-44

Donald Trump destroys Kamala Harris in new poll (www.newsweek.com)

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The poll also highlights an ongoing issue for the Democratic Party in that Harris is considered less popular among voters than President Joe Biden.

top 14 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] [email protected] 48 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Okay I'm not saying she's the best choice, wouldn't be my preferred choice, but also this is a poll run by the Daily Mail. I can't even find any pollster reputation ratings for them. I also can't find any of their methodologies published online, which is also sketchy. And knowing what we all do about the Daily Mail anyways, this should all be taken with a massive truckload of salt.

Edit: Ah found it, it was run by J.L partners, ranked 145 on five thirty eight pollster rankings for reliability (1.6/3 stars for reliability with a transparency score of 4.2/10). And again, without the methodology being published who knows. The pollster themself, James Johnson, is also a former senior advisor to Theresa May and the UK conservative party.

[-] [email protected] 28 points 1 week ago

A DailyMail.com survey of 1,000 likely voters

Well that seems like some untrustworthy bullshit. Give me a sample size of 100,000 and maybe I’ll listen. Fucking polls…

[-] ricecake 28 points 1 week ago

A thousand voters is actually a perfectly good statistical sampling for the US population.

What matters is that

the daily Mail isn't overly credible
they don't mention how the thousand voters were selected.

A thousand people is enough to get you into single digit margin of error for a population the size of the US. If you find them by dialing random landlines, or mailing surveys to people with a voter history, your sample biases towards the demographic that still has landlines or that's willing to take the time to fill out a paper survey.

[-] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago

That's just an absurdly large sample size. 1000 is adequate if a little on the low side.

[-] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

1000 daily mail readers isn't adequate

[-] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

If the Daily Mail had been the complaint I might agree with you, it was the numbers though.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

A 100,000 person response rate for a snap poll is basically impossible. Not enough people say yes to taking political polls. Most polling is done with 1000-1500, and if you want higher response rates, you have to look at aggregators like 538.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago

DESTROYS!

[-] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The survey says other Democrat figures seen as possible replacements for Biden—such as California Governor Gavin Newsom, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg—would also lose to Trump by double figures.

Disclaimer: I'm on the Momala bandwagon now.

Part of the problem here is that the job of the VP is kind of meh. Sit around as an understudy in case the main act has a colonoscopy or something, and go down to the Senate every now and then to break up fights. It's not supposed to be a popular job. So of course people don't like her. She's had to stay in the background, particularly when people have doubts about the President's ability, and if she was more visible people might think it's because the President needs his nap.

I don't believe all these bad numbers will stick, because they're all hypothetical. If Harris ultimately gets the nod, she will gain in the polls once it no longer becomes hypothetical. (For that matter, so would any other candidate listed. I like Harris, but I like the others listed, too. They can all at least stay up past Jeopardy.)

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

Honestly I don't know anyone who likes her. And it isn't a sexism thing. She was a terrible AG locking up many people for minor crimes and being "tough on crime" to the point of advocating for police militarization and excessive force. I absolutely detest her. Still voted for her on the ticket.

At this point it doesn't matter. Count Binface could run with Hillary Clinton and all the Democrats that would vote Biden/Harris will vote for them. Anyone that is "undecided" is just a fool.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

Even her own staff hates her, so this should not surprise anyone.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/30/kamala-harris-office-dissent-497290

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/people-really-really-do-not-want-to-work-for-kamala-harris/

[-] gravitas_deficiency 4 points 1 week ago

Those are very old stories

this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2024

-44 points (23.8% liked)

politics

18138 readers

3647 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News