Topic: Harris jumps slightly ahead of Trump in national polls (Read 318 times)

Hillary was leading in the polls in 2016 too. She was winning by a landslide according to the pollsters. Then she lost by a landslide. I don’t trust anything that comes out of a democrat’s mouth nowadays. They are wonderful liars.

^^^ Polls are a playful thing. They can't be trusted because the pollsters can adjust them to anything. One needs to view the whole picture with his eyes.

She will do what president Biden did: keep the US stable and secure while we in business can do what we do in peace.

Bitcoin doesn't need special favors from the government, as so many here are begging for, and Bitcoin getting in bed with the US government that way can only end in disaster. If US taxpayers are going to be asked to prop up some rich people's investment, then US taxpayers are going to come for the money right after that.

Trump promises radical change, including the deportation of 5% of the US workforce and a massive new police state to stop the millions of abortions that occur in the US every year.

And Trump is now in the crypto business himself, meaning everybody in the crypto business will be competing with the US president if he is elected--and Trump has shown that he does not care about anything but himself, and funneled millions into his businesses last time he was president.

I wouldn't be surprised if she wins(!) again without showing her face in the public. No need to worry about the election when they have an asset like Dominion. Worked for the demented Joe. Hopefully won't work this time.

The one major point that Kamala is doing is to get her face out there.

People often don't understand what a candidate is talking about. So, they vote based on who makes more of a show. That's Kamala.

If people understood what she was talking about, they wouldn't even waste toilet paper on her. But they don't understand. They just see her, and so they vote.

Is this for real that Kamala Harris means much well for Bitcoin and the crypto industry than Donald Trump would do? well, I don't know, is like you missed out on watching Donald Trump's speech at the just concluded Bitcoin conference 27th of last month at Nashville, Tennessee, I would like you to state briefly some few things you think Kamala would do and what hope that she will bring for the crypto market because as it stands so, Donald did mention a lot of things he will do immediately that he got into office, and despite that I'm not expecting him to just do all, but to me, there's more hope for the crypto community with Trump becoming the next President of the United States.

I just looked at the polymarket data and saw the odds and expectations of a Trump win being higher than Harris, which is contrary to the survey results you provided.

To win, candidates need a larger number of popular votes as well as electoral votes, while random surveys only rely on the popular vote so that makes no sense. In general, the survey does not say anything and we need to wait until the final results of the election are known. But we will easily see that on forums or Twitter, Trump supporters are in the majority rather than Harris.


https://x.com/Polymarket/status/1821384828035428608

I completely agree. Harris is very similar to Macron in her opinions, but dumber.


That's why they differ so much depending on who makes them, but it doesn't mean they can't be right. When They made Polls in Russia they always said Putin and it always was Putin

Democrats cannot win, otherwise it will be like in France, when LGBT freaks take over everything...

Imagine still believing that polls are data and not propaganda. 

It is clearly a "religious" question. There are plenty of Catholics who are pro-choice (about half of them, if I recall), but the question itself is a deep one that is effectively religious.

For this reason, libertarians were always very much pro-choice--before Trump turned them into partisan robots.

Regardless, the 2024 election in the USA will mostly revolve around this question. If Americans want abortion to be illegal, they will vote for Trump. If they want to keep it legal, they will vote for Harris. Everything else will be pretty small in comparison to that.



Sure. But's the actual world we live in...



The money we give Ukraine is almost insignificant in terms of our GDP. Most of the US federal government is Medicare, Social Security and the army. When politicians talk about things other than those when they talk about reducing the size of the government, they are lying to you. But those things are very popular, so they don't talk about reducing them.


Russian and their 3,000 nuclear warheads doesn't actually have to use their weapons for them to be effective: the threat alone is quite sufficient.

And sure, the Russian people will remove Putin from power. LOL. Why didn't they think of that? Just go ahead and remove a former KGB agent with a stranglehold on the political apparatus. Easy-peasy, right?


We bill them, and some of them pay, and some don't. But we don't leave them to die. Once you make that promise, you need some kind of public system to deal with this.

A few years ago the radical socialists wanted a single-payer system like in the UK, but the Republicans stopped them an created a more evolutionary system that kept private insurance companies around with a few changes.

Oh wait, that wasn't the Republicans, that was the Democrats and the system they created was Obamacare which is so popular with Americans that about half of Republican politicians support it now, too.


Countries deal with migrants in slightly different ways, and the US is constantly tweaking the way they do so as well. But there's nothing in here that makes them "socialists". That's just a smear put out by Republicans. Democrats are not "socialists". Not even close.

Long story short, if you've heard that Democrats are "socialists", you are just hearing partisan campaign rhetoric, not anything that reflects reality.

Since when does support of separation of church and state makes anyone pro-choice?
Religion is not the only reason why people are pro-life.


It's popular because it's populism. That's how you buy votes, by promising to give people what they want even if you cannot afford it.


Try to give the dog a sausage every day and then come with the sausage, but refuse to feed the dog, just stand there so he can see you. You'll make him frustrated, anxious and aggressive.
It's the same in Europe. If one government increases welfare, the next one will have to deal with the cost it generates. Do you know how they do it? By printing money, decreasing its value and this way decreasing the amount of welfare people receive. This way they can tell people the welfare remains the same, but in reality it slowly gets reduced into nothing and inflation is a tax that everybody has to pay.


Sure, it's better not to be honest with your voters. Promise them increased healthcare, welfare for migrants, money for Ukraine and tell them all that money going to grow on trees.



You could always compare the military power of Russia and the EU. There's no way Russia will ever be able to conquer the EU, even without the US support and Putin knows that.
Even if somehow they could win in the end by nuking Europe, such conflict would leave Russia completely destroyed as well. Debating this makes no sense. I believe that if he ever tries that, his own people will remove him and take power.


You don't leave them to die, but you bill them afterwards, don't you?
As for migrants, start giving them everything for free and you'll start getting the type of migrants that the EU is getting. Refugees from Africa who rob trucks on highways, stab police officers with knives and cut off their heads with machetes. Many EU countries now wish they haven't made this mistake.


Many countries require migrants to apply for citizenship before they can get free education, healthcare and all that. Read how this works in Switzerland.

But that would make you pro-choice, which Trump and Republicans are very much not.



That was my point: since the turn of the 20th century, US presidents and their parties have built and maintained the US social safety net, and nobody will dare challenge it because it's infinitely popular with Americans. A politician who even whispers that they will cut Social Security or Medicare will lose by a landslide (and Republicans go back and forth on Obamacare now, too).

The difference is that Democrats want to pay for that somewhat more consistently*, and Republicans say they don't, and then offer some lies about magic ("we will cut out the fat" or whatever).

(* Of course today, Democrats aren't talking about significantly raising taxes on anybody either, except in vague terms e.g. "make billionaires pay their fare share").



Yep, you got me there: Putin has thus far one invaded part of Europe. With Trump in the Whitehouse, praising Putin for his invasion(s) (Trump called the invasion, "smart"), there is... no guarantee that Putin won't be an idiot and pass up a chance to further extend his empire into the rest of Europe, even though he has made statements saying that is exactly what Russia should do, and even though he continues to build up his military to do exactly that.

Also, Trump could quit the race and endorse Harris tomorrow. I mean, you never know...


Immigrants pay tens of billions of dollars in taxes in the USA, and contribute significantly to our economy. Immigrants are, on average, less likely to commit crimes than non-immigrants. And immigrants provide critical labor for key industries like agriculture, building and hospitality. Without immigrants, the US population growth would be negative, causing the US to join "death spiral" countries like Japan and South Korea, unable to fund their pension systems for lack of new residents. In other words, without immigrants, grandma works until the say she dies. (Maybe you think that would be great, but... grandma also... votes. A lot.).

But Trump wants to put all of the immigrants in camps, and then send them "back" to their original country, even though most haven't even been to that country in decades and their children have never been there and don't speak the language.

This is a major, major disruption of the US economy Trump is promising here.

And... everybody in the US (including non-citizens) should, according to both parties for the last 80 years, have access to free healthcare. We haven't left people to die at the steps of hospitals here since the 1920s. As such, we have an issue that needs to be dealt with in an efficient and intelligent way (and people can disagree on how). But fundamentally, it is not "socialist" to simply provide basic care to the sick--or if it is, then virtually every developed country in the world is "socialist", and always will be, making this term pretty meaningless.

I fully support the separation and I'm sure many Catholics in the US agree with me.
The facts remain the same. You can be a libertarian and a Catholic who wants to keep the church out of politics.

 
You need to get your facts straight because US debt rose by 69% when Obama was the president and 40% under Trump.
You're also wrong about record high numbers because it actually hit a new record under every single president since the 1930s



You said that Putin will invade Europe under Trump, which implies that you meant the rest of Europe, not the country he actually invaded under Biden.


It's again a lot of fear mongering. Last time Trump was the president he did not wreck the economy and I believe we wouldn't have Russian invasion of Ukraine if not for sleepy Joe.
All this while Kamala wants US taxpayers to finance medical care for all migrants, including illegal migrants. Every person in the US (including non-citizens) should, according to Kamala, have access to free healthcare. Good luck with that.

Libertarians were for the separation of church and state before Trump corrupted them, too.



No, they are politicians who don't want to bankrupt our country. The overwhelming majority of Americans want the things that cost a lot of money, e.g. Medicare and Social Security. Democrats say we need to pay for that. Republicans say the money will come from la-la land--and then we run deficits, which hit records under Trump.


He just invaded Ukraine. Which is in Europe.



And there you have it. I would never debate abortion, or question somebody's deepest religious convictions (no point).

But if you believe abortion is "murder", then you will vote for whatever monster says they will stop the "murder" no matter what else they want to do, including the construction of the largest police state the USA has ever known, which is what stopping all of those abortions will require.

Abortion is the issue this year's primary election in the USA, not "Bitcoin" (in heavy scare quotes) or other relatively small issues. Nobody seriously thinks the US economy will change from what Biden has done, nor change anything else in any significant way.

Republicans on the other hand promise massive and radical change, e.g. a massive deportation force to remove 5% of American workers, and a massive new police state to stop all of the abortions. These radical changes will wreck the economy.

A libertarian can also be Catholic.



I gave many more arguments than this one, but aren't you guys supposed to be about equality? If tax cuts are introduced, corporations should be included. The problem is that Democrats seem to be against tax cuts in general, because they're socialists who look for money in other people's wallets.


Fear mongering at its finest. Putin will invade Europe... With what? An army of convicts? What makes you think Putin even wants Europe?


What about the bodies of their unborn children?

If you are favoring Trump, then you are a Republican this election. Stand up for yourself, and all that.

Most of this election is going to be about abortion, and whether the US should create a new police state in order to stop the millions of abortions that occur in the US every year.

My recollection of "libertarians" was that they were pro-choice, but maybe Trump has changed their minds?



Trump's argument is that abortion must be illegal in the USA, and thus you should vote for Trump. There might be other reasons to vote for Trump: obviously if all you care about is tax cuts for corporations, and are willing to trade away personal freedoms to get it, then I guess you could vote for Trump as well.

But like so many here, you seem to be yet another foreigner who doesn't actually have to live in the USA (and I would also presume you don't live in Europe because Trump will allow Putin to invade Europe and drag countries there into war if he's elected).

Americans who live in America care about the issues that effect their everyday lives, like control over their own bodies--not the value of the investments of a few super-rich people in other countries.

Are you calling me a Republican? My views are rather libertarian, but I'd rather see a Republican on the "throne" than a Marxist.


Here's some arguments:
I'm not in the US, so I won't vote, but here's why I'd never choose Harris.

She's against tax cuts, especially if that reduces taxes for the rich.  
Against reduction of immigration, including illegal immigration.
She supports LGBTQ. I have nothing against sexual orientation, but I'm not going to support people who go against basic biology.
She wants the government to pay for education, which means additional taxes.
She's pro choice.
She was always against decriminalization of prostitution, but in 2019 said she changed her mind. Never did anything about that though.
Against medical Cannabis. Voted to delegalize it, in 2015 and 2018. Now she claims to have changed her mind, but I would not trust that completely. It shows she's against things until she becomes criticized for that and then does a 180 degree turn.
Pro gun control. In 2019 She went against guns along another commie Bernie Sanders, which shows the side she's really on.
Claims to be a capitalist, although her view on taxation proves otherwise.
Some examples of this can be found in 2020. Harris and a well known bitcoin hater Elizabeth Warren would go hand in hand introducing an act that would prevent companies from increasing prices of their products by over 10%, which is a move no communist leader would be ashamed of. The same thing was, for instance, done by Maduro in Venezuela.
She claims the US should spend more money on fighting climate change, which is what Germans did when they shut down their nuclear power plants claiming it's good for environment and later found out they have blackouts and need to buy power from France that kept its nuclear reactors.
Harris and Sanders tried to introduce universal healthcare system covered by the State for years. They started in 2017 and introduced it again in 2023.
It's funny how she says she's not a socialist, but writes a strangely high number of bills with them.  

I anybody agrees with her on the above, they're of course free to vote for her. That said, I can't find a single thing I'd have in common with her.

Yeah this is just a poll from random users within the internet and it doesn't reflect the mind of the citizens of the United States who are the eligible voters in the forth coming US election, so this is clear speculations and what this can point out is that, such polls shows the popularity of those condiddates within the global space unless if the poll is taken based on physical on ground sampolls, only then you can say that it at least reflect the thought's of only US electorate, but for now this kind of pos are just mere speculations and nothing much.
Also let keep fingers cross to see where all the Trump pro bitcoin idealogy take the whole cryptocurrency community and what the effects  will be on the entire cryptocurrency industry and how it help Trump gain the votes needed to secure the US presidential seat once again., Between that we need also to pay closing attention to other candidates who may have not been so pronounced in their cryptocurrency drive but are well following up the progress and advancements that the industry have gained within the time bitcoin and other crypto have been around with us, so likely that regardless of what the party stance are and how the democratis perceived and see bitcoin it doesn't change individual stance if truly they discovered a positive light with bitcoin.

I have seen those national polls, and indeed it seems Trump has lost some steam. Still, I would not rely on them to make an actual prediction, it has already proven they are not a reliable source for us to predict anything relation to politics in the United States.
Midterm polls alledgedly showed the Republican party was going to take over the political battle ground, yet it did not happen at all.

Besides, if one takes a look at the betting markets, it shows a completely different picture of what could be happen. Trump appears to be the likely winner in the eyes of bettors, people who put money where their mouth is.
I believe Harris has a good chance to win over Trump, but it has become too uncertain.