this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024

76 points (87.3% liked)

politics

19104 readers

2601 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
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

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

outrageousmatter@lemmy.world

aidan@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

July 2024 Swing State Polls: Harris Trails Trump in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Tied in Wisconsin - Emerson Polling (emersoncollegepolling.com)

submitted 3 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 49 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] DogPeePoo@lemm.ee 85 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Polls are complete shit tools used to sway sentiment and placate voters.

Fuck polls.

VOTE VOTE VOTE!

GET OUT AND VOTE!

(I love the 🇷🇺 Russian downvotes on this comment 😆)

[+] eldavi@lemmy.ml -86 points 3 months ago (5 children)

yes vote; just not for kamala or trump.

[–] Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world 17 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Which will do what? Other than making yourself feel better.

[+] eldavi@lemmy.ml -35 points 3 months ago (3 children)

prejudice and xenophobia have had an extensive impact on my life; i'm not going to be a party to perpetuating it further and to more fatal extreme.

[–] Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

You'd have to be incredibly privileged to think the Democrats in any way take part in/don't fight against perpetuating xenophobia in America.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml -4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

i don't know how to respond to who has been propagandized to this level; i would share a couple links to laws & videos enacted by democrats that have embraced xenophobia but the way you're punching down/left with your comment and my experience with lemmy.world pre-informs me that you're going to disregard it anyways.

i hope you that one day you can see how your views have been given to you instead of you learning them for yourself.

[–] Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Projection

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml -5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

It's hard not to feel abject rage at a comment like this.

Tell me more about how the undocumented migrants being rounded up and forced into concentration camps are "incredibly privileged" and how the democrats supporting it are "fighting against xenophobia." Bull-fucking-shit. "Incredibly privileged," you're appropriating language meant to critique the powerful and using it to defend them and punch down and ignore the struggles that marginalized people face. Disgusting.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Oh, hey, it's the lemmy.ml user who approves of China rounding up Uyghurs and doing whatever in the camps. Always fun to see you lecture people about human rights abuses from your glass house.

[–] Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

The dems are keeping undocumented migrants in concentration camps?

I'd say being detained for at most a month to a couple months, to a year if deemed an immediate security risk. Is a very far cry from a concentration camp. Especially compared to the fact Trump literally wants to use the military to round up millions of migrants and place them in actual camps.

I agree we need to immediately address the humanitarian crisis at the border, but literally the only ones who are refusing to do so are the ~~Republicans~~ Trump Cultists, and they control half of congress right now.

Maybe help more Democrats get elected so we can get a real solution, and more legal pathways to citizenship, instead of just claiming "the Dems are the real fascists".

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml -4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Nobody had any problems correctly calling them concentration camps when Trump was president. Now, you're literally over here going to bat for ICE. Now, all of a sudden, you trust ICE to decide if someone's a security risk. People can be held in these camps indefinitely for no crime other than crossing the border. This is the same system, by the way, with kangaroo courts where young children are made to defend themselves in court, with no right to an attorney, against the threat of deportation.

Especially compared to the fact Trump

This is whataboutism. The question wasn't "who's worse on immigration" the question was "do the democrats engage in/fail to fight xenophobia." If you want to tell me that you're holding your nose and voting for a lesser evil that still engages in and promotes xenophobic policies, that's one thing, but you're claiming that the democrats don't engage in xenophobia at all. You're moving the goalposts from "not xenophobic" to "less xenophobic than Trump."

agree we need to immediately address the humanitarian crisis at the border, but literally the only ones who are refusing to do so are the Republicans Trump Cultists, and they control half of congress right now.

Really, and what does "addressing the humanitarian crisis" look like, exactly? Does it look like this?

The Biden-backed compromise bill was crafted to reduce border crossings, raise the standard for migrants to qualify for asylum and empower officials to rapidly send away those who fail to meet that standard. It would give the president power to shut down the border if migration levels exceed certain thresholds. On the brink of its release earlier this year, Lankford told NBC News it was “by far the most conservative border security bill in four decades.”

Or does it look like shutting down asylum?

In 2018, the Trump administration tried to enact similar border restrictions but courts blocked them. The Biden administration now expects to defend the executive action against legal challenges...

Many immigrant advocates are furious at the president’s harsher immigration policies and argue the changes will cause chaos.

“It is a betrayal of what we were told in his campaign four years ago,” said Lindsay Toczylowski, the executive director for the California-based Immigrant Defenders Law Center. “We were told that President Biden would be restoring humanity at our border. … But what we are seeing is that history is repeating itself.”

Lee Gelernt, the deputy director of the ACLU's Immigrants’ Rights Project who argued the challenge to asylum restrictions during the Trump administration, said the advocacy group planned to sue.

“A ban on asylum is illegal just as it was when Trump unsuccessfully tried it,” Gelernt said in a statement.

Your support for the marginalized is entirely mercenary. When you can use their plight to help your team win an election, you have nothing but sympathy for them against those cruel, evil, xenophobic Republicans. But when your team is the one doing it, when the truth becomes inconvenient for you, suddenly you don't give a single shit about them and happily cheerlead immigration cops, concentration camps, and giving unpresidented powers to the president to shut down the border for no reason. It's absolute, tribalistic loyalty, and any principles or empathy you might pretend to have are always secondary to saying whatever helps your team.

[–] Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Do you think there's a difference between the Dems having migrants detained for on average a month (farrrrr less than the limit for pretrial detention for even citizens), just to process paperwork and decide whether they can come in or not, and the Republicans who intentionally used it to punish and seperate families, and plans to use the military to round up millions of immigrants?

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Absolutely incredible the lengths you're willing to go to to throw minorities under the bus and downplay what's happening the very moment it becomes inconvenient to you. What you described is absolutely not what's happening. The system doesn't fundamentally change overnight the moment a democrat gets in office, immigrants are still being detained en masse, indefinitely, in terrible conditions, with no due process or right to council. If it's just about "processing paperwork" then why did Biden shut down asylum and try to pass a bill giving the president the power to unilaterally shut down the border?

Again, this isn't about the Republicans. You're doing whataboutism again. You chose to make that irrelevant when you made the claim, not that democrats were merely "less xenophobic than Republicans" but "not xenophobic at all." I don't want to hear another word from you trying to change the subject to something irrelevant like that to weasel your way out of this.

[–] Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I think arguing that the Dems are fighting against the literal fascist party is a sign of them fighting not taking part in xenophobia. But sure, if you'd only like to talk about the Dems policy and ignore the fascists I can do that too.

First Biden ended the xenophobic Trump travel ban, and other programs that inhumanely seperated families and kept migrants detained for months. This changing is the main reason the system is different, Trump didnt pass any laws on the border, so all of his executive orders could be immediately rescinded or changed.

Second he strengthened programs such as DACA to protect over 700,000 people from deportations

Third, he sent Kamala Harris to address migration at its root causes, primarily poverty in Latin America, by investing in unions, public welfare plans, and businesses in those countries, while also working with NGO's to strengthen democracy in those countries.

Fourth Biden increased Trump's limit for how many refugees/asylum seekers the US could take per year, from 15,000 people per year, to its level now of 125,000 per year.

Fifth, Biden signed executive orders reforming ICE, limiting the amount and type of deportations they can carry out, and requiring border facilities to have the same standards as Federal Prisons. While also drastically shortening the average amount of time migrants and asylum seekers stayed detained.

Sixth, Biden put back in place protections originally granted under the Obama administration but gotten rid of by Trump, that grants asylum for gang or domestic violence, allowing them to stay in the U.S (not in detainment) while their case is reviewed.

Seventh, Biden created a new path to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of people when he signed an executive order granting the undocumented spouses of U.S. citizens green cards.

The policy of the Biden administration has been entirely built around taking in more people through legal avenues, while trying to decrease the amount of illegal migration, while also trying to aid the countries battered by poverty and decades of U.S. military intervention that are the sources of the migration in the first place.

You can say "Biden tried to close the border" or "People held indefinitely" but both of them are untrue, border crossing would only become closed to those who tried to come across illegally, the legal avenues wouldn't close, and the Biden administration has brought the amount of time the average asylum seeker is detained massively from several months under Trump, to an average of 10 - 30 days under Biden.

That's the Democratic policy, and I strain to see how any of it comes from xenophobic intentions, but if you would like to say that they're the same, or even that the democrats are "an evil" on the issue and don't want to fix it, then go ahead.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I think arguing that the Dems are fighting against the literal fascist party is a sign of them fighting not taking part in xenophobia.

It's absolutely not. The Democrats were always going to fight the Republicans regardless of policy, because they want to be the ones in charge.

If I'm like a warlord conquering shit for my own gain, and one of the places I conquer happens to be full of assholes, that does not prove that I have some kind of ideological commitment against being an asshole. In the same way, the Democrats' road to power happens to involve winning elections against Republicans, but they don't get credit for pursuing their own self-interest.

As for the points you mentioned, it's true that they have relaxed immigration policy in some areas, but my criticism still stands - Biden wants to give the president power to unilaterally shut down the border, people are held indefinitely in camps, and he also put limits on the number of asylum seekers. Your assertions to the contrary are simply false. Since your claim was that they don't engage in, or even fail to fight xenophobia "in any way" it's not enough to just show a couple points in that direction, it has to be a consistent policy.

[–] Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Points out what you're saying isn't true

"Okay but it's still indefinite and he wants to close the border"

As I addressed, both of those are false, but if you would like to ignore the truth and retreat to your comfortable talking points where you can pretend the Dems only want to do good things to fight the Reps then go ahead.

What you're forgetting is that Indefinite Detainment, (which lasts usually until Trial, on which case they go to a real prison or are deported) only applies to literal terrorists and cartel members, and that the Biden "Closed Border" Policy only applies to illegal between-port-of-entry immigration, legal immigration through legal ports of entry is still completely allowed under this policy, and has several exemptions for humanitarian concerns.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

"Only applies to" so you admit that it is, in fact, happening. So when you say, "Points out what you were saying isn't true," and "both of those are false," you're just brazenly lying and contradicting yourself.

You're not going to convince me that trusting border cops to indefinitely detain whoever they feel like, so long as they accuse them of being a terrorist first, is in any way a good idea or not xenophobic. I don't give a shit about the distinction between "legal" and "illegal" ports of entry either.

[–] Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

You can't say you don't care about specifics when the specifics specifically refute what you're saying.

You can ignore the difference between legal ports of entry and the rest of the border, but the entirety of border law is built upon this difference, so ignoring this difference immediately makes you irrelevant among all professional discussion of the border. There's also a massive difference between closing the border and closing the border in areas where it can't be regulated, which is what the Biden administration did, the border is not closed.

"Border Cops" aren't the ones doing the investigations into Cartel and terrorist group members, that would be DHS. There's a massive difference between DHS getting the name and identity of a terrorist, putting them on a list, their name coming up to Border Control at the border, and then Border Control holding them until DHS can investigate, and "every immigrant is detained indefinitely with no lawyer in terrible conditions" which was your original claim.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago

they're sealioning you in an attempt to frustrate you; don't feed the troll.

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And so you're not even going to try to prevent worse? Lol ok.

Gotta love it when people virtue signal on the Internet while admitting they plan to do nothing about the thing they "care" about.

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's easy to mistake people not liking your shitty mood for prejudice and xenophobia, especially when you refuse to self reflect.

I hope things get better for you.

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Lmao, you have 0 pull here or in the real world.

At least the folks in my tarnished country get to have a say 🤷

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

lemmy.ml

[–] aseriesoftubes@lemmy.world 34 points 3 months ago (1 children)

She has the next several months to go out there and hit the campaign trail harder than Trump is physically capable of doing (and much harder than Biden was capable of doing). These numbers only go way up from here.

[–] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 24 points 3 months ago

Harris is going to be far less familiar to voters, particularly the undecideds that aren't as tuned in to politics. I suspect it will be a lot easier for her to potentially win undecided voters than for Trump, who people have had a lot more time to develop opinions about.

And threats to democracy showing up as the number two issue in WI and PA is another good indicator for those states.

[–] JimSamtanko@lemm.ee 17 points 3 months ago

Polls are inaccurate. Vote like they don’t exist.

[–] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It feels like the wording of the question could be swaying the responses?

In a hypothetical 2024 Presidential match-up between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump who would you vote for at this time?

It's all but guaranteed that this will be the match up in November, it's not really a hypothetical anymore. Previous polls had the question worded when Biden was still running, so it made sense it was a hypothetical. It'd be interesting to see if other polls with differently worded questions yield different results.

Also, interesting results from this question:

Although you are undecided, which candidate do you lean toward?

In AZ and WI, the undecided voters are leaning very favorably to Harris, about 10% points. Trump only leads the undecided voters by 5% points in PA and MI, with GA being evenly split in the undecided vote. Still though, the Combined Presidential Vote is basically evenly split in each of these states based on the polls.

It really seems like it'll be a toss up and will come down to getting the people who aren't sure they're going to vote to be motivated enough to vote.

[–] ccunning@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

It really seems like it'll be a toss up and will come down to getting the people who aren't sure they're going to vote to be motivated enough to vote.

“Have you heard the good word?…”

*Hands out Project 2025 summary…

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

New Emerson College Polling/The Hill polling in five swing states finds Vice President Kamala Harris trailing former President Donald Trump in four states, and tied in Wisconsin. In Arizona, 49% support Trump and 44% support Harris. In Georgia, 48% support Trump and 46% Harris. In Michigan, 46% support Trump and 45% Harris. In Pennsylvania, 48% support Trump and 46% Harris. In Wisconsin, 47% support Harris and Trump respectively.

Support for Harris surpassed Biden’s support from earlier this month in all five states; in Arizona, by four points (Biden’s 40% to Harris’ 44%), Georgia by five points (41% to 46%), Michigan by three points (42% to 45%), Pennsylvania by three points (43% to 46%), and Wisconsin by four points (43% to 47%).

“Harris has recovered a portion of the vote for the Democrats on the presidential ticket since the fallout after the June 27 debate,” Spencer Kimball, executive director of Emerson College Polling, said. “Harris’ numbers now reflect similar support levels to those of Biden back in March.”

Everything is still fresh and new so Harris has time to rise in the polls. This shows she's trending upwards already.

[–] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

Within the margin of error everywhere but Az. Polls were taken just after Biden stepped down 22-23 July. Could well be more of a momentum shift in the weeks to come.

[–] unconsciousvoidling@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 months ago

Ugh …People are so incredibly brainwashed. Donald trump is a traitor to this country. It shouldn’t even be this close.

[–] mineralfellow@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

The error is +/- 3, do all of the states except Ga are a statistical tie in this poll.

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz -1 points 3 months ago

Good to know which out-of-state plates I'll be brake checking and tailgating for the next 4 years.

[–] p5yk0t1km1r4ge@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago

Polls are useless. I and many, many others have not done one. This is like a tiny snapshot of a bigger picture.