam. Polls were inflated to attract big money donors and the funds were laundered.

VIX 11/29/24, 12:09:52 PM

debut: 2/7/03
17,449 runs

In reply to Casper

Yet when I suggested suggested shortly before the election:

Doesn't matter, he's favourite to win.

YOU replied with

Where are you getting these “alternative facts” from?

With another ignoramus on the thread bloviating with his typical uninformed idiocy

Confirmation bias is a helluva drug!!!

Courtesy 11/29/24, 12:17:00 PM

debut: 4/16/09
36,111 runs

In reply to VIX

lol

I was using data from usually reliable pollsters..

Did you conduct your own polls?

Some polls with the benefit of hindsight got it right and the majority of A+ polls got it wrong.

I NEVER conducted my own polls.

You never cease to amaze me with your child-like revenge seeking thinking.

You never cease to amaze

Courtesy 11/29/24, 12:21:36 PM

debut: 4/16/09
36,111 runs

In reply to Casper

Yes most of the usually reliable polls in the Presidential election like some did in the Mid-term elections got it wrong.

A degenerate poster is parading as if he did his own polling and should receive credit for his polling.

Casper 11/29/24, 1:58:13 PM

debut: 11/9/18
7,282 runs

We just can't believe the polls anymore. How can one trust these polls, especially when many of the racist Deplorables who want America returned to to the 1860s don't tell the pollters that they really going to vote for Trump.

Also remember in the first Trump term there was an expected "Red Wave" and Dems recaptured the House. In the era of Trump, especially, I wouldn't trust any polls.

dayne 11/29/24, 3:11:08 PM

debut: 5/29/07
8,185 runs

In reply to Casper

Very true, there are many shy Trump voter out there, they were ashamed to say to pollsters that were going to vote for Trump.

birdseye 11/29/24, 5:38:15 PM

debut: 3/24/04
38,231 runs

In reply to Casper

Were the polls wrong, or they knowingly published false information? Which if the latter is the case, for what reason?

Courtesy 11/29/24, 6:10:01 PM

debut: 4/16/09
36,111 runs

In reply to birdseye

Ann Zelzer had too much to lose by deliberately publishing wrong info in the Iowa poll.

But yes there are lots of paid pollsters on both sides who give you what they believe you want to see. This why increasingly, political parties do their inhouse polling.

KTom 11/29/24, 6:38:02 PM

debut: 7/22/22
928 runs

Why would the Democrats' internal polling be superior to the professional pollsters? How would they be better at reaching likely Republican voters? One answer could be that their internal polling was different in nature to the public polling. It may have been a better indicator of the enthusiasm of known/likely Democrat voters. If they sensed a lukewarm response to Harris and the campaign amongst their supporters, they could translate that to a weaker turnout than expected, sufficient to lose the marginal battleground states.

I thought Trump was likely to win ever since the polls after the assassination attempt put Trump ahead of Biden in all the battleground states.

- edited -

camos 11/29/24, 7:11:13 PM

debut: 5/6/03
57,775 runs

the election was too close to call up to the end, victory was always going to be within the margin of error.

birdseye 11/29/24, 7:49:17 PM

debut: 3/24/04
38,231 runs

In reply to camos

This may sound strange coming from me, and maybe I am totally wrong, but I always thought Harris had too many non-white neophytes in key campaign positions. David Axelrod and David Plouffe should have been in the mix from the beginning; Jim Messina I think was added late, i guess too late.

Drapsey 11/29/24, 8:02:05 PM

debut: 12/26/07
34,183 runs

In reply to birdseye

This may sound strange coming from me, and maybe I am totally wrong, but I always thought Harris had too many non-white neophytes in key campaign positions. David Axelrod and David Plouffe should have been in the mix from the beginning; Jim Messina I think was added late, i guess too late.

The list of 'celebrities' accompaniment as well as 'performers' on the campaign circuit also gave pause.

Yes, I had my doubts but went out and voted for her (early) anyway.

camos 11/29/24, 9:16:55 PM

debut: 5/6/03
57,775 runs

In reply to birdseye

To be honest I never saw the loss coming, I got the feeling that most people were genuinely glad to be rescued from a Trump presidency .

Master_Blaster 11/29/24, 9:27:09 PM

debut: 4/5/05
7,660 runs

People who were objective and not emotional saw a clean sweep but the Dems supporters woul have none of it. .

-The betting market had Trump winning
-The Trump trades had Trump winning
-The polls on X had Trump winning

Numbers never lie.

VIX 11/29/24, 10:39:35 PM

debut: 2/7/03
17,449 runs

In reply to Master_Blaster

That's right!

The trajectory was clear.

People here refused to acknowledge the warnings.

Brerzerk 11/29/24, 11:10:19 PM

debut: 3/16/21
11,634 runs

If The polls said Harris was leading by 3 pts within the margin of error and she lost narrowly were they wrong? What Trump’s campaign (helped by the Gaza destruction of course) was able to do successfully is suppress reliable democratic turnout. Notice in Jewish areas they advertised Kamala as an Israel/Jew hater ( no matter she married one)! Then in Muslim/Arab areas she was advertised as supporting Israel and hating Muslims.

InHindsight 11/29/24, 11:19:51 PM

debut: 2/24/07
12,027 runs

In reply to dayne

Very true, there are many shy Trump voter out there, they were ashamed to say to pollsters that were going to vote for Trump.

Talking about deplorable.

Which is it, 'shy' or 'ashamed'? You're speaking from two corners of your mouth

You guys are incorrigible - lost cases

- edited -

camos 11/30/24, 1:15:18 AM

debut: 5/6/03
57,775 runs

In reply to Master_Blaster

If the results were that obvious no bookie would take bets!

buds 11/30/24, 2:47:22 PM

debut: 11/15/02
20,387 runs

In reply to nickoutr

HAmerica is the most corrupt government in the world.

Polls were wrong. Harris never led Trump

Main

Search

Live Scores

Coming Matches